San Luis Obispo City Council
January 12, 2023

17 Urban Forest Resource
debris management and a crisis communication plan. Staff are regularly trained and/or updated.

Strategy 3: Maintain or increase extent of urban forests and vegetative cover.

A healthy urban forest is more able to withstand stresses, including the direct and indirect impacts of climate change. By increasing the extent of urban forests and canopy cover, the benefits they provide and climate change mitigation functions they provide can be maximized.

The key adaptation methods or approaches include:
 Minimize forest loss and degradation.
 Maintain existing trees through proper care and maintenance.  Restore and increase tree, forest, and vegetative cover.  Sustain sites and ecosystems that provide high value across the landscape.

The following are examples of how urban forest management can support the maintenance and expansion of canopy cover:
 Provide Clear Guidance and Protections Through a Tree Ordinance — A tree ordinance provides enforceable guidance for adequate maintenance and protection of the canopy cover provided by significant trees on private property. With strong enforcement, the loss of individual trees will not result in significant losses to the overall canopy cover.
 Define and Protect Heritage Trees — Trees are long lived organisms and mature trees provide the greatest benefits. Defining heritage trees as those trees that are especially significant to the community promotes their protection and recognizes the benefits of mature or unique trees, which can further promote canopy protection and enhancement.
 Protect Trees During Development and Redevelopment — According to the USDA Forest Service, it is estimated 175,000 acres of urban forest was lost per year between 2009 to 2014 due to development. During the same period, pavement and other impervious surfaces grew by 167,000 acres each year (Janowiak et al. 2021). While space is limited in urban areas, redevelopment projects do not have to result in the loss of trees and tree canopy. By establishing tree protection measures and implementing protection requirements whenever construction occurs near trees, the loss of valuable canopy cover can be avoided. Further restrictions on development and/or acquisition of land for the purpose of preservation and/or creation of conservation easements on private land holdings can limit development and its effects on the urban forest.  Follow a Comprehensive Tree Planting and Replacement Plan — With a comprehensive tree planting and replacement plans, the resources needed to plant trees and establish trees can be more efficiently and strategically used to meet canopy goals and to maximize potential benefits (i.e., planting large-stature trees where space allows, prioritizing growth and expansion of canopy to address canopy distribution

Urban Forest Resource 18
inequities, planting trees at optimal distance and direction from building to offset carbon emissions from heating and cooling).
 Routinely Maintain Trees — When all community trees are proactively and systematically maintained on a cyclical basis, optimal tree health and condition are more easily achieved, which contributes to tree longevity and maximal benefits.  Ensure Tree Care Meets Industry Standards — By ensuring that tree care is conducted by ISA certified arborists and meets industry standards, tree health is optimized. Improper pruning practices (e.g., “topping” or removing the tops of trees and reducing large branches to stubs) can be extremely detrimental to tree health and can lead to irreparable damage that can lead trees to be prematurely removed.  Establish and Use Irrigation to Combat Drought — All trees need water during times of drought. Droughts are occurring more frequently and for longer periods, which require planning to ensure that trees receive water during such periods. By installing efficient drip irrigation systems that are separate from turf irrigation or where not feasible, supplying water bags or scheduling hand watering trees will have some assurance that trees will receive adequate water.
 Plant Trees per Best Practices — By planting trees per best management practices and post-planting care are followed trees have improved long-term outcomes, which can reduce maintenance costs and maximize benefits.
 Set and Follow Minimum Soil Volume Requirements when Planting — In the urban environment, soil is one of the most critical environmental factors that contributes to street tree health. Trees have extensive root systems that grow beyond the spread of the canopy and can be more than 6.5 feet into the ground (Day et al. 2010). If a tree is provided with an adequate amount of uncompacted soil, then the necessary water, mineral, nutrient, and oxygen requirements are more likely met and it will have a greater opportunity to grow for years to come and can reduce costs associated with maintenance (pruning) and infrastructure damage caused by trunk buttress flare and root expansion (Clark et al. 1997).
 Build Wildlife Habitat and Corridors — Strategically plant and/or preserve trees and tree canopy to connect with and/or bridge existing core canopy to promote ecosystem functionality and biodiversity and create wildlife habitat and corridors for the movement of birds, insects, and other animals.

Strategy 4: Sustain or restore fundamental ecological functions of urban ecosystems Climate change is projected to have negative impacts on the environment and in many cases is already. In urban environments, trees are a critical component of the ecosystem. Trees have numerous properties that make them natural tools for mitigating the many of the effects of climate change. By supporting trees, the health of urban ecosystems can be improved through lessening environmental degradation and reducing physical and emotional health incidents.

19 Urban Forest Resource
The key adaptation methods or approaches include:
 Maintain or restore soils and nutrient cycling in urban areas.  Maintain or restore hydrologic processes in urban forests.  Restore or maintain fire in fire-adapted ecosystems.

The following are examples of how urban forest management can support urban ecosystems:
 Sequester and Store Carbon — Trees sequester carbon throughout their lifetimes and store it in woody biomass. These carbon sequestering capabilities suggest that urban trees could be incorporated into overall greenhouse gas emission reduction and/or storage strategies. To maximize such carbon sequestering benefits, trees should be retained as long as possible and when they must be removed, to avoid the release of carbon back into the atmosphere from decomposition, utilize the woody biomass in the highest and best possible end-use to maximize carbon storage capacity.

Strategy 5: Reduce the impact of physical and biological stressors on urban forests.

Climate change presents many challenges to the health of trees, including variations in precipitation and extreme temperature shifts. With these changes, many trees that were once successful in a local area may no longer be suitable.

The key adaptation methods or approaches include:
 Reduce impacts from extreme rainfall and enhance water infiltration and storage.  Reduce risk of damage from extreme storms and wind.
 Reduce risk of damage from wildfire.
 Maintain or improve the ability of forests to resist pests and pathogens.  Prevent invasive plant establishment and remove existing invasive species.  Manage herbivory to promote regeneration, growth, and form of desired species.

The following are examples of how urban forest management can reduce physical and biological stressors on urban forests:
 Establish and Maintain a GIS Based Tree Inventory— Comprehensive, GIS-based, current inventory of all intensively managed public trees to guide management, with mechanisms in place to keep data current and available for use.  Follow a Current and Comprehensive Urban Forest Master Plan — Having an urban forest master plan provides long-term management goals for increasing community safety and preserving and improving the health, value, and environmental benefits of the urban forest and can even support efforts in response to climate change.  Monitor Tree Performance — The inventory indicates the condition of trees and is used to identify underperforming or maladapted tree species. Trees are continually monitored for the condition and test species anticipated to be adapted to the future

Urban Forest Resource 20
climatic conditions are incorporated and monitored. Managers have a sense of species that either should be continued or phased out over time.  Fully Staff and Adequately Fund Urban Forestry Programs — Establish stable funds to cover the costs of proactive and reactive tree maintenance as well as staffing, administration, and programming. Stable funds can allow for consistent staffing to meet daily workloads and ensure access to necessary equipment and vehicles needed so that the community receives a high level of service.  Assess and Promptly Address Urban Forest Risks — Large, mature trees may be removed because they are perceived as a health or safety hazard, but the benefits these trees provide take hundreds of years to replace. While it is true that wherever trees are present, there is some potential risk to people and property, many of these risks can be mitigated. In many instances, removal of entire trees can be avoided, through proactive inspection and management.
 Follow an Integrated Pest Management Program — Use of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) protocols can effectively address pests and diseases (Wiseman and Raupp, 2016).
 Prepare for Wildfire — In recent years, wildfires have devastated many communities.

With prolonged periods of drought and a changing climate, wildfire is likely to continue to be a threat to communities that neighbor the wildland urban interface. Developing wildfire preparedness plans is not only important for establishing community wide evacuation protocols, but also can assist in wildfire mitigation strategies.  Build Drought Tolerance — The tree species that make up the urban forest each have different requirements and are best adapted to certain environments. Drought tolerant and native trees are represented in the inventory to help managers minimize tree losses during and following droughts.

Strategy 6: Enhance taxonomic, functional, and structural diversity.

With highly mobile populations, the spread of pests and pathogens that can negatively affect tree and other plant health is an ever-growing concern. Pests and pathogens that are currently devastating tree populations in one part of the country now, can easily immigrate to other areas.

Through enhancing species diversity and stratifying the age of tree populations, communities can reduce the likelihood of severe losses in canopy from pests, pathogens, or other stressors brought on by climate change.

The key adaptation methods or approaches include:
 Enhance age class and structural diversity in forests.  Maintain or enhance diversity of native species.
 Optimize and diversify tree species selection for multiple long-term benefits.  Maintain or enhance genetic diversity.

21 Urban Forest Resource
The following are examples of how urban forest management can enhance taxonomic, functional, and structural diversity:
 Diversify the Population of Community Trees — Industry leaders suggest that no species should represent more than 10% of a population and no genus should represent more than 20% of a population (Clark et al. 1997; Santamour, 1990).

Managers should consider diversity (i.e., species, genera, and family) when planting new and/or replacement trees to reduce vulnerabilities to pests and pathogens and reduce the likelihood of catastrophic losses to trees and tree canopy (Janowiak et al. 2021).  Strive for an Ideal Aged Tree Population — An ideally aged tree resource allows managers to allocate annual maintenance costs uniformly over many years and assures continuity in overall tree canopy coverage and associated benefits. Striving to achieve an ideal age distribution ensures that there is a high proportion of young trees planted to offset establishment and age-related mortality as the percentage of older trees declines over time (Richards, 1982/83).
 Provide Adequate Funding and Resources for the Urban forest — The community tree resource, just like other community infrastructure, requires consistent planning and maintenance. Climate change is likely to increase the frequency of reactionary maintenance. By providing stable funding for urban forestry, preventative maintenance can occur, which is frequently less costly than reactive maintenance and prolong the lifetimes of trees.

Strategy 7: Alter urban ecosystems toward new and expected conditions.

Research is actively trying to understand the potential impacts of climate change. With climate change, local climate conditions are expected to shift. Models have been developed to project some of these changes and communities can evaluate these projections and begin planting trees that are anticipated to be more successful in future climatic conditions.

The key adaptation methods or approaches include:
 Favor or restore non-invasive species that are expected to be adapted to future conditions.
 Establish or encourage new species mixes.
 Introduced species, genotypes, and cultivars that are expected to be adapted to future conditions.
 Disfavor species that are distinctly maladapted.
 Move at-risk species to more suitable locations.
 Promptly revegetate and remediate sites after disturbance.  Realign severely altered systems toward future conditions.

The following are examples of how urban forest management can support urban ecosystems:

Urban Forest Resource 22
 Apply Climate Change Projections to Species Selection — Increasingly, cities are recognizing that shifts in weather patterns are likely to alter species habitat ranges and render some species less adapted to the region. Although there is no clear consensus on the future outcomes, some research has pointed to looking toward comparable cities thought to have a similar climate to future projections as a way to move forward.

The current climate of a comparable city is known (Bastin et al. 2019) and managers make connections with colleagues in comparable cities and explore their species palettes. Experimental species are chosen based on climate projections, such as changes in temperature and precipitation. Strategies for climate adaptation include favoring species that are predicted to do well in climate models, encouraging new species mixes, and choosing species that are well adapted to weather events such as flooding, high winds, and other storm events (Janowiak et al. 2021).  Remove and Replace Trees — Some species of trees are maladapted to the local climate or succumb to pressures brought on by climate change (e.g., saltwater intrusion, increased temperatures, etc.). Once species are identified to be unsuccessful, future plantings of the species should halt and existing trees be gradually phased out and removed.
 Fully Stock the Community Tree Resource — Municipalities are limited to planting trees in the public rights-of-way. If all vacant sites are tracked and as funding permits, planted with trees, then the contribution of public trees to overall canopy cover is maximized.

Strategy 8: Promote mental and social health in response to climate change.

Climate change is anticipated to severely impact human health and many health issues may exacerbate inequalities and disproportionately affect those with underlying health conditions.

The key adaptation methods or approaches include:
 Provide nature experiences to ease stress and support mental function.  Encourage community and social cohesion to support climate response.

The following are examples of how urban forest management can promote mental and social health in response to climate change:
 Share Information, Ideas, and Resources — Collaborative planning is important for effective communication amongst partners to plan for and respond to climate change stressors. Together, managers can communicate and collaborate to address the urban forests’ greatest vulnerabilities and select experimental species that may be best adapted to the future climate.
 Integrate Urban Forestry in Climate Planning and Policy — Trees have properties that make them especially useful in mitigating the effects of climate change. Wherever possible, policies and long-term planning for response to climate change should consider opportunities to support urban forestry programming.

23 Urban Forest Resource
Strategy 9: Promote human health co-benefits in nature-based climate adaptation.

Nature-based climate adaptation technologies, like trees, can not only mitigate the effects of climate change, but also promote improvements in human health.

The key adaptation methods or approaches include:
 Co-design large-scale green infrastructure and build systems to promote health.  Provide micro-scale nature experience to promote health and healing.

The following are examples of how urban forest management can promote human health cobenefits in nature-based climate adaptation:
 Considered Trees Essential Infrastructure — Prior to planting a tree, provide adequate space for future growth of the tree (including space for the root systems) and consider future impacts of trees with lines of sight and other critical infrastructure and to avoid conflicts between trees and above or below ground utilities. In many instances, structural pruning can mitigate conflicts with infrastructure and avoid premature removal.
 Incorporate Trees into Stormwater and Other Green Infrastructure — Trees filter stormwater, cleaning and moderating the amount of water in urban areas. Urban forests can provide both cost savings and reduce pressures on engineered systems with urban area function in mind.

Specific recommendations for the City of San Luis Obispo for implementing and improving resiliency strategies are noted in the sections where they apply.

Urban Forest Resource 24

25 Operations and Programs
Operations and Programs
San Luis Obispo’s urban forest is composed of both public and private trees within City limits and in the surrounding Open Space areas. Trees within the built environment, or in the urbanized area, require more management than trees within the City’s Open Space areas and other more natural areas. The Urban Forest Services program within the Department of Public Works is responsible for the maintenance of trees along streets, in medians, parks, and at City facilities. Urban Forest Services staff perform the following services:
 Maintenance of trees along streets, in medians, parks, and at public facilities  Proactive maintenance of trees in the downtown core
 Accelerating maintenance for grid pruning to re-establish a maintenance cycle for all other rights of-way trees (contractor)
 Reactive maintenance resulting from service requests or special requests (e.g., planting, pruning, watering) (in-house or contractor)
 Contract monitoring (grid pruning, removal, stump grinding, and planting)  Commemorative Tree Program
 Service requests/citizen complaint and correspondence  Safety and clearance for all public trees (including natural areas)  Safety and clearance for private property trees that interfere with public rights-of-way  Emergency response for all public trees
 Tree inspections, including new tree plantings
 Tree removal applications
 Enforcing the Tree Ordinance
 Development design review
 Heritage tree program
 Tree Committee liaison
 Coordinating with urban forest partners
 Community outreach and engagement
 Addressing hardscape/tree conflicts
 Supplemental watering
 Pest monitoring
“The City should have an
aggressive street tree
planting and maintenance
program.”
-Survey Respondent

Operations and Programs 26
Services and Programs
Service Requests
Residents can submit service requests and report
tree issues through a link on the City’s web page.

The Public Works Department also has a central
call line, but residents are directed to the online
portal when possible. Urban Forest Services
receives approximately 415 service requests each
year. Most service requests are for pruning to
address fallen or broken limbs or tree removal.

At any given time, there may be around 20 open
service requests. Generally, staff review requests
within 24-hours, but the time it takes to address
the request depends on the situation. For example,
downed limbs are typically addressed on the same
day whereas requests for tree removals require an
inspection, which can take as long as a week. If
approved, trees will be removed within the
scheduled cycle or a property owner may pay for the removal at their own expense. The majority of requests for tree removals are attributed to conflicts between trees and sewer lines. Residents Staffing Level Changes
Historically, the urban forestry program has provided proactive maintenance to all community trees along streets, in parks, public rights-of-way, and at city facilities on an 8– 10-year cycle with an in-house tree crew. The team was fully staffed with 1 city arborist, 3 urban forest service staff, 3 tree assistants, 1 annual contract arborist, and 1 arborist in the Community Development department who was responsible for design review.

Since 2019, staffing in the urban forestry program has dwindled. Attrition from retirements and transitions has reduced staffing from 4 FTE staff members to 2. At current staffing levels (2 full time staff), Urban Forestry Services is limited to providing reactive maintenance for most community trees (excluding trees in the downtown core and watering).

In an effort to return to previous service levels and catch up on delayed routine maintenance, Urban Forest Services increased the use of contractors. Since the beginning of 2021, Urban Forest Services is having contractors prioritize areas known to have higher risk trees. San Luis Obispo is like many municipalities, where tree maintenance is increasingly being contracted out to reduce risk and reduce the physical demands on City staff. Despite staffing levels and a period of deferred maintenance, Urban Forest Services staff exhibit extreme professionalism and are committed to identifying areas to make progress on maintenance priorities and fulfill the responsibilities for the care of “I appreciate how quickly a SLO
urban forest employee
responded when we had an issue
with a tree on the sidewalk near
the driveway to our house
(large, broken branch was
hanging so low that we couldn't
access our driveway without
possible damage to our cars).”
-Survey Respondent

27 Operations and Programs
with old, cracked sewer pipes often experience issues when tree roots exploit cracks in search of water. Urban Forest Services requires images or video of the damage before approval of a removal request for any healthy tree that has roots growing into sewage pipes. As the City is concerned with stormwater intrusion, there is a voluntary program for sewer line replacement through the utilities program. This program allocates a set amount of funding to address this issue in specific districts that tend to experience the majority of cracked sewer pipes.

Tree Pruning
Urban Forest Services program’s primary objective is to maintain the estimated 20,000 trees along streets, in parks, rights-of-way, and at public facilities on an 8 to10-year pruning cycle, but maintenance currently is largely reactive and staff estimates they are a full cycle behind (8 to10 years behind in maintenance). The Urban Forest Services program has contracted tree pruners working to accelerate maintenance work to get back to a regular pruning cycle. With the current maintenance backlog, inspections for trees only occur during routine maintenance or when staff are in the field. Ideally, Urban Forest Services would conduct proactive, cycle-based maintenance that corresponds to the maintenance schedule for other Public Works assets. The intent of these studies and inventories is to provide the necessary resources to the program to properly management the urban forest assets to the community’s expectations.

While the frequency of care and the levels of services have been reduced in most areas of the community, downtown trees receive biannual maintenance for structural pruning, building clearance, and signage visibility. Business owners are notified of pending work whereas residents are notified of this and all other maintenance through parking notices. If adjacent property owners wish to prune a tree outside of the Urban Forest Service’s maintenance schedule, the resident must first acquire permit and must employ an ISA Certified Arborist to perform the work.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Service Requests
 Clearly communicate which services Urban Forestry Services offers and the time it takes to provide the services in a future urban forest strategic plan.

Challenges and Opportunities: Service Requests
 Some community members use the hotline to call in situations that are out of the scope of services, taking up valuable time and resources.  Service requests are submitted frequently because the majority of street trees adjacent to private property are not regularly maintained.

Operations and Programs 28
Municipal Code 12.24.150 protects all trees within the City from improper pruning practices by requiring that all tree care follow industry standards. The primary focus for pruning may differ between city departments (e.g., safety, risk management, storm mitigation, utility clearance), but following industry standards ensures that all public trees are properly maintained. Stakeholders indicated some concern for tree pruning that occurs in natural areas where the primary focus is on quickly addressing safety and clearance issues. A future UFSP should reiterate the requirement to follow industry standards for all tree care and ensure that maintenance staff are fully trained to meet these requirements. When private trees are damaged due to improper pruning, the Urban Forest Services Program enforces the City’s Municipal Code and holds the responsible parties responsible for violations. Despite this, not all trees are receiving quality care.

Challenges and Opportunities: Tree Pruning
 The pruning cycle is estimated to be one full cycle behind.  Resources need to be augmented to meet community and organizational needs.  Industry standards recommend trees be pruned on a 5 to 7-year cycle, but current maintenance is reactionary.
 Despite Municipal Code, maintenance on some trees does not follow industry standards including private property and natural areas where the primary focus is on safety and clearance.
 Inspections occur during the routine maintenance of trees in the downtown core, but most trees are not regularly inspected.
 All City trees should receive the appropriate maintenance complying with best management practices.

29 Operations and Programs
Recommendations for UFSP Planning; Tree Pruning
 Use maintenance schedules to quantify resource needs for budget augmentation.  Continue to use contract services to enhanced tree pruning and maintenance to promote the long-term health and vigor of the city's urban forest, as well as maintain public safety (per Strategic Budget Direction Report).
 Determine the amount of funding needed to maintain a fully stocked inventory, where all planting sites are filled.
 Ensure contract services are regularly evaluated to ensure work meets best management practices and standards.
 Ensure all public trees are maintained according to industry standards as well as Municipal Code.
 Move toward a 5-year maintenance cycle to proactively maintain all rights-ofway trees using pruning grids to efficiently group routine maintenance. ○ Publish the grid pruning map and schedule on the City website to provide residents with information on when to expect routine service.  Continue to plan for the increased maintenance for species that require more frequent pruning in the downtown area as well as throughout the community (an estimated 20% of the current inventory).
 Work with the Parks and Recreation Department to ensure proper pruning for trees in natural areas.
 Develop an annual work program (per Management and Performance Audit of the Public Works Department).
 Use Department-wide work planning and scheduling systems.  Include tree planting and maintenance costs for trees planted in support the goal of planting 10,000 new trees by 2035 in partnership with ECOSLO and the community (per Strategic Budget Direction Report).
 Provide efficient and prescriptive maintenance to all city trees.  Continue to work with Downtown SLO Ambassadors and the Downtown Foresters for tree well maintenance and tree pruning in the downtown core.  Designate someone qualified within Urban Forest Services to set the level standards and policies for tree care.
 Communicate the standards to all other City departments and partnering organizations tasked with managing public trees.
 Lead a campaign to support business licensing for tree care professionals and to educate private property owners on their responsibilities.

Operations and Programs 30
Clearance and Visibility
Urban Forest Services provides clearance and visibility pruning for all trees interfering with the public rights-of-way. In the past, Urban Forest Services commonly provided safety and clearance services to private trees interfering with public property. This is an auxiliary service that takes away time and resources that should be directed toward the care of public trees because Municipal Code designates private property owners responsible for addressing safety concerns on their property. While the goal is to change this precedent, staff continue to provide safety and clearance services to private trees for increased safety and accessibility. Municipal Code calls for Urban Forest Services to provide a notice to property owners to abate clearance and visibility issues caused by privately-owned vegetation encroaching into the rights-of-way.

Heritage Trees
Heritage trees are landmark trees that stand out for their size, growth habit, or represent a unique species. Trees can be nominated for this designation by anyone in the community, but trees must be approved by the Tree Committee and City Council before they are given this designation and recognition. Once a tree becomes a heritage tree it is given the highest preservation priority. According to Municipal Code, heritage trees can be any healthy tree within City limits and the City is responsible for their maintenance. The current Urban Forest Services policy is to inventory heritage trees, but designate maintenance responsibilities to the property owner.

Urban Forest Services provides information about the heritage tree program for the City website and features a self-guided tour of San Luis Obispo’s heritage trees, which includes the tree location, photos, notable facts, and relevant history.

Challenges and Opportunities: Clearance and Visibility
 Urban Forest Services is upholding the past precedent to provide safety and clearance services to private trees.

Heritage Trees
 There is a discrepancy between the Municipal Code and the current Urban Forest Services policy around the maintenance of heritage trees.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Clearance and Visibility  Increase public awareness of Municipal Code that designates private owners as responsible for private tree clearance and safety concerns.

Heritage Trees
 Modify Chapter 12.14.160 Heritage Trees to designate private property owners responsible for their maintenance.
 Consider a permit process to prune heritage trees.

31 Operations and Programs
Tree Planting
Urban Forest Service’s tree planting efforts are primarily grant based and conducted by the longstanding nonprofit partner organization ECOSLO or contractors. Urban Forest Services does not have an up-to-date inventory that includes available planting sites (i.e., stumps and vacant sites) nor a tree planting and replacement plan. Staff direct tree planting to known vacant sites, but with these tools, tree planting could be done in a more targeted, efficient manner. On average, approximately 150-200 new trees are planted each year in vacant sites within public rights-of-way and Public Works is responsible for planting approximately 50 trees each year and relies on partnering organizations to plant the remainder. Urban Forest Services provides young tree care to trees they plant, including watering. Mortality rates are generally low (<5%) and are mostly attributed to gopher damage, lack of establishment, or vandalism.

ECOSLO is co-leading the City’s tree-planting efforts in the rights-of-way. ECOSLO and its volunteers have been
integral to obtaining grant funding, planting, and
establishment of 140 new trees since 2019. The
organization works with several city departments,
including Urban Forest Services, to identify planting sites and flag utility lines. For tree-planting requests in front of private property, ECOSLO encourages residents to
choose a species from a limited list, based on the
approved street tree list, grant requirements, and current availability. Planting is done by hand, which is difficult due to the hard, heavy clay soil. This is becoming a limiting factor for the organization because only a portion of volunteers are able to help with the physically demanding tree plantings. The City also relies on ECOSLO for watering and providing some structural pruning on the young trees planted through the partnership (during the first three years).

All tree planting on public property follows the City’s Tree Planting Standards as well as the Guidelines Specifications for Nursery Tree Quality, which is a document compiled by industry professionals in the region. Nursery stock is monitored to ensure newly-planted nursery trees are of high quality and to ensure any existing structural problems are identified and addressed as quickly as possible (e.g., problematic branch connections or girdling roots). “Tree planting requires continuous community engagement, volunteerism, and stewardship beyond what our small City Urban Forest Services team can provide.”
-Survey Respondent
“ECOSLO is a relatively
small nonprofit trying to do
BIG work.”
- Executive Director,
ECOSLO

Operations and Programs 32
Community members are interested in caring for and expanding the urban forest. As a testament to this, community members initiated 10 Tall: An Initiative to Plant 10,000 Trees on Public Property in San Luis Obispo by 2035, which was introduced in the Climate Action Plan.

Planting efforts are largely centered around low-cost, one-gallon container stock of native trees in City open space, creeks, and riparian areas. However, a subset of the 10,000 trees will be larger container trees and fill in vacant tree wells. This initiative is currently in the visionary stage, and Urban Forestry Services and ECOSLO are currently assessing their capacity to meet this vision. Public Works is aligning staffing and funding levels with this vision, as they will ultimately be responsible for the planting and maintenance of trees in the public-rights-of way.

In the benchmark community survey, eleven participants
expressed the importance of tree planting and increased tree canopy at schools. While school properties present an opportunity for potential planting space, the San Luis Coastal Unified School District has been reluctant to
expand existing tree planting efforts at facilities. Urban forest partners believe the barriers to tree planting at local schools are related to their capacity to provide tree maintenance and limited species availability through
grant funded tree planting initiatives.
“Please look at our public
school's needs for trees.

Many of the school sites in
SLO can benefit from
more trees.”
-Survey Respondent
Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo (ECOSLO)
The nonprofit ECOSLO has been working to preserve and protect the beautiful natural areas of San Luis Obispo for more than 50 years. Since the organization’s humble beginnings as a group of college students taking it upon themselves to clean up city creeks, it has grown into being the area’s premier nonprofit for environmental advocacy.

Among residents, ECOSLO may be most well-known for its creek-to-coast clean-ups, which historically have had considerable volunteer support and turnout. However, ECOSLO now works across many facets, including open space stewardship, county parks, green business development, sustainability outreach, and as of recently, urban forestry. Currently, ECOSLO is a team of six with two staff members primarily dedicated to the urban tree program.

These staff members coordinate with numerous partners and, at any given time, work with approximately 40 volunteers.

ECOSLO is an incredibly valuable partner to the City, who has come to rely on ECOSLO for several projects, including trail work and tree planting. In 2019 a grant with California ReLeaf spurred what is now a large focus for the organization, planting trees in the urban areas of the community. Currently, ECOSLO is managing three tree planting projects supported by CAL FIRE, the Tourism Business Improvement District Board, and Hardwood Revitalization. In addition, the city has already relied heavily on ECOSLO in their robust tree planting initiative. The natural areas and features of San Luis Obispo, so intensely treasured by residents and visitors alike, would not be what it is today with ECOSLO! The partnership between ECOSLO and the City of San Luis Obispo is a model example for progressive tree planting partnerships.

33 Operations and Programs
Commemorative Tree Program
The Commemorative Tree Program, managed by the Public Works Department, allows residents and groups to plant a tree in the Commemorative Grove at Laguna Lake Park in honor of significant events or people. In the past, the Urban Forest Services provided planting, maintenance, and replacement trees for those that were damaged or removed. Although not the City’s responsibility, plaques are often damaged, vandalized, or removed. While the City has long prided itself on offering this service, the program has been temporarily suspended due to the COVID-19 pandemic and other recent complications. Maintaining the Commemorative Grove is time-consuming and with the program's suspension, there is a considerable maintenance backlog. The City is currently assessing how to manage the program.

Challenges and Opportunities: Tree Planting
 A City-wide tree planting and replacement plan does not exist.  Vacant tree wells are common and hard to locate because inventory records are not up-to-date.
 Existing stumps limit planting in available spaces.
 Replanting does not occur quickly.
 ECOSLO staff have informal training on tree care and rely on community partners for technical advice.
 Most young trees are not pruned by Urban Forest Services for the first 5-6 years.  ECOSLO is limited in the number of trees they are able to plant.  ECOSLO does not have heavy machinery such as a truck, watering truck, or auger, therefore tree planting is done manually.
 ECOSLO would have a greater capacity to plant trees if holes were pre-drilled.  Due to visibility and safety concerns for volunteers, the ability to plant trees in medians is limited.
 Tree planting does not occur at local schools.

Commemorative Tree Program
 Many trees have suffered as a result of recent droughts and replacing them has been a challenge.
 The Commemorative Grove initiates a relatively high amount of service requests for trees that die, as each tree is tied to an individual or event.  Plaques were installed on the ground, which presents difficulties maintaining grass and controlling weeds.
 The costs of maintaining the Commemorative Grove are not adequately covered by the current fee structure, as the fees only cover the planting cost.  The current location of the Commemorative Grove hinders some functionality of the park.

Operations and Programs 34
Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Tree Planting
 Create a planting plan.
 Identify tree planting sites (per Strategic Budget Direction Report and Climate Action Plan).
 Include the number of trees that need to be planted by Urban Forest Services, ECOSLO, as well as other partners (e.g., Tourism Business Improvement District Board) and Departments each year to support the initiative to plant 10,000 new trees.
 Plan for the increased planting and maintenance efforts that will be taken on by Urban Forest Services as a result of the 10,000 Tree initiative.  Quickly replant rights-of-way trees and replace infrastructure damaged by tree roots upon tree removal (not only those in wells).
 Set and follow policies to check that replacement plantings occur after removals.  Ensure young trees receive structural pruning several times in the first 5-6 years to meet industry standards.
 Include shade trees as a cooling mechanism in new development (per Urban Heat Effects Policy in the General Plan).
 Engage with ECOSLO in strategic planning to determine what each party can manage in regard to future tree planting.
 Consider pre-drilling holes with an auger for ECOSLO plantings or donating equipment for this use.
 Take over tree planting in medians, as Urban Forest Services can follow clear safety policies set by the City and the materials needed to divert traffic.  In the planning process, explore ways to partner with schools to increase canopy cover.
 Address schools’ concerns over maintenance with possible solutions.

Commemorative Tree Program
 Re-evaluate the program, consider ways to continue recognizing and memorializing significant individuals while addressing maintenance challenges.  Consider implementing a commemorative wall, bravado, and/or path with engraved bricks as memorials so that a tree is not tied to an individual.  Work with the community and other City departments to determine if another location would be more appropriate for the Commemorative Tree Grove.

35 Operations and Programs
Tree Selection
The City has a regularly updated (every
4-5 years) Street Trees Species List in the
Engineering Standards that guides tree
species selection. Urban Forest Services
is interested in expanding the tree list.

Local nurseries stock an assortment of
species, but on occasion, some species
are not available. Other species perform
well in San Luis Obispo, but they are hard to source and therefore are not widely planted.

Right Tree, Right Place
To visitors and residents alike, the most recognizable trees in San Luis Obispo are the large ficus trees that line the streets of downtown. Many people have a fondness for these trees, as the urban forest is part of the culture in San Luis Obispo and these particular trees have been an integral part of downtown for around 50 years. These trees provide ample shade to the downtown area of San Luis Obispo, and undoubtedly contribute other benefits.

While it is always unfortunate when one of these iconic ficus are removed, practicing “Right Tree, Right Place” can help avoid some of the current issues caused by the trees.

The practice of installing the optimal species for a particular planting site is known as the “Right Tree, Right Place”. This philosophy considers the effects of tree growth on existing and planned utilities, existing landscape, and other infrastructure. Factors to consider include, planter size, soil characteristics, water needs, as well as the intended role and characteristics of the species. By considering the long-term consequences of planting a particular tree in a particular place, conflicts and premature removal of trees can be avoided.

Some species, such as redwoods, are not suited for the local climate and climate change will likely exacerbate the problem. In the case of the downtown ficus trees, there are several causes of concern when considering “Right Tree, Right Place.” First, the ficus tree population is in a state of decline due to aging, which increases maintenance costs, safety concerns, the incidence of nuisance pests, and disease potential. Due to the large size of the trees and the root systems, sidewalk buckling and safety are ongoing issues.

Furthermore, ficus trees drop fruit, which requires clean up, can cause slipping hazards, and commonly attracts flies and pigeons.

Ficus trees are also largely a monoculture in the downtown area, and species diversity is an important aspect and goal for the urban forest going forward. This is not to disregard their importance and relevance to the San Luis Obispo urban forest. Urban Forest Services is slowly replacing ficus with other species, aligning with the philosophy of “Right Tree, Right Place.” Going forward, replacement and new plantings should consider different species to increase species diversity and age distribution.
“I definitely would plant more trees in
my front and back yard if I know what
and where!”
-Survey Respondent

Operations and Programs 36
Challenges and Opportunities: Tree Selection
 The species list should be expanded to include climate ready species.  Species availability is dependent upon current nursery stock and some species the City, ECOSLO, community members, or grant funders want to plant are not available through vendors.
 Some species are performing well, yet they are not widely planted.  Some species are not considered in future plantings because people rule out species because they are basing their opinions on the maintenance needs of overly mature individual trees.
 Planting the appropriate tree species for the available space to help to reduce infrastructure conflicts and nuisance fruit drop (“Right Tree, Right Place”).  Providing ample shade downtown by selecting adequate replacement species during the phased removal of downtown ficus trees.
 Community survey respondents expressed a desire to incorporate more trees known to support wildlife.
 There is some desire to increase the amount of fruit and bearing trees in the community along pedestrian and bike paths and parks.
 While fruit trees could provide residents with a nutritious source of food, consider the maintenance requirements associated with fruit and nut producing trees.
○ Increased maintenance to clean-up of fruits and nuts. ○ Potential to harbor agriculturally significant pests and pathogens.  Determine if trees will be pruned for fruit production.  Determine who is able to harvest fruit from public trees.  Some trees are blocking historic and architecturally significant buildings.

37 Operations and Programs
Irrigation
Trees in the public rights-of-way are rainfed and hand-watered when needed by staff with a City-owned water tanker. Through ECOSLO’s Adopt-a-Tree Program, called Tree Keeper, volunteers’ water their adopted tree using a 5-gallon water jug. Trees are watered with 5-10 gallons of water each week. ECOSLO and the City have an agreement where volunteers are permitted to access public water at the City’s Corporate Yard (non-potable well), at parks, or community gardens. Other strategies such as water bags, mulching, and informal neighbor adoption also provide water to rights-of-way trees. Urban Forest Services requests irrigation systems be retrofitted in a limited number of locations with a significant amount of landscaping impacted by redevelopment projects.

Trees in parks are irrigated with lawns on a watering schedule that is also conducive for the trees. Per the General Plan, recycled water is used to irrigate park trees whenever possible. The recycled water often has high levels of salt and chlorine, although park trees are not currently experiencing problems. The San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility is transitioning the use of UV filtration technology and this problem will be resolved. It is likely more parks can be transitioned to recycled water as distribution lines are implemented.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Tree Selection
 Expand the tree list.
 Engage the Tree Committee and Cal Poly students when doing so.  Work with vendors, and collaborators such as Cal Poly, to get access to species that are not currently available.
 Consider limiting the incorporation of tree species that require more frequent maintenance.
 Develop specific planting plans and palette themes for neighborhoods and areas with different characteristics.
 Engage the community in meetings to determine preferences for a downtown tree list and age succession of downtown trees.  Identify and implement a strategy for a prioritized replacement schedule for downtown ficus trees in order to ensure the long-term preservation of the street tree canopy (per Strategic Budget Direction Report).
 Explore the use of plant growth regulators to decrease maintenance needs of downtown ficus.
 Consider conducting case studies on other communities using growth regulators.
 Explore the use of anti-gibberellins to reduce nuisance berry drop.  Promote species that provide wildlife habitat.

Operations and Programs 38
Challenges and Opportunities: Irrigation
 Irrigation is not in place for current trees nor is there a plan for irrigation for new trees planted as part of the 10,000 Tree initiative.
 Changing water needs as a result of climate change and significant new tree plantings.
 Watering needs fluctuate and it is difficult to predict how much of Urban Forest Services staff’s time will be needed to water in any given year.  ECOSLO has to frequently remind volunteers and City staff about their agreement for volunteers to access city water at parks and community gardens.  Vigilant community gardeners are unaware of the agreement ECOSLO and the City have to access city water. This negatively reflects on the program and can be difficult for ECOSLO volunteers to navigate.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Irrigation
 Update the engineering standards to require irrigation in new tree plantings.  Create an irrigation installation standard for the 10,000 Tree initiative.  Include requirements for developers or property owners.  Work collaboratively with the San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility to implement irrigation whenever feasible.
 During new and re-development.
 During street renovations.
 As new lines are implemented.
 Consider taking on some of the responsibilities to ensure newly planted trees in the rights-of-way are adequately watered.
 As the water facility is upgraded, include tree irrigation as part of this plan.  Explore additional planter designs to help with stormwater management and bioremediation.
 Explore improvements to the watering agreement with ECOSLO.

39 Operations and Programs
Tree Removal
Although there are some exceptions, tree removal is regulated for the majority of otherwise healthy trees within the City. Municipal Code 12.24.090 prohibits removing most any tree (public and private land) without a permit and requires replacement trees to mitigate the loss of canopy. Residents can submit a service request for the removal of dead or dying public trees.

Trees are inspected and if a tree needs to be removed, the tree will be removed during the routine maintenance schedule, if it does not constitute a public hazard. Residents may pay for a tree to be removed outside of the schedule. On average, less than 50 community tree removals occur each year.

Per Municipal Code, all tree care
companies are required to be licensed.

Yet, some tree care companies are
operating without licenses and
participate in illegal removals. Urban
Forest Services is responsible for the
enforcement of the Tree Ordinance and
is authorized to hold both the private
property owner and the vendor
responsible for violations of the chapter
(including illegal removals). Many
violations are reported by neighbors. All responsible parties are subject to fines and must mitigate the loss of the tree or trees through a mitigation plan.

Mitigation planting, as a result of the removal of rights-of-way trees, can be a slow process. For the relatively small portion of community trees removed from wells, City staff are responsible for mitigation planting and trees are replaced relatively quickly. All other mitigation planting is performed by contractors or ECOSLO. The City always meets, but more typically exceeds, the current mitigation for replacement by planting more trees than are required. In mitigation Illegal tree removals are most commonly spotted and called in by neighbors. Even so, collecting evidence and accessing policies make mitigation challenging. Many community members are concerned that a large portion of mitigation plantings on private property do not occur at all.

Also, some residents are reluctant to plant trees because Municipal Code requires mitigation planting upon removal. The City should educate the community about the options to plant for mitigation.

Tree Removal Applications are required for the removal of private trees. The City Arborist will review requests for removals and inspect trees and either approve or deny the removal request.

Residents and developers can appeal the City Arborist’s decision to the Tree Committee or Community Development Director (Figure 4). Community members can review pending removal permits on the City website and may submit an appeal within 10 days. Approximately 25% of the City Arborists decisions on tree removal permits are appealed. “The city requires a property owner to
get permission to remove a tree, requires
replacement planting, but never checks
to see that the replacement planting has
taken place.”
-Survey Respondent

Operations and Programs 40
Figure 4: Tree Removal Flow Chart
In 2019, the Municipal Code was amended, which provided the Urban Forest Services and the Tree Committee with improved standards to review tree removal requests. Some subjectivity remains in the ordinance, but staff try to remain consistent in decisions for approval or denial of removal requests. The recent revisions improved the tree removal application process and Urban Forest Services is actively working to educate and assist residents and developers with these changes.

After removal, Urban Forest Services hires contractors for stump grinding. Occasionally, contractors have not ground stumps adequately, which prohibits replacement planting until it has been re-ground. To address this, the City recently modified their contract to include guidelines that ensure stumps are ground to an adequate depth and to prepare the site for future planting.

Debris and Wood Utilization
When public trees are removed, either the contractor disposes of the material or the in-house crew chips and repurposes the woody material into mulch. Mulch is used in parks or is offered to residents for private use. Residents can pick up mulch at designated public pick-up sites seven days a week. These sites are the City Corporation Yard, Laguna Lake, and Sinsheimer Park.

41 Operations and Programs
To save on disposal costs and to give the community an opportunity to use wood produce from urban forestry operations, Urban Forest Services will occasionally leave usable wood adjacent to the rights-of-way, where residents can take the wood on a first-come, first-served basis. Until recently, a local mill that specialized in reclaimed wood processed wood from in-house removals. The wood produced from this operation was used to make custom furniture.

ECOSLO received the Hardwood Revitalization Grant, a CAL FIRE grant focused on planting trees that have an end-use for furniture. Likely, these trees will be harvested before they are mature, between 20 to 50 years from now. ECOSLO is responsible for their establishment and then these trees will become the Public Works Department’s responsibility. The City realizes that premature removals may become contentious, as community members have a strong desire to see healthy trees maintained to the end of their lifespan. In addition, trees removed as part of the Hardwood Revitalization Grant will require milling rather than chipping, which is a different process than other rights-of-way trees.

Challenges and Opportunities: Tree Removal
 In the past, Urban Forest Services has not always followed the Tree Ordinance when approving tree removal permits.
 Current staff are doing their best to follow these policies and provide clear documentation on their rationale, but there is still confusion for those applying for tree removal permits.
 Applicants or property owners call City staff regarding permit applications. These staff do not have access to information to update callers if the tree(s) in question have been approved or appealed.
 There is little to no code enforcement so many tree replacements that result from tree removals do not get planted and it can be hard to track down those involved in illegal tree removals.
 There is some subjectivity in Municipal Code 12.24.090, convoluting the process for tree removals, especially as to what constitutes as significant damage to infrastructure.
 Current policies allow for mitigation planting to occur offsite (another property or in the rights-of-way), but an alternative Tree Fund does not exist.  Not all property owners understand the tree removal and mitigation planting process.  Public outcry commonly occurs around tree removals, especially large mature trees in the downtown area and as a result of development projects.

Debris and Wood Utilization
 There is no plan in place for the removal of trees planted as part of the Hardwood Revitalization Grant through ECOSLO.
 A wood utilization program is not in place.

Operations and Programs 42
Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Tree Removal
 Review and revise the ordinance to clarify what constitutes significant damage.  Conduct a PSA to promote proper tree care and business licensing within the City.  Consider testimonials from property owners.
 Use a variety of outlets such as newspapers, social media, and the City’s website.
 Continue to consistently enforce Municipal Code when illegal tree removals occur.  Increase mitigation requirements in cases where large stature, mature trees are being removed to incentivize retaining existing canopy. Explore alternative mitigation measures, such as funds to increase the size of the greenbelt.  Have a system in place so partnering City staff can be up-to-date on information when applicants or owners call regarding if the tree(s) in question have been approved or appealed.
 Follow up to ensure tree replacement planting / mitigation is occurring.  Explore creating a separate category on the City’s Tree Removal Application for tree removals associated with biofiltration planters.
 Explore creating a Tree Fund where mitigation fees as an alternative to tree planting.
 Explore an educational campaign outlining the City’s tree removal and planting policies.

Debris and Wood Utilization
 Coordinate with ECOSLO to determine ways to meet the Hardwood Revitalization Grant requirements while addressing concerns about premature removals.  Consider outreach events to educate the community on wood utilization.  Consider the phased removal of trees planted as part of the grant so their benefits are not all lost in a short amount of time.
 Consider implementing a wood utilization program to help meet carbon sequestration goals in the Climate Action Plan.
 Collaborate with other City Departments and local mills.  Partner with contracting arborists to recycle/reuse wood from large tree removals.
 Track carbon sequestration benefits provided by community trees in the urban areas.
 Consider partnerships with local mills.

43 Operations and Programs
Emergency Response
Urban Forest Services plays a significant role in the Public Works Storm Response Plan. Staff are involved in training and implementing the storm response plan each fall prior to the rainy season. The storm response plan has thresholds to activate departments. Urban Forest Services staff have a clear understanding of when to respond, where equipment is stored, and identified locations to stage debris.

When emergencies occur, Public Works, Parks and Recreation, Natural Resources have a reciprocal relationship and help each other address tree maintenance across the community. All crews help address emergencies such as storm cleanup and patrol along streets, in parks, and open spaces although Rangers are relied on more heavily and take more responsibility. If Urban Forest Services is not able to address a call, Ranger Services seamlessly steps in. In addition, Urban Forest Services rely on contracted crews for quick response.

Community Engagement and Outreach
The City’s website provides quick and accurate information for residents on tree care operations, current tree ordinance, the tree removal process, tree species selection, and frequently asked questions. By partnering with ECOSLO, the City is able to incorporate educational materials about the benefits of trees, the state of the urban forest, how to best care for trees, and how to volunteer which provides another avenue for community support of the urban forest.

Urban Forest Services perform outreach with local elementary schools highlighting the benefits of trees. They also hold an annual Arbor Day celebration that commonly includes tree talks by City staff, tree plantings by ECOSLO and the public, and a tree art contest for elementary school students in San Luis Obispo. Urban Forest Services had a bi-yearly presence at the Farmer’s Market, both the week of Arbor Day and Public Works Week, where the booth for the urban forest program is always one of the most popular. Some community engagement has been put on hold due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Challenges and Opportunities: Emergency Response
 Currently, there is not a specific training program or drill for emergency response duties.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Emergency Response
 Implement a training program or drill that covers staff responsibilities during emergency response.
 Include existing emergency response policies in the future Urban Forest Strategic Plan.

Operations and Programs 44
As part of their tree planting partnership with the City, ECOSLO coordinates an adopt-a-tree program called Tree
Keeper and engages a steady volunteer base. Volunteers
are typically enthusiastic to help plant and maintain trees, demonstrated by their current volunteer base, exceeding their need for current work. In fact, some trees are
receiving double watering in order to keep volunteers
engaged.

Cal Poly students make up a significant portion of the
volunteer base. In the past, Cal Poly students have interned with the urban forest program, most commonly to conduct spot inventories. With an engaged community, there is an opportunity to engage an even larger volunteer base for urban forestry in San Luis Obispo.

Challenges and Opportunities: Community Engagement and Outreach  Partnering organizations have expressed interest in increasing collaborative efforts to provide urban forest-related outreach and education as well as career development internships within Urban Forest Services.
 There is an opportunity to expand education and outreach at local schools.  Community members are interested in volunteering and the online survey results revealed a potential to engage an untapped volunteer base.  Community members filled out the online survey in great numbers and many want to be more engaged in the urban forest planning process.  There is an opportunity to partner with the Parks and Recreation Department in facilitating urban forest outreach and volunteer events. “My children's school
participated in an Arbor
Day art contest and tree
planting event.”
-Survey Respondent

45 Operations and Programs
Development
Historically, a design review arborist was on staff in the Community Development Department.

The design review arborist was engaged in every development proposal. This position no longer exists. Municipal Code requires developers to submit an arborist report with development proposals, but proposals for single-family residential sites are up to the discretion of the Community Development Department. If an arborist report is required, ideally, they are reviewed by the City arborist for accuracy. Due to staff attrition, a fraction of the proposals is currently being reviewed thoroughly by an arborist. This, coupled with the recent increase in growth/infill Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Community Engagement and Outreach  Engage local schools.
 Promote the benefits of the tree canopy in regard to student health and well-being and provide access to the wealth of information that support these benefits.
 Develop tree care programs that students can get involved in, use tree planting as an educational tool for students.
 Work with ECOSLO to further circulate outreach and educational materials as well as volunteer opportunities.
 Promote the Adopt-a-Street-Tree volunteer program coordinated by ECOSLO.  Continue to partner with local nonprofit and tree advocacy groups to support tree planting events.
 Continue to collaborate with Cal Poly to provide students with environmentally focused volunteer and internship opportunities.
 Consider creating an annual internship with an arborist.  Collaborate with Downtown SLO to provide outreach and educational programming around trees and the natural environment in the downtown area.  Provide nonprofit partners with more clarity on the communication chain and what services are provided.
 Continue to explore ways to engage ECOSLO’s volunteer base and expand volunteer engagement.
 Provide additional opportunities for engagement during the Urban Forest Strategic Plan development process.
 Organize another, more in-depth community survey.
 Consider pop-ups at parks or local events.
 Explore support for moving large urban forestry-related events and volunteer coordination to the Parks and Recreation Department.

Operations and Programs 46
development within the community, has led to many projects going without adequate consideration for existing trees. As a result, many large, mature trees are being removed for development projects. While replacement trees are required, they take decades to replace the benefits and the community is currently experiencing a loss in tree canopy.

Currently, developers are responsible for maintaining new tree plantings in the rights-of-way for 1 year and then these trees become the responsibility of Urban Forest Services. While many of these trees are in adequate condition, some trees were neglected and the City is responsible for these poorly established trees. The City should consider prolonging developer maintenance of new tree plantings to ensure proper establishment (e.g., 3-5 years) and mitigation if trees die.

State Housing Mandates
Historically, the City of San Luis Obispo has had a 1% growth rate cap set forth in the General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 17.144 of Municipal Code). According to the City’s “Sustainable Growth Management” document, the last time this cap was reached was 2004. Since then, growth has remained under 1%, hovering around 0.5% from 2015- 2020 (SLO City, n.d.). However, growth increased to 1.2% in 2021 and this growth trend is expected to continue with an increasing population and multiple new development projects in the City (Johnson, 2021). Starting as early as next year, the new State Housing Bills have potential to compound this growth as they modify single-family zoning to easier allow subdivisions and multi-unit properties.

In September 2021, several new bills were signed into law by Gavin Newsom to address the growing housing crisis in California. The most consequential of them may be Senate Bill 9, which changes single family zoning to allow for subdivisions and multiple units on single-family zoned property. These bills aim to address a severe housing shortage and demand for affordable housing across the state.
 Senate Bill 8- extends the existing 2025 deadline for the ‘Housing Crisis Act of 2019’ by another 5 years, which requires local governments to increase density in areas to offset ‘downzoning’ in other areas.
 Senate Bill 9- will allow most homeowners to build two homes or a duplex on single-family zoned lots through local ordinance or by ministerial approval. In some cases, the bill allows lots to be split to build an additional 2 homes for a maximum of 4 units for each lot. The bill sets forth the requirements local agencies can impose to approve subdivisions and multi-units in single-family zoned areas.

This bill goes into effect January 1, 2022.
 Senate Bill 10- Streamlines the process for cities to upzone single-family neighborhoods and build small apartments in transit and/or jobs-rich areas. The bill provides the groundwork for cities or counties to pass ordinances streamlining the construction of small apartments of up to 10 units on a single parcel.

47 Operations and Programs
The City uses the Engineering Standards in Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) and therefore follows the minimum requirements for the incorporation of trees in capital projects. Trees are incorporated, when possible, especially in rights-of-way improvements. Many times, the project budget is not adequate and more emphasis is placed on other infrastructure. In other words, trees are one of the first components cut. Trees are essential infrastructure that should be given consideration in planning through completion of Capital Improvement Projects.

Challenges and Opportunities: Development
 According to Municipal Code, not all development proposals require an arborist report, it is up to the discretion of the Community Development Department.  Lack of coordination between Urban Forest Services and Community Development in architectural review / planning in early stages of projects.  In many instances, development plans are not reviewed by an arborist and do not provide consideration for the preservation of existing trees (e.g., zero setbacks from the back of the sidewalk are not wide enough to allow for preservation).
 Lack of clarity on what trees need to be removed or what trees can stay during development.
 Trees in parking lots are being removed as a result of infrastructure conflicts and development.
 The community is undergoing a period of significant infill development and many of the recent projects have conflicted with the City’s priorities to preserve existing trees.
 New tree plantings are cared for by developers for a relatively short amount of time.  Some of the trees planted by developers are in poor condition when Urban Forest Services takes over their maintenance due to inadequate maintenance and young tree establishment.
 Residents contact ECOSLO to request trees for mitigation planting.  Urban Forest Services is tasked with inspection of tree protection measures during construction, but staffing restrictions limit their ability to do so.  There are no standards for the replacement/planting of trees during CIP.  Placing the same emphasis on trees as other community infrastructure.

In the online survey, community members were invited to provide comments on their thoughts on San Luis Obispo's urban forestry program. There was overwhelming concern about the recent developments causing the removal of mature trees, more than 50 responses were related to this topic.

Operations and Programs 48
Design
Trees in the Mission Sidewalk Districts have iron tree grates and tree guards that allow for pedestrians to walk over tree wells. Tree grates frequently require repairs, as the trunks and roots expand and create trip hazards. Urban Forest Services and Streets Maintenance address any maintenance needed to the grids. Sidewalk buckling also occurs regularly in the downtown core as a result of tree root lifting. As such, maintenance also occurs regularly in the downtown core, but in other areas of the community maintenance only occurs in conjunction with the Pavement Management Plan (every 9 years). Some sidewalk maintenance projects require tree root pruning. Any root pruning has to be approved by the City arborist and is then completed, with little oversight, by the Streets Maintenance team. The team is not trained in urban forestry and uses a stump grinder to prune roots, which is not consistent with industry standards and can severely impact tree health.

Alternative designs are considered when possible. For
example, bricks are included when sidewalks cannot be
ground down. To allow for more space and water
infiltration, the City has implemented engineered soils in the downtown core around carrotwood (Cupaniopsis
anacardioides), a species known to frequently cause
hardscape damage. While engineered soils increase
water infiltration, other design options are available
that hold more water (e.g., suspended sidewalks). As
long-term improvement projects occur, the City should
consider ways to expand the sidewalks and tree wells by implementing alternative designs to provide trees with adequate space, especially in the downtown core and parking lots. “Encourage creative
designs so that existing
trees can be maintained
for environmental and
visual esthetics.”
-Survey Respondent
Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Development
 Ensure all development proposals are reviewed by an arborist in the initial planning stages to provide adequate consideration and space for existing and planned trees.  Review and consider mature tree canopy growth.
 Explore a requirement for a longer establishment time for new tree plantings that are required as part of development.
 Require developers follow minimum (ANSI A300) maintenance standards.  Ensure developers are responsible for reporting the status of their trees postoccupancy.  Recognize trees are a critical infrastructure and plan to include them in development and new construction projects on public land.  Ensure tree replacements after removals are not referred to ECOSLO.  Explore incentives for retention of large trees in new construction.

49 Operations and Programs
In the rights-of-way of the downtown core, temporary parklets have been installed to provide businesses with outdoor spaces during the COVID-19 pandemic. As these areas have been successful at keeping the downtown area safe and lively, the City is considering creating a permanent program for parklets. Tree maintenance has become more complex as a result of the parklets. If parklets become permanent, the City should work with the Downtown Association to explore their support in taking on some of the extra cost of this service.

The City is working on several infrastructure projects that have the potential to impact trees.

Several solar panel installation projects are underway including at the Bus Yard, Fire Station 1, and Sinsheimer Pool parking lots. These projects do not interfere with tree canopy but should initiate the development of internal policies on solar/tree conflicts as these are the first projects of their kind. As planters for stormwater management, such as bioretention basins and bioswales, become more common, Public Works may need policies that differ from typical street trees. Trees incorporated in stormwater management infrastructure may require more frequent maintenance or removal and replacement as their purpose is to enhance water quality and reduce runoff.
“I am extremely grateful for SLO's urban forest. It is why I shop here rather than in surrounding communities—all the shady parking.” -Survey Respondent
Challenges and Opportunities: Design
 Implement alternative designs to benefit the trees, but also decrease trip and fall hazards.
 Where planters are designed with a focus on stormwater mitigation and/or bioremediation maintenance of stormwater infrastructure may require premature removal of trees.
 Internal policies around trees and solar collectors do not exist.  Some homeowners’ associations within the community discourage tree planting.  The Streets Maintenance program often uses a stump grinder to prune tree roots when they are disrupting sidewalks and potentially causing hazards, which does not follow current industry standards.

Operations and Programs 50
Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Design
 Explore the use of pervious pavements and suspended pavements to increase the amount of uncompacted soil available to trees.
 Partner with Downtown SLO to implement designs that can help reduce hardscape conflicts involving large, mature trees in the downtown core.  Perform case studies to explore the products/designs available for stormwater management and how they may work in San Luis Obispo.
 The Tree Ordinance should exclude requirements for tree removal permits within stormwater mitigation treatment areas.
 Educate the public on the purpose of trees planted for stormwater mitigation.
 Assess parking lot sites and create larger tree wells whenever possible.  Explore policies and procedures that fit the community’s vision around solar/tree conflicts in the Urban Forest Strategic Plan.
 Explore and identify reasons why some homeowners and HOAs don’t want trees in rights-of-way or on private property.
 Identify strategies to increase appreciation for the urban forest (e.g., more species choices, education, etc.).
 Explore policies and procedures around tree and solar conflicts in the development of an Urban Forest Strategic Plan.
 Update policies for tree root pruning to follow ISA standards.

51 Operations and Programs
Safety
Tree care is a very dangerous occupation, frequently cited as being one of the top 10 most dangerous jobs in the US. In 2017, the Tree Care Industry Association (TCIA) reported that there were 153 incidents, 92 resulted in fatalities and 63 were nonfatal in 2016. When Urban Forest Services had more staff and a working crew, several incidents occurred and initiated safety training around the topic, but most accidents are minor. Each division, including Urban Forest Services, has a representative on the City’s Safety Committee which reviews accidents as they occur and relays information back to their group.

Urban Forest Services staff are required to adhere to standards set forth by CAL OSHA (Group 3, Article 12 Tree Work Maintenance or Removal), The American National Standard (ANSI Z133.1 Arboricultural Operations Safety Requirements and ANSI A300 Tree Care Specification), and ISA Western Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture pruning standards. In addition, all staff are first aid CPR trained. Safety tailgates are reviewed every 2 weeks and staff complete field assessments when they are in the field. In the past, Urban Forest Services was TCIA certified. Although they are currently not certified, they continue to supplement safety training with TCIA materials and participate in TCIA programs, such as the Aerial Lift Specialist Course.

Challenges and Opportunities: Safety
 Training on equipment and safety has been suspended for almost 2 years, but in the past Parks Maintenance, Urban Forest Services, and Ranger Services participated in joint trainings.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Safety
 Reenact training on equipment and safety.

Operations and Programs 52

53 Urban Forest Partners
Urban Forest Partners
Key urban forest partners were engaged to identify existing challenges and opportunities and to provide insight and recommendations to strengthen the existing urban forestry program structure. All engaged stakeholders were asked to respond to an initial survey and depending upon response and level of engagement, some team members were invited to participate in interviews for more nuanced discussions on maintenance, construction and development, planning, and preservation. All stakeholders provided important information about the current function of the Urban Forest Services program and potential staffing needs. Concerns, requests, and suggestions from all stakeholders were of primary interest and were provided full consideration in the development of the summary report.

Internal Partners
The urban forest in San Luis Obispo is managed by 4 city departments including Public Works, Parks and Recreation, Community Development, and Administration. Cross-departmental cooperation is often necessary to achieving urban forestry goals. While there is a great deal of shared appreciation, resources, and effort, coordination and communication among departments is generally ad hoc. Regularly set meetings are not in place, but communication avenues are open and staff have high rapport and a desire to support each other when possible.

The different departments recognize that helping each other results in shared success yet also appreciate the value of their independence.

Urban Forest Partners 54
Parks and Recreation Department
The Parks and Recreation Department is responsible for managing over 4,000 acres of open space with priority for maintaining viewpoints, building trails, outreach and education, and safety and risk management. When needed, they conduct large-scale pruning for trees in the Open Space areas. Urban Forest Services is responsible for maintaining trees in developed parks.

Parks and Recreation staff periodically help Urban Forest Services address emergency response for rights-of-way trees. Discussions with this department revealed the following challenges and opportunities:

Challenges and Opportunities: Parks and Recreation Department  Currently, park tree maintenance is reactionary and does not meet the community’s expectations.
 More attention should be placed on adequate staffing and the resources needed to maintain park trees and mitigate hazards.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Parks and Recreation Department  Plan maintenance cycles to include park trees.
 Develop and document inspection protocols for park trees to identify and mitigate structural concerns and risk.
 Train all maintenance staff to recognize and communicate hazardous situations.
 Document mutual aid policies, including available resources.

55 Urban Forest Partners
Community Development Department
The Community Development Department oversees many programs including development projects, building permits, code enforcement, affordable housing, and the flood control programs. The Code Enforcement division is made up of Code Enforcement Officers and Code Enforcement Technicians who provide information, investigate, and actively patrol for code violations. When complaints are received for vegetation encroachment into the rights-of-way Code Enforcement will make the initial vist, provide the propertry with a door hanger and pass along the violation to Urban Forestry. When violations are related to trees, Code Enforcement notifies Public Works who is then responsible for communication with property owners and ensuring the hazard is mitigated. Public Works is also responsible for enforcing the Tree Ordinance.

Challenges and Opportunities: Community Development Department  The Public Works Department (Urban Forest Services) is currently tasked with enforcing the Tree Ordinance and code-related tree removals but the Department does not have the staffing capacity to adequately provide this service especially when violations occur on private property.
 Standards for tree removal policy during development are not always clear and objective.
 Existing trees are not always provided full consideration during the planning process for development proposals.
 The 2019 Senate Bill 330, Housing and Accountability Act, limits proposed housing developments to a total of 5 public hearings, putting the Community Development Department in a position where they do not want to refer a hearing to the Tree Committee but are required to in some cases to follow Municipal Code.  The role and expectations for the Tree Committee are sometimes unclear.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Community Development Department  Explore the feasibility for Code Enforcement to take on Tree Ordinance enforcement duties through an impact study.
 As development proposals are being planned, trees should be considered by all parties and if removals occur, plan for tree planting requirements and mitigation requirements.
 Create a study group that examines the optimal role of the Tree Committee in the development of the Urban Forest Strategic Plan.
 Explore modifications to Municipal Code 12.24.090 Tree Removal in relation to Tree Committee hearings.
 Create a policy and procedures guide for the Tree Committee and conduct training for new members.

Urban Forest Partners 56
Fire Department
The San Luis Obispo Fire
Department is a full-service
fire department that protects
residents and visitors from
fires, medical emergencies,
and other dangers. The
department has an Insurance
Services Office Public
Protection Class 2 Rating,
which is only achieved by 2%
of fire departments in the
country (City of San Luis
Obispo Fire Department,
2021). In relation to trees, the department deals in fuel reduction, weed abatement, and enforcing code for hazard trees. It is rare, but when hazard trees are reported as fire hazards, the Fire Department will send out an inspector to see if the tree is on City property. If it is, the Public Works’ city arborist or contract arborist assumes responsibility for mitigation.

Challenges and Opportunities: Fire Department
 Fire response is not a consideration in the current disaster and preparedness response plan followed by the Public Works Department.
 Pinch points, or areas where if a fire were started it would spread into residential areas, are not all identified nor inspected annually for hazards.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Fire Department
 Develop/Update an overarching after-hours emergency response plan that includes existing plans for storm and flood response, and fire.
 Collaborate with the Fire Department to address trees that may pose fire hazards and identify and manage vegetation where infrastructure may need defensible space.
“The Urban Forestry Program needs to be part of a
City standing taskforce/working group with Fire
Department/Parks Dept/Public Works to conduct
wildland fire interface vegetation management
projects along open space boundaries, roadway
right of ways and city boundaries with areas such
as Cuesta Park to reduce ladder fuels and maintain
defensible space in the event of wildfire.”
-Survey Respondent

57 Urban Forest Partners
Administration Department - Office of the City Manager
The City Administration Department is led by the City Manager who guides the day-to-day activities for the City. The City Manager reviews and sets standards for the urban forest, such as planting, trimming, monitoring, carbon sequestration, and urban cooling. Serving as the Department Head, the Deputy City Manager manages Finance, Human Resources, the City Clerk’s office, the Economic Development Program, the Office of Sustainability, and Information Technology. High level goals and visioning for the urban forest have largely been spearheaded by the Administration Department.

Challenges and Opportunities: Administration Dept. — Office of the City Manager  Although visionary documents call for robust tree planting efforts, plans have not been developed for the implementation of 10,000 Trees, including planting, maintaining, and ensuring tree survival.
 While City leaders have provided clear direction for increasing tree planting efforts, Urban Forest Services has concerns around the long-term maintenance of new trees as they are understaffed and not currently able to meet these expectations.  The City intends to create a planning document for the urban forest such as a UFSP.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Administration Dept. — Office of the City Manager  Create and facilitate greater connection between Departments involved in caring for the urban forest. Develop and document mutual aid policies, including resources.  Ensure that planning for 10,000 Tree initiative includes funding for tree establishment, structural training, and long-term maintenance for trees planted in public space and rights-of-way.
 Partner with other departments and stakeholders to develop a comprehensive UFSP with clear action steps to achieve immediate and long-term goals.  Create an Urban Forestry Core Team to aid in cooperation and communication among departments involved with the urban forest.
 Clear goals and plans in place for Urban Forest Services, partnering organizations, and nonprofits.
 Include trees planted as part of the 10,000 Tree initiative in maintenance plans.  Create and engage with a technical group, including CalPoly, ECOSLO, and other key partners for the development of the Urban Forest Strategic Plan.  Consider including sidebars with culturally significant trees and tree-related projects in the Urban Forest Strategic Plan (e.g., the “moon tree”, wood utilization projects, and growing Italian stone pine from seed for use in parks).  Continue to promote the role importance of trees in long term planning, including the General Plan. Climate Action Plan, etc.
 Recognize urban trees as critical public infrastructure.

Urban Forest Partners 58
Administration Department — Office of Sustainability
The Office of Sustainability was created with the vision for San Luis Obispo to be a “thriving, resilient, and sustainable community” and works to achieve this through positive leadership, collaboration, and policy development. The Office has several programs to support this goal, including Natural Resources and Climate Action. Natural Resources oversees greenbelts, land stewardship, natural history education, environmental restoration, and environmental mitigation.

These programs include habitat restoration and tree planting in open space. San Luis Obispo has ambitions to curb the effects of climate change through an aggressive tree planting initiative, which will largely occur in open space. The Natural Resources Environmental Restoration program focuses on creek restoration, tree planting, wetland and natural habitat improvements and considering these aspects in development processes.

Challenges and Opportunities: Administration Department — Office of Sustainability  There is an opportunity to increase collaboration between the Office of Sustainability — Natural Resources and Urban Forest Services, as there is shared interest in the urban forest.
 Without a plan for the implementation or tracking tree planting as part of the 10,000 Tree initiative, Urban Forest Services is not sure how many trees will be planted in the built areas of the community.
 Collaborating Departments have ambitious goals around the urban forest and Public Works Urban Forest Services is not always included in visionary conversations.  The transition from urban forest to open space is clear, but urban forest managers would like less distinction and more of a natural transition between urban forest trees and trees in open space.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Administration Department - Office of Sustainability
 Ensure all key Departments and organizations involved in managing the urban forest are engaged in planning and implementation for the 10,000 Tree initiative.  Record details each time a new tree is planted for tracking purposes.  Collaborate with the Office of Sustainability, Natural Resources to create a transition zone between urban forest trees and open space trees by using an appropriate mix of native species.
 Explore interdepartmental relationships and needs/opportunities for better communication and inclusive planning where appropriate.

59 Urban Forest Partners
Public Works Department — Maintenance Operations (Parks) Public Works provides safe mobility options and maintains public infrastructure and assets in San Luis Obispo. Public Works’ programs are divided between the Deputy Director, the City Engineer Deputy Director, and Maintenance Operations. The City Engineers manage the CIP Programs in addition to Transportation. The Deputy Director — Maintenance Operations manages Facilities, Fleet, Parks, Street, and Urban Forest. The Parks division manages approximately 550 acres of parks and a large number of park trees. The Parks maintenance staff monitor all trees in parks, provide clearance, and remove dead trees. When trees require service, they fill out a work order to be sent to Urban Forestry.

Challenges and Opportunities: Public Works Department — Maintenance Operations (Parks)
 Trees in parks are not maintained regularly, which has caused a backlog of maintenance and impacted tree health and aesthetics in parks.  Over the past two years, Urban Forest Services has not been able to complete the work orders submitted by Parks Maintenance, creating a significant amount of additional work for Parks Maintenance staff to report and/or address, such as broken branches, branches blocking sidewalks, hangers, and litter clean up.  San Luis Obispo’s parks are the unintended hosts of a consistent homeless population, which cause damage to park trees through improper pruning or destruction of young trees.
 Tree care is considered in Parks Maintenance Plans, although to a lesser extent than other infrastructure.
 Parks provide ample, irrigated space for trees.
 In most cases, the initial Parks Maintenance Plans underestimate the number of trees and amount of maintenance that will be needed in the future.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Public Works Department — Maintenance Operations (Parks)
 Inventory trees in established parks and include their maintenance in pruning cycles, work plans, and maintenance budgets.
 Continue working with the Parks Maintenance staff on trainings such as hazard identification, chainsaw safety, and basic tree pruning.  Current and future growth/planning — Involve Urban Forest Services in new park plans and include trees in new development maintenance plans.

Urban Forest Partners 60
Advisory Bodies
San Luis Obispo Tree Committee
The Tree Committee is an advisory body that provides recommendations to City Council and City Staff after reviewing tree-related proposals and requests. If the City Arborist cannot approve a tree for removal (non-development) the application is typically determined by the Tree Committee. Members of the committee may have some expertise in arboriculture and/or an interest in trees. The majority of the Tree Committee’s time is spent reviewing development proposals but they also engage in the appeal process around tree removals that are deemed a hazard and the nomination of Heritage trees. Commonly, topics include whether or not removal is warranted and/or if the proposed mitigation planting is adequate. The Committee reviews each topic and suggests recommendations on policies and regulations relating to the urban forest (e.g., invasive species management, specimen or rare species, overcrowding issues, mitigation requirements, planning to offset the canopy loss, and reasonably allowing for development). Currently, the Tree Committee is housed in the Public Works Department, which provides a staff member as a liaison/subject matter expert to the Committee.

Challenges and Opportunities: San Luis Obispo Tree Committee  The roles, responsibilities, and authority of the Tree Committee are ambiguous.  The Tree Committee is housed within the Public Works Department yet spends the majority of deliberations on topics relating to private trees.  The community is undergoing a significant amount of infill development, partially related to an increased demand for housing, commercial sites, and the recent state Housing Mandate. Increasingly, the Tree Committee is being asked to review these development plans.
 The Tree Committee is the last governing body to review large development proposals. In most situations, by the time these projects are presented to the Tree Committee, they have already been approved and the Tree Committees recommendations may or may not be taken into consideration.  There is no requirement for City staff involved with the proposal process to report back so that the Tree Committee knows whether or not their recommendations are being implemented.
 Currently, neither the Tree Committee nor the City Arborist serve as a liaison/ support for the Architectural Review Commission yet this Commission reviews projects that involve consideration for tree preservation and removal permits.  The Tree Committee has a limited advocacy role for urban forestry budgeting through an annual report to the City Council that includes desired improvements.

61 Urban Forest Partners
Recommendations for UFSP Planning: San Luis Obispo Tree Committee  Perform case studies on the roles and responsibilities of Tree Committees in various model cities to help develop a clear purview and purpose for San Luis Obispo’s Tree Committee.
 Consider the amount of authority the Tree Committee should have in large development proposals.
 Clearly communicate the purpose of the Committee.
 Create guidance on roles and responsibilities and train new members.  Consider changes to the organizational structure, specifically moving the Tree Committee to a Department with a larger focus on policies and regulations for the entire urban forest (e.g., the Office of Sustainability or Community Development).  Make an ISA-certified arborist available to support both the Architectural Review Committee and Tree Committee for technical questions involving tree health and preservation strategies.
“I recently had to remove a tree on our
property. The process was good. The tree
committee members listened, the arborist
was helpful, and it was easy to see that the
City is working to maintain trees citywide.”
-Survey Respondent

Urban Forest Partners 62
San Luis Obispo City Council
The San Luis Obispo City Council is a five-member board consisting of the directly-elected Mayor and four City Council Members. The City Mayor is elected to a two-year term, whereas City Council Members have four-year terms. The City Council is the primary legislative authority that sets policy, adopts ordinances, approves programs, appropriates funds, adopts budgets, and approves contracts. The City Council outlines four overarching goals for San Luis Obispo, including:
 Climate action, open space, and sustainable transportation  Housing and homelessness
 Economic resiliency, recovery, and sustainability
 Diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Challenges and Opportunities: San Luis Obispo City Council  The community and City Council are supportive of trees and understand that tree canopy is integral to the culture and character of the community.  The budget for tree care is often one of the first to decrease during economic downturns.
 City Council Members are not always aware of the urban forest needs and the actions and associated budget required to meet visionary goals.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: San Luis Obispo City Council  Develop a robust and comprehensive Urban Forest Strategic Plan (UFSP) and clearly communicate the following:
 Value and benefits of the urban forest
 Community vision and direction for tree care and canopy cover  Long term goals and objectives, including long and short-term action steps and proposed timelines for meeting them
 Maintenance standards for trees, including pruning cycles and industry BMPs
 Use direction from the UFSP to develop annual work plans in support of budget requests.
 Deliver an annual State of the Urban Forest Report to Council, outlining successes of the UFSP as well as challenges for implementation.
 Designate a liaison that can advocate for tree maintenance needs and goals.  Advocate for the importance of community trees and predictable, stable funding so that tree maintenance can meet community expectations.

63 Urban Forest Partners
External Partners
Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo (ECOSLO)
ECOSLO is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that serves the community of San Luis Obispo.

ECOSLO was originally started in 1972 by Cal Poly students with the goal of cleaning up polluted creeks in the City. Now, ECOSLO is the premier organizer for sustainability, environmental advocacy, and environmental justice in the community. ECOSLO’s programs include various environmental cleanups, green business certifications, county park improvements, as well as urban tree planting.

The ECOSLO urban tree planting program started in 2019. It is made possible by grant funding from CAL FIRE and California ReLeaf and is largely volunteer supported. ECOSLO currently partners with the City to plant trees on city street parkways and on residential front yards. Tree care and maintenance is done through a volunteer adopt-a-tree program for which anyone can volunteer. The organization is interested in exploring additional opportunities to partner with the City in support of urban forestry.

Challenges and Opportunities: ECOSLO
 Communication and planning with multiple city departments on tree planting locations, tree removals, watering needs, and other maintenance needs is difficult for ECOSLO to navigate.
 Under ideal circumstances, ECOSLO would ask for more support, but they limit their requests to Urban Forest Services’ support because they recognize that staff are currently overstretched.
 ECOSLO would like to explore a more clearly defined partnership with the city.  Community members often reach out to ECOSLO for tree removals or replacement trees, but these requests have to be re-routed because these services are the responsibility of Urban Forest Services.
 ECOSLO is integral to the planting and maintenance of public trees throughout the community, a greater emphasis should be placed on continued collaboration, clear communication, and joint strategic planning.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: ECOSLO
 Explore existing partnerships with ECOSLO to optimize the relationship for both parties:
 Create a central chain of communication and identify a primary contact from the city to coordinate with ECOSLO and facilitate projects.  Engage with ECOSLO during the development of the Urban Forest Strategic Plan to discuss existing partnerships and future opportunities.  Discuss and clarify expectations for the 10,000 Tree initiative, including specific planting sites and their intended planting date.

Urban Forest Partners 64
Downtown SLO
Downtown SLO is a nonprofit organization formed in 2007 with the mission to promote an economically vibrant downtown in San Luis Obispo. Downtown SLO has several proclaimed values, including creating community, promoting sustainability, prioritizing the environment, helping businesses thrive and making downtown a beautiful place to visit. Partners of Downtown SLO include fee-paying businesses, volunteers, nonprofit organizations, residents, visitors and the City of San Luis Obispo. Many of the regular events in the downtown core are run by the nonprofit, including the Thursday Night Farmers Market and Concerts in the Plaza (Downtown SLO, 2021).

Downtown SLO hires Downtown
Ambassadors, professional staff that
clean and maintain tree grates or
remove suckers and small limbs below
6 feet if they impede pedestrian paths.

Historically, there has been a group of
tree care volunteers called Downtown
Foresters who have assisted with tree
care in the downtown core.

Challenges and Opportunities: Downtown SLO
 There is opportunity for Urban Forest Services to further engage Downtown SLO in redevelopment projects, maintenance, and education and outreach.  The upcoming downtown pavement project could be an opportunity to explore designs that promote large-stature shade trees.
 Large ficus trees provide a significant amount of canopy cover for downtown streets, but present several challenges.
 Fruit and wildlife (e.g., birds, etc.) create aesthetic and nuisance conditions that are a concern for patrons.
 Many of the trees are aging and a succession plan is needed.  Most agree that large shade trees are important to the character of downtown, but would like to explore other species options with an emphasis on reducing litter and pavement conflicts.
 As a result of COVID-19 and staffing changes, the Downtown Foresters have been less active than before.
“I think it is time to find a species of tree
to start replacing the ficus trees
downtown that are tearing up sidewalks.”
-Survey Respondent

65 Urban Forest Partners
California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly)
Located in San Luis Obispo, Cal Poly is a public university and one of the two polytechnic colleges in the California State University system. Cal Poly’s motto is “learn by doing,” hence many of the academic programs promote hands-on learning. Cal Poly offers more than 60 majors across 6 different colleges, many falling under the college of Agriculture, Food and Environmental Sciences. The college includes the major Forest and Fire Science that gives hands-on experience in forestry, as well as access to a 3,800-acre field laboratory site. Cal Poly has been recognized as a Tree Campus USA by the Arbor Day Foundation since 2014, and boasts the most diverse urban forest of any college campus in the nation (Cal Poly, 2020).

Cal Poly has previously been involved with San Luis Obispo’s urban forest. Previous projects and partnerships include work on the City’s approved tree species list, spot inventories done by student interns, and graduate work on urban forest planning. Volunteers from Cal Poly’s arboriculture class have also helped with city tree planting in the past.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Downtown SLO
 New downtown development and reconstruction projects should emphasize designs that support large-stature shade trees.
 Upcoming downtown pavement project.
 Construction plans should include consideration for suspended sidewalks and/or plazas with pervious pavements to support large trees and canopies.  Consider areas of the Monterey District, Mission Plaza Concept, and Downtown District.
 Engage the community to clarify the vision for the future character and role of trees downtown.
 Create a species palette for downtown, including large-stature shade trees. Develop a successional planting plan to replace aging ficus.
 Engage with existing volunteers (e.g., Downtown Foresters) to formalize relationships and goals.

Challenges and Opportunities: Cal Poly
 Many opportunities to acquire and recruit Cal Poly students to become involved in the Urban Forest program through volunteering, interning, or other means.  There are currently no formal programs or partnership agreements with Urban Forestry Services.

Urban Forest Partners 66
Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E)
Pacific Gas and Electric are responsible for the management of trees located under utility lines in San Luis Obispo. Municipal Code requires public utilities to acquire a permit before completing any utility work that impacts adjacent trees. State law allows utility providers to remove or prune trees as necessary to provide safe clearance. PG&E was not engaged in the development of this report, but should be in future planning efforts around the urban forest.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: PG&E
 Increase communication with PG&E.

Challenges and Opportunities: PG&E
 Urban Forest Services has established communication avenues with local utility providers, but in most instances, they do not learn about work occurring on public trees until after it is underway.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Cal Poly
 Engage with Cal Poly students and faculty to explore opportunities for students and programs to support the urban forest and gain valuable hands-on experience.  Increase collaboration with Cal Poly through internship and volunteer opportunities.  Consider student help with expanding the species list, inventory management and updates, new tree plantings, and tree maintenance.  Engage forestry students in the UFSP planning process.

67 Organizational Structure and Staffing
Organizational Structure and Staffing
Staffing
The urban forestry program has been undergoing organizational and staffing changes over the past 10 years. However, the most significant decreases in the staffing levels have occurred over the past two years. Currently, Urban Forest Services employs one full-time Urban Forest Supervisor (Interim) and one full-time Tree Assistant (Figure 5). The Department is currently assessing staffing needs with consideration for the soon-to-be-developed Urban Forest Strategic Plan, the 10,000 Trees initiative, and existing responsibilities.

Many of the organizational changes in the past 10 years have followed the 2011 Management and Performance Audit of the Public Works Department, a document that assessed the organization’s structure and provided recommendations for the program (Management and Performance Audit of the Public Works Department, 2011). The audit recommended the Urban Forest Supervisor report to the Public Works Director and manage an in-house, 3-person crew.

Some of the asset management recommendations outlined in the report have not been adopted by the urban forestry program and positions have not been backfilled as employees transferred, retired, or left the City. As a result, the program is understaffed and there is a backlog of maintenance needs and an anticipated increase in future workloads from infill development and increased tree planting. Urban Forest Services has fallen behind on the majority of maintenance tasks they are responsible for.

Figure 5: Current Staffing Structure of Urban Forest Services

Organizational Structure and Staffing 68
Currently, Public Works has begun to use a contractor to perform the scheduled maintenance of area pruning. An in-house crew would continue to address reactive maintenance, training/structural pruning of young trees, specialized pruning, and emergency response. While contract crews can lead to greater efficiencies and reduced liability for the City, it is important to maintain an in-house crew that has a vested interest and knowledge of community assets and able to put trees into context with other city policies, goals, and infrastructure.

In addition to Urban Forest Services, other departments and teams have responsibilities for urban forest assets. Although this project did not include a full review of tasks or staffing in those other departments, several duties relating to the urban forest fit the purview and skillsets of other departments. For example, a Development Review Arborist could provide advise during development planning, review development proposals, and fulfill other duties that relate to private trees. Furthermore, a Volunteer Coordinator position placed in the Parks and Recreation Department could organize outreach, community engagement and education for the urban forest program as these roles fit the vision of this department. As the recommendations in this document address optimal staffing for the urban forest and consider the addition of staff in other departments, it should be reviewed and discussed by appropriate city staff to ensure agreement.

Challenges and Opportunities: Organizational Structure
 Positions have not been filled in the last 2 years and the program is severely understaffed.
 Maintenance requests from other divisions are submitted to Urban Forest Services, but in most cases, there is not enough staff to complete the work.  Staff are not able to complete all of the assigned duties.  Progress on the current high-level goals is not feasible for the Public Works Department with the current staffing levels and budget.  Maintenance and administrative roles are being carried out by the same individual, yet these roles require different skillsets and full-time attention.  The city has followed a model where a subset of individual trees are managed by multiple departments but does not have a designated urban forest team to facilitate a shared vision and allows for inconsistent standards in tree care and programming inefficiencies.
 While interdepartmental staff collaborate well and often coordinate for success, these relationships and overall program efficiency could be improved by documenting policies, responsibilities, and procedures. Coordination and collaboration with other departments responsible for shared visioning and care for the urban forest could be improved.
 Not all of the work provided by Urban Forest Services fit the vision of the Public Works Department.

69 Organizational Structure and Staffing
Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Organizational Structure  Explore the development of a comprehensive staffing structure that ensures both administrative and maintenance roles related to the urban forest are provided full attention.
 Collaborate with all urban forest service providers to identify optimal structure for consistent and efficient services.
 Create a team consisting of the Maintenance & Operations Manager, Natural Resources Manager, and Development Review Arborist (NEW) to administer consistent vision and policy across departments and teams engaged in managing urban forest assets and is who responsible for the stewardship of the Urban Forest Strategic Plan and liaison with planning, development, Tree Committee, and City Council.
 Advocate for the entire urban forest.
 Set goals for canopy cover, sustainability, and climate action.  Create and share policy, visionary documents, and an overall budget.  Increase staffing levels, include the following positions (see Figure 6):
 2 FTE Arborists to create an in-house crew in the Public Works Department.  1 FTE Development Review Arborist (potentially located in the Community Development Department).
 1 FTE Volunteer Coordinator (potentially located in the Parks and Recreation Department).
 Explore the need for additional administrative support to address permitting and applications.
 Support and collaborate with all other departments responsible for the urban forest.

Organizational Structure and Staffing 70
Figure 6: Staffing Recommendations

Organizational Structure and Staffing 70
Positions within the Public Works Department
1 FTE Arborist Coordinator. This is a lead arborist position that reports to the Maintenance and Operations Manager or another maintenance supervisor. This position should have the same duties as an Arborist but act as a crew lead at times.
1 FTE Arborist. Together, with the Arborist Coordinator these positions should create one functional in-house crew. At a minimum, the tree crew should contain one Arborist Coordinator able to tree climb and work from a bucket truck as well as two additional arborists. The tree crew should have the following duties:
 Respond to internal work requests.
 Address clearance and visibility of City owned trees.  Conduct structural pruning in parks and city facilities, training pruning, and watering trees.
 Provide emergency response.
 Conduct tree inspections and risk assessments on public trees along streets, in parks, and at city facilities when a hazard has been identified (TRAQ qualification is preferred).  Young tree care and watering.
1 FTE Maintenance Contract Coordinator. In addition to other contract monitoring within the Public Works Department, this position provides oversight of the contract for cycle pruning and large tree removals.
 Oversee the contract for cycle pruning and large tree removals (ISA certification is preferred).

Positions outside of Public Works Department
Several key positions are needed in other departments to support urban forestry goals. Their placement is flexible and all partners should be involved in determining the optimal placement. 1 FTE Development Review Arborist. This position, potentially located within the Community Development Department, should have the following duties:
 Review all development proposals.
 Advise during development planning and review.
 Ensure contractors are following the Tree Ordinance and ANSI standards.  Administer Removal Applications.
 Apply ordinances and evaluate trees.
 Respond to resident correspondences.
 Conduct tree inspections and risk assessments on private trees when a hazard has been identified (TRAQ qualification is preferred).
 Liaison to other departments, City Council, the Tree Committee and Architectural Review Commission, work with partners and stakeholders.  Participate in tree related outreach activities, support Parks and Recreation in the annual Arbor Day events.

71 Organizational Structure and Staffing
1 FTE Volunteer Coordinator. This position, potentially located within the Parks and Recreation Department, should have duties that relate to education and outreach events that impact the entire urban forest, even trees cared for by Public Works. This would allow the City to expand formal volunteer opportunities and community engagement around trees.  Conduct large outreach and education events, including those related to public trees managed by Urban Forest Services (e.g., Arbor Day).
 Further expand relationships with City Departments and partnering organizations caring for the urban forest.
 Coordinate with Public Works and ECOSLO on an Adopt a Street Tree program.  Lead volunteer efforts.

Equipment
Urban Forest Services has the equipment needed for a functional in-house crew. Staff have access to an aerial lift, truck, and chipper. Other equipment, such as the brush chipper and mowers, are shared amongst Departments. Once an organizational structure, services, and work plans are agreed upon, Urban Forest Services can explore additional equipment needs, potentially during the development of an Urban Forest Strategic Plan.

Challenges and Opportunities: Equipment
 Re-examine equipment needs once there is consensus on the appropriate organizational structure.
 The Parks Maintenance crew has one chipper truck and the City has a backup chipper truck. During winter storms, chipper trucks can be high in demand and not available, limiting clean up efforts to one crew.
 Several community survey respondents were concerned with the amount of fossil fuels being used to maintain the urban forest.

Organizational Structure and Staffing 72
Contract Management
Approximately 95% of tree maintenance is currently conducted by contractors. In the current agreement, contractors are required to provide the City with tree maintenance forms that log the maintenance performed each day. The following work is being contracted:
 Tree pruning
 Tree removal
 Stump grinding
 Emergency response
The ISA-certified Interim Urban Forest Supervisor has been working with the contractor to ensure maintenance meets the standards of Urban Forest Services, industry standards, and community expectations. The Public Works Department recently hired an in-house Maintenance Contract Coordinator who will be tasked with overseeing the tree maintenance contract as well as other contracted work within the Department. While this will help with the administrative aspects of the contract agreement, it is important that an ISA-certified arborist is involved in work planning and inspections of contract work.

Currently, the contractor has their own inventory and plans to integrate data on community trees to the City’s inventory database quarterly. Periodic data transfers do not allow the City to have a real time, up-to-date inventory. Ideally, contractors would update the City’s inventory.

Recommendations for UFSP Planning: Equipment
 Evaluate equipment needs.
 Assess whether the City should replace the current water truck or fully contract out this service (also consider other young tree care duties).  Assess whether a stump grinder would be useful, or if this work will continue to be contracted out.
 Assess whether the City should purchase an auger to aid urban forest partners in tree planting.
 Evaluate where redundancies would be useful.
 Explore the carbon use and capture that results from urban forestry operations.  Explore ways to reduce the amount of carbon (carbon footprint) produced in the management of the urban forest.

73 Organizational Structure and Staffing
Challenges and Opportunities: Contract Management
 Contractors are not providing updates to the city’s tree inventory data, rather they are using their own internal system.
 Depending on the size of the in-house crew, Urban Forest Services may need to explore additional contract funding in the future.
 Additional contract services will be needed to successfully complete the future increase in planting and maintenance expected as part of the tree planting initiative.
 The city recently transitioned contract monitoring to the Maintenance Contract Coordinator and although they are experiencing positive results, contract services are only sporadically monitored by a certified arborist.

Recommendations to follow up for UFSP Planning: Contract Management  Require contractors to update the city’s inventory data as work occurs.  Confirm species
 Update DBH as needed
 Update condition as needed
 Explore additional contract needs for expanded services (e.g., watering, new tree establishment).
 Ensure a certified arborist is regularly monitoring/inspecting contractor’s work to avoid conflict of interest with maintenance contractor.  Monitoring can be done in-house (e.g., consider requirements for ISA certification for the Maintenance Contract Coordinator position) or through a contractor/company.
 Ensure contractors are completing and documenting tree inspections as they conduct routine pruning.
 Document risk factors, health, and pest/disease concerns that cannot (or will not) be mitigated through maintenance.
 Continue to contract regular street tree maintenance / cycle pruning.  Continue to implement contracts that:
 Can be easily extended if the level of tree care provided by the contractor is satisfactory.
 Clearly state the goals for contract services.
 Require contractor adhere to all ANSI and ISA standards and BMPs for tree care operations.
 Require that pruning be completed or supervised by an ISA certified arborist or ISA certified tree worker.

Organizational Structure and Staffing 74
Funding
Funding for the urban forest program within Public Works is sourced from the General Fund and is expected to be $680,571 in FY 2020-2021. Preserving and maintaining the urban forest is one of four strategic goals laid out for Public Works in San Luis Obispo’s 2021-2023 Financial Plan.

As part of this goal, the Financial Plan provides funding projections to meet the objectives of completing the Urban Forest Strategic Plan, a comprehensive tree inventory update, creating a database tracking system, and more pruning and maintenance.

The 2021-23 Financial Plan calls for an overall 35% budget cut to Urban Forest Services’ FY 2020-2021 budget, for a FY 2021-22 budget of $441,419. A large portion of this budget cut is in staffing, the budget of which is being cut by 40% due to the open positions that were not filled during the Departments assessment/evaluation period. While there are staffing constraints to the program, contract services are increasingly meeting needs for tree maintenance. In recent years, the City has increased funding to contract services which has lessened the backlog of service requests and
made tree maintenance more proactive. The budget for
contract maintenance services has increased from $60,000 to approximately $175,000. A portion of the funding
allocated to contract services is also to support the
development of an Urban Forest Strategic Plan.

Challenges and Opportunities: Funding
 Historically, Urban Forest Services has been underfunded.  Securing steady funding for Urban Forest Services that does not fluctuate based on external factors and take future growth into consideration.  City leaders and the community support the urban forest and may be willing to provide more financial support recommended maintenance and service levels.  Increase investment in proactive, preventative maintenance by exploring options to increase the frequency of pruning events for public street trees.  Creating a sustainable funding plan for Urban Forest Services that forecasts and plans the budget for more than 2 years into the future.  All of the current funding for the program comes from the General Fund. “The city urban forestry
department is woefully
underfunded.

Subsequently tree
maintenance is not
completed in a timely
manner and the trees
suffer for it."
-Survey Respondent

75 Organizational Structure and Staffing
Recommendation for UFSP Planning: Funding
 Create maintenance zones and work plans that includes all trees in the rights-of-way, streets, medians, parks, and city facilities and budget for their maintenance.  Plan for increased maintenance costs for proactive care on a 6-year cycle.  Plan for increased contracted or in-house work to support the robust tree planting initiative.
 Plan to include the cost of maintenance for newly planted trees along streets, in parks, rights-of-ways, and at city facilities, including all trees planted by partnering organizations.
 Use the current assets, workloads, and anticipated growth in staff and new tree planting to determine what the future resources are needed.  Create a long-term budget for the 10,000 Tree initiative and consider it in future funding projections.
 Develop a sustainable funding plan that looks further than the current budget cycle of two years.
 Partner with ECOSLO as conduit for donations to help support the urban forest and volunteer services.
 Explore implementing a Tree Fund that is used toward tree planting or urban forest conservation easements.

Organizational Structure and Staffing 76

77 Policy and Regulation
Policy and Regulation
Urban forest management operations are influenced by and subject to regulations, policies, and guidance from federal, state, and local direction. The following section provides a summary of the regulatory and guiding policies explored during this assessment of the urban forestry framework in San Luis Obispo. Additional regulations and policies may also apply.

Federal and State Law
Endangered Species Act
Signed in 1973, the Endangered Species Act provides for the conservation of species that are endangered or threatened throughout all or within a significant portion of their range, as well as the conservation of the ecosystems on which they depend. The listing of a species as endangered makes it illegal to "take" (i.e., harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or attempt to do these things) that species. Similar prohibitions usually extend to threatened species.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
Passed by Congress in 1918, this Act defines that it is unlawful to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, possess, sell, purchase, barter, import, export, or transport any migratory bird, or any part, nest, or egg or any such bird, unless authorized under a permit issued by the Secretary of the Interior.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act can impact forestry operations during times when birds are nesting, which may delay work in order to avoid violating the MBTA.

Vegetation Management Standards
In California, all utility providers are subject to General Order 95; Rule 35 Vegetation Management (California Public Utilities Commission, revised 2012) and FAC-003-2 Transmission Vegetation Management (NERC), which outline requirements for vegetation management in utility easements. These requirements include clearance tolerances for trees and other vegetation growing in proximity to overhead utilities.

California Urban Forestry Act
Section 4799.06-4799.12 of the California Public Resources Code defines a chapter known as the California Urban Forestry Act. The Act defines trees as a “vital resource in the urban environment and as an important psychological link with nature for the urban dweller.” The Act also enumerates the many environmental, energy, economic, and health benefits that urban forests provide to communities.

The purpose of the Act is to promote urban forest resources and minimize the decline of urban forests in the state of California. To this end, the Act facilitates the creation of permanent jobs related to urban forestry, encourages the coordination of state and local agencies, reduces or eliminates tree loss, and prevents the introduction and spread of pests. The Act grants the authority to create agencies and mandates that urban forestry departments shall provide technical assistance to urban areas across many disciplines (while also recommending numerous funding tools to achieve these goals).

Policy and Regulation 78
Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO)
To promote the conservation and efficient use of water and to prevent the waste of water, a Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) was adopted in 2009 and later revised in 2015. The Ordinance requires increases in water efficiency standards for new and retrofitted landscapes through the use of more efficient irrigation systems, greywater usage, and onsite stormwater capture. It also limits the portion of landscapes that can be covered in turf.

California Global Warming Solutions Act
In 2006, the California Global Warming Solutions Act (Assembly Bill 32) was implemented to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Through this Act, California was the first state in the nation to initiate long term measures to help mitigate the effects of climate change through improved energy efficiency and renewable technology. California approached the goal to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 through direct regulations, market-based approaches, voluntary measures, policies, and programs. The 2015 update set targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

California Solar Shade Control Act
Passed in 1978, California’s Solar Shade Control Act supported alternative energy devices, such as solar collectors, and required specific and limited controls on trees and shrubs. Revised in 2009, the Act restricted the placement of trees or shrubs that cast a shadow greater than ten percent of an adjacent existing solar collector’s absorption area upon the solar collector surface at any one time between the hours of 10am and 2pm.

The Act exempts trees or shrubs that were:
 Planted prior to the installation of a solar collector  Trees or shrubs on land dedicated to commercial agricultural crops  Replacement trees or shrubs that were planted prior to the installation of a solar collector and subsequently died or were removed (for the protection of public health, safety, and the environment) after the installation of a solar collector  Trees or shrubs subject to city and county ordinance
Climate Adaptation Actions for Urban Forests and Human Health In July 2021, the U.S. Forest Service published Climate Adaptation Actions for Urban Forests and Human Health, a comprehensive document that synthesizes information and recommends action steps for professionals and communities in expanding the role of urban forests for climate adaptation. The central component to Climate Adaptation Actions for Urban Forests and Human Health is the Urban Forest Climate and Health Menu. This menu provides information and ideas for urban forestry projects to improve climate and human-health related outcomes with a clear, organized step-based approach. The Urban Forest Climate and Health Menu is structured with three chronological steps going from conceptual stages to action stages to accomplish each of nine core strategies. These strategies are:
 Activating social systems for equitable climate adaptation, urban forest and health outcomes

79 Policy and Regulation
 Reducing impact of human health threats and stressors using urban forests  Maintaining/increasing extent of urban forest and vegetative cover  Sustaining or restoring ecological functions of urban ecosystems  Reducing impact of physical and biological stressors on urban forests  Enhancing taxonomic functional on structural diversity  Altering urban ecosystems toward new and expected conditions  Promoting mental and social health in response to climate change  Promoting human health co-benefits in nature-based climate adaptation This report solves the common challenge of synthesizing broad science-based information into actionable steps for communities. It can be used in developing new climate adaptation plans, to explore benefits and drawbacks of existing adaptation plans, and to generate discussions about community needs with regards to urban forest development.

Guiding Documents for the Urban Forest
Municipal Code
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code has seven titles that include provisions that impact trees, tree care, or the urban forest.

Title 1 General Provisions cross references Tree Regulations (Chapter 12.24) for the penalties applied for violating code.

Title 8 Health and Safety defines rubbish to include tree trimmings. Requires the removal of fallen or standing trees that are causing dangerous obstructions or preventing the flow of water in streambeds or other bodies of water.

Title 10 Vehicles and Traffic includes provisions for trees in visibility and clearance requirements. Requires reporting any accident that causes damage to trees. Designates oversize and overweight vehicle permit holders responsible for repairing any resulting damage to public property, including trees. Prohibits the permit holder from trimming city trees.

Title 12 Streets, Sidewalks, and Public Places prohibits any structures from encroaching on or coming into contact with street trees. Outlines the encroachment permit process, and trees can be included as obstructions. Provides protections to trees and tree-stakes/guards along creeks, riparian areas, and city properties adjacent riparian areas. Encourages tree and landscape plantings in parking lots as well as alternative designs, such as porous pavement, to retain existing trees in or near parking areas.

The Tree Ordinance, Chapter 12.24 Tree Regulations, establishes policies and regulations on the maintenance, removal, and preservation of trees. Explains the structure and duties of the tree committee. Requires a street tree list, major street tree list, and, when applicable, a tree planting plan for developments. Requires following standards and procedures for tree planting and maintenance.

Sets criteria for tree removal and explains the tree removal permitting and appeals process.

Requires mitigation in the case of tree removal. Designates the City responsible for sidewalk

Policy and Regulation 80
maintenance resulting from street tree conflicts. Designates the City responsible for maintaining trees on public property. Allows private property owners to hire certified professionals to prune trees or repair sidewalk damage out of the maintenance cycles, but at their own expense.

Prohibits hazardous trees on private property, outlines the abatement notice process, and designates responsibility to property owners for addressing hazardous trees. Requires public utilities to obtain a permit to maintain trees adjacent to utility infrastructure. Requires tree care contractors to have the appropriate licensing and accreditation and to follow industry standards.

Provides tree protections for physical damage, including considerations for roots. Prevents tree planting unless it is in accordance with the ordinance. Requires approval for the use of treestakes and guards. Specifies where slacklining is allowed on public trees and the necessary tree protections. Outlines penalties for violations to the ordinance.

Defines heritage trees and outlines their maintenance and protections. Designates the Public Works Department responsible for the enforcement of this chapter and addresses liability.

Title 15 Buildings and Construction adopts California Building Code and amends site plan requirements to include the location and size of all trees, indicating trees to be preserved or removed. Prohibits posting signs on street trees.

Title 16 Subdivisions requires plans and site maps for lot line adjustments to include all trees on the property. Considers trees in design standards for lots and street layouts. Allows for exceptions to the typical requirement for subdividing lots to reduce grading or tree removal.

Considers street trees in street improvements. Requires subdividers to grant land easements for street trees if determined necessary. Defines “street tree”.

Title 17 Zoning Regulations requires trees as a pedestrian amenity in open space. Explains that creek setbacks are not based on individual trees. Explains that lot areas do not include the area within the dripline of heritage trees. Prohibits dead, decayed, infested (i.e., pests, including vermin), diseased, overgrown trees on private property that are a public nuisance. Ensures street trees are incorporated in street and right-of-way improvements when possible. Considers tree removal as an option in reasonable accommodation for disabled persons in land use and zoning regulations. Includes trees in the definition of “riparian vegetation”.

San Luis Obispo General Plan 2035
The General Plan is a document adopted by the City Council that considers the current, future needs as well as available resources and provides the following:
 Visions for San Luis Obispo’s future physical and economic development  Strategies and specific actions that will allow this vision to be accomplished  Bases for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with community goals
 Authorizes the design of projects that will enhance the character and safety of the community and preserve environmental resources
 Guides planning and implementing programs
The General Plan consists of eight elements, all of which pertain to the urban forest.

81 Policy and Regulation
Land Use Element summarizes current community values to preserve the natural resources and control urban growth. Calls attention to the greenbelt surrounding the City and requires preservation of significant trees in the greenbelt. Highlights that the City works with partnering land managers to protect significant trees located outside of city limits. Recommends trees and groves of trees be used to differentiate the edge between developed areas and open lands.

Some of the Land Use Sustainability Policies have a central focus that directly relates to trees and tree canopy, including:
 Carbon sequestration (Policies: Climate Action, Natural Areas, and Green Space)  Urban cooling and shade (Urban Heat Effects)
 Efficient landscapes with drought tolerant /native species, efficient irrigation, and captured rainwater (Sustainable Design)
 Long term tree planting program (Renew the Urban Forest)  An up-to-date master tree plan (Urban Forest)
 Protecting the urban forest (Healthy Environment)
The Land Use element also calls to retain mature trees in the rights-of-way, cluster street trees along scenic roadways to conserve views, encourage fruit trees in lieu of lawns or other plants with high water use, and consider solar collector locations that minimize tree removal.

Circulation Element emphasizes creating streetscapes that incorporate street trees and considers tree planting, maintenance, and retention. Expresses a preference for native species with the desired characteristics. Addresses street tree placement along scenic roadways, and encourages clusters of street trees to still allow for views. Promotes pedestrian and bike paths that use trees as part of a buffer between pedestrians and traffic.

Housing Element supports neighborhood improvement projects, some of which incorporate street trees. Considers trees and other natural features when assessing the environmental constraints on residential development and estimated residential capacity.

Noise Element allows for landscape plantings
as a way to create an attractive noise
mitigation wall.

Safety Element presents policies and
programs to address hazardous trees and
emergency response.

Conservation and Open Space Element
describes San Luis Obispo’s natural resources
and emphasizes the importance of open space
for wildlife habitat and corridors. Notes that
trees are an essential component of the
habitats the City aims to preserve and expand
(i.e., oak woodland). Many of the goals,
policies, and programs covered in this element
impact trees, including the following:
“Significant trees, as determined by
the City Council upon the
recommendation of the Tree
Committee, Planning, or
Architectural Review Committee, are
those making substantial
contributions to natural habitat or to
the urban landscape due to their
species, size, or rarity.”
-Conservation and Open Space
Element of the General Plan

Policy and Regulation 82
 Protect significant trees
 Continue the City’s Heritage tree program
 Incorporate native plant species in landscapes
 Minimize habitat disturbance during development, emphasize soil conservation  Follow integrated pest management practices to avoid the use of environmental toxins  Engage in area-wide planning efforts around environmental conservation (e.g., Habitat Conservation Plans, U.S. Endangered Species Act)
 Participate in environmental review
 Incorporate trees around pedestrian and bike paths
 Preserve and expand ecotones, wildlife corridors, and native vegetation  Require creek corridor setbacks that allow for riparian habitat, including trees  Engage the Tree Committee when implement tree preservation and planting programs  Promote wood reutilization through mulching, milling, or pulping  Support protected species and the conservation strategy (e.g., the conservation strategy for monarch butterflies is to conserve groups of trees) Parks and Recreation Element explains the existing park facilities. Mentions trees as amenities in some of the City parks and considers landscaping a basic element of the parks. Recommends acquiring new parkland, developing new parks, and increasing connectivity between parklands.

Highlights community and volunteer participation in park projects.

Water and Wastewater Element calls attention to the use of recycled water for irrigating landscaping in parks, streetscapes, and medians as well as some types of landscaping on private properties (e.g., homeowners associations, commercial, industrial, and business areas).

Introduces other water efficiency programs.

Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery
San Luis Obispo’s Climate Action Plan sets goals to reach carbon neutrality by 2035. During the development of the Climate Action Plan, community workshops identified updating the City tree list to focus on native species. The Plan is organized into 6 pillars, one of which is centered around the urban forest.

Pillar 6: Natural Solutions focuses on ways to increase carbon sequestration. This pillar introduces the City’s plan to develop their first Urban Forest Strategic Plan to guide tree maintenance and planting. It also introduces 10 Tall: An Initiative to Plant 10,000 Trees in San Luis Obispo by 2035 and supports this initiative’s goals to plant and maintain 10,000 new trees by 2035. Although not a current goal, the City is looking into using the urban forest and other carbon sequestration tools as carbon credits to offset greenhouse gas emissions.

This Pillar of the Climate Action Plan recognizes the urban forest for its contributions in providing residents with benefits to mental health, cooling, stormwater management, watershed health, and increased property values. It also highlights the role of the urban forest in supporting local economic development through job creation. The community partnerships and

83 Policy and Regulation
volunteer networks currently in place to help obtain urban forestry related goals are documented.

This pillar sets the City’s intentions to continue routine tree maintenance and emergency response for the current 20,000 trees in the inventory as well as the anticipated 10,000 new tree plantings in existing vacant sites, open spaces, riparian areas, and parks. In total, the Plan estimates 10,670 trees will be planted on public and private property. Another priority is riparian restoration with a focus on native tree planting, the suggested species composition is included.

It calls for the use of an inventory management system to track progress.

This pillar includes equity considerations to identify the populations most vulnerable to extreme heat and flooding and then use the urban forest to increase the benefits from trees in areas with vulnerable populations.
2021-23 Financial Plan
The Financial Plan outlines the City’s two-year plan and the associated budget allocation for core services and programs. In the current Financial Plan, the City Council, guided by community input and advisory bodies, chose four areas to address the highest priority goals, these include:
 Economic Recovery, Resiliency & Fiscal Sustainability  Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
 Housing & Homelessness
 Climate Action, Open Space & Sustainable Transportation The Financial Plan focuses on considering the financial resources needed to be successful in implementing the goals adopted in the Climate Action Plan (e.g., carbon neutrality, preservation of open space and the urban forest, and resilience planning). Tracking the number of public trees that are maintained is included as a performance measure.

The Financial Plan also outlines the operating budget for General Fund programs that are needed to continue Public Works operations, such as annual maintenance to the urban forest.

The staffing levels are reported, showing the Urban Forest program has lost staff (full time and supplemental employees) in recent years, but contract services have increased.

Engineering Standards
Inspections at construction sites to assess progress also include an assessment for proper tree protection.

Tree Protection Provides standards for tree protection during construction, including details on protection fences, when it is appropriate to prune or attach something to trees being protected, criteria for excavation, grading, trenching, and boring, and tree protection and monitoring plans.

Includes criteria for street trees and tree wells in the design standards for roadways. Mentions permeable pavement as a way to increase aeration and water for tree roots in parking areas and alternative, compact designs are allowed if it may result in saving a tree.

Provides standards for bioswale designs with and without trees. Includes the street trees master list and street trees major lists. Illustrates and describes standards for tree wells and alternative tree well covers.

Policy and Regulation 84
Street Tree Planting Instructions and Requirements Illustrates and describes expectations for tree planting, including tree quality, backfill material, tree size, type of tree, and planting location, and materials (e.g., stakes, mulch, and guards). Requires inspections of the hole dimensions prior to planting as well as the planted tree. Illustrates and describes standards for installing drip irrigation and tree bubblers. Specifies using mulch at the base of trees.

Management and Performance Audit of the Public Works Department The Management and Performance Audit categorized improvements to the Public Works Department into six categories, all of which include recommendations that impact the urban forest including the following:
 Accountability focuses on clear and transparent direction. This category has broad recommendations that relate to the urban forest, such as redirecting resources to infrastructure maintenance and preservation as well as developing work planning and scheduling systems.
 Asset Management calls for a better understanding of community resources, such as their condition and performance of the community tree resource.  Maintenance Management recommends implementing an information system that can be used to track the inventory of all infrastructure and work activities as well as setting annual work programs.
 Administrative and Management focuses on implementing structural changes to the department to increase efficiency, including changes to staffing levels and position responsibilities. Specific recommendations are included for the Urban Forestry Division.  Preventative Maintenance of the Infrastructure recognizes the long-term benefits of preventative maintenance to increase the useful lifespan of assets and reduce overall costs.
 Cost Effective Service Delivery highlights the cost savings associated with redesigning staffing levels and duties, vehicle needs, and implementing managed competition for contract work.

Estimating Urban Canopy Cover in San Luis Obispo
The tree canopy was determined for the urban reserve, which includes all of the core-built features within the City boundary. This assessment uses 2012 aerial imagery to estimate the tree canopy. When breaking down tree canopy by land use type, it showed that office properties and residential areas have the highest canopy cover. Tree canopy varied slightly between the residential density levels. The assessment found that tree canopy is not equally distributed throughout the City and tree canopy varies nearly eight-fold between the land use categories with the highest (Office) and lowest (Business Park) categories.

San Luis Obispo Creek Stormwater Resource Plan
Summarizes what is known about the watershed and recommends ways to improve watershed health. Tree canopy is mentioned as a non-quantifiable benefit to buffer and shade aquatic habitats. Tree planting is recognized as a way to control stormwater flow and water quality.

85 Policy and Regulation
Green streets that increase water capture and reuse are identified as a priority need. Several methods to increase water infiltration are listed including: bioretention, pervious pavements, downspout disconnection, infiltration basins, and dry wells. Sets criteria to prioritize for green streets projects (considers feasibility and ranks planned projects, public visibility, contributing runoff and pollution, infiltration feasibility, proximity to critical habitat, and existing drainage problems). Maps areas that generate greater stormwater runoff, which are largely areas with a high proportion of roads.

Parks and Recreation Blueprint for the Future 2021-2041 Guiding themes for the SLO Parks and Recreation Blueprint plan include Stewardship and Sustainability as well as Inclusion and Access. As part of the ‘Stewardship and Sustainability goal,’ Parks aim to become carbon neutral and incorporate ‘low-allergen plants and trees’ (SLO Parks). Additionally, as part of the ‘Inclusion and Access’ theme, Parks aims to create equal access to green spaces for all. One of 25 new park projects, the Margarita Area plan, includes park trees. At a 2018 pop-up event to gain community input, participants voted for trees as being an important feature to be included at future parks. Trees were emphasized as important to creating shaded play areas at future parks, as they not only contribute shade but a ‘distinctive identity and sustainability’ (SLO Parks.) The park blueprints highlighted issues and future planned improvements for each park in San Luis Obispo. Minimal shade was listed as an issue at both Meadow Park Center and Laguna Lake Park. Shade could be increased at these parks with tree planting.

The Blueprint document sets goals to:
 Prepare a tree inventory for all the parks to inform future planting, maintenance needs, and budget
 Develop a master tree list to accommodate for climate change, allergen levels, and drought tolerance
 Develop a new work order management system in collaboration with Public Works to assist staff in remaining up to date on maintenance tasks of various frequencies. This includes managing natural assets like trees.

Resilient SLO
Resilient SLO is currently in the planning phase and this planning document aims to increase resilience to the impacts of climate change.

Additional Planning Documents
In addition to these guiding documents, the City has developed Specific Area Plans that embed the principles for tree maintenance that are presented in other guiding documents, such as the General Plan and Engineering Standards.

Policy and Regulation 86
Higuera Street then and now.

87 Benchmark Community Survey
Benchmark Community Survey
An online survey was created for an initial assessment of community understanding, appreciation, and future vision for San Luis Obispo’s urban forestry program and urban forest.

The survey was available on the City’s website, announced at City Council meeting and also advertised with signs at parks and trailheads. Responses were collected between September 22 and October 21, 2021. In this one-month period, the online community survey received 644 responses from community members. The survey included 9 questions about community members’ views on tree benefits, education and outreach, urban forest program operations, and preferences for future plantings. The survey offered participants to expand on their answers and provided space for thoughts and suggestions at the end. The complete survey and results are available in Appendix E, and questions are summarized below.

While all the benefits of trees are important to consider, the preferences of a community for certain benefits can be used by tree managers to select appropriate trees to further meet the needs of the community. When asked why trees are important to the City, shading/cooling, community character/aesthetics, wildlife habitat, and improving air quality were most frequently chosen. However, a majority of the benefits offered in the survey were rated as important, including connection with nature, improving quality of life, and reducing urban heat island effects.

Figure 7: San Luis Obispo Community Member Opinions on the Most Important Benefits of Trees

61.8%

58.5%

54.8% 53.9%

46.6% 46.4%

42.6%

35.3%

16.8% 15.7% 14.4% 13.4%

8.5% 6.4% 4.5% 2.2% 1.7% 1.4%
Shading/cooling
Community character/aesthetics
Wildlife habitat
Improving air quality
Connection with nature
Quality of life
Reducing urban heat island
effects
Greenhouse gas reduction
Reducing energy needs
Reducing stormwater runoff
Reducing stress
Enhancing pedestrian/bike
corridors
Screening/creating privacy
Increasing property values
Reducing health incidence/cost
Other (please specify)
Increasing retail sales
Safety/reducing crime
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Benefit
Number of Responses

Benchmark Community Survey 88
The survey indicated that environmental benefits from trees are relatively equal in importance to the community. Respondents rated shading and cooling, greenhouse gas reduction, reducing urban heat island effects, and improving air quality each around 20%. The lowest rated benefits in level of importance were reducing stormwater runoff and wildlife habitat.

Figure 8: Community Member Opinions on the Most Important Environmental Benefit from Trees Survey respondents were asked which socioeconomic benefits from trees they felt were most important and given 11 options to choose from. The most important benefits according to the survey, in descending order, were community character/aesthetics, quality of life, connection to nature, and reducing energy needs which together received 85.1% of the votes.

Figure 9: Community Member Opinions on the Most Important Socioeconomic Benefit from Trees

22.1% 21.3% 20.2%

18.3%

13.4%

2.8% 2.0%
Greenhouse gas
reduction
Shading/cooling
Reducing urban
heat island effects
Improving air
quality
Wildlife habitat
Reducing
stormwater runoff
Other (please
specify)
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
Number of Responses

32.8%

24.2%

16.6%

11.5%

3.6% 3.1% 2.3% 2.0% 1.7% 1.1% 0.6% 0.5%
Community
character/aesthetics
Quality of life
Connection to nature
Reducing energy needs
Enhancing
pedestrian/bike corridors
Reducing stress
Increasing property
values
Reducing health
incidence/cost
Other (please specify)
Screening/creating
privacy
Increasing retail sales
Safety/reducing crime
0 50
100
150
200
250
Number of Responses

89 Benchmark Community Survey
When asked where residents thought it was most important to plant trees, neighborhood streets, parks, and open space were most important, but respondents also mentioned trees should be planted everywhere. Respondents also emphasized the need for tree planting in medians along arterial roads, many of which lack greenery or canopy and feel like ‘freeways’ and to use these trees as traffic-calming devices. While locations such as schools, parking lots, and buffer zones between freeways and neighborhoods were not choices, respondents volunteered that these as important locations for further planting.

Figure 10: Community Member Opinions on Where it is Most Important to Plant More Trees Private property planting is an important aspect of growing urban forest canopy and will be an important factor in increasing canopy with San Luis Obispo. When asked what survey respondents thought were the best ways to encourage private property planting, the top three responses were to offer a free or low-cost tree, to offer a rebate on water bills, and to have a rebate for purchased trees. Survey respondents also had other recommendations, such as having a lawn sign or decal to show they are a part of the 10,000 Trees initiative, to hold a photo contest, and to have a tax incentive.

Figure 11: Community Member Opinions on Encouraging Tree Planting on Private Property

77.3%

54.5%

40.9%

34.7%

29.3% 28.9%

7.6%
Neighborhood
streets
Parks Open space Medians Retail areas Arterial roads Other (please specify)
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
Number of Responses

72.0%

61.2%

49.4%

45.0%

34.7%

7.0%
Free or low‐cost
tree
Rebate on water
bill
Rebate on
purchased tree
Tree species and
site selection
information
Community tree
planting event
Other (please
specify)
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
Number of Responses

Benchmark Community Survey 90
Overall, survey respondents were fairly aware of the urban forest program and its operations in the City. About 70% of respondents had seen city crews working on trees, and about 20% of respondents had used the City website or called about tree information. However, 25% of respondents were not aware that there was an urban forest program. Some of the respondents had connections with the Tree Committee, heard about the program through ECOSLO, had taken an Urban Forestry class at Cal Poly, or had personally planted trees at the Arbor Day events.

Figure 12: Community Member Awareness and Interactions with the Urban Forestry Program Residents were generally satisfied with the level of care given to community trees. Most were ‘somewhat satisfied’ (38.4%) and neutral or no opinion (32.1%). A total of 16.8% of respondents were either somewhat dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied with the level of tree care.

Figure 13: Community Member Opinions on the Level of Care Provided for Community Trees Most respondents were not sure whether urban forest services and programs are equally accessible to all residents (63.3%). About 20% of respondents said that they are not equally accessible, whereas 16.5% answered that urban forest services are equally accessible.

70.3%

52.8%

25.4%

20.4%

15.6%

9.0% 8.3%
I have seen City
crews working
on trees
I was aware
that the City
responds to
tree
emergencies
I did not know
the City had a
program to care
for trees
I have used the
City website or
called for tree
information
I have read an
article in The
New Times or
The San Luis
Obispo Tribune
about trees
Other (please
specify)
I have
volunteered at
tree related
events
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Number of Responses

38.4%

32.1%

12.8% 11.1%

5.7%
Somewhat satisfied Neutral Completely satisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Completely dissatisfied
0 50
100
150
200
250
Number of Responses

91 Benchmark Community Survey
Figure 14: Community Member Opinions on Whether Urban Forest Services and Programs are Equally Accessible to all Residents
SLO survey respondents were interested in most topics of education and outreach presented in the survey. Most respondents were interested in information on a tree list and about which trees to plant in the City. They also indicated education and outreach regarding irrigation and watering during a drought as an important topic. Survey respondents also commented that education could be provided in public schools and requested guidance and education regarding tree planting for greenhouse gas reduction.

Figure 15: Community Member Opinions on Topics of Education and Outreach of Interest

63.3%

20.3%

16.5%
Not sure No Yes
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Number of Responses

84.6%

73.9%

47.7% 46.5%

28.4%

6.5%
Tree list/what tree
should I plant in
San Luis Obispo
Irrigation/watering
during drought
How to plant a
tree
Benefits of trees How to hire a tree
care professional
Other (please
specify)
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
Number of Responses

Benchmark Community Survey 92

93 Analysis of Sustainability Indicators
Analysis of Sustainability Indicators
The Sustainability Indicators is a tool based on the Characteristics of Urban Forest Sustainability as defined in the 1997 Journal of Arboriculture article “A Model of Urban Forest Sustainability”, which describes specific criteria that can be used in conjunction with measurable indicators to evaluate sustainability (Clark et al. 1997). To identify goals and areas where the urban forestry program can be improved, Urban Forest Services can regularly assess, evaluate, and indicate the current performance levels of the urban forest through the Sustainability Indicators.

While the Sustainability Indicators is a useful tool for assessing the current status of an urban forest program, it does not necessarily provide a comprehensive review of all the areas in which a program could be improved. In the case of San Luis Obispo, not all of the indicator categories are applicable to the Public Works Department. The Sustainability Indicators do provide an opportunity for Urban Forest Services to benchmark their current conditions and understand how they can be improved to meet industry recommendations and then establish performance measures to improve the effectiveness of their management approach (Kenney, et al 2011). The criteria for the Sustainability Indicators were used as a reference to assess the current urban forestry practices in San Luis Obispo and proved the framework for describing what current urban forest management looks like and a step to advance urban forest management. For a detailed report of the results of the assessment, refer to Appendix D.

The Trees
Among the three performance areas, The Trees is where San Luis Obispo currently has the lowest performance. The categories relating to the tree inventory, such as Age of Trees and Condition of Publicly Owned Trees have low to medium ratings because most community trees are not receiving routine maintenance nor are their attributes regularly updated in an inventory system.

Trees in the downtown core are the exception. Downtown trees are regularly maintained, they are also monitored for structural defects and trees are removed and replaced as needed. San Luis Obispo is moving toward proactive maintenance for trees along streets, in parks, rights-ofway, and at City facilities. As work is completed, inventory data specifications such as tree condition, defects, and any necessary maintenance tasks to address risk will be updated. As part of the next phase in the urban forest planning process, the City intends to update the entire tree inventory, with the exception of trees located in open spaces.

Location of Canopy and Trees on Private Property were categories of low performance for San Luis Obispo. These categories are used to assess whether a community has an equitable distribution of canopy across the community and if the extent and health of canopy on private property is well known. Currently, urban forest managers have access to limited, outdated information on tree canopy in the built areas of the community. Furthermore, the community is currently experiencing a considerable amount of infill development as a result of state housing mandates. Like many California communities, development will continue to put pressure on urban forest growth and result in additional competition for space for trees. Some development plans omit setbacks, taking away already limited space for trees. As a result, the extent and location of tree canopy is changing quickly. To progress in this area, the City should conduct a land cover and tree canopy assessment to determine the amount and distribution of tree

Analysis of Sustainability Indicators 94
canopy citywide and use this information to determine areas that are in the most need of additional tree preservation and planting efforts.

Table 2: Sustainable Indicators
Indicators of a Sustainable Urban Forest
Assessed
Performance Level
Low  Medium  High
The
Trees
Urban Tree Canopy
Equitable Distribution
Size/Age Distribution
Condition of Public Trees ‐ Streets, Parks
Condition of Public Trees ‐ Natural Areas  n/a  n/a  n/a Trees on Private Property
Species Diversity
Suitability
Soil Volume
The Players
Neighborhood Action
Large Private & Institutional Landholder
Involvement
Green Industry Involvement
City Department/Agency Cooperation
Funder Engagement
Utility Engagement
State Engagement
Public Awareness
Regional Collaboration
The
Management
Approach
Tree Inventory
Canopy Assessment
Management Plan
Risk Management Program
Maintenance of Publicly‐Owned Trees (ROWs)
Maintenance of Publicly‐Owned Natural Areas  n/a  n/a  n/a Planting Program
Tree Protection Policy
City Staffing and Equipment
Funding
Disaster Preparedness & Response
Communications
Totals  9.5  15.5  3.5

95 Analysis of Sustainability Indicators
Although San Luis Obispo has not set canopy goals, community members initiated an aggressive tree planting initiative. While the majority of the trees planted as part of this initiative will occur in open spaces, it calls for a fully stocked inventory in built areas. Urban forest Services, in partnership with ECOSLO, is not on a trajectory to achieve a fully stocked inventory along streets, in parks, rights-of-way, and at City facilities by 2035. To meet this goal, Urban Forest Services will need to prioritize tree planting through the development and implementation of planting plans that not only outline planting sites and timeframes, but also the roles of Urban Forest Services, ECOSLO, and contractors.

In The Trees indicator category, San Luis Obispo’s strongest areas of performance is in Species Diversity. As of 2008, the most abundant species, coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), is native to the region and represents 10% of the entire population. All other species represent 5% or less of the overall population. Incorporating as much species diversity into an urban population as possible is hugely important for a sustainable and resilient urban forest, especially considering current and emerging pests and disease threats. Although Urban Forest Services is likely still meeting expectations in this area, striving for even greater diversity is well-advised.

The Players
The Players is a performance area where Urban Forest Services is consistently ranking in the medium category. Three categories were assessed as low to medium and could be improved to advance the urban forestry program, including large private and institutional landholder involvement, utility engagement, and funder engagement. Greater interaction with external groups could promote Urban Forest Service’s goals to provide proactive maintenance to all along streets, in parks, rights-of-way and at City facilities. Currently, all of the Urban Forest Service’s funding comes from the General Fund. While the community is currently supportive of urban forest goals, it is still important to secure adequate and sustainable funding.

Discussion with Urban Forest Services and other urban forest partners revealed that communication between teams is generally good. Collaborations are often on a project-specific basis and most frequently revolve around emergency response. While communication avenues are in place, the current workload hinders Urban Forest Service’s ability to be a stronger collaborator toward shared visions for the urban forest. One area in particular, development review, has fallen by the wayside due to the recent increase in development and the lack of a review arborist. Development proposals often result in the loss of mature trees which is a primary concern of community members that feel the City is not doing enough to preserve the urban forest.

As a whole, the community has a great appreciation for trees and a strong desire to support tree canopy through the preservation of existing trees and increased planting efforts. In fact, the community was integral to the robust tree planting initiative outlined in the Climate Action Plan and recognizes the urban forest for its role in providing a number of benefits to health and welfare of the community. Urban Forest Services relies on their nonprofit partner, ECOSLO, to coordinate with volunteers for tree planting and care in urban areas. While coordinated neighborhood action is limited to the Downtown Foresters and Downtown Ambassadors, many residents volunteer to support the urban forest.

Analysis of Sustainability Indicators 96
The Management Approach
Finally, The Management Approach is the area identified by the assessment to have the most criteria where the urban forestry program is performing at medium to high levels. The community’s tree protection policy is an area of high performance for the program, as the policy not only protects benefits derived from trees on public property, but also those on private property. While this is a significant achievement for the program, this area can further be strengthened through educational campaigns to increase community awareness for the ordinance and expanded enforcement to protect the resource and the benefits derived from all trees.

Recent retirements and general staff attrition have strained staffing levels and at the current level (two staff) is inadequate to effectively manage the resource and the urban forestry program. As a result, the program is performing at a medium level in the City Staffing and Equipment categories. This area has numerous opportunities for improvement, as the intention is to increase staffing levels and expand the use of contractors to provide regular and routine maintenance for all community trees. Improvements in these two categories could also result in improvements in other areas, such as Risk Management, which was ranked low. To enhance performance in this category, Urban Forest Services should conduct annual inspections and proactively address hazards.

Tree Inventory and Canopy Assessment are areas of medium performance. Currently, the program does not have a comprehensive and complete GIS-based community tree inventory nor an urban forest canopy assessment based on high-resolution tree canopy imagery. Updates to the inventory, will provide greater knowledge about the community tree resource. Further study and assessment of overall canopy cover could assist in community-wide planting projects, like the 10,000 Trees initiative. Both an inventory and a canopy assessment would aid in the development of management plan, which would define long-term maintenance schedules, planting plans that consider the strategic placement of trees to maximize benefits. The implementation of a management plan would further advance the program in the Management Plan category. These would give the urban forest program a greater understanding of the current resource, benchmark canopy levels, and help determine progress on their planting initiatives.
“Progressive cities like ours should lead the way in tempering our desire to provide additional housing with the restraint necessary to keep from destroying the very reason we love our community.”
-Survey Respondent

97 Conclusion
Conclusion
The information gathered during this review of the urban forestry program provided an initial assessment of the challenges and opportunities for San Luis Obispo’s urban forest. Further exploration of urban forestry partnerships, community engagement, and assessment of the community tree resource and overall canopy will be critical for the development of a comprehensive urban forest strategic plan. The initial review of tree care operations, staffing, policies and guiding documents, and community feedback have emphasized a critical need for improvements in the care for the community tree resource.

Challenges with staffing have resulted in long-term delays of routine care for trees in most areas of the community, which prior to 2019, were receiving care every 8 to 10 years. With the implementation of contractor services to provide routine care in 2021, Urban Forest Services is moving toward a cyclical maintenance cycle for the estimated 20,000 trees along streets, in parks, public rights-of-way, and at City facilities. Tree maintenance in the downtown core is a priority and these trees receive regular care, but all other maintenance is reactionary, driven by responding to service requests, work orders, or concerns. Ideally, Urban Forest Services would have all trees on a predictable pruning schedule, considering species that require more frequent maintenance (such as palms and Ficus spp.). Many of the concerns around establishing more proactive maintenance can be addressed by (1) contracting out cycle pruning, (2) reinstating an in-house crew to address service requests and work orders, and (3) developing comprehensive schedules and work plans that consider routine maintenance needs, rotation schedules, and the time required to complete necessary maintenance (e.g., average time to complete maintenance).

Urban forest partners are critical to meeting the long-term goals for the urban forest. While Urban Forest Services is responsible for the maintenance of trees in the built areas of the community, staff in the Parks and Recreation Department and Administration Department care for a large portion of the urban forest and provide critical visioning and goals setting. The City’s partnership with ECOSLO has been integral to tree planting and establishment. Over the past 2 years, approximately half of the tree plantings in the urban areas of San Luis Obispo have been planted by volunteers through this program each year. Departments collaborate to effectively address storm response. Through open communication and shared equipment, these situations can be quickly addressed.

Prior to 2008, it was standard procedure that the inventory was updated as work was completed.

At the time, the species diversity, age distribution, and condition ratings indicated a diverse, ideally aged resource in fair or better condition. Since that time, the inventory has not stayed current and therefore the current structure and health of the community tree resource is largely unknown. An up-to-date, regularly maintained inventory is key to understanding the tree resource in real time, which is especially helpful for assisting staff in determining and prioritizing tree care and tree planting. Urban Forest Services recognizes the importance of having a current inventory and there are efforts underway to update the inventory by completing a comprehensive inventory. The updated data specifications for the community tree resource will provide the necessary information to develop a plan for maintenance and identify areas where tree planting is needed to replace trees that have previously been removed or to plan for the succession of an aging and maturing trees, especially in the downtown core.

Conclusion 98
Responses to an online community survey revealed that trees are greatly appreciated by residents and are seen as a valuable part of the community’s identity. Respondents noted that trees are most appreciated for providing shade and contributing positively to the overall community aesthetics. Through comments, respondents voluntarily expressed great concern over the loss of mature trees as a result of the recent increase in development.

A strength of San Luis Obispo’s urban forestry program is that there is a strong tree protection ordinance. The ordinance not only prohibits the removal and pruning of public trees, but also trees on private property. Furthermore, if trees are removed, those trees must be replaced with a sufficient number of trees as determined by the ordinance, Tree Committee, or City Arborist.

While mitigation planting can help offset some of the benefits that are lost from mature trees that are removed, sufficiently replacing mature trees with mitigation plantings takes decades, as trees planted as part of mitigation efforts will take a long time to achieve the same level of canopy as the trees that were removed. Although mitigations are required per Municipal Code, not all large statured trees are being replaced with species of similar stature. As San Luis Obispo continues to undergo infill development and potentially expand, undoubtedly trees will continue to be affected. Feedback from stakeholders and the community suggest that expanded education to the community about the tree protection ordinance, coupled with expanded development review, and clarification of the role of the Tree Committee will be critical to protecting large, mature trees and preserving tree canopy.

From this assessment of the urban forestry program, it is clear that further study and examination of urban forest partnerships and community engagement are needed to not only improve the urban forestry program, but also to develop a comprehensive urban forest strategic plan, which will ensure that the necessary resources are in place to care for the entire community tree resource and provide a long-term vision for the urban forest. In order to develop a comprehensive urban forest strategic plan future planning phases should include:
 A comprehensive tree inventory that is regularly updated by all urban forest partners  A Resource Analysis that benchmarks the composition, benefits, and the value of the community tree resource
 Mapping of the existing canopy and summarize results through a Canopy and Land Cover Assessment
 Management plans and budget needs to maintain trees on a 6-year cycle  Further engagement of applicable stakeholders to identify and build consensus for solutions to challenges and opportunities that were identified for trees managed by Urban Forest Services in the summary report
 Consideration for challenges and opportunities for the remainder of the urban forest, including trees maintained by other departments in open space, natural areas, and riparian areas, private landowners, and other government agencies  Robust community engagement
Additional discussions with urban forest partners and the community will be required to determine the path forward to re-enacting the high-performing urban forestry program with restoring service to the level prior to 2019. Discussions with Public Works and urban forest

99 Conclusion
partners coupled with a review of policies and guiding documents have revealed great concern over the need to provide a greater level of care to San Luis Obispo’s community trees. With adequate staffing levels and continued contracted maintenance, San Luis Obispo’s urban forestry program will be on the right track to re-enact a high-performing urban forestry program, considering:
 Secured funding for increased staffing and contract maintenance  Ambitious tree planting initiatives
 Collaborative avenues in place amongst Departments
 Engaged, passionate, and supportive community members  Progress in increasing the level of performance in meeting Sustainability Indicators

Conclusion 100

101 Appendix A: References
Appendix A: References
Bastin J-F, Clark E, Elliott T, Hart S, van den Hoogen J, Hordijk I, et al. (2019) Understanding climate change from a global analysis of city analogues. PLoS ONE 14(7): e0217592. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217592
Bond, J. and Buchanan, A. 2006. Best Management Practices Tree Inventories. International Society of Arboriculture. Champaign, IL.

California Legislative Information. 2021. Senate Bill #9. Chapter 162 of Government Code Regarding Land Use. Retrieved from:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB9 California Oak Mortality Task Force. 2020. Maps & Visual Media. Retrieved from:
http://www.suddenoakdeath.org/
California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2021. Traffic density. Retrieved from: https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicator/traffic-density City of San Luis Obispo. 2021. Fire Department: About Us. Retrieved from:
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/fire-department/about-us Cal Poly. 2020. Cal Poly Honored Again by Arbor Day Foundation as a Tree Campus USA.

Retrieved from: https://calpolynews.calpoly.edu/news_releases/2020/april/arbor_day Carter, J. G., Cavan, G., Connelly, A., Guy, S., Handley, J., & Kazmierczak, A. (2015). Climate change and the city: Building capacity for urban adaptation. Progress in Planning, 95, 1-66.

Clark et al. 1997. A Model of Urban Forest Sustainability. Journal of Arboriculture 23(1). Retrieved from: https://naturewithin.info/Policy/ClarkSstnabltyModel.pdf City of San Luis Obispo. N.d. Sustainable Growth Management. Retrieved from:
https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/21740/636734813174500000 City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department. 2021. About us. Retrieved from:
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/fire-department/about-us Clark, J.R., Matheny, N.P., Cross, G., Wake, V. 1997. A Model of Urban Forest Sustainability. J Arbor 23(1):17-30.

Daugherty, M. and Hung, K. n.d. Sudden Oak Death. University of California Riverside Center for Invasive Species Research. https://cisr.ucr.edu/invasive-species/sudden-oak-death Day, S. D., Wiseman, P. E., Dickinson, S. B., & Harris, J. R. (2010). Contemporary concepts of root system architecture of urban trees. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry, 36(4), 149-159.

Downtown SLO. 2021. Downtown San Luis Obispo. Retrieved from: https://downtownslo.com/

Appendix A: References 102
EDDMapS. 2021. Early Detection & Distribution Mapping System. The University of Georgia — Center for Invasive Species and Ecosystem Health. Retrieved from http://www.eddmaps.org/ Eskalen, A. Kabashima, J., and Dimson, M. 2017. Invasive Shot Hole Borer and Fusarium Dieback Field Guide. Identifying signs and symptoms of the Polyphagous and Kuroshio Shot Hole Borer.

University of California, Agriculture and Natural Resources. Retrieved from:
https://ucanr.edu/sites/eskalenlab/files/290780.pdf
Grafton-Cardwel, Daugherty, Jetter, & Johnson. 2019. ACP/HLB Distribution and Management.

University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Retrieved from:
https://ucanr.edu/sites/ACP/
Janowiak, Maria K.; Brandt, Leslie A.; Wolf, Kathleen L.; Brady, Mattison; Darling, Lindsay; Lewis, Abigail Derby; Fahey, Robert T.; Giesting, Kristen; Hall, Eboni; Henry, Molly; Hughes, Maise; Miesbauer, Jason W.; Marcinkowski, Kailey; Ontl, Todd; Rutledge, Annamarie; Scott, Lydia; Swanston, Christopher W. 2021. Climate adaptation actions for urban forests and human health.

Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-203. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 115 p. https://doi.org/10.2737/NRS-GTR-203 Johnson, P. 2021. Building out: The city of SLO has enough housing under construction to reach its growth cap ahead of schedule. New Times SLO. Retrieved from:
https://www.newtimesslo.com/sanluisobispo/building-out-the-city-of-slo-has-enough-housingunder-construction-to-reach-its-growth-cap-ahead-of-schedule/Content?oid=10949205 Kenney, W. A., van Wassenaer, P. J., & Satel, A. L. 2011. Criteria and indicators for strategic urban forest planning and management. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry, 37(3), 108-117.

Management and Performance Audit of the Public Works Department. 2011.

Nessen, K. 2012. Estimating urban canopy cover in San Luis Obispo. PDF power point presentation.

Richards, N.A. 1982/83. Diversity and Stability in a Street Tree Population. Urban Ecology. 7:159- 171.

Santamour, F. 1990. Trees for urban planting: Diversity, uniformity, and common sense.

Proceedings of the 7th Conference of Metropolitan Tree Improvement Alliance. 7.

Senate Bills 8. Housing Crisis Act of 2019.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB8 Senate Bill 9. Housing development: approvals.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB9 Senate Bill 10. Planning and zoning: housing development: density. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB10

103 Appendix A: References
SLO City. n.d. Sustainable Growth Management. Retrieved from https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/21740/636734813174500000 Umeda, C., Eskalen, A., and Paine, T. D. 2016. Polyphagous shot hole borer and Fusarium dieback in California. Insects and Diseases of Mediterranean Forest Systems (pp. 757-767). Springer, Cham.

University of California. 2021. Pest Overview: Invasive Shot Hole Borers. Retrieved from:
https://ucanr.edu/sites/pshb/pest-overview/#about-the-beetles Wiley, Hannah. 2021. “More duplexes. Gavin Newsom signs bills aimed at creating more affordable housing in California.” Retrieved from: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politicsgovernment/capitol-alert/article254302493.html Wiseman, P. E., & Raupp, R. J. 2016. Best Management Practices. Integrated Pest Management, 2nd ed. International Society of Arboriculture, Champaign, IL.

Zhu, K., Woodall, C. W., & Clark, J.S. 2012. Failure to migrate: lack of tree range expansion in response to climate change. Global Change Biology, 18(3), 1042-1052.

Appendix B: Industry Standards 104
Appendix B: Industry Standards
ANSI Z133 Safety Standard, 2017
Reviews general safety, electrical hazards, use of vehicles and mobile equipment, portable power hand tools, hand tools and ladders, climbing, and work procedures.

ANSI A300
ANSI A300 standards represent the industry consensus on performing tree care operations. The standards can be used to prepare tree care contract specifications.

ANSI A300 Pruning Standard-Part 1, 2017
ANSI A300 Soil Management-Part 2, 2011
ANSI A300 Support Systems Standard-Part 3, 2013
ANSI A300 Construction Management Standard-Part 5, 2012 ANSI A300 Transplanting Standard-Part 6, 2012
ANSI A300 Integrated Vegetation Management Standard-Part 7,2012 ANSI A300 Root Management Standard-Part 8, 2013
ANSI A300 Tree Risk Assessment Standard a Tree Failure-Part 9, 2017 ANSI A300 Integrated Pest Management-Part 10, 2016
Includes guidelines for implementing IPM programs, including standards for Integrated Pest Management, IPM Practices, tools and equipment, and definition.

Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Integrated Pest Management, Second Edition, P. Eric Wiseman and Michael J. Raupp, 2016 Provides a comprehensive overview of the basic definitions, concepts, and practices that pertain to landscape Integrated Pest Management (IPM). The publication provides specific information for designing, planning, and implementing an IPM program as part of a comprehensive Plant Health Care (PHC) management system, including topics such as:
 IPM Concepts and Definitions
 Action Thresholds
 Monitoring Tools and Techniques
 Preventive Tactics
 Control Tactics
 Documentation and Recordkeeping
Integrated Vegetation Management, Second Edition, Randall H. Miller, 2014 A guide to the selection and application of methods and techniques for vegetation control for electric rights-of-way projects and gas pipeline rights-of-way. Topics included: safety, site evaluations, action thresholds, evaluation, and selection of control methods, implementing

105 Appendix B: Industry Standards
control methods, monitoring treatment and quality assurance, environmental protection, tree pruning and removal, and a glossary of terms.

Managing Trees During Construction, Second Edition, Kelby Fite and E. Thomas Smiley, 2016
Describes tree conservation and preservation practices that help to protect selected trees throughout the construction planning and development process so that they will continue to provide benefits for decades after site disturbance, including planning phase, design phase, preconstruction phase, construction phase, and post-construction phase.

Root Management, Larry Costello, Gary Watson, and Tom Smiley, 2017 Recommended practices for inspecting, pruning, and directing the roots of trees in urban environments to promote their longevity, while minimizing infrastructure conflicts.

Special companion publication to the ANSI A300 Part 8: Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Management–Standard Practices (Root Management)
Tree Planting, Second Edition, Gary Watson, 2014
Provides processes for tree planting, including site and species selection, planting practices, post-planting pruning, and early tree care. Other topics included are time of planting, nursery stock: types, selection, and handling, preparing the planting hole, planting practices, root loss and new root growth, redevelopment of root structure, pruning, palms, after planting, final inspection, and a glossary of terms.

Tree Inventories, Second Edition, Jerry Bond, 2013
Provides considerations for managing large numbers of trees considered as individuals rather than groups and serves as a guide for making informed decisions that align with inventory goals with needs and resources, including inventory goals and objectives, benefits and costs, types, work specifications, and maintaining inventory quality.

Tree Risk Assessment, Second Edition, E. Thomas Smiley, Nelda Matheny, and Sharon Lilly, 2017
A guide for assessing tree risk as accurately and consistently as possible, to evaluate that risk, and to recommend measures that achieve an acceptable level of risk, including topics: risk assessment basics, levels and scope of tree risk assessment, assessing targets, sites, and trees, tree risk categorization, risk mitigation: preventive and remedial actions, risk reporting, tree related conflicts that can be a source of risk, loads on trees, structural defects and conditions that affect likelihood of failure, response growth, description of selected types of advanced tree risk assessments.

Tree Shrub Fertilization, Third Edition, E. Thomas Smiley, Sharon Lilly, and Patrick Kelsey, 2013
Aides in the selection and application of fertilizers for trees and shrubs, including: Essential elements, determining goals and objectives of fertilization, soil testing and plan analysis, fertilizer selection, timing, application, application area, rates, storage and handling of fertilizer, sample fertilizer contract for commercial/ municipal clients.

Appendix B: Industry Standards 106
Soil Management, Bryant Scharenbroch, E. Thomas Smiley, and Wes Kocher, 2014 Focuses on the protection and restoration of soil quality that support trees and shrubs in the urban environment, including goals of soil management, assessment, sampling, and analysis, modifications and amendments, tillage, conservation, and a glossary of terms.

Utility Pruning of Trees, Geoffrey P. Kempter, 2004
Describes the current best practices in utility tree pruning based on scientific research and proven methodology for the safe and reliable delivery of utility services, while preventing unnecessary injury to trees. An overview of safety, tools, and equipment, pruning methods and practices, and emergency restoration are included.

107 Appendix C: Estimated Time on Services
Appendix C: Estimated Time on Services
Table 3: Tasks and Estimated Time Spent by Urban Forest Services Staff Urban Forest Services Task  Hours Allocated Each Week
Asset Management and Maintenance
Pruning in ROW, Parks, and City Facilities  60‐90
Commemorative Grove planting and maintenance  5
Commemorative Grove mowing and watering  15a
Young tree care and watering  40
Emergency response  10‐15
Citizen complaint and correspondences  10
Inventory management, including private heritage trees  5‐10 Removal applications  5‐15
Tree planting in empty wells  1‐2b
Pest management  20d
Coordination for hardscape repairs/CIP Projects  1‐3
Contract monitoring  5‐20
Iron grate services  0‐5
Code Enforcement
Illegal removal enforcement  2‐5
Vegetation in the ROW enforcement  1‐2
Inspect tree planting  0‐2
Mitigation planting enforcement  0‐2
Regulatory Framework
Development review  2‐6
Development inspections  2‐4
Regulatory framework for public and private trees  0‐2
Education and Outreach
Education and outreach  0‐10c
Arbor Day celebration  50‐60d,e
Advisory Roles
Tree Committee liaison  3‐5
Other
Clearance and visibility on private trees  0‐1

a
During summer and/or drought
b
City staff time (does not include contractor time)
c
Sporadic; can vary
d
Annual hours
e
3-4 staff a whole month to prepare

Appendix D: Sustainability Indicators 108
Appendix D: Sustainability Indicators
Table 4: The Trees
THE TREES
Indicators of a
Sustainable Urban
Forest
Overall Objective or
Industry Standard
Performance Levels
Low  Medium  High
Urban Tree Canopy
Achieve the desired tree
canopy cover according
to goals set for the entire
city and neighborhoods.

Alternatively, achieve
75% of the total canopy
possible for the entire
city and in each
neighborhood.

Canopy is
decreasing.
‐ and/or ‐
No canopy goals
have been set.

Canopy is not
dropping, but not on
a trajectory to
achieve the
established goal.

Canopy goal is
achieved, or well on
the way to
achievement.

Canopy goals have not been set, but the community has an aggressive tree planting initiative.

Location of Canopy
(Equitable Distribution)
Achieve low variation
between tree canopy and
equity factors citywide by
neighborhood.  Ensure
that the benefits of tree
canopy are available to
all, especially for those
most affected by these
benefits.

Tree planting and
public outreach
and education is
not determined by
tree canopy cover
or benefits.

Tree planting and
public outreach and
education is focused
on neighborhoods
with low tree
canopy.

Tree planting and
public outreach and
education is focused
on neighborhoods
with low tree
canopy and a high
need for tree
benefits.

Tree plantings are ongoing through a partnership with ECOSLO.

Age of Trees (Size and
Age Distribution)
Establish a diverse‐aged
population of public trees
across the entire city and
for each neighborhood.

Ideal standard:
0‐8" DBH:  40%
9‐17" DBH:  30%
18‐24" DBH:  20%
Over 24" DBH: 10%
No current
information is
available on size.
‐ OR ‐
Age distribution is
not proportionally
distributed across
size classes at the
City level.

Size classes are
evenly distributed at
the City level,
though unevenly
distributed at the
neighborhood level.

Age distribution is
generally aligned
with the ideal
standard diameter
classes at the
neighborhood level.

Current information on age distribution is not available, but the outdated inventory data (2008) shows a nearly ideal distribution.

109 Appendix D: Sustainability Indicators
Condition of Publicly
Owned Trees (trees
managed intensively)
Possess a detailed
understanding of tree
condition and potential
risk of all intensively‐
managed, publicly‐owned
trees. This information is
used to direct
maintenance actions.

No current
information is
available on tree
condition or risk.

Information from a
partial or sample or
inventory is used to
assess tree condition
and risk.

Information from a
current, GIS‐based,
100% complete
public tree inventory
is used to indicate
tree condition and
risk.

A partial inventory is regularly monitored, it includes street trees in the Downtown core.

Condition of Publicly‐
Owned Natural Areas
(trees managed
extensively)
Possess a detailed
understanding of the
ecological structure and
function of all publicly‐
owned natural areas
(such as woodlands,
ravines, stream corridors,
etc.), as well as usage
patterns.

No current
information is
available on tree
condition or risk.

Publicly‐owned
natural areas are
identified in a
sample‐based
"natural areas
survey" or similar
data.

Information from a
current, GIS‐based,
100% complete
natural areas survey
is utilized to
document ecological
structure and
function, as well as
usage patterns.
n/a
Trees on Private
Property
Possess a solid
understanding of the
extent, location, and
general condition of trees
on private lands.

No data is available
on private trees.

Current tree canopy
assessment reflects
basic information
(location) of both
public and private
canopy combined.

Detailed information
available on private
trees. Ex. bottom‐up
sample‐based
assessment of trees.

The location and health of the canopy on private property is largely unknown.

Diversity
Establish a genetically
diverse population of
publicly‐owned trees
across the entire city and
for each neighborhood.

Tree populations should
be comprised of no more
than 30% of any family,
20% of any genus, or 10%
of any species.

No current
information is
available on
species.
‐ OR ‐
Fewer than five
species dominate
the entire tree
population
citywide.

No species
represents more
than 20% of the
entire tree
population citywide.

No species
represents more
than 10% of the
entire tree
population citywide.

The most abundant species represents 10% of the population. All other species are less than 5% of the population.

Appendix D: Sustainability Indicators 110
Climate
Resilience/Suitability
Establish a tree
population suited to the
urban environment and
adapted to the overall
region. Suitable species
are gauged by exposure
to imminent threats,
considering the "Right
Tree for the Right Place"
concept and invasive
species.

No current
information is
available on species
suitability.
‐ OR ‐
Less than 50% of
trees are
considered suitable
for the site.
50% to 75% of trees
are considered
suitable for the site.

More than 75% of
trees are considered
suitable for the site.

An approved street tree list is available but does not include consideration for characteristics to help determine appropriate planting spaces.

Space and Soil Volume
Establish minimum street
tree soil volume
requirements to ensure
there is adequate space
and soil for street trees to
thrive. Minimum soil
volumes by mature size:
1000 cubic feet for large
trees; 600 cubic feet for
medium trees; 300 cubic
feet for small trees.

Minimum street
tree soil volumes
have not been
established.

Minimum street tree
soil volume has been
established based
on mature size of
tree.

Minimum street tree
soil volumes have
been established
and are required to
be adhered to for all
new street tree
planting projects.

No soil volumes have been established; however, tree well size dictates tree species.

111 Appendix D: Sustainability Indicators
Table 5: The Players
THE PLAYERS
Indicators of a
Sustainable Urban
Forest
Overall Objective or
Industry Standard
Performance Levels
Low  Medium  High
Neighborhood Action
Citizens understand,
cooperate, and
participate in urban
forest management at
the neighborhood level.

Urban forestry is a
neighborhood‐scale
issue.

Little or no citizen
involvement or
neighborhood
action.

Some active groups
are engaged in
advancing urban
forestry activity, but
with no unified set
of goals or
priorities.

The majority of all
neighborhoods are
organized,
connected, and
working towards a
unified set of goals
and priorities.

The City has the Downtown Foresters who assist with pruning and care for small trees in the downtown core.

Large Private &
Institutional Landholder
Involvement
Large, private, and
institutional landholders
embrace citywide goals
and objectives through
targeted resource
management plans.

Large private land
holders are
unaware of issues
and potential
influence in the
urban forest. No
large private land
management plans
are currently in
place.

Education materials
and advice is
available to large
private landholders.

Few large private
landholders or
institutions have
management plans
in place.

Clear and concise
goals are established
for large private land
holders through
direct education and
assistance programs.

Key landholders and
institutions have
management plans in
place.

Green Industry
Involvement
The green industry works
together to advance
citywide urban forest
goals and objectives. The
city and its partners
capitalize on local green
industry expertise and
innovation.

Little or no
involvement from
green industry
leaders to advance
local urban forestry
goals.

Some partnerships
are in place to
advance local urban
forestry goals, but
more often for the
short‐term.

Long‐term
committed
partnerships are
working to advance
local urban forestry
goals.

Some partnerships are in place (e.g., ECOSLO, and Cal Poly).

Appendix D: Sustainability Indicators 112
City Department and
Agency Cooperation
All city departments and
agencies cooperate to
advance citywide urban
forestry goals and
objectives.

Conflicting goals
and/or actions
among city
departments and
agencies.

Informal teams
among departments
and agencies are
communicating and
implementing
common goals on a
project‐specific
basis.

Common goals and
collaboration occur
across all
departments and
agencies. City policy
and actions are
implemented by
formal
interdepartmental
and interagency
working teams on all
city projects.

The different Departments work well together, but the current work load prevents the optimal level of collaboration.

Funder Engagement
Local funders are
engaged and invested in
urban forestry initiatives.

Funding is adequate to
implement citywide
urban forest
management plan.

Little or no funders
are engaged in
urban forestry
initiatives.

Funders are
engaged in urban
forestry initiatives
at minimal levels for
short‐term projects.

Multiple funders are
fully engaged and
active in urban
forestry initiatives for
short‐term projects
and long‐term goals.

Limited funding comes from local partnerships.

Utility Engagement
All utilities are aware of
and vested in the urban
forest and cooperates to
advance citywide urban
forest goals and
objectives.

Utilities and city
agencies act
independently of
urban forestry
efforts. No
coordination exists.

Utilities and city
agencies have
engaged in
dialogues about
urban forestry
efforts with respect
to capital
improvement and
infrastructure
projects.

Utilities, city
agencies, and other
stakeholders
integrate and
collaborate on all
urban forestry
efforts, including
planning, site work,
and
outreach/education.

Some coordination exists.

State Engagement
State
departments/agencies
are aware of and vested
in the urban forest and
cooperates to advance
citywide urban forest
goals and objectives.

State
departments/agenci
es and City agencies
act independently
of urban forestry
efforts. No
coordination exists.

State department/
agencies and City
agencies have
engaged in
dialogues about
urban forestry
efforts with respect
to capital
improvement and
infrastructure
projects.

State
departments/agencie
s, City agencies, and
other stakeholders
integrate and
collaborate on all
urban forestry
efforts, including
planning, site work,
and
outreach/education.

113 Appendix D: Sustainability Indicators
Public Awareness
The general public
understands the benefits
of trees and advocates
for the role and
importance of the urban
forest.

Trees are generally
seen as a nuisance,
and thus, a drain on
city budgets and
personal paychecks.

Trees are generally
recognized as
important and
beneficial.

Trees are seen as
valuable
infrastructure and
vital to the
community’s well‐
being. The urban
forest is recognized
for the unique
environmental,
economic, and social
services it provides to
the community.

The community is very support of the Major City Goal on Climate Change/Sustainability and know the importance trees play in this.

Regional Collaboration
Neighboring
communities and
regional groups are
actively cooperating and
interacting to advance
the region's stake in the
City's urban forest.

Little or no
interaction between
neighboring
communities and
regional groups.

Neighboring
communities and
regional groups
share similar goals
and policy vehicles
related to trees and
the urban forest.

Regional urban
forestry planning,
coordination, and
management is
widespread.

Some regional collaboration exists (e.g., participation in regional pest and disease programs).

Appendix D: Sustainability Indicators 114
Table 6: The Management Approach
THE MANAGEMENT APPROACH
Indicators of a
Sustainable Urban
Forest  Overall Objective or
Industry Standard
Performance Levels
Low  Medium  High
Tree Inventory
Comprehensive, GIS‐
based, current inventory
of all intensively‐
managed public trees to
guide management, with
mechanisms in place to
keep data current and
available for use. Data
allows for analysis of age
distribution, condition,
risk, diversity, and
suitability.

No inventory or
out‐of‐date
inventory of
publicly‐owned
trees.

Partial or sample‐
based inventory of
publicly‐owned
trees, inconsistently
updated.

Complete, GIS‐based
inventory of publicly‐
owned trees,
updated on a regular,
systematic basis.

The inventory is outdated (2008) and not updated regularly when maintenance occurs. Funds are in place to complete an inventory.

Canopy Assessment
Accurate, high‐
resolution, and recent
assessment of existing
and potential city‐wide
tree canopy cover that is
regularly updated and
available for use across
various departments,
agencies, and/or
disciplines.

No tree canopy
assessment.

Sample‐based
canopy cover
assessment or
dated (over 10
years old) high
resolution canopy
assessment.

High‐resolution tree
canopy assessment
using aerial
photographs or
satellite imagery.

Aerial imagery was analyzed to understand canopy cover in the urban areas (2012).

Management Plan
Existence and buy‐in of a
comprehensive urban
forest management plan
to achieve city‐wide
goals. Re‐evaluation is
conducted every 5 to 10
years.

No urban forest
management plan
exists.

A plan for the
publicly‐owned
forest resource
exists but is limited
in scope,
acceptance, and
implementation.

A comprehensive
plan for the publicly
owned forest
resource exists and is
accepted and
implemented.

There is not an urban forest master plan, but funds are in place to compete a plan.

Risk Management
Program
All publicly‐owned trees
are managed for
maximum public safety
by way of maintaining a
city‐wide inventory,
conducting proactive
annual inspections, and
eliminating hazards
within a set timeframe
based on risk level. Risk
management program is
Request‐based,
reactive system.

The condition of
publicly‐owned
trees is unknown.

There is some
degree of risk
abatement thanks
to knowledge of
condition of
publicly‐owned
trees, though
generally still
managed as a
request‐based
reactive system.

There is a complete
tree inventory with
risk assessment data
and a risk abatement
program in effect.

Hazards are
eliminated within a
set time period
depending on the
level of risk.

115 Appendix D: Sustainability Indicators
outlined in the
management plan.  There is not a risk assessment program.

Maintenance Program
of Publicly‐Owned Trees
(trees managed
intensively)
All intensively‐managed,
publicly‐owned trees are
well maintained for
optimal health and
condition in order to
extend longevity and
maximize benefits. A
reasonable cyclical
pruning program is in
place, generally targeting
5 to 7‐year cycles. The
maintenance program is
outlined in the
management plan.

Request‐based,
reactive system. No
systematic pruning
program is in place
for publicly‐owned
trees.

All publicly‐owned
trees are
systematically
maintained, but
pruning cycle is
inadequate.

All publicly‐owned
trees are proactively
and systematically
maintained and
adequately pruned
on a cyclical basis.

Trees in the Downtown core are well maintained, all other maintenance is reactionary.

Maintenance Program
of Publicly‐Owned
Natural Areas
(trees managed
extensively)
The ecological structure
and function of all
publicly‐owned natural
areas are protected and
enhanced while
accommodating public
use where appropriate.

No natural areas
management plans
are in effect.

Only reactive
management
efforts to facilitate
public use (risk
abatement).

Management plans
are in place for each
publicly‐owned
natural area focused
on managing
ecological structure
and function and
facilitating public
use.
n/a
Planting Program
Comprehensive and
effective tree planting
and establishment
program is driven by
canopy cover goals,
equity considerations,
and other priorities
according to the plan.

Tree planting and
establishment is outlined
in the management plan.

Tree establishment
is ad hoc.

Tree establishment
is consistently
funded and occurs
on an annual basis.

Tree establishment is
directed by needs
derived from a tree
inventory and other
community plans and
is sufficient in
meeting canopy
cover objectives.

Although Urban Forest Services does not have a planting program, staff partner with ECOSLO for tree planting.

Appendix D: Sustainability Indicators 116
Tree Protection Policy
Comprehensive and
regularly updated tree
protection ordinance
with enforcement ability
is based on community
goals. The benefits
derived from trees on
public and private
property are ensured by
the enforcement of
existing policies.

No tree protection
policy.

Policies are in place
to protect trees, but
the policies are not
well‐enforced or
ineffective.

Protections policies
ensure the safety of
trees on public and
private land. The
policies are enforced
and supported by
significant deterrents
and shared
ownership of city
goals.

Municipal Code Chapter 12.24 provides protections for the majority of trees (public and private).

City Staffing and
Equipment
Adequate staff and
access to the equipment
and vehicles to
implement the
management plan. A
high‐level urban forester
or planning professional,
strong operations staff,
and solid certified
arborist technicians.

Insufficient staffing
levels, insufficiently‐
trained staff, and/or
inadequate
equipment and
vehicle availability.

Certified arborists
and professional
urban foresters on
staff have some
professional
development but
are lacking
adequate staff
levels or adequate
equipment.

Multi‐disciplinary
team within the
urban forestry unit,
including an urban
forestry professional,
operations manager,
and arborist
technicians. Vehicles
and equipment are
sufficient to
complete required
work.

Equipment for the program is adequate. The staffing level is low due to the current transition period.

Funding
Appropriate funding in
place to fully implement
both proactive and
reactive needs based on
a comprehensive urban
forest management plan.

Funding comes
from the public
sector only and
covers only reactive
work.

Funding levels
(public and private)
generally cover
mostly reactive
work. Low levels of
risk management
and planting in
place.

Dynamic, active
funding from
engaged private
partners and
adequate public
funding are used to
proactively manage
and expand the
urban forest.

Funding is currently allowing Urban Forest Services to complete reactive maintenance and begin transitioning to cycle pruning.

Disaster Preparedness &
Response
A disaster management
plan is in place related to
the City's urban forest.

The plan includes staff
roles, contracts,
response priorities,
debris management and
a crisis communication
plan.  Staff are regularly
trained and/or updated.

No disaster
response plan is in
place.

A disaster plan is in
place, but pieces
are missing and/or
staff are not
regularly trained or
updated.

A robust disaster
management plan is
in place, regularly
updated and staff is
fully trained on roles
and processes.

Urban Forest Services plays a significant role in the City‐wide storm response plan.

117 Appendix D: Sustainability Indicators
Communication
Effective avenues of two‐
way communication
exist between the City
departments and
between city and its
citizens.  Messaging is
consistent and
coordinated, when
feasible.

No avenues are in
place.  City
departments and
public determine on
an ad‐hoc basis the
best messages and
avenues to
communicate.

Avenues are in
place but used
sporadically and
without
coordination or only
on a one‐way basis.

Avenues are in place
for two‐way
communication, are
well‐used with
targeted,
coordinated
messages.

Avenues for communication are in place, but workloads interfere with a high level of messaging.

Appendix E: Community Survey 118
Appendix E: Community Survey

1. Trees are important in San Luis Obispo for the following reasons (choose your top 5).

Response
%
Number of
Responses
Shading/cooling  61.8%  398
Community character/aesthetics  58.5%  377
Wildlife habitat  54.8%  353
Improving air quality  53.9%  347
Connection with nature  46.6%  300
Quality of life  46.4%  299
Reducing urban heat island effects  42.6%  274
Greenhouse gas reduction  35.3%  227
Reducing energy needs  16.8%  108
Reducing stormwater runoff  15.7%  101
Reducing stress  14.4%  93
Enhancing pedestrian/bike corridors  13.4%  86
Screening/creating privacy  8.5%  55
Increasing property values  6.4%  41
Reducing health incidence/cost  4.5%  29
Increasing retail sales  1.7%  11
Safety/reducing crime  1.4%  9
Other (please specify)  2.2%  14
All of the above; I should not have to choose just 5.

Carbon sequestration
Providing beautiful shade
this entire list are my reasons
promoting sustainability and nature
We need to improve the how do I say this the overall canopy. We need more instead of cutting down native trees for housing.  They need to be replaced with natives not ornamental
Climate Control
Urban Wildfire Interface Defensive Planning‐Veg Mgmt
Really, aren't all of the above important? I think so.

Natural Beauty
The trees are terrible for the city. The sidewalks are popping up very dirty and it changes the attitude of people in the city to not take care of our city it is filthy along with the shoe polish
Traffic Calming
Life all life!  Trees aren’t important they are essential? Who’s writing these questions???
Total
644
(0 skipped)

119 Appendix E: Community Survey

2. What do you feel is the most important environmental benefit from trees (choose one)?

Response
%
Number of
Responses
Greenhouse gas reduction  22.1%  142
Shading/cooling  21.3%  137
Reducing urban heat island effects  20.2%  130
Improving air quality  18.3%  118
Wildlife habitat  13.4%  86
Reducing stormwater runoff  2.8%  18
Other (please specify)  2.0%  13
All of the above; I should not have to choose just one.

All of the above
All of the above.  You're not giving us the opportunity to tell you what trees REALLY mean while you're chopping down hundreds all over the city. my feelings are irrelevant, no need to choose when they do all, this is a silly question
Oxygen production
Trees absorb carbon and give off oxygen. We need all the ways of absorbing carbon we can find to combat climate change/global warming.

Trees are just plain good.
the calming, beneficial, aesthetics valley of  living beings that offer nothing but wholesome good feelings and a critical vital connection with our creator that instills comfort, warmth and security.

Don't make me chooooooose!
Reducing urban heat AND shading, cooling
Everything.  Trees are essential for all of the above reasons!! Essential for all life!
Overall benefits of nature ‐ all of the above
Total     644 (0 skipped)

3. What do you feel is the most important socioeconomic benefit from trees (choose one)?

Response
%
Number of
Responses
Community character/aesthetics  32.8%  211
Quality of life  24.2%  156
Connection to nature  16.6%  107
Reducing energy needs  11.5%  74
Enhancing pedestrian/bike corridors  3.6%  23
Reducing stress  3.1%  20
Increasing property values  2.3%  15
Reducing health incidence/cost  2.0%  13
Screening/creating privacy  1.1%  7
Increasing retail sales  0.6%  4
Safety/reducing crime  0.5%  3

Appendix E: Community Survey 120
Other (please specify)  1.7%  11
All of the above. STOP THE MASS tree cuttings!!
again, really? its a fact, has socioeconomic benefits, no need to choose You can't separate the affects of trees socioeconomically because it's all connected to human/nature .  One affects the other spiritually, psychically socioeconomically
Shading/cooling
Shade and protection from rain for our homeless neighbors all of the above
Berries all over the cement
There could be more than one socioeconomic benefit.
wildlife habitat‐including bees and other pollinator insects/birds Life!!!! All life dies without trees. Is this a real survey? Total     644 (0 skipped)

4. Where do you think it is most important to plant more trees (choose up to 3)?

Response
%
Number of
Responses
Neighborhood streets  77.3%  486
Parks  54.5%  343
Open space  40.9%  257
Medians  34.7%  218
Retail areas  29.3%  184
Arterial roads  28.9%  182
Other (please specify)  7.6%  48
Along bike/walking paths
everywhere
udeveloped lots
Maintain mature trees on new construction
Everywhere ‐ you've cut down so many we won't be able to replace them for decades.
everywhere we can!
everywhere
If you replace trees in one area you need to replant in that area.  Also instead of cutting down trees when building find a way to build around the trees.  Make them or it a part of the landscape of the new building projects
New neighborhoods
Schools

SCHOOLS
Schools
Schools
In new housing or commercial developments
All of the above

121 Appendix E: Community Survey
Schools
Razed developments
Waterways
Downtown
Stop removing so many tree @ new developments
Anywhere there isn't much nature, aka wherever there's concrete.

Trees provide cooling in overly concreted areas, and in every area if they are allowed to grow large enough.

Parking lots
Parking lots
ALL the above
Replacement of trees removed for disease or public safety wherever they may be.

Everywhere we can
Between freeways & neighborhoods
All of the above reasons
Schools! There is hardly any shade at the schools
Parking lots
Everywhere possible.

AWAY FROM HIGH VOLTAGE ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION LINES
All of the above
Anywhere they’re less likely to be involved in wildfires? Pedestrian and bike lanes
Parking lots that are giant asphalt islands
all new construction...speaking of where is all the water going to come for all the new construction?  And where is the affordable housing? Private property where trees can be maintained year round.

Everywhere there is room to plant!
Only plant trees of you can take care of them and water them Arterial roads should be downgraded and made pedestrian‐friendly with trees planted
in traffic circles/bulb‐outs/medians/etc. Trees/plantings should be used as traffic calming devices.

Please plant trees in medians where you can also provide pedestrian‐ friendly infrastructure (stop signals, crossings, flashing lights). Trees in a well‐designed median don't do much to encourage walking for streets that are a hundred feet wide.

All of the above
Silly question
All of the above
Open spaces should be left as natural as possible, if no trees in them naturally, don’t add them
Total     629 (15 skipped)

Appendix E: Community Survey 122

5. What are the best ways to encourage tree planting on private property (choose up to 3)?

Response
%
Number of
Responses
Free or low‐cost tree  72.0%  453
Rebate on water bill  61.2%  385
Rebate on purchased tree  49.4%  311
Tree species and site selection information  45.0%  283 Community tree planting event  34.7%  218
Other (please specify)  7.0%  44
City support on recommended trees and locations
Let's protect the mature trees we have and not allow their removal.

PLEASE!
Low cost native and/or drought‐tolerant trees, rebates on property tax All of the above
Discourage developers removing mature trees, financial incentives to plan and build around existing trees
Allowing only minimal cutting of trees for a development project will encourage others to plant trees knowing they won't be removed Low cost maintenance agreement
Free food
Lawn sign or decal "Proud Participant in the SLO 10,000" Native plants/drought resistant
Rebate/Free tree trimming
Requirement Assoc w new construction, remodel, etc
Tree pruning and fire defensive planning is essential
education  and replanting requirement
$ incentive for individuals or small businesses, city money shouldn't pay for corps to green wash.

Tax rebate
Tax incentive
To have a awesome City tree crew and program
Clear planting and maintenance guidance
The city could water the trees for 2 years w/recycled water as done at Laguna Lake Park.

Having the City plant the trees, with permission of property owners, and perhaps with offering a few different tree choices
Free or low cost native tree
Follow up after the tree planting (All of the above!).
offer assistance with tree maintenance & care
All of the above
on going tree maintenance after new planting
Tools to succeed: example Irrigation kit?
Education on which species support NATIVE wildlife AND a financial incentive for native species

123 Appendix E: Community Survey
Education about importance of  trees for birds and wildlife Include edible trees in selection (citrus, feijoa, loquat, mulberry, etc...).

Homeowners value fruit producing trees.

Free pruning
Massive volunteer effort to plant trees.  Use CP and Cuesta volunteers.

Photo contest
Free or low cost trimming & raking when necessary
education on why we want people to plant trees
Don’t allow developers to remove mature trees for subdivisions Na
Tree species and site selection ASSISTANCE (consultation, not just information)
I don't know how much encouragement people need, people enjoy having trees and seem to do a good job of planting them on their property if it is appropriate.

Provide planting service
Not sure we s/b encouraging potential fire hazard
I would say rebate on water bill‐but that should only apply for native plantings that won't increase water usage over the long run Start by talking to people, information is key.  Stop putting out surveys that give people the opportunity to rate essential things as though they weren’t.

Consider free or low cost fruit trees for private property Total     629 (15 skipped)

6. Describe your awareness and/or interactions with San Luis Obispo’s urban forest program (check all that apply).

Response
%
Number of
Responses
I have seen City crews working on trees  70.3%  423
I was aware that the City responds to tree emergencies  52.8%  318 I did not know the City had a program to care for trees  25.4%  153 I have used the City website or called for tree information  20.4%  123 I have read an article in The New Times or The San Luis Obispo Tribune about trees  15.6%  94
Other (please specify)  9.0%  54
I have volunteered at tree related events  8.3%  50
the importance of city arborists     I have called the Davey group in response to a flier they left offering tree service on our powerlines and they did not return a call nor show up until a year later
I learned about it through my GIS class!     Taken classes in dendrology and surveying and became familiar with forestry and management practices in the area

Appendix E: Community Survey 124
I have taken a Urban Forestry class at Cal Poly
I took Urban Forestry at Cal Poly
I know people on the Tree Committee.

Need to maintain all mature trees in new construction!!!! Too many trees removed for development
I have been involved as a citizen in promoting the urban forest program     I have seen many trees removed for urban development when they could have been incorporated into the plan.

Attended the arbor day event with my sons school
Certified arborist who has tree issues with neighbors     I have seen the city approve cutting down massive numbers of our urban forest trees
I received a city notice of meetings.  I have been talking to people about trees in area I live that new building cutting down trees.  I've been concerned and didn't know who to talk to.  There's a big oak and granite right next to where I live and  building is planned.  I do not want to see this removed.  I've been in cities that literally include trees and granite stone within the buildings they've built.  We have made it too easy just to bulldoze things down because it's easy way out.  We need to understand the connection to nature. Our survival depends on it.
the city keeps cutting down trees
Many mature, local trees have been cut down for development.

I heard about the program through EcoSLO
We have a huge oak on property and use tree care professionals once a year
My Dad use to be the manager for parks, buildings, and street trees for SLO.

Have planted trees at arbor day event at Mitchell park
Attempted to increase more wildland fire interface veg mgmt awareness at city boundaries and roadway shoulders
I was told the city waters street trees, but I rarely see it happen‐‐should happen more often.

A BUDDY WORKS THERE
I was liaison to Tree Committee during terms on City Council I have looked into preventing sycamore planting bc I'm allergic to them.

I have attended a tree committee meeting.

The city has trimmed trees in our neighborhood parkways.     why does the Tree Committee allow removal of the vast majority of trees that come before them?  Why does the city of slo allow developers to remove so many beautiful mature trees & then plant small ones.  The GHG & Climate Change seriously necessitates protecting our mature trees for many science based reasons.  The city is a huge tree killing machine! Went befor the tree committee.     I have been to a tree committee meeting and know how strict & difficult the City is with removing and planting trees
I knew there were people that maintained them, but didn't know about the urban forest program per se.

125 Appendix E: Community Survey
My children's school participated in an Arbour day art contest and tree planting event     They planted trees in neighborhood. I wish every street was like Mill street, beautiful tree lined streets
I don't think there's much awareness of the program     I am an arborist and nearly applied to apply for an open position in the urban forestry group in the past.

Trying to remove a tree causing major property destruction at my office.

The city arborist called me
I saw former mayor Heidi Harmon post about it
Served as liaison to Tree Committee from City Council.

Though a Cal Poly urban forestry class
Unfortunately, there are a lOT of trees not maintained...all along Johnson by French Hosp, Bowden Ranch open area.  Dead trees down...fire concern.

Member of Tree Committee for 8 years
I had to work with Ron on a building permit tree requirement.

Na
I have attended Tree Committee meetings     organized a tree planting event, been to street tree comm. meetings, had to get permission to remove trees, my tenant dated the last street tree guy.......

The city cannot take care of of what they have now
I have used the Cal Poly tree/attribute list for evaluation of street tree options
Trees planted with memory plaques     I have a colleague who serves on the City's Tree Committee and has informed me how tight of a budget the City has to care for all of its beautiful trees. We need to incentivize private investment in trees (by individual homeowners and businesses) to help offload some of the future maintenance obligations.

None.  This survey has been enlightening
I am aware they exist but have seen no activity
I am aware that there is a program but have not seen it working.

Total  602 (42 skipped)

7. What is your satisfaction with the level of care provided for community trees?

Response
%
Number of
Responses
Somewhat satisfied  38.4%  231
Neutral  32.1%  193
Completely satisfied  12.8%  77
Somewhat dissatisfied  11.1%  67
Completely dissatisfied  5.7%  34
Total     602 (42 skipped)

Appendix E: Community Survey 126

8. Do you feel that urban forest services and programs are equally accessible to all residents?

Response
%
Number of
Responses
Not sure  63.3%  381
No  20.3%  122
Yes  16.5%  99
Total     602 (42 skipped)

9. What topics of education and outreach interest you (check all that apply)?

Response
%
Number of
Responses
Tree list/what tree should I plant in San Luis Obispo  84.6%  509 Irrigation/watering during drought  73.9%  445
How to plant a tree  47.7%  287
Benefits of trees  46.5%  280
How to hire a tree care professional  28.4%  171
Other (please specify)  6.5%  39
Come look at my HOA and help us decide about our trees.

SLO City staff needs to be educated about benefits of keeping the trees we already have and not replacing them with trees that will take decades to reach the size and advantages of the ones they killed.

More discussion of tree removals for development
Stop cutting down mature trees on all new construction!! How to stop or minimize tree destruction currently happening during urban development.

Identify problem trees and remedy
How to care for and prune a tree
People understand trees.  Find ways to reduce water cost because the city has increased water rates after encouraging saving water. how to avoid cutting trees down
Where to plant trees, how much space is needed
stop cutting down trees. developments can build around them Benefits of planting more fruit trees.

By
All of the above
On‐site school education
Home tree/City boundary/Roadway area defensive veg mgmt for wildfire protection of neighborhoods
provide tree information (like root damage to roads/sidewalks) for various trees that can be planted.

Clarity on rules for neighborhood roadside trees, creek side trees support for replacing trees with native trees

127 Appendix E: Community Survey
How to accelerate tree planting throughout the County to achieve ghg reduction
Tree list should specify soils requirements for particular trees, natives should be encouraged.

It seems like native trees like the Coast Live Oak can survive better during droughts & climate change.  Our tree committee is pathetic.  They're aligned with developers & tree killers.
none interest me
emphasize California native trees ‐ educate public Doug Tallamy videos None; I rent and can't afford the time nor a place
Support for trees on residential properties
I wish the city would help take care of the planter boxes that are in the city right away, I live on Lawton street and most of the curb planter boxes are weeds and it looks terrible. I wish there was some incentive for the home owner or the city to take care of this space and would be nice if it had a uniform look.

All of the above.

How the city incorporates awareness of facilities that can be negatively impacted by trees.

Tell me about all these health benifits.

Educate developers to plan development around existing trees.

NA
I know what I am doing
Na
support people who have a tree issue and not charge them if desiding the free shoud be removed
impact when mature trees are cut for developers
We’re American we don’t need anymore stinking tree in fact if we kill them all we’ll have more room for people and stuff.   Too if we get rid of all the trees we’ll likely wipe out our homeless problem.  They already have no indoor respite so making the outside even more unbearable will aid the City in their current efforts of “anywhere but here.” None
None
Clarity about tree removal and re‐plantings
Total     602 (42 skipped)

10. Optional. Please use this space for any additional comments about San Luis Obispo's urban forestry program.

If the City values trees so much, why are so many trees being allowed to cut down in the project off of Highland Dr.?
More trees please
I support urban forestry. Too many trees are cut down for and by developers. Some of your questions were loaded and the forced choices were sometimes insufficient. https://www.facebook.com/TreesDoc

Appendix E: Community Survey 128
We must make protecting our mature trees a priority.  It is no longer prudent to cut down mature trees and replace them with trees that won't serve us well for 20 years into the future.

Let’s be very careful about eliminating existing healthy trees for the sake of new developments. Very important that any replacement trees be of significant size and quantity (more than equal to those removed!) to enhance the project.

I think it is time to find a species of tree to start replacing the ficus trees downtown that are tearing up sidewalks.
prevent developer removing quality mature trees
Maintain a level of staffing  and funding to meet Arbor Day Foundation recommendations.

The program should also work to remove invasive species when possible from public places and encourage private citizens to replace them with native species.

Get rid of the cattle fields in the city limits and replant that land with native trees. I’m thinking of the field/hill along broad, between orcutt rd and tank farm. community outreach is very important and i love the possibilities of there being some incentive and community aspect in planting trees
More accessibility for the public to plant trees/care for them and know what kinds of trees encourage our local habitat.. Maybe monthly community tree planting with different chapters around SLO county. why isn't the city watering the trees in our parks, they are dying! Please plant more female trees on city streets, excessive male trees are serious allergy issues.

I am concerned that too many mature trees are being removed and their surrounding ecosystems are damaged for new construction projects.

Stop approving new housing and retail development that requires taking down significant numbers of trees. Encourage creative designs so that existing trees can be maintained for environmental and visual esthetics.

There are posts in social media that the City is removing over 1000 mature trees to accommodate development. I don't know if it is true or not, but perhaps more information could be provided to the public about tree removal programs.

Work w the city to leave more ‘set back’ space between streets and homes, offices, etc. Demand architects & builders don’t skimp on green areas, that is, less concrete & MORE trees & plants as a buffer.

Trees in the down town go through a messy stage & the merchants/city does not clean up the pods/leaves that drop. Garden street is the cleanest due to merchants/owners cleaning the sidewalks.

I walk to work and there are a lot of messy trees. It would be beneficial to focus on planting trees that are not so messy along sidewalks. Also adding additional trees along residential quarters. The shadiest street is Pacific on my route but I typically walk on Islay and Buchon.

Really sad that the city is allowing developers to completely eradicate mature trees and not making them replace with older trees, just making them plant super young trees that have no benefit to wildlife or air quality or reduce greenhouse emissions for years. No removal of older trees should be allowed unless they are diseased.

The city shows its bias for developers and the funds new development provides by allowing hundreds of mature and healthy trees to be removed in recent years.  SLO City staff is saying one thing and showing complete disregard for the trees already in the city if they're in the way of development.

The city requires a property owner to get permission to remove a tree, requires replacement planting, but never checks to see that the replacement planting has taken place.

The city in some parts of town have used tree trimmers for city trees that appear to lack basic knowledge about how to prune large trees ‐ for instance the block of Chorro between Marsh and Higuera ‐ second for instance the liquid amber street trees in my neighborhood that were trimmed in a way that opened them up, left long branches with growth only near the ends that then let the branches "bounce" much too much on windy days and encouraged broken branches.

129 Appendix E: Community Survey
And to partially repeat ‐ it is "criminal" that so many mature trees have been sacrificed in recent years (Righetti Ranch, Avila Ranch, San Luis Ranch, etc.) to satisfy the greed of housing tract developers who aren't even local.

Please preserve existing mature trees whenever and wherever possible, especially in new developments.

I am very concerned about the destruction of trees along city’s riparian corridors. Proper planning and design could have saved these trees. New residential development even to meet state mandates for local financial support, should take a back seat to saving these trees. The urban forestry program is will be unable to offset the loss of mature trees by supplanting with immature trees for years to come.

The city allowed the cutting of many full grown trees for housing developments. The new developments could alter their plans to save more full size trees.  I’m aware the city will require planting of trees. The new trees will take years to be full grown. The city doesn’t walk the talk with trees.

The trees on downtown Higuera are beautiful. We need more streets like it.

Please don't remove any more trees in the city in the name of development. Design any future developments around any mature trees, our environment is counting on the city to do the right thing.

Why isn’t the Slo urban forestry more involved with planning and development expansion into formerly open spaces (either private or public) where tree removals are proposed. Shameful planning process when the removal of mature trees is/are a part of. ….

All approved removal of trees on new construction should be stopped immediately!!!! While there may be an urban forestry program, I cringe every time I pass a new development where existing mature trees/habitat have been destroyed to allow for maximum density of units abetted by the unchallenged cooperation of city government. Progressive cities like ours should lead the way in tempering our desire to provide additional housing with the restraint necessary to keep from destroying the very reason we love our community.

SLO is allowing too many mature tree removals and tiny trees planted in their place which does not sequester carbon amounts the mature trees did. This will work against Climate Change efforts that are so important.  Too many trees are killed for development with the City’s permission.

PLEAE STOP THE MASS TREE REMOVALS. YOU HAVE ALREADY DESTROYED HABITAT AND ARE CAUSING US TO PUT THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF CARBON IN THE AIR DAILY.  SHAME ON YOU!!! love that street trees have been planted by cutting holes in concrete on sidewalks.  plant more trees in medians and roundabouts, add speed humps to streets to slow down vehicles. stop approving developments which cut down mature trees and replace with small trees Developers should be required to save old growth trees and also plant more trees as part of the development.

Stop allowing tree removal.

I live 2 blocks from CalPoly and there is constant building in the area.  I am aware of the preferences for infill building and ADUs, but I constantly see that trees and yards are allowed to be removed and built upon.  This is an older neighborhood that contains many mature trees and gardens, many created by professors of the past as a lasting legacy for the community.  This legacy is fast disappearing, along with the environmental and aesthetic benefits of trees and plants.  Housing is important and I am aware of the mandate to build, build, build; however the quality of our neighborhoods should be respected.  If student rentals are purely cement and stucco, what are we demonstrating to the leaders of tomorrow? And basically, if there are no trees to breathe, then we cannot breathe either! Also, Davey Tree is not one of my favorite arborists.  I seldom see a tree cut by them that doesn't look hacked and miserable.

Mature trees in the city need to be protected and preserved. Removing mature trees for development and replacing with immature saplings needs to be avoided and incentives should be provided to developers to preserve the existing urban forest.

Appendix E: Community Survey 130
Return the Tree Ordinance to the strong ordinance it USED to be before Matt Horn destroyed the Tree Ordinance. If you want to improve the quality of life for SLO residents, fire Matt Horn.

I love the city’s commitment to this important quality of life issue. Thank you! We need more trees!! We love watching the animals use the trees! We moved here from Davis where the tree canopy was extensive and we really enjoyed it!!
Not sure if it’s relevant but trees and sidewalks should be friends. There are places it can be difficult to walk due to trees needing a prune such as along Sacramento street and along neighborhood sidewalks.

I have been surprised by permits allowing the complete clearing of mature trees on residential lots without a requirement to replant equivalent numbers after building.

The trees chosen in the past have been terrible. Ficus nitida is the worst street tree you could find.

Camphor is beautiful but not appropriate for street trees. New buildings are being built that have no setback from the street for trees. ???
Please don’t reduce the tree program! We need more trees! Overall happy, but sad to see the large redwood at Amholm Park have its roots cut. I'm guessing it's a trip hazard but cutting surface roots on a redwood is very damaging and it hasn't fixed the trip hazard. I would be very upset if the tree died as a result of poor management. Please look into the care of that beautiful redwood and help it out.

Due to proximity of monarch butterfly migration sites, we should include more nectar flower trees to give them energy to make it to the overwintering sites.

We are blessed to live in an area that can support food bearing trees. We should plant several throughout the city for citizen use. Including things like citrus, avocado, persimmon, etc. more trees needed in neighborhoods with large streets/arteries like Ramona Drive.  SLO Drive neighborhood is so desirable because its got lots of big trees, which are charming and healthy and represent quality of life.

With water costs, how does the community get trees established with proper irrigation.

Tree form selection, upright canopy vs. multi low branching is critical to long term success. the city used to water trees and now it doesn't anymore, why? Loss of new trees is discouraging (e.g., to gophers, poor watering during establishment), so ramping up with successful early plantings seems important
It has been shocking to see so many trees needlessly cut down. Developers can work around nature and not have to clear‐cut.

I'm not informed enough on what is presently being done.  I only know we do need to improve our canopy.

I don't want to see city use pesticides/herbicides and I'd like to see public better educated on their use and negative affects on human Flora and fauna.
there is no urban forestry program. when a developer wants to clearcut trees the city allows it. the city also does not follow its own rules about requiring additional trees to be planted with new development There is a low hanging branch of a tree on the sidewalk of Stenner street that could be a potential hazard.

Please preserve mature trees and speak up about their preservation during the development process.

In older neighborhoods, city trees were planted that have caused damage to sidewalks, driveways, foundations as well as excessive leave/ needle litter that clog storm drains.

I think there should be an effort to plant more fruit trees in public spaces.  As long as we're making an effort to increase urban forests, why not plant something that we can eat?  Free fruit to anyone willing to harvest it.  What a concept!
I don't think that many people, especially students in SLO, know about the urban forestry program and how they could interact with and utilize this program. I might be unaware if there is any, but I think this program should find more ways to connect with Cal Poly.

Please consider planting native tree species for new plantings. They will thrive in our climate and support wildlife

131 Appendix E: Community Survey
Many trees should be planted in new neighborhoods like San Luis ranch Very disappointed that folks remove trees from parkways and do not replace.  It seems if trees are mandated for parkways, then there should be some enforcement of this mandate.

Is there a volunteer program with the urban forestry in slo? I think another incentive would be for the city to cover cost of ripping out concrete in sidewalks for tree placement. I would really like to see the city encourage planting of natives as much as possible. These have a much greater benefit for wildlife and are best adapted to our environment.  Perhaps incentives could be larger for native plantings.

In Cambria we have several well educated and capable tree specialists who assist in permitting, removal, maintenance etc. our trees.  Thank you for this opportunity to chime in.

Thanks for caring for the trees. Does the city provide water for trees in open spaces, such as the many oak trees? I heard many are dying due to drought conditions.

I want to see protection for all oaks and mature trees when new subdivision permits are granted. Case in point: the removal of oaks by wealthy winery owner in 2015 in North SLO county.

Thank you for reaching out to the community. Please look at our public school's needs for trees. Many of the school sites in SLO can benefit from more trees.

I would love more trees!  There are a lot of places where tall weeds grow on the sidewalk that the city should be maintaining— just want to make sure we take care of what we have too :) There is a huge lack of trees at schools.  Blacktops are SO hot and there is no shade for students.  ECo Slo had FREE trees for Pacheco this year and they would not take them. We tried to facilitate planting but the school would not allow them. Too much work or concern with kids climbing?  City should impose same requirements on schools as homes.  They must have trees.  Look at an aerial of any neighborhood and it’s the most grass, least tree area. Crazy. I think you could add hundreds of trees to our school and make a big impact.

The more outreach the city does regarding their tree policies and general tree care BMPs (both for community as well as private trees), the more the residents will benefit.

Glad this is a topic of conversation. Trees are so necessary! Please add more to the schools. After so much construction at each site, the trees were the first to be moved to give room for the new facilities.

I would like to see wood from trees cut down to be repurposed for furniture, instruments, or art Street trees need to be planted in established residential areas where trees are lacking. The lack of trees in the historic and downtown areas are a good example.

The more trees the better
I think we really need to focus on planting more trees in our city especially at our schools. Our youth need to see the process of planting a tree and the care if provides from a educational stand. We also DESPERATELY need more shade at our elementary schools
First off stop cutting down the “urban forest” because a developer can’t figure out how to design a project around mature trees regardless of the are “native” or not. Maybe the City needs to read the it’s Land Use Element a little more carefully.  It’s says new development is supposed to respect existing  trees on the project site. I don’t think cutting them down is what is meant by respect.

Proper pruning is crucial for shaping the canopy. So many trees in town have been butchered (esp the sycamores). Please have educational opportunities for local landscapers to learn how to care for local trees.

The Urban Forestry Program needs to be part of a City standing taskforce/working group with Fire Department/Parks Dept/Public Works to conduct wildland fire interface vegetation management projects along open space boundaries, roadway right of ways and city boundaries with areas such as Cuesta Park to reduce ladder fuels and maintain defensible space in the event of wildfire The street tree in front of our house is barely surviving. The city is supposed to water and take care of it, but I doubt they are doing anything. How do I contact the SLO urban forestry program people?

Appendix E: Community Survey 132
Who is responsible for sidewalk repair when city tree roots raise/break sides? I’d like to see easier outreach and info for caring for trees, and the rules surrounding trees esp “sidewalk” trees and support for re planting w drought tolerant natives Regarding trees only in the downtown core: they are very poorly managed and trimmed. The primary goal of these trees is to provide shade, not just to look pretty. The more shade, the longer people will linger downtown, providing an economic benefit to businesses. Trees are trimmed far too high above sidewalks and the street; doing that reduces shade in mornings and late afternoons. When trees are removed they should be replaced with larger trees than saplings. There are two types of trees downtown. One type provides nice shade, the other does not. Those scraggly trees should be replaced by the better shade species. There are far too many gaps between trees on many streets. Plant more trees! Line the streets.

Our trees are what makes downtown SLO unique, for the shade the trees provide.

I am extremely grateful for SLO's urban forest.

It is why I shop here rather than in surrounding communities‐‐ all the shady parking.

And I brag on that very benefit every chance I get.

I have lived in over a dozen communities in 8 states, and SLO has by far the most satisfying, soothing, calming presence of all.

In my opinion,  you can never have too many trees!!!
Thank you, SLO urban foresters!!!
Give a higher priority to keeping existing trees when permitting new development.

Please stop allowing development plans to cut so many  trees.  Make plans fit into the site, not try to remake the site.

The City should consider (and promote if it exists) a program/fund/bank that allows private property owners to pay into when on‐site replacement to offset tree removal isn’t feasible or appropriate due to soil type, topography, or other property constraints. Not all lots in SLO should have trees. I haven’t removed a tree that requires a tree removal permit that was planted too close to my house which is in a fire hazard zone because my lot doesn’t have any suitable spots for the replacement requirements. I’d be very happy to pay a fee that supports the replacement at 1:2 or more in a more appropriate location somewhere else in SLO. This plan should identify the preferred and most suitable locations that maximize benefits to the environment and community.

Species list for street trees should be revisited. Add more options, but be aware of pollen allergy ratings! (looking at you sycamore, I can't go outside in my neighborhood during windy days in spring since sycamore were added a few years ago). Native trees are best. Drought tolerant are a must. Trees with flowers are nice, ie crepe myrtle, jacaranda, the ones w yellow flowers in the creamery. (Not mimosa trees, I'm also allergic. It's a sad life.)
I'm not a big fan of the particular street trees downtown. I like trees, just not that overwhelming? It was a great idea to plants them in the 50s (sad we can't see the mountains, but benefits make it worth), however now they are huge! Destroying sidewalks and dominating historic facades. Also, if your dog eats enough of those seed pods they get diarrhea. :(
Planting trees in open spaces is great! If budget were unlimited I'd say definitely do that. Since that's not reality, my focus would be on areas human's hindered nature (with structures and paving). More trees in parks is also a plus, but I feel like y'all are already pretty good at that.

I love trees and I'm excited to see where the City goes from here! Thank you for the survey! Please stop removing large trees from the downtown areas.  We've lost so much shade, cooling benefit and character in these losses.  It seems tree removal is very easy for anyone who seeks it.  Replacing trees with a much smaller tree will take decades to provide the same benefits.  Look at the character of a place like Carmel, CA where large trees grow in the middle of neighborhood streets.  Traffic is calmed dramatically, shade is abundant and cooling is easy to find.  We keep removing our assets!

133 Appendix E: Community Survey
I would be happy to be involved as a taxpayer
Because it is hard to get a tree removed (permits and cost) it would be nice to mail new homeowners a tree planting guide. Most nee homeowners will plant a tree‐ but they don’t know what they’re doing.

I worry about tree removal for developments, especially older trees that are well established. Too many older trees are removed and ‘replaced’ by young, non natives. Many die and are not replaced after they die
I have two trees planted at the Commemorative Grove for my deceased parents.Does the city’s Urban Forestry program still maintain these trees?
I have only seen one young man out there. There wasn’t anything in the survey about this wonderful program. I hope it will be a priority in the future!
Full staffing is vital.

I think that adding 10,000 new trees is a good start, but we should be more ambitious with our goals to transform our city into a beautiful space with plenty of shade, beauty, and animal life that will help sustain us through the difficulties to come from climate change The Urban Forestry program has NOT been staffed for over one year. Only one interim city arborist and one part time temporary tree worker. They have only recently renewed a contract service provider that is based out of Ventura. There is nothing safe or efficient about the current program.The current state of our street trees/urban forest is literally an accident waiting to happen. Please look up ISA best management practices!!
Please check the irrigation system for the oaks along the railroad safety trail.

Too many mature trees are cut down to make it easy for developers, instead  project design should be guided to protect them. It takes years to replace their value with new planting.

Tree planting requires continuous community engagement, volunteerism, and stewardship beyond what our small City Urban Forest Services team can provide. Therefore, our community would benefit from a dedicated tree planting organization like Portland's Friends of Trees. https://friendsoftrees.org/ How can the City foster the growth of such an organization? Removal of the mature and varied species of trees at Palm & Nipomo is an outrage as is removal of trees at the Westmont property. There is no more park‐like parking lot than at Palm & Nipomo. Replanting with immature trees requires more water & provides fewer benefits of all kinds for many years until the trees mature.

The last 3+ years of the SLO Urban Forestry program have been severely understaffed and underfunded.

Either hire 4 full time crew members, or contract it all out.  Sidewalk impact from tree roots is a major problem ‐ cheaper to fix by in‐house crews? As downtown trees age and need replacing, more $$$ will be needed....

I would love to see an emphasis for the City to plant native trees. In my neighborhood (Sinsheimer) we have street trees that in not doing well because they are not native and they are infested with aphids. I would also love to see more natives (trees and shrubs) planted in our parks. Meadow Park is a good example of a great park with amazing trees (it's a hotspot for birds!) and it could also benefit from even more native trees and shrubs there. Sinsheimer Park could also become a better habitat for birds/pollinators with better tree selection. Thank you! We need a really well‐qualified City Arborist that has a 4 year university degree & perhaps advanced degrees.  You're selling our trees short.  Remove Allan Bate, the lead tree killer from the tree committee.

He intimidates and manipulates the others and is the alpha dog.

There is not a 3 person crew! 1 part‐time, temporary employee and a interim City Arborist.

Please be truthful in the way you present this to the community Refrain from cutting  trees  downtown
I recently had to remove a tree on our property. The process was good. The tree committee members listened, the arborist was helpful, and it was easy to see that the city is working to maintain trees citywide.

Appendix E: Community Survey 134
We should take a hard look at the species approved for planting within San Luis Obispo.... Native species are drought tolerant instead of exotics from outside our bio zone...

I would love to see a whole lot less of sprawling parking lots and a whole lot more of city open spaces/small parks with trees.

Education of the public about how important native trees to the area are, also what is your soil, what tree is appropriate for your space, how to care for it.

I'm not clear what this survey is supposed to do. Is there really a "debate" about trees? Or are you just looking for "well, 99% of the people who responded to the survey said they support trees!" Someone broke a new tree in Islay Park. The city cut it to the stump, but I hope they replace it. Sad that people vandalize things.

Thank you for wanting to Plant more trees. They take years to mature. What you plant today will be fore the next generation.

We have had many trees cut down in our neighborhood (on City property) over the past five years. All due to the trees becoming damaged during strong winds. But the City has never replaced one of these trees! Don’t they require it of residents who wish to remove their trees? Our property value and our enjoyment of our home and neighborhood continues to decrease with each tree the City removes and does nothing replace. We get more freeway noise and more light pollution (headlight pollution, to be specific) with each removed tree. This survey is so limiting as far as being able to say what topics really matter, so I wish I could say more, but this one issue in particular really hits home and bothers me greatly! We have such a beautiful city due to the planting done so long ago.  I'm concerned about the cutting down of trees for all the development going on.  These are mature trees going away, and even if we plant something new, it pales in comparison.  We need to plant bigger trees so they can replace those gone missing.  Also, downtown is amazing in large part to the trees/cover.  It would be great to expand that further from the center out to the neighborhoods, and further up the main roads.  Also, for the new development, they should have to plant a mixture of mature and smaller trees.

So happy to see the trees in Laguna Lake getting some much needed trimming, with the dredging project.

We love our trees! I know there are issues with the large ficus (?) trees downtown, but they really are gorgeous and it is so neat to see such a large canopy.

How trees impact sewer and other infrastructure needs to addressed…funding to help take out root invasive trees in neighbors along with utility under grounding in older Slo neighborhoods Too many trees are planted without overhead power lines in mind.  Also I see too many trees planted too close to homes.  This is worrisom.  I would love to hear the plan on how the city is able to keep up with the trees in neighborhoods that are encroaching on power lines, damaging foundations and roofs and keep up with thousands of new trees.

I used to live on Branch Street in SLO ‐ that’s one street where I would love to see dead trees removed so that new ones may flourish. Avenues lined with trees give a homey, authentic ans welcoming feel ‐ would love to see more of that along Tank Farm or Higuera (also, where did all the higueras ‐ fig trees‐ go?) The trees on our street (Jeffery) are significantly over grown, dropping access in yards, and dropping limbs.

The city said we are not scheduled for trimming for 3+ years. I think there needs to be much more routines matinence on trees to encourage more planting and keep them healthy.

Focus should be on native trees, and maintaining older growth vs removal.

The more trees the better. Ideally, less water intensive trees would be great across the city.

I'm retired and would love to volunteer to help with planting trees/maintaining trees/watering, etc. I think it's a huge priority. I also think that there probably are many retirees like me who would be delighted to volunteer to help establish/maintain an urban forest. You have an untapped volunteer base! I am very interested in the potential for enhancing the synergies between the urban forest and environmental education at all levels. Any enhancement of open space/urban forests should consider the opportunity for student engagement and education programs addressing the topics of scientific method,

135 Appendix E: Community Survey
climate science education, biodiversity/wildlife, and anything else identified by teachers in the county.

Also, any plans going forward should be laser focused on planning in a way that can be used as a model for safe planting methods and decision making in the context of high voltage electric distribution/transmission lines, both underground and above ground.

My HOA (Righetti Ranch) has discouraged residents from planting trees on private property! That should not be allowed!
I wish there were more tree shaded playgrounds and play areas for children on hot days.

Thanks!
I would like to see an ambitious reforesting effort pursued on the City's hillsides. There are so many bare or merely grass‐covered slopes all around us, but it is clear that our climate (even during drought) can support hillside forests. This seems to be the most effective way to both beautify our surroundings while greatly contributing to carbon sequestration and habitat restoration. The age of widespread grazing is over, but the damage caused by it has not yet been undone. Though street trees greatly contribute to the well‐being of residential areas, reforestation of our hillsides would seem to be the most effective investment in the long‐term.

It is gratifying to witness the maintenance of our trees, although I believe that budget restraints have meant that our creek/riparian corridor has been neglected in the last 15 years. I remember the community service program using the labor of corrective institutions to help trim the trees, which benefited the laborers and the community and nature.

Please use more reclaimed water for maintaining trees and parks.

I was somewhat reluctant at doing this survey given what I consider the reckless destruction of our urban trees by the city council.  The removal of trees for development is constantly justified as necessary to meet the state housing act.  What is also stated to rationalize it is the intent to plant trees elsewhere to replace these.  The fact that "elsewhere" is a place unlikely to be visited or seen by people seems to be a missing part of the conversation. We need to keep our urban trees for people and other living things that need them. If we want wildlife in our cities we need to keep our trees.  Heck with the state housing act ‐ do you know how to say No?
If an expert could come to your home and tell you what kinds of trees to plant and where to plant them, that would be amazing!! I definitely would plant more trees in my front and back yard if I know what and where!
The city has done a poor job with tree replacement at our parks. Many have been removed because of disease or damage with no replacement. Many are poorly trimmed or not at all and they grow awkwardly.

Many residents take trees out without permission. Need enforcement and monitoring the tree companies that do this.

It is essential for our community to have healthy and abundant trees in all areas. Please do not use the tree survey as a tool to limit trees or to bolster extreme tree trimming. Thank you.

City‐owned property backs up to my property and tree branches reach across into my yard.  What types of maintenance will the city do on these trees?
I think the downtown trees on Higuera are nuisance trees.  They bring flies and ruin sidewalks, and the newer look on Monterey street is much cleaner, easier to navigate and more appealing.  I know its not popular to say this but please remove the trees along Higuera in the shopping district! A lot of people hate the mess and maintenance on trees. How about access to tree maint. And landscaping. Especially for the old and others that physically cant.

Reducing energy is an environmental benefit, not socioeconomic… I heard it’s going away and will be contracted out. They were nice people. Sad the city doesn’t care about having professional staff anymore.

SLO needs lots more tree cover. SLO needs to stop allowing developers to essentially clear cut well‐treed sites. The city needs to have more respect for wild things that live in and depend upon trees; I have seen

Appendix E: Community Survey 136
city contractors trimming palm trees during owl nesting season, and have seen city repeatedly allow cutting large trees where hawks nest. The willow habitats along waterways need to be protected; willows need to be replanted there, and existing groves protected.

I would like the city to plant more edible trees (citrus, feijoa, strawberry/lemon guava, loquat, avocado, fig, white sapote, persimmon, etc...) along pedestrian & bike paths (e.g., RRST is good candidate). This would allow residents to better interact with and get value from our trees and paths. Additionally would be a resource for our food‐insecure population. Use the local California Rare Fruit Growers chapter as a resource.

Trees are good.

There are several sidewalk and median areas where the trees have been abused or removed and never replanted ‐ e.g., Bishop St at the entrance to Terrace Hill.

I walk a lot in the city and open spaces and there is a need for more shade! I’ve seen so many trees being cut down due to lack of proper management such as pruning. Old trees providing crucial habitat ripped out for new construction with miniature trees being replanted. People cutting trees without approval and no repercussions
If we focus planting efforts on NATIVE tree species, we can simultaneously create shade/privacy/beauty etc. for people, AND protect biodiversity. It's a win‐win! I would like to see more urban forest staff performing much needed maintenance of our city trees. when i visit a city without trees, i quickly want to leave it. please let's not make this our city. working hard to educate on how, when to plant trees and offering incentives is a great idea for property owners! however, where we will really see positive outcomes if the city is acting on the land they manage to plant more trees. i'm also a strong believer that any new developments need to include not just landscaping but trees, and ones that thrive in our SLO county environment.

The city urban forestry department is woefully underfunded. Subsequently tree maintenance is not completed in a timely manor and the trees suffer for it. Urban forest staff is overwhelmed with duties and cannot be proactive in programming. City inspection of tree protection measures during construction is non existent due to short staffing. The city should have at least 3 urban foresters plus a 3 person tree crew to attend to on call tree maintenance issues. Contracting tree crews for regular maintenance is a good direction to go regarding keeping on schedule.

Need improvement on quality of tree maintenance services, arborists that are able to properly prune and care for tree health ‐ have seen soooo many trees butchered by tree crews, and killed due to improper pruning practices.

Provide more funding for the Urban Forest Dept to maintain street trees ‐ public and private. Incentivize developers to retain large trees in new construction.

The more trees the better !  Part of ANY new residential or large commercial development must include as many trees as possible, we need them to help us keep our air cleaner & to help us breathe! Please plant trees and places benches to rest under the shade along the open space and the street on Orcutt and Sacramento. That open area needs shade and benches. Thanks Those huge ficus trees need to be trimmed way back and gradually replaced.  They take too much water and are out of scale with the Downtown.

We should consider those spaces outside the city limit but in our county also. They are part of fire considerations for Slo city.

I am disappointed and feel this survey and effort is a bit late having already lost too many mature trees to development.

Some of our major thoroughfares (Broad Street is a perfect example) are completely devoid of trees. Broad Street is horrible — it’s like a freeway.  I would love to see streets like Broad have medians fully lined with trees, except where turn lanes are required.

137 Appendix E: Community Survey
Trees are good. The more the merrier. Trees make sense. Do it.  Protecting and promoting trees is working with nature and that is the best guarantee of a healthy, wealthy, prosperous future. The presence of Trees is the most quintessential expression of our own value and worth.  By showing gratitude and respect for the importance of trees we are showing our priorities and the importance of life and harmony with nature as our greatest strength.

I love trees and I love forests! I think they have many benefits for communities and I love that the City of San Luis Obispo is prioritizing trees and urban forestry! I would love to see trees used to beautify artery streets (johnson, broad, santa rosa, LOVR), and provide shade and protection to pedestrians/bicyclists.

By moving trees, bike lanes and pedestrians to the middle of these roadways we would see a huge increase in non‐motor transportation.

Glad you are helping the community gain the many benefits of trees. Thank you! I’ll repeat, do not allow developers to remove trees. Require them to develop in such a way to preserve existing trees. What’s the point of planting new trees when mature trees continue to be cut down.

I appreciate how quickly a SLO urban forest employee responded when we had an issue with a tree on the sidewalk near the driveway to our house (large, broken branch was hanging so low that we couldn't access our driveway without possible damage to our cars).

I do love when trees separate pedestrians and cyclists from automotive vehicles too....

We love our trees and are excited for more to be in our public spaces. We feel that while most everyone may have access to the Forestry Services, they may not be aware of that access. the program needs better funding, haven't seen a street tree list recently, but in the past they have been bad (poor choices)
Please educate homeowners about tree selection…let’s get away from plum and ficus trees or East‐coast natives and encourage more of our awesome and hardy native and adapted species! This is wonderful ‐ let’s plant many more trees! Broad Street between High and Orcutt feels like a highway and is unpleasant for walking, yet is a key road to use to walk to the Coop, parks, etc. please improve with more trees (and traffic calming)!!
I know people who say they are afraid to plant trees on their properties because if it turns out to be the wrong tree for a location, it's almost impossible to get permission to remove it. Several people at a neighborhood BBQ were in agreement.

If trees are so valuable to the City, why are you permitting a developer to cut down 50 trees off of Westmont Dr.?
The City should have an aggressive street tree planting and maintenance program.  We cannot rely on homeowners and renters to take care of street trees.

We need more trees. The benefits are immense
Thanks for making trees an important part of the city plan! The more trees, the merrier!
I hope the city plants as many trees as possible
It would be helpful to include a link on the City website to selectree.calpoly.edu or other similar Matt Ritter selection tool.

I am not sure what can be done about tree roots that cause sidewalks to be unsafe, but it needs to be addressed. I believe it can make the city vulnerable to law suits from individuals of a litigious nature who may trip over an uprooted portion of a city sidewalk.

Trees are important for humanity.

The tree maintenance  program is much better in the retail parts of town but in the residential areas it is lacking.  Many street trees in our neighborhoods  have gone many years without attention.  It is showing up in trees with dead limbs and misshaped trees due to wind damage.

Also the City is slow on removing  dead trees in open spaces and in the street side. And even slower to

Appendix E: Community Survey 138
replace that tree with another.

It would be nice to see a wider variety  of trees. It seems to be when the city plants trees the are all the same. Then a few years later they do a different tree. It is like they go to Costco and buy a bunch, regardless location of the tree, then move to another variety. need to place more trees in multi family unit housing, which are mostly surrounded by cement and low income.

We use way too much fossil fuel maintaining the city's trees‐I would bet that in the 30 years I've lived here there has been a multiple of more carbon emitted by vehicles and power tools than any amount of carbon our trees have captured. The same is true of how most businesses and residences (and all schools) maintain their landscaping. The number of gasoline powered leaf blowers being used on sidewalks/parking lots/streets is also kind of horrifying, especially considering many of those are also maintained by street sweeping vehicles‐public and private.

It's a travesty that the City has systematically been allowing for the removal of thousands of mature trees for purposes of residential and commercial developments.  The increased number of small trees planted in their place will nowhere near provide the carbon sequester benefit for many years.  I find it hypocritical to act concerned about our Urban Forest while approving the removal of mature trees all over the city to make it easier for a developer to build.  We need to preserve our existing Urban Forest as well as continue to plant trees to increase it.
mature trees shouldn't be swapped with small trees for developers.  Development should build around the trees = for example the trees on Madonna Road for the development under construction and the proposed development on Westmont
Too many trees are being cut down for development.

I’m hoping that there’s integrity behind the reasons for creating a survey like this  but hah!  Will the city leadership have us rate the importance of water next, can’t wait for that survey:) We should plant more edible fruit trees as an inexpensive way to provide a social safety net Efforts seem to be directed toward tree removal rather than planting.  Questionable choices of street trees allowed (oaks by American Riviera Bank).

I had two young trees in front of my house.  Same species.  One died because the other was stronger and shaded it. They were planted too close to each other.  Maybe more thought can be put into species and spacing.

There are some very large trees on public and private land that present a clear and present danger to nearby people, homes and other structures due to damage from storm events and age‐related falling limbs. How does the city address tree maintenance in those situations? I'm SO happy the city cares to sustain and hopefully expand the urban forest.

It’s not advisable on downtown City sidewalks due to bird droppings, falling leaves, etc. although they are attractive and provide shade.

Downtown sidewalks are a hazard due to tree roots pushing up the sidewalks. I have tripped/fallen & ended up in the E.R. with injuries due to this. Sidewalks need to be redone & some trees need to be removed.

Total                                                                                                                                             192 (452 skipped)

City of San Luis Obispo

INVENTORY OVERVIEW

IMPORTANCE OF A TREE

INVENTORY
It is important to accurately
identify the trees within an
agency’s urban forest. Knowing
the quantities, locations,
species types, and health
conditions of these essential
assets within the community
provides the foundation for
which annual work plans and
budgets are based. Therefore,
having an inventory is critical to
the implementation of an
effective tree care program.

As of June 15, 2022 the data in
ArborAccess determined that
the City of San Luis Obispo’s
inventory consisted of 12,970
owned tree sites located
throughout streets, parks, and
facilities while including data
collection of stumps and vacant
sites. Examples of some of the
information collected for each
tree site is listed below:
• Tree Site Address
• Tree Species Identification
• Diameter Range
• Utility Presence
• Recommended Maintenance
• Removal Priority
• Height Range
• Condition
• Tree Health Concern
• Parkway Size/Type
June 15, 2022
1 City of San Luis Obispo

INVENTORY OVERVIEW

TREES +
12,455

PLANTING SITES
379

RECOMMENDED

REMOVALS
127
+ STUMPS
134
2 June 15, 2022
TOP 10 SPECIES & VALUE

June 15, 2022
3 DBH HEIGHT

ROUTINE TRIM
Routine Trim/Grid Trim (10,156 trees)
Regardless of the amount of a community’s tree management budget, systemic tree maintenance reduces costs in the long term. There are 10,156 trees identified and recommended for routine trimming. Systematic tree maintenance programs reduce the need for “emergency” maintenance, help prevent liability problems (such as dead or weak branches that could fail), reduce tree mortality and improve urban forest health and real value over the long-term.

A systematic tree maintenance program is comprised of pre-designed trimming grids which are inspected and trimmed as needed in their entirety on a set schedule. By trimming trees on the street, regardless of size, every resident in that community feels that they have received a service for their tax dollars. At the same time, the safety and welfare of the community will be enhanced. *Trees can present a serious safety concern, especially larger, mature trees. Because many agencies assume
responsibility for a safe public right-of-way, any negligence for the care of trees impacting the safety of the right-of-way may fall on the agency. However, by implementing a
comprehensive tree risk management program, the agency
can take steps to limit their liability while keeping the public safe.

Benefits of Grid Trimming
• Scheduling
• Improved Public Relations
• Equitable Service
• Preventative Maintenance
4 Patrol - Diseased or Declining (114 Trees)
These 114 trees are in decline due to environmental conditions, pests, disease problems, or due to natural senescence. At the time of data collection these trees had not reached the point where removal was necessary. In some cases, the condition of these trees may be improved by trimming, watering, or improved by application of plant health care practices. It is recommended that these trees go through a process of disease identification and treatment prescription and be patrolled to determine the timing of treatment and application, or when removal is warranted.

Trim - Poorly Structured (29 Trees)
These 29 trees have been identified as having structural defects that can be improved through structural pruning. These defects can include codominant stem trees requiring reduction cuts to reduce the likelihood of failure. This can also include end weight reduction cuts to improve structure.

Young Tree Maintenance (1,703 Trees)
These are newly planted trees that have not been established or had stakes removed yet. These trees need monitoring, watering, re-staking, fertilizing and structural pruning. This typically ends when the stakes are no longer needed and they work type should be transitioned to a routine/grid trim.

June 15, 2022
• Improve Health
• Maintain Capital Asset
• Reduced Liability*
• Efficient Record Keeping

REMOVALS/ INSPECTION
Removal - Stump
(134 stumps)
Removal - Diseased or Declining
(20 trees)
Twenty trees were identified as diseased or
declining and are declining due to pest
infestations, disease or natural senescence.

Removal - Dead Tree
(59 trees)
Dead trees are identified by their species names
where the species can be determined. If they are
not identifiable they are called "Dead Tree." All
dead trees should be scheduled for immediate or
routine removal unless they are considered for
preservation to create suitable wildlife habitat
where conditions for public safety are not a
concern.

Removal - Poorly Structured
(12 trees)
These twelve trees have potentially hazardous
cracks or structural problems that present abovenormal safety concerns, and the potential for tree failure cannot be mitigated through pruning. Other
examples of poorly structured trees are those that
have included bark located in a primary branch
attachment, which greatly increases the potential
for limb failure in the future.

Removal - Overhead Spacing Criteria
( 1 tree)
Maintained by other agency or HOA
(327 trees)
June 15, 2022
Removal - Seedling or Volunteer
(35 trees)
Trees meeting this criteria were not
intentionally planted by homeowners; they
were grown from seeds, from surrounding
5 Inspect - Recommended Removal
(1 tree)
One poor condition Sweetshade tree has
been recommended for removal by our tree
crew. It may not benefit from plant health
care techniques, and should be viewed by
City staff.