,.__ e,
- ::s, ~ Q
'1-, '\'\, ~() ,~ /1p0RR1l0
,., '•• PlanlT Ceo™
developers of TreePlotter
,,, l,A
URBAN FOREST INNOVATIONS INC
CITYOF -----
SAN LEANDRO
TREE
MASTER
PLAN
' '
A balanced (rather than exploitative) relationship
with the environment; an economic system based
on sharing rather than competing; a strong sense
of family and community; social moderation and
restraint; the opportunity for widespread artistic
creativity; a way of governing that serves without
oppressing; a deeply spiritual sense of the world:
these are the very things many of us are currently
striving to attain in our own culture. The irony is that while we look forward to a dimly-perceived future
when such values might be realized, we have failed
to understand that they existed in the not-sodistant past as the accomplishments not only of the '' Ohlones, but of Stone-Age people the world over."
- Malcolm Margolin, The Ohlone Way: Indian Life
in the San Francisco-Monterey Bay Area
PREPARED BY
Plan IT Geo, Inc., Arvada, Colorado
PREPARED FOR
City of San Leandro, Cal ifornia
FUNDED BY
American Rescue Plan Act
COMPLETED
December 2024
2 07 PLAN SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 6 0 2 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 70 03 PRIORITIZING TREE EQUITY ............................................................................................. 79 0 4 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. .......................................................................................... 35 0 5 URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT .................................................................................. 42 0 6 IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................................................. 74 07 RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................... 93 3 City Manager Janelle Cameron
Mayor Juan González III
City Council
Project Team
City Department Staff
Focus Group Participants
Sbeydeh Viveros-Walton - Council Member District l
Bryan Azevedo - Council Member District 2
Victor Aguilar, Jr. - Council Member District 3
Fred Simon - Council Member District 4, Vice Mayor
Xouhoa Bowen - Council Member District 5
Pete Ballew- Council Member District 6
Dr. Hoi-Fei Mok- Sustainabil ity Manager
Jennifer Auletta - Parks and Landscape Manager
Avalon Schultz-Assistant Community Development Director Sheila Marquises - Public Works Director
George Garcia - Supervising Engineering Inspector
Erwin Ching - Engineering Manager
Debbie Pollart- Public Works Director (retired)
Vicente Zuniga - Recreation and Parks Director
Thomas Browning - Street Services Supervisor
Winston McKee - Parks Supervisor
Daniel Contreras - Park Maintenance Worker 3
Justin Taylor - Parks Maintenance Worker 2
Eric Engel bart- Deputy City Manager
Megan Stephenson - Risk Manager
Fran Robustelli -City Manager
Susan Levenson - Friends of the San Leandro Creek
Mei Visco - Hyphae Design Laboratory
Michael Flynn - Common Vision
Liz Eisler - SL Resident
Corrina Gould - Tribal Chair of Confederated Villages of Lisjan/Ohlone Deja Gou ld - Language Program Manager, Sogorea Te' Land Trust Ha na Mariyam -San Leandro High School Eco Club Student Tricia - San Leandro High School Eco Club student
Marc Gordon- San Leandro Hig h School Environmental Sciences Teacher and Eco Club Advisor Amy Olson - San Leandro High School Counselor and Eco Club Advisor Morgan Mack-Rose- Downtown San Leandro
Guadalupe Gonzalez- Chamber of Commerce
4 We envision a future where San Leandro's urban forest stands as a symbol of our collective dedication to sustainability, environmental stewardship, and inclusivity. We celebrate the diversity in our canopy, recognizing each tree's role in shaping our c·1ty's character. Through a unified commitment to tree equity, our urban forest fosters unity across al l communities. By cultivating support and engagement, we ensure that our trees will thrive for generations, leaving a legacy of environmental stewardship and civic pride for every member of the San Leandro community.
5 SAN LEA NDRO TREE MASTER PLAN
The City of San Leandro is proud to adopt this Tree Master Plan (TMP and/or "Plan") as a strategy for improving community resilience; redressing environmental justice in access to cleaner air, green spaces, and reduced exposure to urban heat island; proactively maintaining the urban forest; and mitigating the impacts of climate change.
6 Redress Inequities
Proactive Maintenance and Growth
Ecosystem Benefits for All
Only 8% of San Leandro is covered by tree canopy, and that canopy is not distributed evenly across our neighborhoods The history of racial segregation in the United States, exclusionary housing po licies, redlin ing, and forced removal of Indigenous commu nities coincide with the inequitable distribution of t ree canopy in San Leandro today. These systemic injustices have resulted in vulnerable comm u nities who are disproportionately exposed to the impacts of climate cha nge, such as flooding, urban heat islands, and poor air quality. The City of Sa n Leandro is prioritizing strategies to distribute a variety of trees t o areas that have historically received less urban forest investment.
Over 16,000 trees line San Leandro's streets, creating a sense of place for com m unity members and serving as a critical piece of the City's infrastructure system. Planti ng trees is one of many strategies t hat can help to mitigate climate issues, and trees are the only example of infrastructure that increases in value after installation. As trees mature, they provide shade, clean the air, and reduce stormwater. Research shows that emotional, psychological, and physica l health all improve with the presence and proximity of trees. These urban trees require proactive maintenance to th rive in the harsh and ever-changi ng conditions of an urban environment.
A healthy and resil ient u rban forest does not appear overnight. It is planted based on t he common p ractices, plans, and policies of today, maintained by the next generation's tree stewards, and enjoyed by our grandchildren. With smart planning and equitable policies, al l residents can benefit from tree canopy. Trees are critical urban infrastructure t hat are essential to public health and w ell-being. The City has identified areas where there are the greatest soc·1oeconomic needs, lack of tree canopy, highest heat severity, and highest pollutant levels. This shaped the development of the priority planting locations. By focusing investment in these neighborhoods, the City can not only address environmental justice issues, but b ring about much needed tree benefits to frontline communit ies.
While tree planting efforts are key to this init iative, it is equally as im portant to fact or in post-planting ca re and community stewardship. With care and deliberate plann·1ng, t he urban forest can grow in value over t'1me and contribute to shared improvements in public health, resilience, and well being. The contents of this Tree Master Plan reflect a shared commitment from the City, its partners, and the commu nity to manage and grow a sustainable and equitable urban forest.
7 SAN LEANDRO TREE tvlASTER PLAN
The City of San Leandro is prioritizin g strateg ies t o d istri bute a va ri ety of trees to areas th at have histori ca lly received less urba n forest investment. W hile tree planting efforts are key t o thi s initiative, it is eq ually as important t o fact or in post-planting ca re and community stewa rd ship. W ith ca re and deliberate planning, the urban forest ca n g row in va lue over time and co ntribute t o shared improvem ents in pu b lic hea lth, resilience, and well being . The contents of this Tree Master Pl an refl ect a shared commitment fro m the City, its partners, and the com munity t o m anage and g row a sust ainable and eq uitable urba n forest .
STRATEGIC PLANNING
This strategic planning process was used
during the d evelopment of the Tree Master
Plan. The fram ework of g oa ls, objectives,
actions, and strategies t o guide Sa n
Lea ndro through implem entation in the
co ming yea rs. Recommendations were
d eve loped based on d at a analysis, loca l
st akeholder in p ut, an urban forest p rog ram
audit, reg ional context via benchmarkin g,
industry st andard s, and best m anage m ent
practi ces. The Plan is intended t o be
revisited peri odica lly and ad apted to refl ect
changes in the region over time.
RESEARCH DEEP DIVE
Research and review existing
documents and plans.
STAFF CONSULTATIONS
Interviews, meetings, and surveys
for key staff and stakeholders.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Analysis of datasets to inform
recommendations.
BENCHMARKING
Cross-reference with other cities
and industry standards.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Gather input through public
meetings, surveys, and events.
URBAN FOREST AUDIT
A a systematic evaluation of the
urban forest program operations.
GOALS + ACTIONS
Recommendations and guidance
informed by the planning process.
8 Community Forest Ethos
Key Themes Align with Tree Master Plan Goals
In pursuit of red ressing tree canopy inequities, t his Tree Master Plan is centered in "Community Forestry Ethos," a concept suggested in the 2022 paper, Not by Trees Alone: Centering Community in Urban Forestry Community Forestry Ethos centers "the needs, capacities, and priorities of historically margi nalized communities at the heart of the work of creating more just sustainable cities" (Campbell et al., 2022). It is intended to prioritize BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) and frontline commu n ities who are disproportionately impacted by cl imate change and unjust policies.
The three key themes of Community Forestry Ethos guided the development of the Tree Master Plan's goa l areas: people, performance, and planning, which are carried through to t he key performance indicators and implementation framework.
9 PEOPLE
COMMUNITY FOREST ETHOS: Supporting human capacity and care (investment s in people and organizations)
TMP GOAL: Foster a culture of inclusive tree stewardship through robust education, partnerships, and capacity-building opportunities that empower all commun ity members to build tree equity
PERFORMANCE
COMMUNITY FOREST ETHOS: Re-envisioning the functions of the urban forest (productive systems and biocultural approaches) TMP GOAL: Measure and track the performance of San Leandra's urban forest in an effort increase the quality and quantity of t rees, the benefits provided by trees, and the resources dedicated to tree management.
PLANNING
COMMUNITY FOREST ETHOS: Community organizing beyond the green silo (intersectional and cross-sectoral approaches) TMP GOAL: Develop and implement plans, policies, and p rocedures that reflect the community's priorit ies, are d riven by data, and proactively tackle issues facing trees in San Lea ndro.
SAN LEANDRO TREE tvlASTER PLAN
"Between every two pine trees there is a door leading to a new way of life." - John Muir
10 History of the Land
77 San Leandro's urban forest reflects a layered history of the land, as well as an evolution of the role of trees in the region. The City of San Leandro acknowledges
that the land we call San Leandro today is the
homeland of the Chochenyo and the Mewukma
Oh lone Tribe.
The Jalquin and Yrgin People who lived in this area
developed deep local knowledge of the grasslands
and oak savannas. They used controlled burns and
other techniques to increase yields and steward the
land. Today, the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe and other
familial descendants of the Verona Band retain and
share this local knowledge.
There have been many changes to the landscape
here since the early 7800s. At least six Muwekma
Indian rancheria communities emerged in the
7830s-7860s in East Bay, one of which was located in
the areas of modern-day San Leandro. In the early
7900s, cherry orchards were planted and cultivated,
with San Leandro's first cherry festival in 7909 to
celebrate a particularly bountiful harvest.
The San Leandro Dahlia Society formed and held its
first show in 7925, with many of the farm lands
turned to floriculture by the early 7930s, and the city embraced their new title as the "City of Sunshine
and Flowers."
During the l950s-7960s, San Leandro became
known as the "City of Industry" as agricultural lands
were quickly paved over to make room for industry
and economic growth.
SAN LEANDRO TREE ~ASTER PLAN
Modern-Day San Leandro
Today, the land we ca ll San Leandro is high ly urba nized, with an estimated 60% of the city's land covered by
impervious surfaces. The majority of San Leandro is
zoned for single-family and duplex housing, which bodes well for trees, since residential areas provide great
opportunity for trees to live long healthy lives with space for adeq uate growth.
The preva lence of industrial zoning poses a challenge to the urban forest, as industrial areas fulfill economic
needs but provide less opportunity for green space and
are associated with higher levels of pollution. As San
Leandro accommodates a growing population w ith
development and redevelopment, o pen space
conse rvation and tree preservation efforts will be key to e nsuring that trees w ill continue to t h rive.
Natural Resources Today
The City of San Lea ndro m akes deliberate effort to
maintain it s natural resources, with the San Francisco Bay waterfront on the west side of the city, Cha bot Park in the north east, and San Leand ro Creek running between the
two. These ecological resources play a vital role in the balance of San Lea ndra's u rban forest today. The City ba lances the restoration needs of t hese verdant natural areas with t he maintenance needs of inte ntionally
planted tree-lined streets, trees in yards, and m anicured commercia l la ndscapes. With this Tree Master Plan, the City of San Lea ndro is planning to protect these pocket s of natural resou rces as the city evolves and ensure t hat trees wil l continue to be a beautiful and healthy
component of thi s livable community.
SAN LEANDRO ZONING CATEGORIES
- comrnetttol
:::J Orfice
- Cl!>eflSpace
- Multi-Use
CJ Industrial
C:J ResldenUal Single- Family
IJli] Residential Muttl-Family
12 Aligning with San Leandro’s Existing Plans
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
San Leandro's urban forest is a vital public asset that has been high lighted in existing City plans and community efforts. The City's Climate Action Plan (CAP), Green Infrastructure Plan, and t he General Plan have paved the way for this TMP by recognizing the role of trees and the benefits they provide in San Leandro.
Through the adoption of this Trees Master Plan, t he City of San Leandro is taking a v ital step in redressing inequities and growing a resilient urban forest for generations to come.
The following are some of the key urban forestry references in policies and plans. This TMP aligns w ith t hese existing efforts, reducing the risk of wasted resources and building momentum for projects t hat su pport urban forestry goals. A total of 45 documents and resources were reviewed and indexed as part of the information discovery process, and some of the key ones identified below. 2035 General Plan
Urban Greening
Environmental Justice
Community Outreach
Parks and recreational facilities
Removal of Hazardous Trees
Open Space and Carbon Emissions
Street Trees
Climate Action Plan, 2021
Carbon sequestration
Climate Adaptat'1on
Resilience of vulnerable commu nities
Public-private partnerships
Green Infrastructure Plan, 2019
San Leandro Creek Trail Master Plan, 2017
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, 2018 and 2024
Recreation and Parks Master Plan, 2024
73 SAN LEANDRO TREE tvlASTER PLAN
San Leandro Creek
San Leandro Creek is a nearly22-mile-long stream t hat begins in the densely forested hills east of Oakland and outflows into San Leandro Bay. Along the way it f lows t h rough t he City of San Leand ro for 2.1 m iles and forms the border between San Leandro and the City of Oakland for another 7.8 mi les.
While most urban st reams in the East Bay have been heavily channel ized and cu lverted, San Leandro Creek is one of the rare few that remains uncovered. As such, San Leand ro Creek is a val uable nat ural resource to the community and there are ongoing efforts, such as the work of the nonprofit Friends of San Leandro Creek, to restore and enhance the environmental, recreational, and cultural va lue of t he creek.
San Leandro Creek is also a source of concern in the context of urban forest management. The native oaks and willows that historically lined the creek have been supplanted by invasive eucalyptus trees. The large eucalyptus trees have damaged infrastruct u re. The management of the t rees along San Leand ro Creek is currently a j urisdictional gray area and these trees were not included in the 2022 inventory. Discussio ns on the responsibility for maintaining the t rees along San Leand ro Creek are ongoing. 14 Each tree in San Leandro provides a multitude of benefits, and the City of San Leandro developed this Tree Master Plan to redress inequities and ensure that tree canopy benefits reach all community members. Results of the urban tree canopy study included in this Plan show th at areas with dense tree canopy cover are concentrated in northeast San Leandro. Areas with lower tree canopy cover are faced with hotter temperatures, more pollution, and greater risks to public health. It is vital that vulnerable populations are extended tree canopy that can help to alleviate the risks and impacts of climate change and the urban heat island effect
MENTAL HEALTH
People w it hout views of nature from
their desks claimed 23% more sick days
than workers w ith views of nature.
§>©) CLEANER
~ AIR
Roadside trees
reduce nearby
indoor air
poll ution by more
than 50%.
• -• STORMWATER '~
~
.. ':: MANAGEMENT
15 Contiguous tree canopy
is estimated to intercept
4" of rain over l acre in a
typical year- about /
708,000 gal lons. - ----~
WILDLIFE HABITAT
Planting and protecting trees
provides habitat for hundreds of
birds and small ani mals.
• ENERGY
SAVINGS
Residents and
businesses can
save up to 50% on
hot-day energy
bills.
CARBON
SERVICES
In one year, an acre
of mature trees
absorbs t he amount
of CO2 produced by
a ca r driven 26,000
miles.
SAN LEANDRO TREE MASTER PLAN
Quality of Life
Neighborhoods with generous canopies of trees are uplifting and good for public health.
Greater contact with natural environments correlates with lovver levels of stress, improving performance. Students' concentration levels go up vvhen they can look out onto a green lar,dscape. Studies shovv that children with attention deficit disorder function better after activities in green settings A green environment FJlso improves worker productivity People drive more slowly and carefully through tree-lined streets, because trees create the illusion of narrower streets. One study found a 46'-Y:, decrease in crash ri'ltes clcross urbi:ln c:irtcriol ond highwoy sites ofter bndscZJpe improvements were instc:illed. Foster drivers and slower drivers both drove at decreased speeds in the presence of trees.
Trees reduce noise pollution, buffering as much as half of urban noise. By absorbing sounds, a belt of trees 100 feet wide and SO feet tall can reduce highway noise by 6 to 70 decibels. Buffers composed of trees and shrubs can reduce 50% of noise.
IN 11--lOUUC IO N 16
Urban Cooling
77 As natural screens, trees can insulate hornes and businesses from extreme temperatures, keep properties cool, and reduce air conditioning utility bills. A deciduous tree covering 20% of a house results in annual cooling savings of 8 to 78% and annual heating savings of 2 to 8'16. By planting shade trees on sunny exposures, residents and businesses can save up to 50% on hot-dcJy energy bills.
Broad canopy trees lower temperatures by shading buildings, asphalt, and concrete.
They deflect rudi;:ition from the sun und reb:ise moisture into the c1ir. The urb;:in hcc1t island effect is the resulting higher temperature of areas dominated by buildings, roads, and sidewalks. Cities are often 5° to l0°F hotter than undeveloped areas, because hot pavement and buildings have replaced cool vegetated land. Shade trees can reduce asphalt temperatures by as much as 36cF, which diminishes fumes and improves air quality. Shaded streets last longer and require far less pavement maintenance. reducing long-term costs.
Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG)
Earth's climate is rapidly changing due to an increase of g reenhouse gases (GHG) such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O) w hich are emitted from human activities such as transport ation, industry, and power gene ration. These are primary contributors to increased temperatures in u rban areas. Trees absorb ca rbon dioxide and store carbon in wood, which helps to reduce green house gases and t he harmful impacts of climate change.
Carbon sequestration is the removal of carbon dioxide from the air by trees (and all plant life), while carbon storage is the amount of carbon already deposited in woody parts of vegetation. In addition to carbon dioxide, t rees' leaves or needles absorb pollutants, such as ozone, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and some particulate matter. It is est imated that trees in the United States store 700 million tons of carbon valued at $74 billion w ith an an nual ca rbon sequestration rate of22.8 million tons, valued at $460 million annually INTRO DUCTIO N: 18
Ecosystem Restoration
79 A tree's fibrous roots are premier pollution filtration and soi l erosion prevention systems.
Intensely urbanized areas are covered with impermeable surfaces. A healthy urban forest can reduce annual storm water runoff by up to 7%. Hig hly efficient t rees also utilize or absorb toxic substances such as lead, zinc, copper, and biological contaminants, reducing the demand on local stormwater filtration systems.
By cleaning the water and air, trees create a safe and hea lt hy space for w ildlife.
Planting and protect ing t rees ca n provide habitat for hundreds of birds and small animals. Habitat f ragmentation can be devastat ing to animals, particu larly those in need of safe passage for migration. Urbanization and the destruct ion of valuable ecosystems have led to the decline of many species. By adding trees, particularly native trees, valuable habitat can be restored, corridors can be reestablished, and preservation areas can provide sustainable space for a variety of w ildlife species.
―
"We don't experience natural environments enough to realize how restored they can make us feel, nor are we aware that studies also show they make us healthier, more creative, more empathetic and more apt to engage with the world and with each other.
Nature, it turns out, is good for civilization."
Florence Williams, The Nature Fix: W hy Nature Makes Us Happier, Healthier, and More Creative
PRIO RITIZING TREE EQU ITY 20
With this Tree Master Plan, the City of San Leandro is striving to increase community resilience holistically by centering the urban forestry program in tree equity. It is essential to first understand the baseline conditions of the urban forest, which includes condition of San Leandro's trees, as well as the programming and resources that support the urban forest.
An urban forest audit was conducted to gain a comprehensive understanding of the current state of the urban forest (including any disparities or inequities that may exist), identify areas of need, and develop targeted strategies to address challenges and gaps in services.
A tree canopy assessment, urban heat assessment, and public tree inventory provide detailed information about the distribution, health, and accessibility of trees across different neighborhoods within the city. This baseline provides a solid foundation for implementing equitable urban forestry initiatives that ensure all residents have access to the benefits of trees. It also allows for the measurement of progress over time, ensuring that efforts to promote equity in urban forestry are effective and sustainable in the long term. 21 THEME
w
_j
0..
0 w
0..
w
u
z
<(
~
0::
0 LL
0::
w
0..
0 z
z
z
:5
0..
COMMUNITY FOREST ETHOS
Support human capacity and care
(investments in people and organizations)
Re-envision the functions of the urban
forest (productive systems and biocultural
approaches)
Community organizing beyond the green
silo (intersectional and cross-sectoral
approaches)
TREE MASTER PLAN GOAL
Foster a culture of inclusive tree stewardship
through robust education, partnerships, and
capacity-building opportunities that empower
all community members to build tree equity.
Measure and track the performance of San
Leandro's urban forest in an effort increase the
quality and quantity of trees, the benef its
provided by trees, and the resources ded icated
to tree management.
Develop and implement plans, pol icies, and
procedures that reflect the community's
priorities, are driven by data, and proactively
tackle issues facing trees in San Leandro.
PEOPLE
Public agency cooperation
Involvement of large private and institutional land holders Green industry cooperation
Neighborhood action
Community - municipality - business interaction
General awareness of trees as a community resource
Regional cooperation
City staffing
PERFORMANCE
Relative canopy cover
Age Distribution of the trees in the community
Species suitability
Species distribution
Condition of publicly owned trees (trees managed intensively) Publicly owned natural areas
Native vegetation
Tree risk management
Maintenance of publicly owned intensively managed trees
PLANNING
Tree inventory
Canopy cover inventory
Citywide management plan
Tree establishment planning and implementation
Publicly owned natural areas management planning and
implementation
Municipality-wide funding
Tree habitat suitability
Tree protection policy development and enforcement
The criteria and key performance indicators (KPI) used to assess San Leandra's urban forest were derived from the "Indicators of a Sustainable Urban Forest," a comprehensive resource and program assessment tool for urban forestry programs (Clark, et al., 7997; Kenney, et al., 2077). The 25 criteria and indicators apply u rban forest ry industry standards and best management practices to evaluate and rate t rees, how they are managed, and the level of community involvement in the urban forest.
The criteria were organized by the three TMP themes: people, performance, and planning. San Leand ro's performance level was rated as low, medium, high, or opt imal based on data ana lysis, existing conditions, and feedback from the City's project team and department staff The areas of low and medium performance are areas of opportunities that, with active support and investment , could be acf1vely e nhanced t o a hig h o r optimal performance level. LOW MODERATE GOOD OPTIMAL
PRIORITIZING TREE EQUITY: 22
#
ll
12 l3
14 15
16 17
18 23
Criteria
Public agency
cooperation
Involvement of large
private and
institutiona l land
holders
Green industry
cooperation
Neighborhood
action
Commun itymunicipa litybusiness interaction
Genera l awareness
of trees as a
community
resource
Reg iona l
cooperation
City staffing
AUDIT RESULTS: PEOPLE
Criteria Objective
Ensure all city department cooperate
w ith common goa ls and objectives.
Large private landholders embrace
citywide goa ls and objectives through
specif ic resource management plans.
The green industry operates w ith high
professiona l standards and comm its to
citywide goa ls and objectives.
At the neighborhood level, commun ity
members understand and cooperate in
urban forest management
All commun ity members in the
commun ity interact for the benefit of the
urban forest
The public understands the ro le of the
urban forest
Provide for cooperation and interaction
among neighboring communities and
reg iona l groups.
Employ and tra in adequate staff to
implement citywide urban forestry plan.
Level
Achieved
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Good
Optima l
Low
Moderate
Indicator Achieved
Common goa ls but no
cooperation among
departments and/or
agencies.
Educationa l materials and
advice ava ilable to
landholders.
Genera l cooperation
among nurseries, tree care
compan ies, etc.
Isolated or li m ited number
of active groups.
Informa l and/or genera l
cooperation.
Urban forest recognized as
v ita l to the commun ity's
environmenta l, social, and
econom ic wel l-being.
Commun it ies cooperate
independently.
No tra ining of existing staff
AUDIT RESULTS: PERFORMANCE
# Criteria C riteria Objective
Level
Ind icator Achieved
Achieved
Relative canopy
Ach ieve climate-appropriate The existing canopy cover equa ls 25%- 2.7 degree of tree cover, Moderate cover
commun ity-wide
50% of the potential.
Age Distribution Provide for uneven aged Any size class represents between 50% 2.2 of the trees in the distribution citywide as well as Moderate and 75% of the tree population community at the neighborhood level.
Establish a tree population
2.3 Species su itabi lity
su itable for the urban Moderate 50% to 75% of trees are of species environment and adapted to considered suitable for the area. the regional environment.
Species
Establish a genetica lly diverse No species represents more than 70% of 2.4 distribution tree population citywide as well Good the entire tree population citywide. as at the neighborhood level.
Cond ition of
publicly owned Detailed understanding of the Complete tree inventory that includes 2.5 trees (trees cond ition and risk potential of Good detailed tree cond it ion ratings. managed all publicly- owned trees. intensive ly)
Detailed understanding of the Publicly owned natural areas identified
2.6 Publicly owned ecologica l structu re and Moderate in a "natura l areas survey" or similar natu ra I areas function of all publicly owned document. natu ra I areas.
The use of native species is encouraged
Preservation and enhancement on a proJect- appropriate basis in both
2.7 Native vegetation of loca l natural biodiversity Good intensively and extensively managed areas; invasive spec ies are recognized,
and their use is discouraged.
Complete tree inventory w hi ch includes
detailed tree fa ilure risk ratings; risk
2.8 Tree risk All publicly owned trees are Good abatement program is in effect management safe. eliminating hazards w ithin a maximum
of one month from confirmation of
hazard potential.
Maintenance of All publicly owned trees are
publicly owned maintained to maximize Publicly owned trees are maintained on
2.9 current and future benefits. Moderate a request/ reactive basis. No systematic intensively Tree health and cond ition (block) pruning managed trees ensure maximum longevity
PRIORITIZING TREE EQUITY: 24
AUDIT RESULTS: PLANNING
# Criteria Criteria Objective Level Ind icator Achieved Achieved Complete inventory of the tree resource Complete or sample-based
3.7 Tree inventory to direct its management, including age Moderate inventory of publicly- distribution, species mix, tree cond ition, and risk assessment. owned trees.
High resolution assessments of the Sampling of tree cover
3.2 Canopy cover
existing and potential canopy cover for Optimal using aerial photographs or inventory the entire commun ity. satellite imagery included in citywide GIS.
Develop and implement a
Existing plan limited in
3.3 Citywide comprehensive urban forest Moderate scope and management plan management plan for private and public implementation property Urban forest renewal is ensu red through
Tree establishment a comprehensive tree establishment Tree establishment occurs 3.4 planning and program driven by canopy cover, species Moderate on an annua l basis. implementation diversity, and species distribution objectives.
Publicly owned The ecolog ica l structu re and function of Reactionary stewardsh ip in natural areas
all publicly owned natural areas are
effect to facilitate public
3.5 management protected and, w here appropriate, Moderate use (e.g., hazard planning and enhanced. abatement, trail
implementation maintenance).
Municipality-wide Develop and maintain adequate funding Funding to optimize
3.6 funding to implement a citywide urban forest Moderate existing urban forest management plan.
Tree habitat All publicly owned trees are planted in Tree spec ies are considered
3.7 habitats that w ill maximize cu rrent and Moderate
su ita bi I ity future benefits provided to the site. in planting site selection.
Tree protection The benefits derived from large-stature Policies in place to protect 3.8 policy development trees are ensured by the enforcement of Moderate public trees. and enforcement municipal wide policies. 25 This urban tree canopy assessment utilized publicly available urban tree canopy data created by Earth Define, based on 2078 National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) aerial imagery and LiDAR data collected by the U.S. Geological Survey. The NAI P imagery was acquired during the growing season and included four spectral bands (red, green, blue, and near infrared) at 60-cm spatial resolution. Results of this study indicate 8% canopy cover citwide, and that most of this tree canopy coverage is in wea lthier neighborhoods in the northeast quadrant of the City. Additional analyses using this UTC data are included in the following pages.
PRIORITIZING TREE EQUITY: 26
Ecosystem Benefits
The urban forest holds millions of dol lars of savings in avoided infrastructure costs, pol lution reduction, and stored ca rbon. Using the best available science from
USDA Forest Service's i-Tree Landscape tool, pai red
with the f indings from the UTC assessment,
ecosystem benefit values were calculated for the ai r
quality, stormwater, and carbon functions provided
by the urban tree canopy in San Leandro. The i-Tree
tool reported monetary, pollution removal, and
benefit value coefficients per tree canopy acre,
tailored to the San Leandro area. The per acre
coefficients were then applied to the 2078 UTC data
(686 acres).
Air quality in San Leandro is estimated to be
improved by removing over 37 tons of pollutants out
of the air annually, which otherwise may ca use
expensive or life-threatening respiratory issues. Every year, trees in San Leandro d ivert over 27 million
gallons of stormwater away from sewers and
roadways. Citywide, San Leandra's trees have stored
approximately 5,400 tons of carbon, valued at over
$928,000, and each year the tree canopy absorbs and
sequesters approximately250 tons of ca rbon dioxide,
valued at over $42,000. These an nual benefits
represent over $844,000 and a value of $9.73 per
capita.
Annual Citywide Benefits Provided by Trees 1n San Leandro 27 Air Quality Stormwater Carbon Total Annual Carbon Storage Runoff Avoided Sequestration Value (lifetime)
$612,170.93 $189,467.61 $42,556.24 $844,794.78 $928,525.05
31.47 tons
21.27 million 249.51 tons 5,444.21 tons
g allons
Additional i-Tree m ethodology and documentation can be found here:
https:llwvvwitreetoo/s.orq/supportlresources-overviewli-tree-m ethods-and-files In San Leandro, some areas of the city experience
hotter temperatures than others due to the urban
heat island (UHi) effect. UHi happens when urban
areas with large amounts of pavement and buildings
tend to have less trees and vegetation, a combination
that results in warmer temperatures. Asphalt and
concrete gradually release stored heat at night,
which can produce higher temperatures in the
evening, further exacerbating daytime heat issues.
•F
w
f3 92
i
w
~
~
w
1-
90 ~----------------~-
Research on the UH I effect indicates that people who
live in the hottest parts of a city are more likely to be low-income and experience increased health risks.
Respiratory issues, heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and
other heat-related health conditions
disproportionately impact our most vulnerable
populations such as children, the elderly, and those
with preexisting conditions. Heat mitigation
strategies such as planting trees and increasing
shade can be life-saving public investments that also
increase quality of life.
oc
33 32
.. .. z
0 0
z
a:
w
,
, Downtown 31
t:
<
w
~ _, ---- ...
Rural
,
,
, -- ,
Suburban
residential
PRIORITIZING TREE EQUITY:
Commercial Urban
residential
Park
.. ..
Suburban
residential
.. 30
------·
Rural
farmland
28 The "Urban Heat Island Index" map is an index
created by consultants at Plan IT Geo based on
high heat severity, high impervious surface,
and low tree canopy. Areas near water and
greenspaces are less susceptible to urban
heat, while areas with lots of buildings and
pavement experience the most heat severity.
Urban Heat Severity: shown on a scale of
mild to severe, with mild heat in light pink
(slightly above the city's average), and
severe heat in dark pink (sign·1ficantly
above the city's average).
Urban Tree Canopy (UTC): shown for each
Census Tract, from yellow or low {0-5%) to
green or high (75-20%).
Impervious Surfaces: shown for each
Census Tract, from teal or low (0-15%) to
grey or high (>75%). Low
Low-Medium
E::] Medium
E:::] Medium-High
- High
URBAN HEAT ISLAND INDEX
URBAN HEAT SEVERITY URBAN TREE CANOPY IMPERVIOUS SURFACES Moder1~e.
- Moder.a:e:toHoh
. ,., ...
29 10 - 1s
- 1.5-20
30. •s
L 45 • (,(J
60- n,
. ,,,
Vulnerable Populations
Planting Prioritization
The "Vulnera ble Populations" map includes data
from t he Califo rni a Cli m ate Invest ments program,
which funds projects in or near areas w ith
d isadvantaged and low-income communities.
Disadvantaged Communities: as d efined by the
California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA)
in 2022.
Low-Income Communities: income either at or
below 80 percent of the statewide median or below a
threshold designated as low-income by the
Department of Housing and Community
Development.
The Priority Plant ing map shows San Leand ra's
census tracts that have been prioritized and
identified for increased tree investments, reflecting a scale of red (highest priority) to blue (lowest priority).
The following datasets were used as indicators for this p rioritizat ion:
Heat Severity
Priority Populations
Impervious Surface
Imperviousness in Streets
Pollutant Levels
Displacement Potential
See discussion on pages 32-33
Urban Tree Canopy
Storm Drain Density
Park Access
Tree Equity Score
See discussion on page 30
PRIORITIZING TREE EQU ITY
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS INDEX
- Low
D Low-Medium
D Medium
B Medium-High
- High
PLANTING PRIORITIZATION
- Low
Low-Medium
□ Medium
B Medium-High
- High
30 Tree canopy coverage is rarely distributed equitably throughout a city. The American Forests organization created the Tree Equity Score (TES, www.treeequityscore.org) tool to help address environmental inequities by identifying and prioritizing areas with the greatest need. The tool measures tree equity across every urban Census block group in the United States. TES scores indicate the level of access to the health, economic, and climate benefits provided by trees. A score oflOO represents tree equity.
The map below displays the Tree Equity Scores for each U.S. Census Block Group (CBG) within the City of San Leandro. Based on a 2023 analysis, San Leandro's TES is 82, compared with the average score of 85 for all 797,505 U.S. Census-defined urban areas included in the study. The disparities are clearly seen between the highest scores in the northeast and the rest of the city. Three CBGs are attaining tree equity with a score of at least 95, while 29 CBGs have a score below the city's average of 82. This illustrates an opportunity for the City to adopt and implement a canopy goal that addresses tree equity in priorities areas. 31 San Leandro's Tree Equity Score
Tree Equity Scores
j=1 U.S. Census Block Groups
.. <75
.. 75-80
80 - 85
.. 85-90
.. 90-95
.. 95-700
Existing Canopy
Surface Temperature
Tree Equity Score Inputs
Population Density
• •
Race
~
l(o O oJI
Income
Age
Employment
Health
Tree Equity Scores are calculated using the metrics li sted in the figure above for each Census Block Group, and an average score is then provided for each community. Compared with 27 other cities in the region, San Leandro's Tree Equity Score of 82 is on par with the average. Achieving tree equity is a high priority for San Leandro, so the goals and strategies outlined in this Tree Master Plan guide the City towards an equitable distribution of tree canopy cover.
Regional Comparison of Tree Equity Scores
- - - ---- - - --- -
a6 87 89 89 91 93 0(
80 81 81 82 82 82 82 82 83 83 8.ii 84 8.lt 8.lt 8.ii
67, 67, 69 69 :73 :76
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- Average Tree Equity Score (82)
PRIORITIZING TREE EQUITY: 32
Urban Canopy and Racist Housing Policies
Green gentrification (also known as environmental or ecological gentrification) happens when the installation of new, improved, or restored green sp;:ices and infrastructure, such as trees, gets the attention of developers and results in increased investment, which drives up cost of living and forces existing residents to relocate (Anguelovski et al, 2079; Curran and H;:imilton; 2072; Mcclintock, 2078) To understand the risk of green gentrific:ition in Sun LeJndro us the City Jims to direct urb;:in forest investments towurds Jrcus with low tree cunopy, it is importJnt to ucknowlcdgc the history thJt led to toduy's inequities. 33 RESIDENT IAL SECURITY MAP
L E G E N D
- A FIRST GRADE
- -- B SECOND GRADE
[ =Le THIRD GRADE
- D FOURTH GRADE
~ .... SPARSELY BUil T UP
(C::~01111 1~iltCaH~ GR4 Df)
~ - INDUSTRIAL
~·-·--COMMERCIAL (''-'~~bf:~ .. ~i'~~'f
CJ. ... UNDEVELOPED OR FARMLAND t .. v ,..Afle,\ia~, 01M•li£ "'''"i"' $ ,uffS l OPIISION OF fl£S£ARCH ANO STATISncs
• • ,,,. l~E ro-OFllfATION or THC
APP"-AISAL OEPARTMENl
HO.._£ OW~ERs° 1..0AH CORPORATION
A recent assessn,ent of 37 U.S cities found that inequitable urban tree c;:inopy distribution today is correlated with r;:icist housing pr;:ictices called "redlining" th;:it began in 7933 with the cre;:ition of the fcdcrul government's Home Owners' Lo;:in Corporc1tion {HOLC) (Locke ct JI., 2027}. HOLC issued louns bused on J system of perceived risk, ;:ind those upprc1isc1ls were bused primurily on Jn area's demographics and the age and physical condition of its housing stock. Areas with predominantly U.S.-bom, white populations, and nevver housing vvere vvidely appraised as the "safest" places for lending, vvhile areas with significant nurnbers of racial and ethnic n,inorities. foreign-born residents, and older housing stock were ;:ippraised as h;:iving the highest risk for lenders.
These lending practices, ;:ilong with segregation and exclusionary zoning, resulted in immense economic disparities ;:imong urban popul;:itions th;:it wns perpetuuted by continued disinvestment of public resources c1nd infrustructure. While housing discriminntion ;:ind redlining pructices \Vere outlawed with the 7968 F;:iir Housing Act, San Leandro and adJacent cities remained mostly racially White and working-class for decades (City of San Leandro, 2024).
The Urban Displacen,ent Project (UDP) published a report in 2078 which found that from 2000-2075, there was a migration of lowincon,e people of color from San Francisco to the outer areas of Alamed;:i County such as Oakland, San Leandro, and Daly City (Schafran, 2078; Menendian and Gambhir, 2078)
Untended Consequences
Opt-Out Programs
Even well-intended public investments such as tree planting projects can contribute to gentrification, displacement, or exclusion of vulnerable populations and disenfranchised communities. Many cities in California are investing in projects like bike lanes, g reen spaces, and public
transportation to mitigate and ada pt to the impacts of climate change {Chapple, et al, 2022). Policies, plans, and programs can help t o stabilize San Leandra's neighborhoods identified for urban forestry investments and strengthen against potential green gentrification.
The map on the left shows the Urban Displacement Project's Estimated Displacement Risk Model for San Leandro. Census tracts in red indicate the areas with greatest displacement risk, estimating an elevated d isplacement for low-incom e (50% - 80% AMI) and high displacement risk for very lowincome households (0% - 50% AM I). Areas in orange indicate elevated displacement for low-income households (50% -
80% AMI), and areas in yellow have a proba ble displacement risk (Thomas et a I , 2022)
Some property owners are not prepared to ta ke on the
responsibility of caring for a tree. A 2019 study out of Detroit found that roughly 24% of impacted property owners
decided to opt out of the City-led street tree planting effort.
Community members expressed a lack of confidence that
the local government would share the bu rden of ca ring for the tree and cleaning up debris (Carmichael, 2019).
The goal is to replace a tree at every location, but it is not always feasible In certain circumstances, the City of San Leandro offers the option for property owners to "opt-out" of receiving a replacement street tree when one is removed from the right-of-way adjacent to the property. Instead, a one-time fee is collected to locate an alternate space o n public property to p lant a tree.
PRIORITIZING TREE EQUITY: 34
San Leandro community members contributed their input, opinions, priorities, and ideas for the Tree Master Plan at community events, stakeholder focus groups, and public meetings. Engaging community members in the TMP was vital to the long-term success of the project, and a comprehensive Outreach and Engagement Plan (OEP) was developed to establish a clear understanding of purpose, target audiences, strategies, messaging, and deliverables.
35 Earth Day
The City hosted an Earth Day event in April with a variety of act ivities and informat io n offered t o the community.
In support of urban forestry, the City had a boot h w it h educational posters about trees and a dot board exercise to gather community input for the Trees Master Plan.
The results of the dot exe rcise are shown below. The vast majority of pa rticipants voted for "Trees to beautify t he city" where a picture of a flowering cherry was d isplayed. "Low maintenance trees" and "large-canopied t rees for shade" received the next highest nu m ber of votes. ■ Trees to beautify the city
■ Low maintenance trees
■ Large-canopied trees for shade
■ Small-canopied trees
■ Native trees, climate adaptive, or resilient
■ Trees for wildlife
■ Other
■ Evergreen/ conifer trees
Community Engagement:
Small canopied trees at maturity
Others
• •••• • •
36 Tree Planting Projects
Focus Groups
The City of San Leandro partnered with Common Vision to plant 1,000 trees and engage t he community o n t ree planting, maintenance, and care. Planting proj ect s were funded through a Cal Fire grant received in May 2022. The p lanting event s were held throughout t he course of the Tree Master Plan, which prov ided ample opportunity for crossover on public education and outreach regard ing the TM P.
Common Vision is an organization that improves community health and food security t h ro ugh outdoor classrooms and school gardens th roughout Cal ifornia. Executive Director Wanda Stewart's vision aligns w ith t he City of San Leandra's t ree planting efforts to reach underrepresented communit ies, maxim ize public education, and empower youth.
Community partners were essential to the Trees Master Plan's success. Specia l attention was given t o target ing f rontline communities where tree canopy is low, urban heat island impacts are high, and allocatio n of resources has historically been lacking To achieve the TMP priorities of environ mental justice and resilience, a stro ng network of stakeholders was formed to share information and news about the TMP, recruit volu nteers and attendees for community events, advise the City and consu ltants of issues and def iciencies in the outreach process, and provide input. Several of these organizations partner with the City of San Leand ro on existing and/or recent efforts such as the General Plan Update, Climate Action Plan, Resilience Hubs, and the Cal Fire Tree Planting Grant.
37 1
CoN.N.on
· Vision
The Trees Master Plan's outreach and engagem ent
included a series of focus group sessions. In t hese
sessions, various interest g roups shared perspectives
and ideas about San Leandro's urban forest. These
groups provided local expertise and innovative ideas to inform the TM P's recom m endat ions.
Community-Based Organizations
Common Vision joined two other community groups in the
TMP's first focu s group. One member joined from the Friends of San Leandro Creek, a 50l(c)3 non-profit organization and community group made up of community members, students, and businesses ·interested in the protection and enhancement of San Leandro Creek, and in learning more about the creek's ecology. They had a key role in volunteer organization for the CalFire g rant tree planting effort. The g roup is supportive of native plants to replace eucalyptus and restore the San Leandro Creek.
A m ember of Hyphae Design Laboratory joined and shared experience with vegetative buffers, ecosystem restoration, and w ildlife corridors. Hyphae's vision is to break down disciplinary silos and conventions to redef ine t he relationship between nature, humans and the built environment.
5 Key Takeaways
7) Continued engagement: Effective community engagem e nt and education are vita l to the success of the urban forest.
2) Tree maintenance: San Leandro needs g reater resources, su pport, and buy-in for m aintaining new ly p lanted trees, established t rees, and m ature trees. 3) Soils: Soil and u nderstory vegetatio n play an impo rtant role in t he health of t he urban forest. There is often not e noug h soil for trees. When possible, remove conc rete and m ake m o re permea ble spaces for trees. 4) Recommended trees: San Leandra's recommended tree spec ies list should be u pdated wit h cl im ate ad aptat io n in m ind. The re is a d esire to include m o re conife rs and everg reen trees w hile red uc ing euca ly ptus. 5) Green infrastructure: The TM P sho uld hig hlig ht t he im po rt ance t he urban forest as an asset, and t he ap plicat io n of g reen inf rast ru cture conce pts such as wi ld life corrido rs, living shore lines (Sa n Leand ro c reek), and veg et at ive buffers in urban enviro nme nts.
Community Engagement: 38
Indigenous Communities J!,C_· SOGOREA TE' LAND TRUST ,_, LED BY URBAN INDIGENOUS WOMEN A focus groups was held w ith t he Sogorea Te' Land Trust, an urban Ind igenous women-led land trust based in the San Francisco Bay Area that facilitates the retu rn of Indigenous land to Indigenous people.
During the focus group session, Corrina Gould, co-founder of the Sogorea Te' Land Trust, emphasized the importance of passing on Indigenous ecological knowledge to futu re generations. Gathering native oak acorns, harvesting manzanita berries, and weaving baskets with willow are traditional skills that are t hreatened by colonization and rampant development
Deja Gould, Language Program Coord inator at the Sogorea Te' Land Trust, suggested that the Tree Master Plan include recommendations of companion plants for t rees. Honeysuckle, California rose, and d utch man's pipe support a balanced ecosystem in San Leandro Creek.
39 5 Key Takeaways
l Tree Pruning Program: San Leand ro w ould benefit f rom a com m u nity t ree care train ing program. As w e increase t he amount of t ree canopy throug hout the city, youth should learn t o care for the trees as part of a generational program (e.g. on school grounds).
2. Sharing Tribal Knowledge: Tradit ional ecological know ledge from old Tribal diaries ad t ext s would g reatly benefit t he TM P's land ma nagement approach.
Need t o follow up w ith a request for a q uote or excerpt t o include in t he TM P (potentially Ch ris Longoria).
3. Recommended Tree Species: Include fruit trees in the recom mend ed species list. Companion p lanting should be g iven more consideration w it h t ree p lanting p lans.
4. Planting Strategies: The City 's TM P should include strategies for the removal of invasive spec ies, moving towards nat ive spec ies, and incorporating trees t hat can h and le saltwater int rusion.
5. Ongoing Relationship t he Tribe would li ke continued communication and invit ations to be part of urban forestry effort s as time goes on. Tri bes in t he area would like to be involved in part ic ipating in the t raini ng events for tree p lanting, p ru ning, harvesting, and using wood and other p roducts fro m t he trees.
Young People
The San Leandro High School's Eco Club is an active group t hat helps to org;:inize volunteers ;:ind educ;:ition;il events focusing on a vvide variety of environmental topics Two ninth-grade Eco Club rnet--ribers joined to express their passion for t he erwironrnent ond idecJs to rniJke the world J better ploce.
Mr. Marc Gordon (pictured below), the students'
environmental sciences teacher and advisor of the Eco Clu b, joined to shore more iJbout the sustJinJble iJctivities, tree plantings, and nature-based activities he helps to organize for the students. Amy Olson, who works in the high school's counseling office cJnd is Jctive with erwironrnentol issues, shared her knowledge of and desire for more California-native trees and plants
5 Key Takeaways
l Recommended Tree Species: Include drought tolerant
species. native species (such as red bud and valley oak), ,rnd species well udupted to ncJturiJI disiJsters
2. Planting Strategies need more trees along streets and on ecimpuses When street trees die, it is import,rnt to replc1ce them iJnd fill the gups [e.g. ulong 1-580).
3. Canopy for Schools: San Leandro High School needs m ore trees and canopy cover.
4. Growing Trees: The students are interested in sta rting a nursery (on the roof) at the cl ub and bringing professionals in to support distribution.
5. Ongoing Youth Involvement yo uth groups are interested in getting outside, into nature, and looking for social volunteer opportunities The San Lec1nd ro High School Eco Club, AEY Club, lnterJct Club, t he AP Environment clJss, and the Stude nt Conservation Comm ission are all possib le future partners.
Cor,rrunity 1rc;1cigem2, t 40
Community Responses
Survey Highlights
MOST IMPORTANT
QUALITY OF TREES:
SHADE AND REDUCING
TEMPERATURES
CITY RESOURCES
SHOULD GO TO:
SETTING AND ACHIEVING
TREE CANOPY GOALS
AREA TO PRIORITIZE
PLANTINGS:
STREETS AND MEDIANS
GREATEST CONCERN:
WATER CONSUMPTION,
ESPECIALLY DURING
DROUGHT
GREATEST EDUCATIONAL
INTEREST:
CREATING WILDLIFE
HABITAT
GREATEST OPPORTUNITY:
JOB CREATION &
WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT
The community participated in two public surveys to share ideas, knowledge, and feedback for the Tree Master Plan. The first survey aimed to gauge community members' understanding of the urban forest and t heir thoughts on how to manage public trees, while the second focused on defin·1ng goals, vision, and m easures of success. Between the two surveys, 368 responses were received (352 in English, 3 in Spanish, and 73 in Ch inese).
Complete su rvey results were provided to t he City.
47 ―
; .'i!:\ ,.,.~!:\:: ~~,::~ ,·,,:·., <·;~: .'.'it.i.'•/.'•:l', .. ••:'i:~:. h, ..... ~:o,•:-;!:l•'·;o•.:., ,:)~; o .;·t.:ii-'!'r.:,:;,_,'f. !:\•:lt. : ,'y .' ;t)•:.: ! ,'·;e_•: -:to U;;.~;. .J 1 .. ,'
•/A:· :·1.:'j.'1 ·t y·.: i :-:.'·. ·.: .. ,-,: :S! ,t ·.,..,.,•-.at ·.,v:; .;:;.::- ,'5 ~>-:~:· .c,r;o,vr:r •::+ ,J•·.,'t>,: 1//.'·.:..,.r ;·.(,c;r•:: ,·.:; r:: ,;.,·, ·.:
.••.:.;:.:,r.,f:?,·•:· ~t) L,·~· .... ,',' 1//~ ( ...... , :·~t).' '• ·!:l ,:t)ii~!l:!:i, t), ..-~ ..... ~.•. ~t.>(:-:": ,· ;,:?:
::.,.;;b,':-. •,.:.,,,:,:: •<.',•-r,,•-.·, .;, .;,, .'sr•:-:,\:iir.~, :)·.,•,:.;-:;!~ra1;.;: ,':-i:-:.:~,:;r,,:•d.i ·.11,:,·.-.:·:.:;.'r•, :)r:/c:1i,'ti.;; ,V.r,.::•,:,,,':::dgt:' or.d r:ht:' T~a.;,>-::,;g~ o~ ,"':ar•r:~
HIGHLIGHTS
Successful urban forest management includes an
organized, proactive program that utilizes the most recent and accurate tree inventory data to set goals and measure progress.
In late 2022, Plan IT Geo's Inventory Arborists (certified by the International Society of Arboriculture) assessed and
inventoried San Leandra's trees within the public rights-ofway (ROW) and select parks and public properties. As of December 2022, a total ofl6,745 street trees, 7,779 park trees, 4,032 planting sites, and 369 tree stumps were inventoried.
Based on this recent inventory, the TMP considers the tree species diversity, distribution, and general condition to provide a prioritized system for managing San Leandra's trees.
43 Tree distribution considers various characteristics of where trees are located throughout San Leandro, such as land use, site width, and growing space. Understanding
tree distribution helps plan for potential risks such as pests, diseases, or the impacts of climate change.
Equitable distribution of trees throughout the city
ensures that all residents have access to the canopy's
benefits.
Tree care management strategies, tree care priorities,
budgets based on projected needs, and are identified in an effort to minimize the need for costly, reactive
solutions to crises or urgent risk mitigation. The
strategies included in the TMP will help the City
maximize benefits the urban forest will provide in the
years to come.
GENUS DIVERSITY
10-20-30 Rule
The public L'ees in S;-m e,wdro ;.-ire corn prised of57 uniq....1e ger-era. The tcp ten most comrnon tree
gerera comprise 56% of the public tree pop~1latio11.
The Ci:y should monitor the divc'sity of public :recs
by periodically updatirg its i·we'ltory.
A guideline for ·ncreasing urban tree biod·vers·ty by
limiting urbHn foresl.s Lo: 103/, of any species. 703/, of any genus, ar'd 3C½ of any farnily. This rule a·ms to
redu::e Lhe r'sks assoc:i&ed vviU- pest.sand c i:,;eases and increase u 'ban forest resi ience. VVhen trees of
the same gerus are plarted to,;iether, trey are
r'norc susccp:iblc to being c::ittuckcd by c single pest or disease, wilier can spr2ac rapidly and cau5e
vvioespreiJd dc::imi:lgc. Divcrsifyi '"lg pliJntings cc::in significantly reduce the 'isk of large-scale darrage
from s:::;cc cs-specific thrcc::its.
Bcscd on the 10 20 3C Pule for urbcn tree divers ty,
tre genus Lagerstrcemia, which coMprises fo~r
crc::ipcmyrtlc species in S::in Lcc::ino'o (comm:::;n
crapemyrtle, Muskogee crapemy'tle, Tuscaro'a
crc::ipcrnyrtlc, c::ind NiJtc-1ez cr::iocn-yrtlc). is '"lo:
exceeding the threshold vvith 131., compared to the
rccorn··ncndcd 20-:J<-, for genus. Whcr- looking
speci~ically at the street tree popula:ion hcwever,
th"s ir-cre,)SCS t:::; l49f,
It rntiy be rccomr··1cr-ded to lirrit the pltint" ng of crapemyrtle species as street trees and prior'tize
trees from ,, dif"ercnt genus th,,t prese'"lt sirnil,,r aesthetic and mairtenance characteristics vvhile
incre"sing ....1rb,,n forest resilience through
diversification.
44 SPECIES DIVERSITY
While crapemyrtle species dominate the urban tree
population in San Leandro with 7,787 trees in the
inventory, the London planetree 1s a contender for
most common species with 7,708 trees; both
represent 70% of the citywide inventory. Still, San
Leandro has healthy species diversity when
assessing based on the 70-20-30 Rule, since no
species mc1kes up more thc1n 20% of the totul
inventory Sun Lec1ndro's public tree inventory hus
373 unique species, a relatively impressive species
richness for urban areas.
The genus Lagerstroemio makes up 73% of San
Leandro's tree inventory Roughly 50 species of
La.9erstroemio trees and shrubs commonly known
as crapemyrtle. Ubiquitous to warm climates and
the southern United Stutes, crupemyrtle ure populur
for their drought tolernnce und showy flowers. They
are native to India, China, Japan, Korea, northern
Australia, and the Oceana. Examples of native
alternatives for San Leandro include Western
redbud (Cercis occidento/is), California buckeye
(Aescu/us ca/ifornica), and Catalina ironwood
(Lyonhamnus floribundus ssp asplenifolius).
Of the ten most common species, mcJyten is
considered invc1sivc occording to the lnvc1sivc
Species Council of California (ISCC), while coast
redwood is the only native species according to the
California Native Plant Society. With "Right Tree,
Right Place" principles in rY1ind, native species
should be considered by the City for public spaces
and encouraged to private landowners as
replacements for non-native and invas·1ve species to
support local wildlife, lower maintenance needs,
and improve overall drought resistance by reducing
watering needs.
PARK TREES
Parks t rees make up 70% or 7,779 of the City's
inventory, located in 22 City parks. This table on the
right identifies the distribution of inventoried
trees within parks. Trees on or adjacent to vacant
land and other unmaintained areas are included
in the street tree count.
Most park trees (89.2% or 7,534 trees) grow in open
areas associated wit h the m aint ained areas of
parks, while the remaining trees grow in spaces
that are either unmaintained (2.9%), pla nting
strips (3.9%), or other more restricted areas such as
planting wells (7.8%), parking islands (7.5%),
medians (0.5%), or raised planters (0.2%).
While park trees are usually provided more space
than street trees, understanding t he type of space
park trees are growing in allows for informed
analysis of tree condition over time and enables
assessments of tree species su rviva bility in
different growing space types.
Urban Fmest MANAGEMENT: Park Trees
Park Name . -
Marin a Park 327
- - Chabot Park 306
Washington Manor Pa rk 267
Halcyon Park 779
Bonaire Park 779
Stenzel Pa rk 777
- -- - -
Siem pre Verde Pa rk 83
Toyon Park 57 - - Floresta Park 47
Thrasher Park 39
- -- - -
Cherry Grove Park 38
Warden Pa rk 23
Wash ington Manor Middle
23 School Field
San Lea ndro Ba ll Park 27
Mem orial Park 27
Mu lford Point 76
- -- - -
Tony B. Santos Pa rk 76
Root Park 75 - -- - -
Pescad or Point 75 - --
McCart ney Pa rk 77
Victoria Pa rk 7 -
Heath Park Ten nis Courts 2 - -
I Total I 1719
% o f Park
Trees in
Inventory
78.7%
- 77.8%
75.2% -
70.4%
6.9%
6.5%
- 4.8%
3.0% - 2.4% -
2.3% -
2.2% -
73%
73%
12%
7.2%
0.9% -
0.9%
0.9% -
0.9% -
0.6%
0.4% -
0.7% -
100%
46 MONARCH BAY GOLF COURSE TREES
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A total of 508 trees were inventoried in San Leandra's Monarch Bay Golf Course, not includ ing the northwest area which was omitted from the inventory due to logist ical factors. For this Tree Master Plan, t he 508 trees are included in the street tree analysis because they have similar management needs. Rough ly 97% of t he trees were identified for routine pruning at the time of the inventory, while on ly 9% (46 trees) require more urgent pruning or remova l.
It is important to note that seven t ree
species within the Eucalyptus genus
were found on the Monarch Bay Golf
Cou rse. These 775 trees make up 27.5% of
t he inve ntoried golf course trees. The
trees represent a mix of "non-native" and
"invasive" species, many of which are also
considered to be a fire hazard and shou ld
be considered for remova l.
The City is proactively plant ing native
species in Monarch Bay Golf Course. As
part of a CalFire-funded tree planting
project, 725 trees were i nsta I led wit hin the
golf course boundaries in 2023. The
following tree species were planted:
47 Brisbane box (20 trees)
Cypress (74 trees)
Interior live oak (73 trees)
Pacific wax myrtle (40 trees)
Saratoga laurel (5 trees)
Southern live oak (72 trees)
White alder {27 trees)
STREET TREES
According to the 2022 inventory, most
street trees in San Leandro are adjacent to
the sing le-family land use (66%), followed
by small commercial (74%)
"Park/Vacant/Other" is a category of land
uses that may be adjacent to a park or a
vacant lot, which is app1"1cable to 9% of San
Lea nd ro's street trees.
Trees in commercial areas might endure
higher pollution levels, soil compaction
from increased foot and vehicu la r traffic
and are competing for space with utilities,
business operations, and other urban
activities. Conversely, trees near residential
areas may face fewer stressors but stil l
require specific attention to mitigate
potenf1al issues like root intrusion into
underground utilities o r branch
interference with overhead power lines.
The inventory assessed site conditions for
interference with overhead and
underground utilities. 52% of street trees
did not have overhead utilities present,
while 26% of the sites had wires present
wit hout any confl icts. However, confl icts
were apparent at 3,558 sites of 22% of the
streettree inventory. Underground utilities
were observed at 248 sites (7%). More than
half of San Leandra's street trees (55%) are
in good, very good, or excellent cond ition.
Only 7.4% were recorded as dead at the
time of the inventory.
Urban Forest MANAGEMENT: Street Trees
STREET TREE ADJACENT LAND USE
Single Family,
66%
/
Small Commercial, 14%
Industrial/ Large
~ Commercial, 6%
.......__ Multi Family, 5%
\ Park/Vacant/ Other, 9%
48 TREE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The City of San Le,=mdro intends to use the 2022 tree
inventory to proactively preserve, care for, and
enhance the urban forest while maintaining the
capacity to respond to the community's needs. A
five-year Tree Management Program (Program) was
developed to balance these pr'1orities, recognizing
that implementation of this Program will be a
continuous effort, and high-risk tree work must
always be prioritized to maintain public safety. As
such, the Program recommends adequat e staff,
resources, and equipment to support a safe and
healthy work e nvironme nt in addition to utilizing
contractors for proactive ca re. Implementation of
regular training. certifications, And continuing
education credits ensures that the San Leandro staff
are informed of industry standards and use best
munugcmcnt pr;:icticcs dc1ily
SAn LeAndro's public tree inventory cAn be eAsily
accessed in Plan lT Geo's TreePlotter map using any
device t hat supports internet or cellular data at
www.pg-cloud.com/Sa n Lean d roCA/. The City can use
TreePlotter's mapping tool to focus on specific
neighborhoods and areas for maintenance by
utilizing advanced filters to showcase the most
critical tree removal and pruning needs. The
inventory can be printed, althoug h navigation using
the interactive map or spreadsheets 1s
recommended due t o the size and complexity of t he
inventory d at a. A Tree Manag em ent Program
Workbook provides fu ll inventory delivery, tree work
prioritization details, And the breakdown of t he
inventory by priority level.
:< □ CD I~ TREEPlOTIER $ • ~ .. •!• :.
HUB CA.TA SlJPPORT ~ INVENTORY OFfUNE ADD MOVE LOGOUT
49 TREE LOCATION MANAGEMENT
RISK ASSESSMENT WORK RECORDS HISTORY
Common Name
Number of Stems
5,821
Alive
0 Archived
Western redbud
Cercis occidenta!is v
0--31/l
0 Excellent
0 Very Good
@ Good
O Fair
0 Poor
San Leandro, CA
Trees
Species
None
Showing 2,000 of 21,753 sites.
Prioritization of the Tree Work
During the 2022 tree inventory, each tree was
assigned a recommended maintenance priority level
by an ISA Certified Arborist. Overa ll t ree condition and severity of potential defects present were used to
guide the maintenance recommendations. The most
urgent situations are scheduled to be addressed in
the fi rst two years of the Program, followed by twoyear and five-year cycles for proactive pruning, maintenance, and planting. The following pages
provide a summary of these priorities, along with
maintenance and pruning recommendations for San
Lea nd ro's trees.
i[
+'
C
a,
D'I
...
::::>
B;:,cklog
Requests
Pl - Removal
Pl - Prune
P2 - Removal
P2 - Prune
P3 - Routine Tree Removal
P3- Routine Tree Prune
P3 - Frequent Tree Prune
P3 - Routine Palm Prune
P4 - Young
P4-Stump
0 0 ..._Pl_an_t_in_g __ __. ,~,
Year l Year2
Urban Forest MANAGEMENT Tree Manag em ent Program
Year3
TREE MANAGEMENT PRIORITIES
Proactive, 74%
t; -
t; - 0 ~
0 0
0 0
Year4
Reactive, 17%
Urgent,
2% /
0 0
t; -
0 0
0 Years
50 IMMIN ENT
IMMIN ENT
HIGH PRIORITY
PRIORITY3 RO UTIN E TREE
REMOVAL
PRIORITY3 ROUTIN E TREE
PRUNE
w
> FREQUENT i= PRIORITY3
u TREE PRUNE
<I:
0 a: ROUTIN E PALM
a. PRIORITY 3
PRU NE
YOUNG &
PRIORITY 4 SMALL
TREE PRUNE
STUMP
RE MOVAL
Iz TREE NO-N ET-LOSS
:'.3 PLANTING PLANTING a.
57 San Lea nd ro community m embers reg u larly submit request s for City staff t o inspect trees, assess risk, adv ise on m aintenance, and adm inist er treatment or rem oval of trees. Due t o a sho rtage of staff and resou rces, the City is roug hly six m onths behind on these request s.
On averag e, the City's arborist s and urban forest ers receive roughly 2-3 requests per day, or 40-60 request s per m o nth.
Th ese trees are desig nated as imm inent rem ova ls due to their defects that pose potential public safety haza rds and ca nnot be cost-effectively o r pract ica lly treated.
Th ese trees requ ire pruning to rem ove dead, dy ing, or wea kened branches that pose potential safety haza rds.
Th ese trees should be rem oved but do not pose a liability as g reat as Priority l trees.
These trees have dead, dy ing, d iseased, or wea kened branches between two and four inches in d iam eter and do not have the potential safety haza rds of those trees requiring Priority l prun ing.
For som e trees and palm s, the m aintenance need was assessed as routine rem ova l. Th ese trees should be rem oved, but they pose minim al risk to people o r pro perty
Most of Sa n Lea ndra's trees were d eterm ined to need routine m aintenance.
Trees in th is categ ory are est ablished, m ature, and maturing trees greater than 6" DSH.
Certain t ree spec ies were selected for a 2-yea r m aintenance cycl e beca use they commonly present issues that warrant m ore frequent prun ing.
Palm pruning consist s of rem oving dead and dy ing fronds, fl owers, and fru it o n a biennial cycle.
Sm all trees require routine pruning to prevent clea rance issues, and young trees need training prun ing to shape and gu ide the grow th to achieve a d es ired form and structure.
Stumps (and their root system above soil level) require rem ova l.
A no-net-loss planting prog ram proact ive ly replaces trees as they are rem oved. Th is est im ate of 300 trees per yea r accounts for trees rem oved as part of the m aintenance prog ram , as well as pred icted annual m ortality ofl% of the tree po pu lat io n.
Reactive Tree Care
On average, the Urban Forestry Division receives 40 Urgent Hazards and Risks to 60 tree service requests every month for a range of
t asks, including inspections, pruning, hanging limbs,
and removals. There are a wide variety of
unpredictable factors at p lay in t he urban forest, and some reactive tree work will always be needed to
satisfy the community. Decreased urban forestry
budget and inconsistent staffing in recent years have
resu lted 1n uncertainties and inefficiencies in
program operations. Today, the Urban Forestry
Division is faced with a six-month backlog of public
t ree service request s, creating inefficient work
planning and frustration for community members
As the City begins working through pre-planned
maintenance cycles, the ratio of reactive to proactive
tree work will shift so that on-demand requests f rom
t he public will lessen
Urban Forest MANAGEMENT: Tree Management Program
Managing hazardous trees requires a
comprehensive approach that priorit izes publ ic
safety and t imely intervention. While regu lar pruning cycles and tree p lanting initiatives are c ruc ial,
immediate action must be t aken for high-prio rity
and hig h-risk trees to mitigate potent ial hazards
prompt ly. Continuous monitoring of the tree
population is essential to identify and address highpriority situations, and plan for removal of trees w hen hazard management is proven insufficient. Priority 7
and Priority 2 maintenance may involve the removal
of dead, diseased, or damaged trees, or t he
elimination of risks such as broken limbs.
52 Proactive Tree Care
Managing established trees is a crit ical aspect of
maintaining a healthy and sustainable urban forest.
Priority 3 and 4 in the Program encompass a variety
of proactive and rout ine tree work to address
structural issues or growth patterns that could pose
safety risks or interfere with infrastructu re.
Understanding the maintenance type prescribed for
trees helps establish maintenance routes, schedules,
and budgets. Priority 3 maintenance aims to
manage risk, develop structure, provide clearance,
and sustain a tree's health and benefits u nti l natural senescence. Proactive pruning focuses on creating
and mainta ining a sound tree structu re to minimize
risks such as branch failure. When executed properly,
pruning offers numerous benefits including reduced
risk of breakage, improved health and appearance,
and enha need cleara nee for vehicles and pedestrians
Routine Tree Pruning
A f ive-year routine tree p runing cycle is
recommended for most trees in the inventory. It is
crucial for the City to routinely monitor these trees,
along with public t ree needs and service demands,
to ensure adequate staffing and resources are
allocated to maintain the recomme nded pruning
cycle. For San Leandra's Public Tree Management
Program, proactive pruning should remain a central
component to ensure the health and longevity of the
city-maintained public trees. Proactive pruning plans
should align wit h the Tree Master Plan and
complement tree planting and emergency response
efforts. The level of care provided t o established trees directly impacts their long-t erm health and vigor,
ult imately affecting the benefits derived f rom the
urban forest.
53 Routine Pruning of Palms
A total of 422 palms were record ed in the pu b lic tree inventory. Palms provide less ecosystem benefits
t han trees overall, and they require very different
maintenance st rategies that can ma ke a p roactive
maintenance progra m challenging. W hile pa lm s are
much less impactfu l t o sid ewalks and u nd ergrou nd
utilities, they often interfere w ith overhead utilities.
The City should m onit or the palms that were
recorded as confl ict ing w it h w ires and pedestrian
clearance.
•
•
•
•
Frequent Tree Pruning
Certain tree species were selected for a 2-year
maintenance cycle because they commonly present
issues that warrant more frequent pruning.
Exam pies of these trees include:
Fremont cottonwood (Popu/us f remontii) is
most likely to have girdling roots with poor root
systems, and frequently experience crown
dieback.
Chinese elms (ulmus parvifo/ia) were found to
be problematic trees in San Leandro's
streetscapes, causing hardscape damage that is
often due to a poor planting site choice.
Additionally, Chinese elms were frequently
impacted by poor maintenance practices such as
improper pruning and mechanical damage.
Carob trees (ceratonia siliqua) were often
observed to have poor structure with crown
dieback, and sometimes experiencing canker
and abiotic issues, such as mechanical damage
and improper pruning.
Sweetgum (/iquidambar styraciflua), sycamore
(platanus occidentalis), and London planetrees
(platanus spp.) are litter-prone and drop litter
and branches throughout the year. While they
are rigorous trees that provide great shade, their
problematic root systems can cause extensive
hardscape damage.
Urban Forest MANAGEMENT: Tree Management Program
Young Tree Care
Within San Leandro's public tree inventory,
approximately 25% of the trees are less than six
inches in diameter, alive, and not recommended for
removal. These trees are either young trees that
require training pruning, or small trees that require
routine pruning.
Training is the structural pruning of young trees to
eliminate diseased or damaged branches, establish a
central leader, and improve branching structure to
foster strong growth and future tree health. Given
the potential structural challenges young trees may
face as they mature, addressing these issues early is
imperative. Problems such as codominant leaders or
crossing limbs can escalate over time, increasing the
risk of tree failure and liability. Incorporating young tree training into the Program not only promotes
tree health and longevity but also mitigates future
safety concerns associated with structural defects.
54 Mitigation Planting for No-Net-Loss
Planting for Canopy Growth
When a tree is removed, whether d ue to disease, damage, or safety concerns, the benefits they provide to the community are lost. Replanting trees helps to restore these invaluable ecosystem services and ensures that future generations can continue to enjoy the many advantages of a robust urban forest. A plant ing strategy is crucial to sustainability of the urban forest and shou ld be based on data, available resources, partnerships, and community input.
The Tree Management Program recommends a commitment to a "no net loss" planting policy that accounts for planned removals, as well as 7% annual mortality (natural causes or accidents). To meet the "no net loss" commitment the City should plan to plant an estimated 300 trees each year of the five-yea r Tree Managem ent Program to accou nt for these remova ls.
Based on the analysis of the tree diameter classes City-wide, the City should be adding young trees for an improved distribution of tree sizes that red uce t ree maintenance surges and increase the flow of ecosystem services equally across the City Additio nally, the City envisions expanding tree canopy to ensure equita ble distribution of canopy throughout San Leandro, so additional resources wi ll be required as the City grows its urban forestry p rogram to accommodate canopy goals. San Leandra's f uture tree plantings w ill thrive with continuous implement ation of proper t ree care practices. City policies, regulations, and commu nity involvement are just some of the factors that contribute to long-term stewa rdship of trees. 55 •
•
Citywide Canopy Goal Considerations
A canopy goal-setting exercise was accomplished for San Leandro using the 2078 urban tree canopy data as a baseline while referencing the Tree Equity Score assessment and industry standards. As of the 2078 UTC assessment, San Leandro has 8% canopy cover. While the City is committed to no-net-loss, the following canopy goal scenarios were explored to envision canopy growth throughout the San Leandro:
72% by 2050 (25-year trajectory)
20% by 2075 (SO-year trajectory)
These scenarios were guided by tree canopy cover data, socio-demographic data derived from the Tree Equity Score (American Forests, 2027), benchmarking research, analysis of existing and potential resources, City input, and community feedback.
Using the ratio of private land to public land as a guide, it is recommended that the City lead 72.6% of the tree planting and support the community in planting the other 87.4% on private property. City staff, community leaders, tree advocates, business owners, and residents all have a role in stewarding trees to expand tree canopy to areas that need it most.
To reach a citywide canopy goal of 72% the City would need to increase canopy by 4%. In this scenario, the City and community would need to plant a total of 56,384 trees over 25 years, or an average of 2,225 trees planted per year. This is an average of 284 trees planted by the City on public land annually, and roughly 7,977 trees annually on private land.
Tree Planting Plan 56
180,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
180,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
57 0
12% CANOPY COVER BY 2050
25%
20%
15%
10% 11%
8% 9% 10%
12%
~ 10%
-
5%
0%
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 2070 2075
- Private Tree Plantings - Public Tree Plantings ~ Cityw ide Canopy Cover Figure 5: 72% Canopy goal planting needs
20% CANOPY COVER BY 2075
25%
20%
20%
13% 15%
12%
10%
9%
8% 10%
5%
- 0%
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 2070 2075
- Private Tree Plantings - Public Tree Plantings ~ Citywide Canopy Cover Figure 6. 20% Canopy goal planting needs
Tree Preservation for Canopy Growth
While planting new trees is an essential component of achieving 12% or 20% citywide tree canopy cover, it is also crucial to preserve existing trees and protect the baseline 8% canopy cover. Since the majority of San Leandro's urban forest is on private land, it will take support from private property owners to make a meaningful preservation effort. Through community partnerships and robust public education and outreach initiatives the City can encourage homeowners to value and preserve their trees.
Many cities enact private tree preservation ordinances to require permit approval before property owners can remove trees of a certain size or species. The City of San Leandro does not have a private tree preservation ordinance, but many nearby cities used in this Plan's benchmarking analysis do. For example, the City of Livermore protects native tree species with a trunk circumference of 24 inches or more and non-native trees with a trunk circumference of 60 inches or more. Redwood City requires a permit for pruning or removal for trees larger than 12 inches in diameter. It is recommended the City explore private tree preservation ordinances as a strategy for protecting and growing tree canopy.
Right Tree Right Place
Choosing the right tree species for an urban environment involves considering various factors such as site conditions, climate resilience, and desired functions like shade or seasonal flowering. Trees must be able to withstand challenging urban conditions like high temperatures, pollution, and limited growing space. It's crucial to consider the tree's size at maturity, root structure, and maintenance needs, as well as potential impacts on surrounding structures and utilities. By carefully selecting both the tree species and planting location, the City of San Leandro can ensure that the investment in trees will be long-lasting and rewarding.
The City needs to carefully select tree species for each site to avoid potential damage and maximize benefits.
Planting large trees in small spaces can lead to infrastructure damage and shorter lifespans, while small trees in large spaces limit shade benefits. Proactive planning is essential to match trees with available space, utility presence, and clearance needs, ensuring an effective and attractive urban forest. Species diversity is crucial for resilience in the face of pests, diseases, and environmental stressors like drought and storms.
Tree Planting Plan 58
Recommended Tree Species List
In selecting street tree species appropriate for planting in San Leandro's public right-of-way, p riorities were identif ied t hroug h City staff consultations, stakeholder interviews, com m unity engagement, d ata analysis, and industry concerns:
Drought
Tolerance
Reduce
watering need s
for a m ore
susta inable
urban forest
59 Root Growth:
Minim izing
impacts to
adjacent
publ ic
sidewalks
and private
sewer
lat er a Is.
California Natives
p lant species that
are well adapted
to San Leandra's
climat e t oday.
Height A m ajority
of the City's
resid ential
neig hborhood s st ill
have overhead
power lines)
Species Diversity
Growing an urban
forest that is
resilient to pests
and d isease.
Climate Change:
p lant species that
have a better
chance adapting
t o San Leand ra's
future cl im ate
Native Species
San Leandra's community members expressed a strong preference for planting nat ive t ree species. Of the 60 species recommended for San Leand ro, 26 California native species, and eight are approp riate for planting as full-sized street trees: California buckeye, netleaf hackberry, chitalpa, tecate cypress, Catalina ironwood, coast live oak, valley oak, island oak. Only two of those (California buckeye and tecate cypress) are appropriate for planting under power lines, and even those require regular pruni ng to maintain a manag eable height and shape. Several strategies were used to accommodate the priority for California natives:
7) Aligned with San Leandra's Neighbors: Other c ities in t he Bay Area, notably Oakland, San Francisco, and Fremont, have recently updated t heir recommend ed species list. These lists were used as reference in developing the recommendations for San Leandro. a. Oakland's Street Tree List (2023): Oakland's street tree list includes eight native species.
Six of those are included in San Leandra's list.
b. San Francisco's Street Tree List (2027): Ten native species are included in San Francisco's list of recommended street trees, and six of those are recommended in San Leandro. c. Fremont's Tree List {2023): Of the 14 nat ive species in Fremont's list, eight of them are included in San Leandra's list.
2) Beyond Shade Trees: The recommended species list expands beyond shade trees to incl ude understory and large shrubs. Under the right conditions, large shrubs perform extremely well in streetscapes and provid e value for biodiversity, habitat, and ecological ba lance. a. Street-appropriate native shrub species added: mountain mahogany, desert willow, coast silk tassel, toyon, laurel sumac, blue elderberry. b. Park-appropriate native shrub species added: hol lyleaf cherry and catalina cherry. 3) Oh/one Traditions and Significance: As a result of the focus group session with Sogorea Te' Land Trust, several native species were included to honor Indigenous t radit ions and acknowledge the significance to the Muwekma Oh lone.
a. Oak Acorns: Acorn collecting is a tradition of the Oh lone tribe t hat is threate ned by pressures of development. Native oak species include coast live oak, m esa oak, valley oak, island oak, and interior live oak.
b. Manzanita Berries: While 792 species of manza nita are native to California, t hree are recommended for San Leandra's tree list: big berry manzanita, Austin Griffiths manzanita, and Dr. Hurd manzanita. The berries, seeds, and leaves are all traditiona lly used for culinary or medicinal purposes.
c. Culinary and Medicinal Uses: Fruit, seeds, and/or leaves are traditiona lly valued from blue elderberry, toyon, California buckeye, hollyleaf cherry, Pacific m adrone, and California sycamore 'Roberts'.
Tree Planting Plan 60
RECOMMENDED TREE SPECIES LIST FOR SAN LEANDRO
z VJ
2 LU
VJ z LU I LU :::i
0. I- 0 I- u a z ~ 0 LU LU I- I <( 0. s LU <( ~
:j:j: BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME I- lJ LU ~ VJ LU 15 a
a 0 a <( z LU 0. lJ LU 0. t; LU 0.
::s I VJ z > 2
~ a 0. i= LU
z z 0
::s z
0. :J
Acer buergerianum Trident Maple tree 20-25' 75-25' 4' y y y 2 Aescu/us californica California Buckeye tree 20-30' 20-50' 8' y y y y y 3 Angophora costata Sydney red gum tree 50-70' 40-60' 6' y 4 Arbutus 'Marina ' Strawberry tree tree 75-40' 20-30' 2' y 5 Arbutus Menziesii Pacific madrone tree 50-700' 20-50' 7' y y 6 Archontophoenix cunninghamiana king palm palm 35-60' 70-20' 3' y y 7 Arctostaphylos glauca 'Big Berry' Big Berry Manzanita shrub 3.3-20' 6-20' 3' y y y y 8 Arctostaphylos x 'Austin Griffiths' Austin Griffiths Manzanita shrub 8-75' 6-70' 3' y y y y 9 Arctostaphylos x 'Dr Hurd' Dr Hurd Manzanita shrub 70-75' 8-70' 3' y y y y 70 Brahea edu!is Guadalupe Palm palm 20-35' 70-75' 4' y y y 77 Cassia leptophy!la Gold Medallion Tree tree 75-25' 20-35' 3' y y y 72 Ceanothus 'Ray Hartman' Ray Hartman Ceanothus shrub 75-30' 5-70' 3' y y y 73 Ceanothus thyrsiflorus 'Snow Flurry' Snow Flurry Ceanothus shrub 70-20' 20'30' 3' y y y 14 Ce/tis reticulata Netleaf hackberry tree 25-40' 25-30' 4' y y y 75 Cercis canadensis var texensis Oklahoma Redbud tree 70-20' 70-20' 2' y y y y 'Oklahoma'
76 Cercocarpus betuloides Mountain Mahogany shrub 8-20' 70-72' 3' y y y y y 77 Chilopsis linearis Desert Willow tree - shrub 75-40 70-20' 4' y y y y y 78 Chita/pa tashkentensis Chitalpa tree 25-35 20-30' 4' y y y y 79 Corymbia citriodora lemon-scented gum tree 60-80' 20-30' 6' y y 2 0 Corymbia ficifolia red flowering gum tree 25-40' 30-50' 6' y y 27 Corymbia papuana Ghost gum tree 40-50' 20-35' 4' y y 22 Cupressus forbesii Tecate Cypress tree 20-30' 75-25' 4' y y y y y 23 Eriobotrya deflexa Bronze Loquot tree 75-25' 75-25' 3' y y y y 24 Eucalyptus po!yanthemos silver dollar gum tree 60-80' 40-50' 6' 25 Feijoo sel/owiana Pi neapple Guava tree - shrub 75-25' 78-25' 4' y y 26 Carrya eliptica 'James Roof' Coast Silk Tassel tree - shrub 8-72' 6-70' 2' y y y y 27 Ginkgo bi/oba 'Autumn Cold' Ginkgo tree 40-50' 25-35' 7' y y y 28 Cinko biloba 'Grindstone' Ginko Grindstone tree 75-25' 6-70' 3' y y y y 29 Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon shrub 6-30' 70-75' 4' y y y y y 61 RECOMMENDED TREE SPECIES LIST FOR SAN LEAN DRO
z U)
2 w U) z w w ::J I 0. 0 I- 0 I- a I- z ~ 0 w w I <i 0. s w <i ~ # BOTANICAL NAM E COMMON NAME I- l) w ~ U) w 0 a
z -
w a 0 a g 0. l) w 0. I- w
s I U) z > U) 2
~ a 0. ~ w z z 0
s z
0. ::l
I - ... • - - . ·- I I
31 Jacaranda mimosifolia Jacaranda tree 25-40' 25-40' 4' y 32 Koelreuteria bipinnata Chi nese Flame Tree tree 20-35' 75-30' 4' y y 33 Laurus 'Saratoga' Bay Laurel tree 25-40' 75-30' 4' y y 34 Lophostemon confertus Brisbane box tree 40-60' 25-40' 5' y y 35 Lyonothamnus floribundus Catalina Ironwood tree 25- 50' 75- 24' 4' y y y y 36 Magnolia grandiflora 'Little Gem ' Magnolia 'Little Gem' tree 75-25' 6-70' 2' y y y y 37 Malosma laurina Laurel Sumac shrub 70-20' 70-20' 4' y y y y 38 Metrosideros excelsa New Zealand Christmas tree tree 30-40' 25-40' 6' y y 39 Pin us Torreyana Torrey Pine tree 60-720' 40-90' 6' y y y 40 Pistacia chinensis Chinese pistache tree 30-40' 25-40' 5' y y 41 Pistacia chinensis 'Keith Davey' Keith Davey Pistache tree 30-40' 25-40' 5' y y 42 Platanus racemosa 'Roberts' California Sycamore 'Roberts' tree 80-700' 30-50' 7' y y 43 Prunus ilicifolia Hollyleaf Cherry tree - shrub 30-50' 75-25' 4' y y 44 Prunus ilicifolia ssp. lyonii Catalina cherry tree - shrub 25-30' 20-30' 4' y y 45 Punica granatum Pomegranate tree 70-25' 70-20' 2' y y 46 Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak tree 60-80' 40-60' 4' y y y y 47 Quercus engelmanii Mesa Oak tree 50-70' 80-720' 7' y y y 48 Quercus fusiformis Escarpment live oak tree 40-60' 25-40' 5' y y y 49 Quercus hypoleucoides silver leaf oak tree 30-60' 20-40' 5' y y y 50 Quercus lobata Valley Oak tree 60 - 700' 30-60' 7' y y y y 57 Quercus oblongifiolia Mexican blue oak tree 50-70' 20-30' 7' y 52 Quercus rugosa Netleaf Oak tree 40-70' 25-45' 5' y y y 53 Quercus suber Cork oak tree 40-80' 30-60' 6' y y y
54 Quercus tomentella Island Oak tree 40-70' 30-50' 5' y y y y 55 Quercus virginiana Southern live oak tree 30-50' 40-80' 6' y y 56 Quercus wislizeni Interior Live Oak tree 75 - 50' 70- 50' 7' y y 57 Quillaja saponaria soapbark tree tree 40-60' 25-35' 4' y y 58 Rhus lancea African Sumac tree 25-35' 20-35' 4' y y
59 Sambucus nigra ssp. cerulea Blue Elderberry tree - shrub 75-25' 70-20' 2' y y y y y 60 Tristaniopsis laurina Water gum tree 70-30' 70-25' 3' y y y Table n San Leandro recommended tree list
Tree Planting Plan 62
Urban Forestry Team
A well-resourced urban forestry program 1s vital for
efficiently managing tree maintenance tasks and
ensuring publ ic safety. Adequate staffing, equipment
maintenance, and proactive planning improve work
quality, increase efficiency, and reduce long-term
liabilities. With growing demands of a maturing urban
forest and climate change concerns, additional resources are needed to sustainably manage t ree maintenance,
meet community needs, and achieve climate action goals.
Addressing t hese needs now is essential to maintain a
healthy urban forest and provide valuable benefits to the community.
Currently at the City of San Leandro, tree maintenance is managed by staff in t he Urban Forestry Division of the newly structured Department of Recreation and Parks. In addition to tree maintenance and removal, the Urban Forestry Division has a variety of t asks it may be called to assist w ith, such as sidewalk/tree conflict inspections, median beautification, irrigat ion issues, and banner installation. In recent years, the City has hired an independent tree contractor to complete work on large trees due to the equipment, skill, and staffing needed to work o n large trees safely and efficiently. Wh ile overall program fund ing has not decl ined in recent years, staffing was reduced from a c rew of five tree trimmers to tw o tree trimmers, which has put stress on operations.
As the City implements the proactive Tree Management Program outlined in this TMAP, the City should closely monitor changes in demand for in-house services versus contracted services. Effect ive tracking of work relating to the Tree Management Program helps set t he City up for success when requesting an increase in budget and/or staffing. The pricing and recommendations included in this section are outlined for in-house capacity.
City Staff Capacity Assessment
Currently, the City has 4.2 FTEs involved with urban forestry, with 3.0 FTEs dedicated to d oing tree work in the f ield. The exact number of staff need ed depends on various factors such as the size of the urban forest, the complexity of maintenance tasks, and the level of service expected by the community. Ideally, t he team should include a combination of arborists, t ree inspectors, crew supervisors, administrative staff, and support personnel. By having an adequately sized tea m , the workload ca n be effect ively distributed, allowing efficient completion of rout ine maintenance tasks, emergency responses, and p roactive m anagement strategies. 63 •
•
•
•
Using the following assumptions, an exercise
was completed to study the current staffing
level compared with current capacity as well as
predicted future capacity to support the Tree
Management Program.
Average working days per year: 235
Average hours per trimming job: 2.5
Predicted public service requests split
evenly between job complexity/types
Estimated daily job capacity for one
crew: 4.2 jobs (or 82 jobs/month or 979
jobs/year)
The resulting difference between the staff's inhouse capacity and the estimated workload illustrates the need for additional resources,
likely to be addressed using a combination of
City employees, contractors, and volunteers.
SAN LEANDRO CURRENT CAPACl1Y
TREE-RELATED POSITIONS
Director
Parks & Landscape Manager
Street Supervisor
Tree Trimmer I
Street Maintenance Worker II
Street Maintenance Worker I
Admin Assistant Ill
FTE
0.7 0.25
0.65 2.0
0.5 0.5
0.2 Performs
Tree Work?
0 0
0 2.0
0.5 0.5
0 Total FTEs 4 .2 3.0
DAILY WORKLOAD BASED ON THE TREE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
PRIORl1Y1YPE DETAIL YEAR l YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 Reactive Backlog
Reactive New Requests
Urgent + Proactive Trees to Remove
Urgent + Proactive Trees to Prune
Planting Trees to Plant
Estimated Daily Jobs
Estimated In-house Capacity for Jobs
Difference
Urban Forestry Program Growth Plan
0.76 3.06
0.3 2.8
l.0
8 .7
4 .2
-4.5
0.76 3.06
0.3 7.0
l.0
ll.4
4.2 -7.2
3.06 0.7
16.0 l.4
27.l
4.2 -16.9
3.06 0.7
76.0 l.4
21.l
4 .2
-16.9
3.06 0.7
75.9 l.4
21.l
4.2 -16.9
3.06 0.7
76.0 l.4
27.l
4 .2
-16.9
3.06 0.7
15.9 l.4
21.l
4.2 -16.9
64 Scenarios for In-House vs. Contracted Work
Over the five-year tree maintenance program, it is estimated that 28,428 tree work jobs would address reactive tree maintenance, proactive tree maintenance, as well as tree p lanting. The chart be low ill ustrates the number of tree work jobs separated by priority and type per year.
TREE WORK JOBS PER YEAR
■ Reactive Backlog of Request s 8000
■ Reactive New Request s 7000
■ Priority l Imminent Remova l
■ Priority l Imminent Prune 6000
■ Priority 2 High Priority Remova l
5000 ■ Priority 2 High Priority Prune
■ Priority 3 Routine Remova l 4000
Priority 3 Routine Tree Prune
■ Priority 3 Frequent Tree Prune 3000
Priority 3 Routine Palm Prune
2000
Priority 4 Young Tree Prune
■ Priority 4 Stump Remova l 7000
Tree Planting 7S-gallon
■ Tree Planting 24-gallon 0
YEARl YEAR2 YEAR3 YEAR4 YEARS
The City is exploring scenarios for what it would take to grow the urban forestry program in support of the proactive tree maintenance program and planting trees to grow San Leandro's canopy coverage from 8% (no-net-loss) to 72% by 2050 and 20% by 2075. If the City of San Leandro maintains their current capacity of 3 FTEs dedicated to tree work, the majority of tree work will be handled by contractors. A scenario of 50/50 outlines the staffing and budget required to support more in-house staff to tackle some of all types of work:
reactive, urgent, proactive, and planting. A third scenario is outlined, in which al l of the work is hand led in house by City staff. The number of staff needed ranges from 77.3 FTEs for the 8% canopy goal to 78.5 FTEs for the all-in-house scenario. The type of work is directly related to the costs of the work, meaning that the routine and proactive tree work is less expensive on average than reactive and emergency situations. All costs in this exercise are based on current estimates for average salaries and costs outlined in existing contracts. 65 Staff and Resources ------------------
Canopy In-House vs
Goal* Contracted
Current
Capacity
8% 50/50
All In-House
Current
12% by Capacity
2050 50/50
All In-House
Current
20% by Capacity
2075 50/50
All In-House
Canopy In-House vs
Goal Contracted
-
8%
All In-House
CANOPY GOAL CAPACITY SCENARIOS: IN-HOUSE VS CONTRACTED JOBS Reactive Urgent Proactive Planting
Reactive Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 No-Net- Growth Loss UI 1: 'jij
..., <II ..., <II <II C C en C <II <II 'jij <II C <II C C <II a. 'jij ... C C >, .c -~ ... <II .2 .2 .2 .2 In- 0 ~ l!l <II > ~ C .c.~ C > C:::, .!: E <II:::, 3j: C 0 en ... en ... ·- 0 ·- ... :::, ... I- C E ~ 'jij 'jij 'jij 'jij Contracted <II :::, ·- :::, 5 E 5 a. ...,_ 17 a. en :::, House u ·- E E ... ·- 0 ·- 0 :::, ro :::i E en en en en Z 17 E <II J: ·;: J: ·;: C ._ ro <II E a. 0 <II 0 <II 0 a. <II <II :::, a. ... <II :ii -¼ :ii -¼ Ill E a: a. a. a: a: a: <II a: ... <II Ill a: a: ... u. ... ~ N N I- I18.8% 81.2% C SL C SL C SL C C C C C C SL SL
50.8% 49.2% SL SL SL SL SL SL C C C SL SL SL SL SL
100.0% 0.0% SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL
17.9% 82.1% SL SL SL SL SL SL SL C C C C SL C C C C
51.9% 48.1% SL SL SL SL SL SL C C C SL SL C SL SL SL SL 100.0% 0.0% SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL
17.5% 82.5% SL SL SL SL SL SL SL C C C C SL C C C C
52.8% 47.2% SL SL SL SL SL SL C C C SL SL C SL SL SL SL 100.0% 0.0% SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL CANOPY GOAL CAPACITY SCENARIOS: IN-HOUSE VS CONTRACTED JOBS In-House In-House Avg
Avg Daily Annual
Jobs Jobs
Contracted
Avg Daily
Jobs
Contracted City Staff Cost for FTEs Avg Annual FTEs
Jobs Needed (avg annual)
Cost for Estimated
Contract Work Total Annual
(avg annual} Cost*
4.5 1067.0 20.9 4902.6 3.2 $288,428.02 $940,819.99
12.3 2887.8 11.9 2797.8 8.8 $780,620.85 $450,322.00
-
I
24.2 5685.6 0.0 0.0 17.3 $1,536,913.19 $- $1 ,536,913.19 Current 4.5 1067.0 20.9 4902.6 3.2 $288,428.02 $1,303,260.03 $1,591,688.05 Capacity 12% by 2050 50/50 13.2 3096.8 12.2 2872.8 9.4 $837,117.06 $487,562.00 $1,324,679.06 All In-House 25.4 5969.6 0.0 0.0 18.1 $1,613,683.16 $- $1,613,683.16 Current 4.5 1067.0 21.4 5019.6 3.2 $288,428.02 $1,452,575.12 $1,741,003.14 20% by Capacity
2075 50/50 13.7 3213.8 12.2 2872.8 9.8 $868,744.13 $683,751.38 $1,552,495.51 All In-House 25.9 6086.6 0.0 0.0 18.5 $1,645,310.23 $- $1,645,310.23 *Estim a te costs are for staff or contractor time on ly and do not include the cost of equipment, supplies, inspections, overhead, a nd other resources. Input costs are based on 2024 estimates for pricing and wages.
Urban Forestry Program Growth Plan 66
Outreach +
Event Planning
Training +
Workforce
Development
Volunteer
Recruitment +
Coordination
Local
Knowledge +
Tribal
Traditions
Funding + Grants
+ Donations
Tree Infrastructure Team
With limited staff and capacity in the City's Urban Forestry Div·1sion, t he Tree Management Program shou ld be supported by an entire network of community members. By creating a Tree Infrastructure Team, t he City of Sa n Leandro can continue the momentum that was b uilt in 2022-2024 during the d evelopment of t his Tree Master Plan and the Cal Fire-fu nded tree p lanting events. The goals of the Tree Infrastructure Team shou ld reflect the priorities identified in this Plan by expanding canopy cover by p lanting and caring for t rees to increase community resi lience and stewardship of t he urban forest.
Five Functions of the Tree Infrastructure Team
Clear structure and organization of the team is key to its success, so five functions of the Tree Infrastruc t u re Team have been identified in the pie chart below. Each function should be manag ed by the Tree Infrastructu re Team to add capacity and support for City staff.
Focus on secu ring
f inancial resources
from various
sources such as
grants and
donations to
support tree-related
initiatives and
com munity
p rojects.
Funding • Grants
• Donations
Local
Knowledge•
Tribal
Traditions
Leverage community
members' arboricultural
ins·1ghts and indigenous
practices to inform tree
management decisions,
share native traditions, and
align t he program w ith
cultural values and heritage.
67 Organize community
engagement activit ies,
tree p lanting events, and
manage social med ia to
raise awareness a bout
t he importance of trees
and garner support for
tree-related programs.
Provide education and
ski ll-b ui lding
opportunit"1es for
community mem bers
interested in tree care,
enhancing the
capacity and expertise
of the loca l workforce
Recruit and organ ize volunteers to
ident"fy ·nterest and d ·rect volunteers to
the appropriate events and activ;ties.
POTENTIAL TREE INFRASTRUCTURE TEAM PARTNERS
Potential Partners
Local Knowledge and
Tribal Traditions Funding, Grants, and
Donations Outreach and Event
Planning Training and Workforce
Development Volunteer Recruitment
and Coordination
City of San Leandro Urban Forestry Division y y y y y
Downtown San Leandro y y
Friends of San Leandro Creek y y
Hyphae Design Laboratory y y
Kiwanis of San Leandro y y
Merritt College Horticulture Class y y
Muwekma Oh lone Tribe y y
Rotary Club of San Leandro y y
San Leandro 2050 y y
San Leandro Chamber of Commerce y y
San Leandro High School Eco Club y y V
Sierra Club y y y y
Sogorea Te Land Trust y V
Teen Advocacy Going Strong (TAGS) y y y
UC Berkeley Master Gardeners Program y y
Table 73: Potential infrastructure team partners
Urban Forestry Program Grow th Plan 68
Tree Ordinance Checklist
San Leandro's municipal codes contain regulat ions
for management of trees on public and private
property in multiple chapters and sections. A
systematic approach was used to review San
Leandro's codes and organize key considerations for
updating tree-related ordinances. Currently, the tree
protection standards are found in the City of San
Leandra's Municipal Code, Administrative Code, and
Zoning Code.
Municipal Code
Title 5: Streets and Parks
Chapter 5-2: Street Trees was adopted by ordinance
No. 2079-075 in October for 2079. This chapter
addresses regulations for street trees in San Leandro.
Some language found in this section is duplicative of
the language found in the Administrative Code's Title
72 Chapter 8: Street Tree Policy and Procedure. The
Municipal Code sections provide an overview of
street tree regulations, requirements, and activities,
whereas the Administrative Code sections identify
the administrative authority of the City in
implementing the code.
Administrative Code
Title 72: Public Works
Chapter 8: Street Tree Policy and Procedure
identifies procedures for street tree planting,
removal, pruning, and other maintenance such as
69 debris cleanup. There are "reserved" sections which
provide opportunities for fu rt her development of t h is chapter.
Title 8: Engineering and Transportat ion
Chapter l: Sidewalk Repair Prog ram outlines the
details for maintenance of trees and sidewalks when
t he two are conflicting.
Zoning Code
Title 4: Regulations Applying in All or Several Districts Chapter 4.16: Landscape Requirements lay out the
requirements for t ree p reservation, planting, and
maintenance on private property relating to
development p rojects.
A 2074 study of 667 municipal urban forestry
programs in the United States included a
comparison of tree ordinances using a list oftwentyfive ordinance topics categorized as credential, management, planting, and preservation (Hauer,
2076). This st udy provided the framework for the
ordinance checklist exercise. Additiona l categories
and topics were included based on engagement
sessions w·1th City staff to produce a comp rehensive
and customized assessment for San Leandro.
ORDINANCE CHECKLIST FRAMEWORK
Category Description
Authority+
Credential
Canopy
Tree Preservation
Tree Protection
During Construction
Tree Planting
Standards
Tree Maintenance
and Management
Mitigation
Enforcement
Designation of authority over trees by a specific City department, staff person, board, committee, or professional. Ordinances may include requirements for specific professional licenses or certifications.
Requirements to meet canopy goals, whether citywide or by specific districts or land uses. May include per-tree canopy projections to use as a tool for tree selection, or a process to calculate canopy projections.
Criteria for determining which trees are protected using factors such as size, species, or other characteristics of the tree or the location of the tree. Often include definitions and thresholds for signature tree, heritage tree, legacy tree, and similar.
Standards for protecting trees during construction and development activity such as a critical root zone, fencing and signage, or restrictions on activity near trees.
Specifications for the planting of trees, including minimum standards for tree size, species selection, soil volume, spacing from other trees and infrastructure, site selection processes, and criteria for tree planting locations.
Specifications for the maintenance of trees, including strategies for managing specific obstacles such as pests and disease or invasive species removal.
Ordinances may include specific references to industry standards or best management practices.
Requirements to replant on site or off site, including options to contribute to a mitigation fund or other mechanism that assists in the compensation of trees and canopy cover.
Inspections and permit processes to confirm compliance, or fees, fines, and other penalties for noncompliance.
Urban Forestry Program Growth Plan 70
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Ordinance Topic
Authority + Credential
ISA Certified Arborist
requirement
Authority over trees
Tree Preservation
Protected Tree
Heritage Tree
Canopy-based preservation
Exemptions
Incentives
Tree removal permit process
established
ORDINANCE REVIEW CHECKLIST
Included Code
(Y/N) Mentions
N
y
N
N
N
y
N
y
4.16.112.A.2
72.8.700
12.8.126
4.16.112
72.8.775
5-2-215(a)
12.8.llO(b)(l)
Key Considerations
A llow the Recreation & Parks Direct or t o designate
another authority for making decisions and
managing street trees.
Designate a role for an urban forester and/or an
urban forestry division.
Define ISA Certified Arborist.
Clarify roles and responsibilities for maintaini ng
street trees after planting. Confusing and
potentially conflicting info in 12.8.100-125.
Define protected tree and establish a minimum size
for a protected tree. Currently, a tree survey is
required for existing trees measuring at least 6"
DBH (DSH) on development sites, but preservation
requirements are loose and left up to the "Site Plan
Review decision-maker".
Update/create recommended and protected t ree
lists.
Compare species and size requirements for tree
preservation in comparable cities.
Tree Protection During Construction
Dripline or root area definition N
Signage and fencing N
77 4.16.112.B
4.16.772.B
Define and differentiate between "critical root zone"
(CRZ). "drip line", and "tree protection zone" (TPZ).
Include a requirement for signage explaining tree
protection measures during construction.
Require inspection of tree protection fencing and
signage prior to approval of the grading design
plan.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ORDINANCE REVIEW CHECKLIST
Ordinance Topic Included Code Key Considerations (Y/N) Mentions Tree Planting Standards
Tree species list y
4.76.776.B Update the recommended species list and
S-2-220(b) strengthen code language to req uire planting from Tree size y
4.16.116.B this list, with flexibility for other California native
4.76.720 .B species, and/or other regional or state-w ide lists.
Minimum tree well or soil area N Add minimum surface area or soil volume requirements. Consider ANSI A300 Part 6 language:
Minimum spacing y 4.16.776.B "the p lanting-hole width should be a minimum of
1.5 times the diameter of the rootball, or soil
4.76.776.Ca- surrounding the upper 7/3 of the planting hole New private development y b should be loosened to a width of 1.5 times the rootball diameter."
Distance from utilities N Consider d istance requirements from above g round ut ilities.
Tree Maintenance/Management
Private trees y 4.16.1240 Include references to AN SI standards and ISA Best Management Practices to support proper
8.ll20(a)(7- maintenance of trees.
Public trees V 3) Expand on t he reference to "Bay-Friendly Landscape 12.8.100-125 Model Maintenance Specificat ions" to include References to BMPs and references to water-wise. fire-wise. and defensib le industry standards
V 4.76.724.D.lc space standards to increase resil'1ence.
Strengthen clarity around maintenance
Pest/disease strategy y 4.16.124.D.lc responsibil ities for street trees.
Mitigation
Public trees y 72.8.705 Strengthen language and criteria for bot h public and private tree mitigation Consider the following
Private trees N 4.16.712. 8.7 for removal of trees u p 20" DSH, 7:7 inch shall be On site N replanted; for rem oval of t rees great er than 20" DSH. ll.5 inch shal l be rep lanted
Off site N Determine which government entit ies are
exempted from permitting, fees, and f ines (if any)
In lieu of fees V 728770(b)(4) and w hy.
Urban Forestry Prog ram Growth Plan 72
•
•
ORDINANCE REVIEW CHECKLIST
Ordinance Topic Included Code Mentions Key Considerations (Y/N) Enforcement
Inspections y 5-2-270 Establish a process for inspections of tree plantings.
5-2-200 Establish a fund for in lieu of fees, permit
Fines and fees y 47672402-3 fees, fi nes, and other sources of treeOther penalties for dedicated dollars. Define acceptable uses
y
5-2-230 of those dollars.
noncompliance 8.7720
"/fwe want to use forests as a weapon in the f ight against clim a te change, then w e must allow them to g row old ... "
~ Peter Woh/leben, The Hidd en Life of Trees:
What They Feel, How They Com municate: Discoveries from a Secret World 73 You and the tree in your backyard come from a common ancestor. A billion and a half years ago, the two of you parted ways. But even now, after an immense journey in separate directions, that tree and you still share a quarter of your genes….” ― Richard Powers, The Overstory
How Will San Leandro Use the
TMP?
•
•
•
•
San Leandro has a vision for preserving, caring
for, and enhancing the urban forest. Managing
trees in urban areas is a complex, demanding,
and ever-evolving process. Urban foresters are
often tasked with balancing the
recommendations of experts, the needs of
residents, the pressures of local economics and
politics, concerns for public safety and liability,
physical components of trees, forces of nature
and severe weather events, and various other
unforeseen obstacles.
Adaptive Management Approach
With these challenges in mind, San Leandro's
Tree Master Plan was developed to address
these key questions:
What Do We Have?
What Do We Want7
How Do We Get There?
How Are We Doing?
This structure, termed "adaptive management,"
is commonly used for resource planning and
m anagem ent and provides a useful conceptual
framework for managing San Leandra's urban
forest resource (Mi ller, 7988). An adaptive
management approach allows the City to adjust
management actions over time as changes
occur in t he physical and biological
environment, as wel l as the culture and needs of
the City's residents.
75 How
have'?
How do
we get what
we want?
Tracking Progress
The City's strengths and opportunities were
systematically evaluated to inform the Plan's
goals, objectives, actions, and targets. The goals
in the Plan align with Urban Forestry Ethos
themes and the actions are intended to guide
the City towards improvements in ranking for
each criterion identified during the Urban
Forest Audit. As actions are implemented, the
City may update the audit to gauge success,
evaluate progress, and adjust accordingly.
Implementation of this Tree Master Plan will be
GOAL
THEME
w
_J
0..
0 w
0..
w
u
z
<(
2 a
0 LL
a
w
0..
(.J
z
z
z
::5
0..
COMMUNITY FOREST
ETHOS
Support human capacity and care
(investments in people and
organizations)
Re-envision the tu nctions of the
urban forest (productive systems
and biocultural approaches)
Community organizing beyond
the green silo (intersectional and
cross-sector a I approaches)
Urban Forestry Program Growth Plan
a community effort that includes a wide variety
of partners and stakeholders to grow a healthy
and diverse urban forest. A framework is
outlined to ensure smooth implementation as
outlined below. Action strategies are
recommended to assist in achieving the goals
set out at the beginning of this planning
process with the Urban Forest Audit. The
actions and strategies included on the following
pages establish effective and measurable
outcomes for San Leandro's urban forest.
TREE MASTER PLAN GOAL
Foster a culture of inclusive tree stewardship
through robust education, partnerships, and
capacity-building opportunities that empower all
community members to build tree equity.
Measure and track the performance of San
Leandro's urban forest in an effort increase the
quality and quantity of trees, the benefits provided
by trees, and the resources dedicated to tree
management.
Develop and implement plans, policies, and
procedures that reflect the community's priorities,
are driven by data, and proactively tackle issues
facing trees in San Leandro.
76 FRAMEWORK
GOALS
ACTIONS
TARGETS
77 Purpose Action Item 1.1 Action Item 1.2 Action Item 1.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 2.1 Action Item 2.2 Action Item 2.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 3.1 Action Item 3.2 Action Item 3.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
PEOPLE
Align tree-related resources and planning efforts across Cit y departments and partners to meet common goals and improve efficiency .
Partnerships and
coordinat ion enable efficient
achievement of shared goals.
All entities, resources, and
planning efforts identified
(Year 2)
RP, CD, ET
2025,
Annual I
Regular meetings
between departments
and partners im proves
outcomes and
efficiencies (Year 5)
Goals of participat ing
partners are achieved
(Year 20)
l l
C, E, H, N
Utilize a co ntinuous improvement framew o rk {Commitme nt, Strat egy , Process, Performance) to im prove operationa l w o rkflow s a n d coordinatio n among departments impacting or influencing the urba n forest .
As cities grow and change,
workflows will adapt
TMP actions to improve
efficiencies begin to be
implemented (Yearl)
RP
Annually
Regular meetings
betw een departments
and partners identify
changes in workflows
and resource needs
(Year 2)
The fra m ew ork
shows im provements
in workflows,
efficiency, efficacy,
and comm unications
(Year 5)
ll
C,N
Staff p artic ipating in t ree mai ntenance and managemen t sho uld act ively e n gage in City pla n nin g efforts.
Partnerships and
coordinat ion enable efficient
achievement of shared goals.
Urban Forestry Program Gmwth Plan
Tree management staff
represented at relevant
planning meetings (Year 2)
RP, CD, ET
2025,
Annually
78 Tree management staff
represented at relevant
planning meetings
(Year 5)
Urban forestry is
integrated into all
relevant City and
partner planning
efforts (Year 70)
ll
C, E, H, N
Purpose Action Item 4.1 Action Item 4.2 Action Item 4.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 5.1 Action Item 5.2 Action Item 5.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 3.1 Action Item 3.2 Action Item 3.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
PEOPLE
Stay curre nt with industry research, science, and technology through various platforms. An example includes m anagement of cu rrent a nd potential exotic tree pest and disease t h reats.
Long-term planning and
management of a
sustainable urban forest
requires continual
research and practice.
A framework for acquiring
necessary information is
established (Year 2)
RP
Annually
Tree m anagement staff
attend relevant
conferences, webinars,
and trainings (Vear 3-
20)
Tree m anagement
staff attend relevant
conferences, webinars,
and trainings (Vear 3-
20)
7.3 C,N
Establish a tree inspection protocol t h at includes the methodology and format for tree inspections and tree risk assessments by staff w ith ind ustry credent ials such as International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified A rbo rist and Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) e ither d irectly throu g h t he department or supporting depa rtment.
Stafftraining reduces
costs and improves
product ion, safety, levels
of service, and the urban
forest
Required certifications and
q ualifications for tree
management staff and
contractors identified (Year
2)
RP, CD, ET
Annually
Staff and cont ractors
m aintain certifications,
q ualifications, and
licenses (Year 3-20)
Staff and contractors
m aintain certifications,
qualifications, and
licenses (Year 3-20)
7.3 N
Oversee City trees using Industry Stand ards for tree planting, tree pruning, overall tree care, t ree permitting p rocesses, tree and sidewalk conf licts, p lan reviews, t ree inspections, project design, and construction.
Training w ill improve
transparency, consistency,
and effectiveness.
79 Training needs are
identified (Vear 3)
RP, ET
Annually
Staff and contractors
m aintain certifications,
q ualifications, and
licenses (Vear 3-20)
Annual training m eets
the needs of City st aff
(Year 3-20)
l3
C, N
Purpose Action Item 7.1 Action Item 7.2 Action Item 7.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 8.1 Action Item 8.2 Action Item 8.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 9.1 Action Item 9.2 Action Item 9.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Track and ann ually report urban forestry activities to achieve and maintain Arbor Day Tree City USA designation. Strive to achieve Arbor Day Foundation Grow th Aw ards.
A city must
demonstrate that it
cares about its urban
forest.
Receive Tree City USA
recognition (Year l)
RP
2025,
An nually
Receive Tree City USA
annually, receive an ADF
Growth Award (Year 10)
Receive Tree City USA
recog nition and
Sterling status (Year
20)
l.3
C,N
Create a tree pruning program to educate the com munity and work with PG&E on proper t ree pruning p ractices.
Utility forestry
broadens the public
understanding of tree
care.
A positive working relationship
is established with PG&E's
vegetation m anagement staff
and review San Leandro'sTtvlP
actions (Year 2)
RP. ET
2030,
Annually
Public-facing
educational campaign
for proper p ru n ing
practices is rolled out
(Year 3)
Educational events
are co-hosted by the
City and PG&E at least
annually to t rain the
com m unity on proper
pruning practices
(Year 5)
l.5
C, H,N
Collaborat e w ith the school district on increadi ng canopy coverage in schoolyards.
Partner with students in the com munity for pilot projects such as g row ing a t ree nursery with distribution from school propert ies.
School districts
typically put an
emphasis on public
safety and low
maintenance yards,
but canopy helps
public health.
Coordination wit h the school
district opens the conversation
to optimizing sc hoolyards for
increasing urban canopy cover
(Year l)
RP
2035
Urban Forestry Program Gmwth Plan
80 A UTC assessment and
possible p lanting area
for San Leandro schools
is accomplished and
potentia I pilot projects
are identified with
students (Year 2)
One pi lot project is in
the ground at a San
Leandro school t hat
cont ributes to
increased tree canopy
cover (Year 7)
l.5
C, E, N
Purpose Action Item 10.1 Action Item 10.2 Action Item 10.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 11.1 Action Item 11.2 Action Item 11.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 12.1 Action Item 12.2 Action Item 12.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
PEOPLE
Work with local non-profit organizations (or sim ilar) to d evelop a program t hat recognizes exemplary urban forest stewards and volunteers representing youth, residents, organizations, and business ow ners.
A city must
d emonstrate that it
cares about its urban
forest and the
individuals caring for it.
Cr"1teria and sectors of
exemplary urban forest
stewardship is established
(Vear 2)
RP
2025
A nnouncement of
recognition program is
shared w ith City
partners and the public
with a request for
nominat ions {Vea r 3)
Exemplary urban forest
stewardship
recogn ition awarded to
m ultiple sectors (Vear
4)
15 C
Create a Tree Manual to consolidate tree-related policies, guidelines, best practices, and standards for planners, developers, homeowners, contractors, and private tree care com panies.
A well-managed urban
forest is sustainable,
resi1"1ent, lower risk, and
beneficial.
Code, m anuals, standards,
and policies are u pdated
(Vear 5)
RP, CD, ET
2028
The Tree Manual is
updated (Vear 8)
Manuals are prepared
and distributed specific
to all sectors (Vear70)
7.6 C,E, H, N
Create an int eresting, concise, and educat ional handout for u rban forestry staff to d istribute when encountering community members in the field.
Consistent m essaging
resonates with the
audience
87 Information from the TMP
is compiled and outreach
strategies are drafted (Vear
7)
RP,CD
Annually
TMP outreach strategies
are coordinated with
ot her City d epartments
and efforts (Vear7)
A com mu nity outreach
p lan clearly defines the
m essaging and
approaches (Vea r 7)
7.6 C,N
Purpose Action Item 13.1 Action Item 13.2 Action Item 13.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 14.1 Action Item 14.2 Action Item 14.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 15.1 Action Item 15.2 Action Item 15.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Establish consistent talking points a nd int e rdepart mental memos reg ard ing tree ordinances, u nauthorized tree p lant ings, invasives, id e ntifying pests and diseases, planting a nd young tree care best practices, utility pruning roles and p roced ures, public t ree permitting requirements, and tree maint enance responsib il ity .
Readily available
information raises
awareness and
increases support to
achieve common goa ls.
Information 1s gathered and
aligned with the community
outreach strategy (Year 2)
RP, CD, ET
2026,
Annual ly
Information and
resources are shared
annually (Year 2)
Data shows a decline
in invasive species,
tree maintenance
malpractice, pests
and diseases, and
other concerns (Year
20)
7.6 C
Create an u rba n forestry outreach and ed ucat ion ca mpaign t h at includes TMP progress, tree care education, tree planting new s, com m unity storm pre paredness, and more .
Alignment of resources
improves effectiveness
and reduces costs.
Meet w ith City departments
and partners to develop the
community outreach plan
(Year l)
RP,CD
2025
Urban forest outreach
and educat ion al igns
w it h other City and
partner initiatives,
messag ing, and
events (Year 7)
Urban forest outreach
and education
integ rated into all
applicable initiatives,
messaging, and
events (Year 70)
l.6
C, E.N
Partne r with the local Indige nous communities t o host event s that focus o n tree planting, pruning, harvesting, using w ood and other p rod ucts from the t rees, and tribal knowledge sharing. Reinforce an o ngoing re lat io nsh ip w ith t he City .
Stafftraining reduces
costs and improves
product ion, safety,
levels of service, and
working environment.
Cu rriculum is developed
between w ith City and local
Indigenous communities for
annual program on trees (Year
7)
RP
0 Urban Forestry Program Gmwth Plan
82 First program is
hosted (Year 2)
Tribal know ledge is
shared w it h t he
com m unity and t he
city shares industry
standards for t ree
m aintenance (Yea r 3)
7.7 0
Purpose Action Item 16.1 Action Item 16.2 Action Item 16.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 17.1 Action Item 17.2 Action Item 17.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
PEOPLE
A llocate t im e and budget for ISA A rborist cert ification, including ongoing training for department staff to att end CEU accrediting seminars, worksho ps, and conferences each year. Consider the Tree Care Industry Assoc iation 's Certified Treecare Safety Professional accredit at ion.
Stafftraining reduces
costs and improves
product ion, safety,
levels of service, and
working environment.
An assessment of training
needs supports budget
planning (Year l)
RP
0 All tree management
staff retain
certifications, licenses,
and qualifications (Year
2)
All staff associated w it h
urban forest
m anagem ent are
certified and/or
appropriately trained
(Year 70)
18 0
Annually revisit contract specificatio ns and in-house polic ies and d irect ives to ensure t h at tree care operations adhere t o current industry sta ndard s, in cluding ANSI A300 St anda rds for Tree Care Operations, ANSI Zl33.l-2012 for Arboricultura l Operations Safety Requirements, and ISA Series Best Managem ent Practices {BMPs).
A well-managed urban
forest is sustainable,
resi1'1ent, lower risk. and
beneficial.
83 Contractor specificat ions
meet ANSI, ISA, and OSHA
standards (Year l)
RP, ET, CD
An nua lly
Contractor
specificat ions m eet
A NSI, ISA, and OSHA
standards (Year 5)
Observations show a
decrease in tree
m alpract'1ces on public
and private property
(Year 10)
l8
N, H
Purpose Action Item 1.1 Action Item 1.2 Action Item 1.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 2.1 Action Item 2.2 Action Item 2.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 3.1 Action Item 3.2 Action Item 3.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
PERFORMANCE
Strengthen protocols and threshold cr"1teria for routine and impromptu public t ree risk assessments. Consider ANSI A300 Tree Risk Standards, SOPs, communication protocols, and decision checklist for transparency and consistency.
Consistent assessments
using industry best
practices reduces risk and
improves public
perception.
Existing protocols and ind ustry Protocols and risk
recommendations are assessment criteria
compiled (Year l) updated.
RP
documented, and
distributed (Year 2)
Inventories show a
reduction in tree risk,
less service request s,
and improved public
perception (Year 20)
2.5 2025, Annually C, E, H, N
Update the suitable tree list based o n the tree inventory, cl imate change p rojections, site suitability (Right Tree Right Place), d rought tolerance, ecosystem services, tree canopy goals, among other factors.
Adhering to tree species
recommend ations across
public and private property
results in a more resilient
urban forest.
An analysis of the tree
inventory and TMP inform s
changes to the tree species
planting palette (Year 6)
RP
2030
Updated d raft of t he
tree species list is
completed (Year 8)
The updated tree
species list is
integrated into City
proJects, partner
projects, policies, and
manua ls (Yearl0)
2.7 H,N
Review, update, and document the Recom mended Tree Species List to reflect native and non-native species that are appropriate for plant ing in t he public right-of-way, parks, and private property. Encourage and consider a requirem ent for species diversity. Prioritize soi l health and volume in tree plant ings areas. Include understory lants and soils in the lanning p rocess for trees.
A diverse urban forest is
resilient to tree pests and
diseases and climate
change, but must be
planted according to tree
and site requirements,
timing, and desired
function.
Existing tree species lists are
reviewed (Year 3)
RP
2025
Urban Forestry Program Gmwth Plan
84 Inventory data
informs tree species
list (Year 5)
An updated
recommend ed tree
species list is created
(Year 6)
27 C, H,N
Purpose Action Item 4.1 Action Item 4.2 Action Item 4.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 5.1 Action Item 5.2 Action Item 5.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
PERFORMANCE
Use Cit yw ide t ree inve ntory data and b est availab le science to c reate an int e g rated pest manag ement (1PM) program for lo ng-term p la n nin g and m anag ement of existi ng and future t ree pest s and diseases impacti ng the City 's urban forest.
Improve the com m u nity's ab ility t o report tree risk and pest issues t h rough an on line po rtal, ap plication, o r other easy c o m munication m ethod .
A w ell-managed urba n
forest is sustainable,
resilient. lower risk, and
beneficial.
Tree inventory data is
analyzed and crossexamined with industry
research (Year l)
RP
Annually
A tree pest and disease
plan is implemented
and a st rategy for
m anaging other
suscept ible tree species
is established (Year 6)
The public tree
population is resilient
t o existing and
potential tree pests
and diseases (Year 20)
2.8 H, N
Add resou rces and fund·1ng for increased w at e ring c apacity for trees and la nd sc ape (trucks, staff, etc.). I ncentivize xerisca pe practices using policies, codes, and educational campaigns.
Focus on climate Xeriscaping incentives are
resiliency, drought integrated into policies,
tolerant species, and fire codes, and educational
resistent species to campaigns (Year 3)
optimize im plementat ion
strategies
85 RP, CD, ET
2030
Budget ask to increase
resources and fu ndi ng
for increased w atering
capact iy (Year 4)
New w atering
processes in place t o
supplem ent
xeriscaping incent ives
(Year 5)
2.8 C, H, N
Purpose Action Item 6.1 Action Item 6.2 Action Item 6.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 7.1 Action Item 7.2 Action Item 7.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
PERFORMANCE
Pevise the street tree code to al low reside nts t o p la nt street trees, clarify mainten ance responsibilities for street t rees, and empow er resid e nts to care for t he trees with proper training. Create a more systematic ap p roach t o replac ing street trees as they d ie and are removed.
San Lea nd ro's street tree
ordinance is a guiding
document for the
community and city staff,
which will be most
impactful with clarity and
enforceability
Public engagement and
education is completed
regarding potential code
changes (Vear 7)
CD, ET. RP
2026,
Annually
City ordinances are
updat ed to cla rify street
tree planting and
m aintenance
requirem ents (Year 2)
Educational materials
and depart m ent
m emos are published
t o provide clari ty and
em pow er residents
(Vear 3)
2.9 C,N
Identify sidew a lk conflict procedures, al t e rnatives to tree remova l, and p rot oco l for re p lacing damaged trees during infrastructure p rojects.
Partnerships and
coordination enable
efficient ach·1evement of
shared goals
Regular meef1ngs to
identify opportunities to
collaborate (Vear 2)
ET
Annually
Urban Forestry Program Gmwth Plan
86 Trees effectively integrated
into all City proJects w here
feasible (Year 5)
2.9 E, H, N
A shared
commit ment
achieves local and
Citywide tree
canopy goals (Year
20)
Purpose Action Item 1.1 Action Item 1.2 Action Item 1.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 2.1 Action Item 2.2 Action Item 2.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 3.1 Action Item 3.2 Action Item 3.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
PLANNING
Track all City-led tree plantings and tree plantings conducted by partners. Ut ilize tree inventory software and/or city asset management p rogram.
Accurate tracking enables
assessment of efficacy of
actions and progress towards
canopy goals
A system is established to
methodically and
routinely gather tree
planting and removal
d ata (Year 7)
RP, ET,
CD
2025,
Annually
Tree planting and
removal d ata from all
partners is integrated
into the City's asset
system (Year 2)
Al l tree planting and
removal data from
t he City and part ners
is accurately
maintained (Year 5)
N,C,H, E
3.7 Update t he Tree Canopy Assessment (TCA) every 5-70 years using ind ustry recommended protocols.
An updated assessment of
canopy gains and losses
informs policy and
management and offers a
baseline to establish goals.
A budget is p repared and
approved for the TCA
(Year 2)
RP
2030
An RFP is prepared and
consultant selected to
complete a TCA (Vear 4)
An u pd ated TCA is
completed (Year 5)
3.2 N,H
Prioritize canopy cover growt h for San Leandra's street s, parks, school campuses, and areas that currently have very little canopy coverage.
Areas with low tree canopy
cover suffer from the urban
heat island effect, which has
a variety of negative impacts
on the commu nity t hat could
be avoided with more
equitable distribution of tree
Tree plantings are
d irected to priority areas
as identified in t he TMP
t hat used 2078 canopy
d ata (Year 7)
A canopy assessment is
completed to compare
wit h the 2078 data,
identify areas of growth
and loss, and reprioritize
plantings strategies if
necessary (Year 3)
Planting strategies
a re assessed
periodical ly as new
data becomes
available so canopy is
equitable distributed
(Year 4)
canopythrougho_u_t_t_h_e_c_i~tY~--------------------------------------< 87 RP, ET
2025,
Annually
3.2 H,N
Purpose Action Item 4.1 Action Item 4.2 Action Item 4.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 5.1 Action Item 5.2 Action Item 5.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 6.1 Action Item 6.2 Action Item 6.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
PLANNING
Utilize the TM P's Tree Maintenance and Budget Sheet to secure funding for urban forest management activities.
Adequate funding to
maintain a healthy
urban forest benefits
the community
Fund ing mechanisms
provided in the TMP are
explored for funding
strategies (Year 2)
RP
Annually
Priority activities and
projects identified,
funding mechanism
strategy(s)
implemented (Year 4)
Fu nd ing secured for
priority activities and/or
projects (Year 6)
3.3 N
Complete an u rban forest audit using similar criteria as the 2023 audit completed for the TM P to evaluate improvem ents in urban forest management and adapt strategies.
Evaluations enable A team to complete the
adaptive management. updated audit is established
(Year l)
RP, CD, ET
Bi-annually
The first City-led urban
forest audit is
completed (Year 3)
An u rban forest audit is
routinely conducted
(Year 4)
3.3 N, C, H, E
Based on the outcomes of the bi-annual urban forest audit, available resou rces, ind ustry technology and research, and d ata, m odify existing actions and develop new actions to continue to achieve goals of t he 2024 TM P.
Updates to actions
applies adaptive
management and
improves decision
making based on
An assessment ofTMP actions
and targets achieved is
completed (Year 3)
RP, CD, ET
2026
Urban Forestry Program Gmwth Plan
88 Updated actions for t he
TMP are drafted (Year 4)
The TMP has updated
actions and targets
(Year 5)
C,E, H, N
Purpose Action Item 7.1 Action Item 7.2 Action Item 7.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 8.1 Action Item 8.2 Action Item 8.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 9.1 Action Item 9.2 Action Item 9.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
PLANNING
Create an annual activity calendar for u rban forest management aligned w ith actions in this TMP.
Astructured program
guides management,
provides prioritization
guidance, and enables
efficiencies
TMP action worksheet is
utilized (Year 7)
RP
Annual I
y
List of activities d rafted
(Year 2)
Annual calendar created
(Year 2)
3.3 N,C
Maintain t he inventory of pu blic street and park trees. Update as mainte nance and new plantings occur. Encourage partners to manage a cu rrent inventory of util it y trees.
Inventories inform
maintenance, resource
needs, planting, and
ecosystem benefits.
Database updated to
reflect c hanges to t he
publ ic tree population
(Year l)
RP, ET
0 Al l street trees are
inventoried in at least
one City p lanning area
per year (Year 2)
All City planning areas
are inventoried and data
is up-to-date (Year 70}
3 4
0 Implement a holist ic approach to urban forestry that focuses on the entire ecosystem. Create more natural areas, riparian im provements, green spaces, u rba n gardens, pollinator habitat, and wi ldlife habit at in support of a holistic u rban forest.
Holistic urban forest
management takes into
account more than just
trees and leans toward a
comprehensive ecosystem
management approach.
89 Community stakeholders
form a com mittee with
City staff (Year l)
RP
0 Potentia I projects,
partners, locations, and
funding sources are
identified for
im plementation in San
Lea ndro (Year 2)
The first project is
completed and annual
progress is made to
meet the goa Is of the
initiat ive ( Year 5)
3.5 0
Purpose Action Item 10.1 Action Item 10.2 Action Item 10.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 11.1 Action Item 11.2 Action Item 11.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 12.1 Action Item 12.2 Action Item 12.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
PLANNING
Evaluate staffing and budget resources required to safely and effectively p lant t rees aligned with canopy g oals and im plement a p roactive tree m aintenance program. Prioritize pu b lic safety and economic development as import ant factors when using urban forestry fu nds.
Canopy goals cannot
be obtained nor can
healthy young urban
forests be established
without the proper
resources.
Canopy goals and planting
targets are established (Year
6)
RP, CD, ET
0 An analysis of the A budget p roposal is
requ ired staff necessary p repared detailing t he
to plant and maintain necessary staff (Year 70)
new trees to meet
canopy goa Is is prepared
(Year 8)
3.6 0
Monitor grants and technical assistance opportunities from organizations such as Cal Fire.
Diverse funding
achieves long-term
TMP goals
Resources of partners a re
utilized (Year 2)
RP, CD, ET
Annual ly
Grant application
submitted and
a pp roved for a p roject
such as tree planting,
planning, inventory
(Year 3)
Grant application
su bmitted and
a pp roved for a project
suc h as tree planting,
p lanning, inventory
(Year 3-20)
3.6 N, C
Establish a dedicated, sustained funding so urce beyo nd t he current department al budget (such as a Tree Fund from permit fees) for urban forestry operations to increase the level of service to m eet the community's standards.
Funding that is
diversified, sustained,
and dedicated will
enable long-term
success
Tree inventory and canopy
data along w ith supporting
information is utilized to
identify any budget shortfalls
(Year 70)
RP, CD, ET
0 Urban Forestry Program Gmwth Plan
90 Strateg·1es ·1n the
sustained fund ing report
are fully implemented
(Year 15)
A d edicated, sustained
funding source is
established that
represents the need s of
the u rban forest, service
levels, and com munity
(Year 20)
3.6 0
Purpose Action Item 13.1 Action Item 13.2 Action Item 13.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 14.1 Action Item 14.2 Action Item 14.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
Purpose Action Item 15.1 Action Item 15.2 Action Item 15.3 Priority: Department: Criteria Addressed:
Effort: Target Year: Co-Benefits:
PLANNING
Strengthen written urban forestry protocols, specifications, and standards for capital projects, constru ction ad ministration, maintenance, contracts, and performance monitorin g.
A w ell-managed urba n
forest is sustainable,
resilient, lower risk, and
beneficial.
Existing protocols and other
guidance documents are
gathered and reviewed (Year 3)
RP, CD, ET
0 Areas for
improvements to
protocols and
guidance documents
is listed (Year 4)
All releva nt p rotocols
and guidance
documents are
up dated and
maintained (Year 5)
3.8 0
Establish SOPs for enforcement of the t ree o rdinance d u ring development p la n review, in cluding tree p rotection, preservation, a nd planting.
Oversight oftreerelated ordinances
ensures proper tree
preservation and
planting that achieves
common goals.
SOPs established for t he Urban
Forestry division to engage in
plan reviews (Yea r 3)
CD
0 The Urban Forestry
division is involved in
al l pertinent plan
reviews (Year 3-20)
The Urban Forestry
Division is involved in
al I pertinent p lan
reviews (Year 3-20)
3.8 0
Adopt a heritage t ree ordina nce w ith incentives for p roper tree maintena n ce, m ore flex ibility in in dividual situatio ns, added ca pacity for e nforcement, and p otential for financial assistance to n o n-comme rc ial properties.
Standards for tree
protection and planting
on private property
contribute to goals for
canopy growth and
tree health citywide
97 Public engagement and
education is co mpleted
regarding potential code
changes (Year l)
CD, ET, RP
2026, Annually
A heritage tree
ordinances is adopted
to establish new
regulations for
preservation, p lanting,
and m itigation on
private property (Year
2)
Educational materials
and d epart ment
m emos are published
to provide clarity and
empower residents
(Year 3)
38 C
―
"We're taking care of {this land] so the next generation can take care of it," Corrina Gould, co-founder of The Sogorea Te' Land Trust Our nation and this state are at an economic crossroad. We can cut and run, or w e can work our way through t hese challenges by letting cities make the smart investments and good choices that will ma ke t he biggest difference and have the most immediate im pact. Planting trees and caring for them are two of t he smartest investments we can make-providing shade, reducing energy costs, cleaning the air, reducing greenhouse gases that cause global wa rm ing, capturing polluted urban runoff, improving water quality, and adding beauty to our neighborhoods. The urban forest is a critical component of our infrastructure-one that increases in value over time. The Tree Master Plan provides a vehicle in w hich we can move toward achieving our goals around hea lth, climate, and liva bility.
Urban Forestry Prog ram Growth Plan 92
Anguelovski, I., Connolly, J. J., Garcia-Lamarca, M., Cole, H., & Pearsall, H. (2019). New scholarly pathways on green gentrification: What does the urban 'green turn' mean and where is it going1. Progress in human geography, 43(6), 7064-7086.
Campbell, L. K., Svendsen, E. S., Johnson, M. L., & Plitt, S. (2022). Not by trees alone: Centering community in urban forestry. Landscape and Urban Planning, 224, 704445.
Chang, M. (2023). Reclaiming Indigenous Land: Corrina Gould, 2023 Community Leadership Award Winner. San Francisco Foundation. https://sff.org/recla i ming-indigenous-la nd-corri na-gou ld-2023-com mun ityleadersh i p-awa rd-winner/ Carmichael, C. E., & McDonough, M. H. (2079). Community stories: Explaining resistance to street tree-planting programs in Detroit, Michigan, USA. Society & Natural Resources, 32(5), 588-605.
Chapple, K., Ramiller, A., Elias, R R, Greenberg, J., and Jeon, J. S. (2022). Examining the Unintended Effects of Climate Change Mitigation: A New Tool to Predict Investment-Related Displacement. Institute of Governmental Studies, University of California, Berkeley. https://www.u rba nd isplacement.org/ma ps/exa mining-the-unintended-effects-of-climate-changem itigation/ Checker, M. (2077). Wiped Out by the "Greenwave": Environmental gentrification and the paradoxical politics of urban sustainability. City & Society, 23(2), 210-229.
City of San Leandro, CA. (2024, February). San Leandro Redlined. City of San Leandro. h tt ps://www.sa n I ea n d ro.o rg/l 089/Sa n- Leandro-Red Ii n ed Detweiler, M.B., et al. 2009. Scheduled medications and falls in dementia patients utilizing a wander garden.
American Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Other Dementias. 24: 322-332.
Donovan, G.H., Michael, Y.L., Butry, OT, Sullivan, A.O., and Chase, J.M. 2077. Urban Trees and the Risk of Poor Birth Outcomes. Health & Place 77, l:390-93.
Elzeyadi, I. (2017). "Daylighting-Bias and Biophilia: Quantifying the Impacts of Daylight on Occupants Health." In: Thought and Leadership in Green Buildings Research. Greenbuild 2071 Proceedings. Washington, DC: USGBC Press.
Grant, A., Millward, A. A., Edge, S., Roman, L.A., & Teelucksingh, C. (2022). Where is environmental justice? A review of US urban forest management plans. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 77, 727737.
Knuth, S. (2019). Cities and planetary repair: The problem with climate retrofitting. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 57(2), 487-504.
93 Locke, D. H., Hall, B., Grove, J. M., Pickett, S. T., Ogden, L.A., Aoki, C., ... & O'Neil-Dunne, J. P. {2027). Residential housing segregation and urban tree canopy in 37 US Cities. npj urban sustainability, 7(7) , 75.
Lovasi G.S., et al. 2073. Neighborhood safety and green space as predictors of obesity among preschool children from low-income families in New York City. Prev Med. 7(3):789- 793.
Menendian, S., & Gambhir, S. {2078). Racial Segregation in the San Francisco Bay Area. University of California, Berkeley. https://h aasi nst itute. berke I ey.ed u/racia I-seq reg ation-sa n-f ra ncisco-bay-a rea.
McClintock, N. (2020). Cultivating (a) sustainability capital: Urban agriculture, ecogentrification, and the uneven valorization of social reproduction. In Social Justice and the City (pp. 279-290). Routledge.
Miller, R.H., & Miller, R. W. (7997). Planting survival of selected street tree taxa. Journal of Arboriculture, 77(7), 785- 797.
Naderi, J.R. Landscape Design In the Clear Zone: Effect of Landscape Variables on Pedestrian Health and Driver Saftey. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 7857. TRB, National Research Counci l, Washington D.C., 2003, pp. 779-730.
Purdue University. "Trees Cou ld Affect Land Use, Reduce Skin Cancer." San Diego Earth Times. Mar. 2003. Web. <http://www.sdearthtimes.com/et0203/et0203s72.html
Roman, L.A., Conway, T. M., Eisenman, T. S., Koeser, A. K., Ordonez Barona, C., Locke, D. H., ... & Vogt, J. {2027).
Beyond 'trees are good': Disservices, management costs, and tradeoffs in urban forestry. Ambio, 50, 675-630.
Sax, D. L., Nesbitt, L., & Quinton, J. {2022). Improvement, not displacement: A framework for urban green gentrification research and practice. Environmental Science & Policy, 737, 373-383.
Schafran, A. {2078). The Road to Resegregation: Northern California and the Failure of Politics. University of California Press.
Stigsdotter, U. K., et al. 2070. Health promoting outdoor environments - Associations between green space, and health, health-related quality of life and stress based on a Danish national representative survey.
Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. 38:477 - 477.
Tamosiunas, A., Grazu leviciene, R, Luksiene, D. et al. 2074. Accessibility and use of urban green spaces, and cardiovascu lar health: findings from a Kaunas cohort study. Environmental Health. 73(7): 20.
Thomas, T., Chapple, K., Greenberg, J., Ramiller, A., Reifsnyder, E., Schmidt, I., Ham, K. {2022, June 20). California Estimated Displacement Risk Model. Urban Displacement Project. https://www.u rba n d isplacem ent.org/ma ps/ca I iforn ia-est i m ated -displace m ent-ri sk-m od el/ Urban Forestry Program Growth Plan 94
Thompson, A., Bunds, K., Larson, L., Cutts, B., & Hipp, J. A. {2023). Paying for nature-based solutions: A review of funding and financing mechanisms for ecosystem services and their impacts on social equity Sustainable Development, 37{4). 7997-2066.
Vogt, J., Hauer, R J., & Fischer, B. C. {2075). The costs of maintaining and not maintaining the urban forest: A review of the urban forestry and arboriculture literature. Arboricu lture and Urban Forestry, 47(6), 293- 323. https://doi.org/70. 48044/iauf.2075.027.
Wattenhofer, D. J., & Johnson, G. R {2027). Understanding why young urban trees die can improve future success. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 64, 727247.
Wolch, J. R, Byrne, J., & Newell, J. P. {2074). Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities just green enough'. Landscape and urban planning, 725, 234-244. 95