APPENDIX C
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
AND TREE ASSESSMENT
This page is intentionally left blank.
ENVIRONMENTAL COLLABORATIVE
Consultation Documentation Restoration
41 Jeanette Court Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Phone 510-393-0770 [email protected]
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ms. Madeline Miller
PlaceWorks
2040 Bancroft Way, Suite 400
Berkeley, California 94704
FROM: Jim Martin
ENVIRONMENTAL COLLABORATIVE
DATE: 29 October 2025
SUBJECT: Biological Resources Assessment
Yountville Commons Project Site
Yountville, California
This memo serves as the Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) for the proposed Yountville Commons Project site, located on the former Yountville Elementary School property at 6554 Yount St, Yountville (APN #036-070-026-000). The site is 6.83 acres in size and bordered by Yount Street to the west, Town Hall to the southwest, Finnell Road to the south, Hopper Creek to the east, and existing residential use to the north. It contains buildings constructed as part of the former Yountville Elementary School, together with parking lots, paved playgrounds and pathways, irrigated turf, vegetable garden, ornamental landscaping and garden, riparian vegetation along the Hopper Creek corridor, and scattered native oaks and non-native planted specimen trees scattered across the site.
The site is currently under review for reuse as the Yountville Commons Project, supporting a combination of civic uses, retail, residential housing, parking, and open space. Program OS5.4b in the Natural Element of the Yountville General Plan1 calls for preparation of a Biological Resources Assessment to address potential impacts on special-status species and sensitive habitats and provide mitigation measures, if necessary. This BRA has been prepared to fulfill the background review of sensitive biological and wetland resources called for in Program OS5.4b.
This BRA involved a background review and site reconnaissance survey. Information reviewed included: the Yountville General Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR); 2 an
assessment of trees at Yountville Elementary School by the Town’s on-call arborist;3the Napa 1 Town of Yountville, 2019. Envision Yountville, Yountville General Plan. May 7. 2 De Novo Planning Group, 2018. Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Envision Yountville General Plan “Update (SCH: 201808200). Prepared for Town of Yountville. November. 3 Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting, 2024. Assessing Trees at Yountville Elementary School, 6554 Yount Street in Yountville, CA. Prepared for Brad Roulston, Town Manager, Yountville. March 20. 2 County Baseline Data Report;4the Napa County/WICC Interactive GIS map of vegetative cover and streams in the Napa Valley area (see http://www.napawatersheds.org/app_pages/view/45); records on occurrences of special-status species and sensitive natural communities maintained by the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), the National Wetland Inventory maintained by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and critical habitat designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), for federally-listed species, among other sources. I conducted the field reconnaissance survey on August 20, 2025. The focus of the field survey was to perform a habitat suitability analysis for special-status species, verify conditions along Hopper Creek and limits of regulated waters, and determine whether any sensitive habitat features are present on the site.
This memo presents the results of the findings for the background review and field reconnaissance survey of the site. It contains a description of existing conditions on the site, conclusion regarding the presence of regulated waters along Hopper Creek, potential for presences of special-status species and other sensitive habitat, a summary of regulations pertaining to biological and wetland resources, and planning considerations for consideration by the Town in protecting the Hopper Creek corridor and mature native trees on the site. Figures 1 and 2 show the known distribution of special-status plant and animal species in the vicinity of Yountville, respectively. Appendix A contains a table of information on special-status species reported by the CNDDB for the Yountville vicinity.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Existing Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Conditions
The site has been developed with existing school and park-related improvements, bordered by the natural riparian corridor associated with Hopper Creek along its eastern edge. Existing buildings, paved parking lots and playground areas, pathways, and irrigated turf and ornamental landscaping occupy the majority of the site. Non-native and native trees have been planted in scattered locations across the site, or occur as remnant native riparian vegetation along the “ Hopper Creek corridor. These include remnant valley oak (Quercus lobata) that likely predate European settlement of the Yountville area by over 150 years ago and were part of the open riparian woodland that crew along Hopper Creek at the time. Other native tree species along the creek corridor include coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), California buckeye (Aesculus californicus), and black walnut (Juglans hindsii). Scattered mature and sapling oaks occur along the Finnel Road frontage and the fenced northern property line of the site, many growing with the cyclone fencing. Non-native tree plantings dominate the immediate vicinity of the former school building and parking lots, including Monterey pines (Pinus radiata), crape myrtle (Lagerstroemia sp.), Raywood ash (Fraxinus sp.), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), tan oak (Notholithocarpus densiflorus), olive (Olea europaea), fruitless mulberry (Mora alba), ironbark eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sideroxlylon), glossy privet (Ligustrum lucidum), London Plane (Platanus x acerifolia), and Lombardy poplar (Populus nigra 'Italica').
Vegetation along the Hopper Creek corridor is dominated by mature native trees, including valley oaks, coast live oaks, black walnut and California buckeye. A few willows (Salix sp.) and invasive glossy privet also grow along the creek corridor, together with grape (Vitus sp.) vines.
Groundcover is dominated by non-native grasses and forbs, including wild oak (Avenua fatua), 4 Jones & Stokes and EDAW, Inc., 2005, Napa County Baseline Data Report, Version 1, prepared for Napa County Conservation, Development and Planning Department, November 30. 3 bromes (Bromus spp.), English plantain (Plantago lanceolata), and field bindweed (Convolvulus arvense), among others. Highly Invasive periwinkle (Vinca major) and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) are present in some portions of the creek corridor and will continue to spread unless adequately controlled.
The developed portion of the site provides only low-quality wildlife habitat value due to the presence of inaccessible structures, paving, irrigated turf, limited protective cover, and intensity of human activity. Species typical of suburban and ruderal habitat occur in the area, including numerous birds and mammals common in the suburban habitats. Typical species observed or suspected from the vicinities include: house finch, house sparrow, mourning dove, northern mocking bird, American robin, California towhee, pocket gopher, house mouse, Norway rat, and western fence lizard. Raccoon, opossum, and other larger species may occasionally forage through the developed portions of the site and along the Hopper Creek corridor. The trees provide suitable roosting substrate for birds and bats, and there remains a potential for nesting by a number of bird species common in the area. No evidence of any large raptor stick nests was observed in the larger trees during the field reconnaissance, although dense foliage may have obscured nests if present higher up in the mature oaks.
The Hopper Creek corridor does provide important riparian habitat for native aquatic and terrestrial species. The native and non-native trees and shrubs provide foraging, perching, and nesting opportunities for numerous species of birds, and the creek provides at least an intermittent source of drinking water for birds and mammals. Steelhead and other anadromous fish have been reported from the Napa River and tributary drainages, and there is a remote possibility that individuals could move along the unnamed creek corridor during wet weather and periods of prolonged seasonal flows. But the drainage appears too small and narrow to provided sustained habitat for steelhead or other fish species in the vicinity of the site as it appears to dry up during the summer and fall. Pacific chorus frogs, western toad, and possibly foothill yellowlegged frog could use the aquatic habitat along the project reach of Hopper Creek when surface water is present, likely moving to locations with permanent water as the creek dries out in the summer and early fall months. Surface water was largely absent from the project reach during the field reconnaissance with only small areas of ponding near the culvert under Finnel Road, possibly due to irrigation runoff from the residential development to the northeast.
Special-Status Species
Special-status species are plants and animals that are legally protected under the State and/or federal Endangered Species Acts5 or other regulations, as well as other species that are considered rare enough by the scientific community and trustee agencies to warrant special consideration, particularly with regard to protection of isolated populations, nesting or denning locations, communal roosts and other essential habitat. Species with legal protection under the Endangered Species Acts often represent major constraints to development, particularly when they are wide-ranging or highly sensitive to habitat disturbance and where proposed development would result in a "take" 6 of these species. 5 The federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) of 1973 declares that all federal departments and agencies shall utilize their authority to conserve endangered and threatened plant and animal species.
The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) of 1984 parallels the policies of FESA and pertains to native California species.
6 "Take" as defined by the FESA means "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect" a threatened or endangered species. "Harm" is further defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to include the killing or harming of wildlife due to significant obstruction of essential behavior patterns (i.e., breeding, feeding, or sheltering) through significant habitat modification or 4 A record search conducted by the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), together with other relevant information, indicates that occurrences of numerous plant and animal species with special-status have been recorded from or are suspected to occur in Napa Valley vicinity. Figures 1 and 2 shows the known distribution of special-status plant and animal species within an approximately three-mile radius of the site, based on records maintained by the CNDDB. The attached table in Appendix A) shows the status of each of the listed, proposed and candidate species for the Yountville and Rutherford 7.5 minute USGS quadrangles encompassing the area surrounding the site. A total of five animal and six special-status plant species have been reported by the CNDDB in the surrounding area, together with the conclusion regarding the potential for occurrence on the site.
Plant Species. A number of special-status plant species have been reported from the Yountville vicinity, and based on recorded geographic range and preferred habitat, numerous other species may occur in the Napa Valley area. Figure 1 shows the distribution of known occurrences of six special-status plant species within about a three-mile radius of the site according to the CNDDB records. These consist of: Jepson's coyote-thistle (Eryngium jepsonii), Jepson's leptosiphonepson (Leptosiphon jepsonii), Sebastopol meadowfoam (Limnanthes vinculans), Sonoma beardtongue (Penstemon newberryi var. sonomensis), Sanford's arrowhead (Sagittaria sanfordii), and Napa bluecurls (Trichostema ruygtii). All of these California Rare Plant Rank of 1B (rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere) according to the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) in their electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. Sebastopol meadowfoam is the only one with formal listing status, listed as endangered under the FESA and CESA.
The General Plan DEIR provides a review of the 55 special-status plant species documented within the region, including information on status and typical habitat (see Table 3.4-2: Special-Status Plants within 9-Quadrangle Region for General Plan Area). A habitat suitability analysis was performed during the field reconnaissance survey conducted as part of this BRA, during which the potential for occurrence of any special-status species known or suspected to occur in the Yountville vicinity was evaluated. Due to the extent of past disturbance associated with the previous school facilities and on-going open space use, there is no potential for special-status plant species to occur on the site. The narrow band of riparian habitat along Hopper Creek has been routinely managed as part of former school facilities and native groundcover species have been replaced by non-native species. Suitable seasonal wetland and marsh habitat conditions necessary to support vernal pool and other aquatic-dependent species are absent along the creek channel. Based on these existing conditions, no special-status plant species have been reported from or are suspected to occur on the site.
Animal Species. Numerous special-status animal species have been reported from the Yountville vicinity, and based on recorded geographic range and preferred habitat, numerous other species may occur in the Napa Valley area. Figure 2 shows the distribution of known occurrences of five special-status animal species within about a three-mile radius of the site according to the CNDDB records. These consist of occurrences of northwestern pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata), California giant salamander (Dicamptodon ensatus), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii), and Cowan's amphipod (Stygobromus cowani), and designated critical habitat for steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) along the Napa River and northern degradation. The CDFW also considers the loss of listed species habitat as take, although this policy lacks statutory authority and case law support under the CESA. 5 spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) observations in the woodland and forest habitat to the west of the Napa Valley.
The General Plan DEIR provides a review of the 46 special-status animal species documented within the region, including information on status and typical habitat (see Table 3.4-3: SpecialStatus Animals within 9-Quadrangle Region for General Plan Area). Many of these have no listing status under the FESA or CESA, but are recognized or were previously considered California Species of Special Concern (SSC)7 by CDFW or nesting and roosting locations are of particular concern to the CDFW. A habitat suitability analysis was performed during the field reconnaissance survey conducted as part of this BRA, during which the potential for occurrence of any specialstatus species known or suspected to occur in the Yountville vicinity was evaluated. Due to the extent of past disturbance associated with the previous school facilities and on-going open space use, there is very little potential for special-status animal species to occur on most of the site.
However, the mature trees and seasonal aquatic habitat along Hopper Creek provide foraging and possibly roosting, nesting and dispersal habitat for native wildlife and may be used by a number of special-status animal species. Most of these are native bird species that are relatively common but are protected under the federal Migratory Bird TreatyAct (MBTA) and State Fish and Game Code, such as great egret (Ardea alba), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus), and Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), as well great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus) and red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis). Suitable foraging and nesting habitat for western spotted owl, golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni) and ground nesting burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) is absent on the site. No signs of any large stick raptor nests or staining from long term roosting were observed during the field reconnaissance survey, and use of the riparian corridors and remaining ruderal grasslands on the site may be limited to occasional foraging by these species, although new nests or roost locations could be established in the future.
Because surface flows in Hopper Creek are seasonal through the site reach, they do not provide suitable breeding habitat or allow for permanent occupation for aquatic-dependent special-status invertebrates, fish, amphibians, and reptiles known from the Napa Valley, including steelhead, western pond turtle, Cowan’s amphipod, California giant salamander, foothill yellow-legged frog and the federally threatened California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii). The CNDDB records show an occurrence for foothill yellow-legged frog along Hopper Creek through the site reach (see Figure 2).
This is from a record in 1956 described as “Dry Creek tributary to Napa River in Yountville” so it’s mapped extent in the CNDDB is not based on known observations along Hopper Creek. As noted above, the seasonal nature of Hopper Creek on the site precludes permanent occupation by foothill yellow legged frog on this reach of the creek, although there remains a potential for occasional dispersal as individuals are flushed downstream during winter storms or move along the creek in search of suitable habitat when surface flows are present. 7 Species of Special Concern (SSC) are vertebrate animal species designated by the CDFW because of declining population levels, limited ranges, and/or continuing threats that have made them vulnerable to extinction. The goal of designating SSCs is to halt or reverse their decline by calling attention to their plight and addressing the issues of concern early enough to secure their long-term viability. Not all SSCs have declined equally; some species may be just starting to decline, while others may have already reached the point where they meet the criteria for form listing under FESA and/or CESA. 6 Several species of special-status bats are known from the Napa Valley area, including pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), and western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii), all considered SSC by CDFW. Pallid and Townsend’s big-eared bat are known to roost in a variety of habitats, including abandoned buildings and tree cavities. Western red bat typically roosts in forest and riparian woodlands, including snags and trees with moderately dense canopies. The existing buildings on the site are well maintained and showed no signs of access by bats, but there remains a potential for roosting in the larger trees along the Hopper Creek riparian corridor where trunk cavities, exfoliating bark, and dense foliage for both special-status and more common bat species
Jurisdictional Waters
Although definitions vary, wetlands are generally considered to be areas that are periodically or permanently inundated by surface or groundwater, and support vegetation adapted life in saturated soil. Wetlands are recognized as important features on a regional and national level due to their inherent value to fish and wildlife, use as storage areas for storm and floodwaters, and water recharge, filtration and purification functions. Jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is established through provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, which prohibits the discharge of dredged or fill material into “waters of the U.S.” without a permit. The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdiction is established through Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, which requires certification or waiver to control discharges in water quality whenever a Corps permit is required under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and State waters as regulated under the Porter-Cologne Act. Jurisdictional authority of the CDFW over wetland areas is established under Sections 1600-1607 of the State Fish and Wildlife Code, which pertains to activities that would disrupt the natural flow or alter the channel, bed or bank of any lake, river or stream.
A preliminary wetland assessment was conducted as part of the field reconnaissance survey.
Hopper Creek is the only regulated waters encountered on the site. Hopper Creek was largely dry during the field reconnaissance survey, with a cobble and gravel bed about 10 to 15 feet wide. The active creek bank was just a few feet high, with mature trees growing along and beyond the top of bank. The limits of federal waters regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act extends up to the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM), which occurs along the lower elevation of the active creek bank. The limits of State waters regulated under the PorterCologne Act and State Fish and Game Code extend to the top of bank or limits of riparian vegetation, whichever is greater. The existing paved path along the west side of Hopper Creek serves as a useful boundary in defining the limits of potential development. The canopy of some of the riparian trees along the creek extend westward over the pathway, but the tree trunks and major root zones occur between the path and active channel.
Sensitive Natural Communities
The CDFW tracks the occurrences of “special” plant communities that are either known or believed to be of high priority for inventory in the CNDDB. These sensitive natural communities are ranked according to rarity and listed on-line in the VegCAMP program of the CNDDB. 8 Using the NatureServe’s “Heritage Methodology” natural communities with a State Rank of 3 or less are considered “sensitive”. The oak-dominated riparian woodland along Hopper Creek can 8 California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Natural Diversity Data Base, VegCAMP Program, 2025, California Sensitive Natural Communities. February 27. Available at:
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=153609&inline 7 best be classified as Valley Oak Riparian Forest and Woodland alliance (Quercus lobata – Quercus agrifolia / Toxicodendron diversilobum – (Symphoricarpos ssp.)). This riparian woodland community type along Hopper Creek has a State Rank of 3 and qualifies as a sensitive natural community type. The remainder of the site is occupied by former school facilities, parking lots, ornamental landscaping, irrigated turf and scattered native and non-native trees that don’t represent a natural community type and are not considered a sensitive natural community.
Local Plans and Ordinances
In addition to the State and federal regulations pertaining to biological and wetland resources, the Envision Yountille General Plan Update contains a number of goals and policies that serve to protect sensitive resources. The Town’s Municipal Code also has several provisions related to the protection of trees and creeks. These are reviewed below, using the same numbers as used in the Town’s General Plan and Municipal Code.
Yountville General Plan
The Natural Resources Element of the Envision Yountville General Plan Update includes numerous goals, policies and programs related to the protection of sensitive biological and wetland resources. Those most relevant to resources found on the site are listed below:
Goal OS-5: Protect and preserve trees, native vegetation, riparian habitat, and sensitive natural communities that provide ecological, economic, and aesthetic benefit.
Policy OS-5.1 Tree Planting. Encourage the planting and preservation of trees to provide shade, promote wildlife habitat, and benefit the air quality and beauty of Yountville.
Program OS-5.1a Tree Management. Continue to regulate the removal, cutting, and other activities detrimental to trees, and require the replanting of replacement trees as feasible.
Program OS-5.1b Heritage Trees. Continue to identify and protect heritage trees that
warrant additional tree protection measures to best manage and maintain a healthy urban forest.
Program OS-5.1c Trees on Public Land. Protect native woodlands and significant trees on public lands to best manage and maintain a healthy urban forest.
Policy OS-5.2 Preservation of Native Vegetation. Encourage preservation of native vegetation during the development review.
Policy OS-5.3 Native Riparian Vegetation. Protect and preserve native vegetation adjacent to Hopper Creek and Beard Ditch during construction.
Policy OS-5.4 Species Diversity and Habitat. Protect biological resources, including migratory birds, threatened and endangered species, sensitive and riparian habitat, wildlife movement corridors, nursery sites, and open space, that are necessary to maintain a diversity of plant and animal species.
Program OS-5.4a Agency Cooperation. Cooperate with State and federal agencies to ensure that development and infrastructure projects do not substantially adversely affect sensitive habitats or special status species appearing on the State or federal list for any rare, endangered, or threatened species.
Program OS-5.4b Species and Sensitive Habitat Analysis. Require 8 development and infrastructure projects to address potential impacts to specialstatus species and sensitive habitats, including sensitive natural communities, wetlands, vernal pools, waters of the U.S, and wildlife migration corridors. Prior to approval, a Biological Resources Assessment shall be completed for the project site that evaluates the potential for biological resources (including any plant or animal species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) and sensitive habitats to be found on the subject site or affected by the project. The Biological Resources Assessment shall include mitigation measures, if necessary, to reduce impacts to the associated species and/or habitats.
Goal OS-2: Provide and preserve open space to protect habitat, watercourses, riparian corridors, native vegetation, and areas of scenic beauty.
Policy OS-2.3 Natural Watercourses. Protect and maintain existing natural watercourses.
Program OS-2.3a Hopper Creek. Maintain the existing watercourse of Hopper Creek and native vegetation within its bank and along its frontage.
Goal OS-6: Provide an adequate water supply and protect water quality.
Policy OS-6.4 Water Quality. Protect water resources from pollution and sedimentation.
Program OS-6.4a Best Management Practices. Require new development, redevelopment, and infrastructure projects to implement best management practices as feasible, including low-impact development techniques, the minimal use of non-pervious surfaces in landscape design, and the integration of natural features into the project design, to naturally filter and biodegrade contaminants and to minimize surface runoff into drainage systems and creeks.
Program OS-6.4b NPDES Compliance. Ensure that new development, redevelopment, and infrastructure projects comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and the applicable Stormwater Discharge System Ordinance and do not substantially degrade water quality.
Program OS-6.4c Permeable Surfaces. Encourage use of pervious materials to aid in stormwater treatment and infiltration.
Program OS-6.4d Integrated Pest Management. Continue to utilize integrated pest management techniques to reduce the use of potentially toxic chemicals in Town operations.
Program OS-6.4e Fertilizer Use. Continue to encourage the use of organic soil amendments to replace chemical fertilizers as practicable on public and private property.
Yountville Municipal Code
Several chapters of the Yountville Municipal Code are relevant to features on the site, addressing street trees, trees on private property and the protection of Hopper Creek. These include the following chapters of the Municipal Code.
Chapter 12.16 Trees
This chapter was adopted for the purpose of developing and providing for the planting, maintenance, and removal of trees which overhang the public street, and to establish rules and regulations relating to the planting, care, maintenance, removal, and replacement of such trees. 9 Chapter 17.76 C Creekside Overlay
The purpose of this chapter is: (A) to protect private and public lands from flood damage caused by deposits of debris and other materials collected by flood waters; (B) to protect the riparian cover and wildlife habitat extending along Hopper Creek by preventing erosion of the creek’s banks and siltation of the creek’s waters; (C) to preserve the existing natural and visual character of Hopper Creek and its environs; and (D) to promote the broader social, economic and environmental well being of the Town. According to the general conditions of the Creekside Overlay, the following shall apply:
A. A setback line applies to both sides of Hopper Creek which runs parallel and is measured 35 feet from the centerline of the creek and not less than 10 feet from the creek bank, which is referred to as the Hopper Creek setback area.
B. No buildings, wall, fence, or other structure shall be erected, constructed, or placed within the Hopper Creek setback area;
C. It is prohibited to deposit, excavate or remove any material within the Hopper Creek setback area;
D. No native vegetation or tree that has a trunk larger than three inches in diameter measured at ground level shall be removed within the Hopper Creek setback area; E. Conditions may be waived by the Town Council only if determined that the proposed work will not increase any danger of flooding to any part of the Town of Yountville, and that the proposed work will assist in achieving the goals stated in Section 17.76.010 of this chapter;
F. The word "structure," as used in this chapter, shall not include an at grade patio and any trail, walk, path or driveway; and
G. Any structure that now lawfully exists within the Hopper Creek setback area may be continued as an existing legally nonconforming use; provided however, that in the event that the structure is destroyed or demolished, it may be rebuilt only in conformity with the provisions of this chapter.
Chapter 17.128 Tree Preservation and Management
The purpose of this chapter is to promote the health, safety, welfare, and quality of life of the residents through the protection of specified trees on private property and the establishment of standards for removal, maintenance, and planting of trees throughout town. A permit is typically required for the removal of trees that qualify as a “protected tree”, defined as follows:
1. A heritage tree identified in the Heritage Tree Survey;
2. Any native oak tree with a trunk that measures 10 inches diameter at breast height (DBH) (equal to 31 inches in circumference) or more;
3. Any tree with a trunk that measures 12 inches DBH (equal to 38 inches in circumference) or more or a multi-stemmed perennial plant having an aggregate DBH of 20 inches (equal to 63 inches in circumference) or more;
4. A tree shown to be preserved on an approved development entitlement or specifically required by the Town Council or Zoning and Design Review Board to be retained as a condition of approval of an entitlement; or
5. A tree required to be planted as a replacement tree.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
Sensitive resources on the site requiring special consideration during planning and future development include the Hopper Creek riparian corridor and mature native trees. Removal of existing trees may result in inadvertent take of native bird nests when in active use as well as 10 bat roosts that may be present in the mature trees on the site unless appropriate avoidance practices are taken as part of future construction. The following provides a summary of planning considerations related to these features on the site.
Protecting and Enhancing the Hopper Creek Riparian Corridor Assuming new development is restricted to the west side of the existing paved path along the west side of Hopper Creek, no substantial adverse impacts to the Hopper Creek riparian corridor are anticipated. Protecting the Hopper Creek corridor would serve to avoid any specialstatus animal species considered to have a remote potential for dispersal along the aquatic habitat of the creek, including steelhead, foothill yellow-legged frog, and western pond turtle, among other special-status species. Because disturbance to the bed, bank and riparian vegetation along the creek would be avoided, no authorizations would be required from the regulatory agencies (Corps, RWQCB and CDFW).
Future development of the site could increase the intensity of human activity and incursion into the active channel of Hopper Creek. A cyclone fence between the active creek channel and existing paved pathway previously controlled access by humans and pets (likely installed to prevent balls and children from the elementary school from reaching the active creek), but has since been removed. Installing a split-rail or other open fencing system, together with interpretive signage explaining the sensitivity of the active creek and importance of minimizing human access would be useful in protecting this resource. Especially given the concentrated human access along the existing paved pathway.
The existing groundcover along the creek corridor has very few native species, which currently limit the available protective cover and species diversity. Revegetation with appropriate native species would serve to improve the narrow band of riparian habitat between the active creek and paved pathway, and the recommended open fencing system would help in preventing trampling to the native plantings.
Native trees along the Hopper Creek corridor should be protected as part of any future planning efforts, as should the mature, healthy native trees scattered around the site. These trees provide important resting, roosting and possibly nesting habitat for native wildlife, including birds and possibly bats. Smaller trees and the existing structures do not appear to provide roosting or nesting habitat.
Avoiding Active Bird Nests and Bat Roosts
Although no evidence of active nests was encountered during field reconnaissance survey of the site, new nests could be established in advance of future vegetation removal or construction. If new nests are established they could be vulnerable to loss or disturbance as trees and other vegetation are removed to accommodate construction of new buildings, roadways, and other improvements. Construction in close proximity of nests in active use could lead to nest abandonment, unless appropriate seasonal restrictions are implemented.
Destruction of bird nests in active use or activities that could lead to nest abandonment would be a violation of the MBTA and State Fish and Game Code.
A standard method to address the potential for nesting birds is either to initiate building demolition and vegetation removal during the non-nesting season, which in Napa County is typically from September 1 to February 28, or to conduct a nesting survey within 7 days prior to initial tree removal and construction to determine whether any active nests are present that 11 must be protected until any young have fledged and are no longer dependent on the nest.
Protection of the nests, if present, would require that construction setbacks be provided during the nesting and fledging period, with the setback depending on the type of bird species, degree to which the individuals have already acclimated to other ongoing disturbance, and other factors.
Mature trees on the site could also provide roosting habitat for a number of special-status bat species, including: pallid bat, Townsend’s western big-eared bat, and western red bat. Tree removal and construction disturbance as part of future development in the immediate vicinity of an active bat roost could affect special-status bats and other more common bats, if present.
Direct impacts on bats could occur if construction activities resulted in direct mortality or the disruption or abandonment of an active bat roost(s). Anticipated impacts on bat foraging and movement opportunities would be minimal, however, given that the Hopper Creek riparian corridor would likely be retained as a natural feature on the site.
A standard method to address the potential for roosting bats is to conduct a roosting survey within 7 days prior to initial tree removal and construction to determine whether any active roosts are present that must be protected until any young have fledged and are no longer dependent on the roost. Protection of the roost, if present, would require that construction setbacks be provided, with the setback depending on the type of bat species, degree to which the individuals have acclimated to ongoing disturbance, and other factors.
Addressing Tree Removal and Protection
Compliance with provisions in the Yountville General Plan and Municipal Code would serve to adequately protect the Hopper Creek riparian corridor and would address tree removal on the site. Native trees along Hopper Creek would presumably be retained in accordance with the Creekside Overlay setback area called for in Chapter Chapter 17.76 C of the Municipal Code.
The 2024 assessment of trees at the site by the Town’s on-call arborist includes preliminary recommendation for removing and preserving existing trees on the site, and calls for establishing a committee to make additional recommendations related to the existing trees on the site. Future development would have to comply with the various provisions in the Municipal Code related to tree resources. New trees and other landscaping would presumably be planted as part of future development plans, and would serve to replace the wildlife habitat value of any trees removed from the site.
I trust this provides you with the requested review of biological and wetland resources associated with the site. Please feel free to contact me by phone or email if you have any questions or need additional information on any of the above.
14 APPENDIX A
CNDDB EO Summary Table
Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence
Name (Scientific/Common)
CNDDB
Ranks
Listing Status
(Fed/State) Other Lists
Range
(ft.)
Total
EO's A B C D X U
Historic
> 20 yr
Recent
<= 20 yr Extant
Poss.
Extirp. Extirp.
Actinemys marmorata
northwestern pond turtle
G2
SNR
Proposed
Threatened
None
BLM_S-Sensitive
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_VU-Vulnerable
USFS_S-Sensitive
140
1,315
1160
S:6
1 1 0 0 0 4 1 5 6 0 0
Amorpha californica var. napensis
Napa false indigo
G4T2
S2
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
500
1,886
123
S:6
1 0 1 0 0 4 4 2 6 0 0
Amsinckia lunaris
bent-flowered fiddleneck
G3
S3
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
BLM_S-Sensitive
SB_UCBG-UC
Botanical Garden at
Berkeley
SB_UCSC-UC Santa
Cruz
195
195
93 S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
Antrozous pallidus
pallid bat
G4
S3
None
None
BLM_S-Sensitive
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
USFS_S-Sensitive
379
650
425
S:3
1 0 1 0 0 1 2 1 3 0 0
Arctostaphylos stanfordiana ssp.
decumbens
Rincon Ridge manzanita
G3T1
S1
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1
SB_UCSC-UC Santa
Cruz
670
670
12 S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
Ardea alba
great egret
G5
S4
None
None
CDF_S-Sensitive
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
350
350
43 S:1
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Ardea herodias
great blue heron
G5
S4
None
None
CDF_S-Sensitive
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
350
350
156
S:1
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Astragalus claranus
Clara Hunt's milk-vetch
G1
S1
Endangered
Endangered
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
330
330
6 S:1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Bombus caliginosus
obscure bumble bee
G2G3
S1S2
None
None
IUCN_VU-Vulnerable 800
2,500
181
S:2
0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 0
Query Criteria: Quad<span style='color:Red'> IS </span>(Yountville (3812243)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Rutherford (3812244)) Report Printed on Tuesday, June 10, 2025
Commercial Version -- Dated June, 1 2025 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 5 Information Expires 12/1/2025
Summary Table Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence
Name (Scientific/Common)
CNDDB
Ranks
Listing Status
(Fed/State) Other Lists
Range
(ft.)
Total
EO's A B C D X U
Historic
> 20 yr
Recent
<= 20 yr Extant
Poss.
Extirp. Extirp.
Brodiaea leptandra
narrow-anthered brodiaea
G3?
S3?
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
800
1,932
39 S:4
0 1 0 0 0 3 3 1 4 0 0
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
G5
S4
None
Threatened
BLM_S-Sensitive
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
140
140
2585
S:1
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Castilleja ambigua var. meadii
Mead's owls-clover
G5T1
S1
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1 1,600
1,600
3 S:2
0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 0
Ceanothus confusus
Rincon Ridge ceanothus
G1
S1
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1
BLM_S-Sensitive
SB_SBBG-Santa
Barbara Botanic
Garden
1,800
1,900
33 S:3
1 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 3 0 0
Ceanothus divergens
Calistoga ceanothus
G2
S2
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
BLM_S-Sensitive
SB_UCSC-UC Santa
Cruz
350
1,250
26 S:5
1 1 1 0 0 2 3 2 5 0 0
Ceanothus purpureus
holly-leaved ceanothus
G2
S2
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
SB_SBBG-Santa
Barbara Botanic
Garden
600
2,350
43 S:13
0 4 1 0 1 7 10 3 12 1 0
Ceanothus sonomensis
Sonoma ceanothus
G2
S2
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
SB_SBBG-Santa
Barbara Botanic
Garden
700
2,600
30 S:9
1 0 0 0 0 8 8 1 9 0 0
Cypseloides niger
black swift
G4
S3
None
None
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_VU-Vulnerable
USFWS_BCC-Birds of
Conservation Concern
2,500
2,500
46 S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Dicamptodon ensatus
California giant salamander
G2G3
S2S3
None
None
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_NT-Near
Threatened
400
1,300
254
S:7
2 1 1 0 0 3 1 6 7 0 0
Downingia pusilla
dwarf downingia
GU
S2
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 2B.2 1,600
1,600
132
S:1
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Report Printed on Tuesday, June 10, 2025
Commercial Version -- Dated June, 1 2025 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 2 of 5 Information Expires 12/1/2025
Summary Table Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence
Name (Scientific/Common)
CNDDB
Ranks
Listing Status
(Fed/State) Other Lists
Range
(ft.)
Total
EO's A B C D X U
Historic
> 20 yr
Recent
<= 20 yr Extant
Poss.
Extirp. Extirp.
Elanus leucurus
white-tailed kite
G5
S3S4
None
None
BLM_S-Sensitive
CDFW_FP-Fully
Protected
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
100
1,260
190
S:2
1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0
Erethizon dorsatum
North American porcupine
G5
S3
None
None
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
277
277
523
S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
Erigeron greenei
Greene's narrow-leaved daisy
G2?
S2?
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
BLM_S-Sensitive
300
600
20 S:4
0 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 4 0 0
Eryngium jepsonii
Jepson's coyote-thistle
G2
S2
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
19 S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Falco peregrinus anatum
American peregrine falcon
G4T4
S3S4
Delisted
Delisted
CDF_S-Sensitive 602
602
76 S:1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Gonidea angulata
western ridged mussel
G3
S2
None
None
IUCN_VU-Vulnerable 141
141
158
S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
bald eagle
G5
S3
Delisted
Endangered
BLM_S-Sensitive
CDF_S-Sensitive
CDFW_FP-Fully
Protected
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
USFS_S-Sensitive
315
315
334
S:1
1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Hesperolinon sharsmithiae
Sharsmith's western flax
G2Q
S2
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
BLM_S-Sensitive
SB_UCSC-UC Santa
Cruz
800
2,200
32 S:7
0 2 3 0 0 2 5 2 7 0 0
Leptosiphon jepsonii
Jepson's leptosiphon
G2G3
S2S3
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
SB_USDA-US Dept of
Agriculture
350
1,200
51 S:4
0 1 0 0 0 3 3 1 4 0 0
Report Printed on Tuesday, June 10, 2025
Commercial Version -- Dated June, 1 2025 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 3 of 5 Information Expires 12/1/2025
Summary Table Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence
Name (Scientific/Common)
CNDDB
Ranks
Listing Status
(Fed/State) Other Lists
Range
(ft.)
Total
EO's A B C D X U
Historic
> 20 yr
Recent
<= 20 yr Extant
Poss.
Extirp. Extirp.
Limnanthes vinculans
Sebastopol meadowfoam
G1
S1
Endangered
Endangered
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
SB_UCBG-UC
Botanical Garden at
Berkeley
90 90
46 S:1
0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Lupinus sericatus
Cobb Mountain lupine
G2?
S2?
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
BLM_S-Sensitive
SB_UCSC-UC Santa
Cruz
900
900
46 S:2
0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 0
Nannopterum auritum
double-crested cormorant
G5
S4
None
None
CDFW_WL-Watch List
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
350
350
39 S:1
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Navarretia leucocephala ssp. pauciflora
few-flowered navarretia
G4T1
S1
Endangered
Threatened
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
1,600
1,600
10 S:1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 8
steelhead - central California coast DPS
G5T3Q
S3
Threatened
None
AFS_TH-Threatened
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
354
659
55 S:3
0 2 0 1 0 0 1 2 3 0 0
Penstemon newberryi var. sonomensis
Sonoma beardtongue
G4T3
S3
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.3
BLM_S-Sensitive
15 S:2
0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 0
Rana boylii pop. 1
foothill yellow-legged frog - north coast DPS
G3T4
S4
None
None
BLM_S-Sensitive
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
USFS_S-Sensitive
80 1,600
1610
S:11
3 1 1 0 0 6 7 4 11 0 0
Rana draytonii
California red-legged frog
G2G3
S2S3
Threatened
None
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_VU-Vulnerable
1,436
1,436
1796
S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
Sagittaria sanfordii
Sanford's arrowhead
G3
S3
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
BLM_S-Sensitive
80 80
143
S:1
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Streptanthus hesperidis
green jewelflower
G2G3
S2S3
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
BLM_S-Sensitive
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
35 S:2
0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 0
Report Printed on Tuesday, June 10, 2025
Commercial Version -- Dated June, 1 2025 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 4 of 5 Information Expires 12/1/2025
Summary Table Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence
Name (Scientific/Common)
CNDDB
Ranks
Listing Status
(Fed/State) Other Lists
Range
(ft.)
Total
EO's A B C D X U
Historic
> 20 yr
Recent
<= 20 yr Extant
Poss.
Extirp. Extirp.
Stygobromus cowani
Cowan's amphipod
G1
S1
None
None
678
678
1 S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Taricha rivularis
red-bellied newt
G2
S2
None
None
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
486
486
136
S:1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Trachusa gummifera
San Francisco Bay Area leaf-cutter bee
G1
S1
None
None
1,614
1,614
3 S:1
0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Trichostema ruygtii
Napa bluecurls
G2
S2
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
260
1,600
19 S:6
0 0 1 0 0 5 6 0 6 0 0
Report Printed on Tuesday, June 10, 2025
Commercial Version -- Dated June, 1 2025 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 5 of 5 Information Expires 12/1/2025
Summary Table Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
This page is intentionally left blank.
Assessing Trees at Yountville
Elementary School
6554 Yount Street
in Yountville, CA 94599
__________________________________________________________ Prepared for:
Brad Raulston, Town Manager
Yountville, CA
[email protected]
Submitted by Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting
Registered Consulting Arborist #685
959 Cheyenne Drive,
Walnut Creek, CA, 94598
March 20, 2024
The image part with relationship ID rId10 was not found in the file. 1 | Page
Introduction
I met Brad Raulston, Yountville's Town Manager at City Hall, and we walked over to inspect the school property next to City Hall at 6554 Yount Street in Yountville. The date was February 23, and I also visited on February 29, 2024. The pictures in this report are from those two days. I took notes on the tree locations, health, and species desirability.
As an addendum, I revisited the Yountville Elementary School site on March 19, 2024.
There were a few trees inside the school building area. I wanted to photograph and analyze those trees as well. I also wanted to document what trees were dead and others that may be at higher risk than acceptable.
This report aims to present the existing trees and their locations in a photo gallery with notes on tree condition and suitability for retaining them. I have noted trees for removal due to poor tree conditions. This report notes that the Napa School district has agreed to remove the dead trees.
This Arborist Report divides the school property into functional areas with tree issues. I am recommending some tree removals due to overcrowding, poor location, or not reasonable to keep due to functionality. The school property can be divided into the following areas.
• Section 1 The front area has a parking lot, islands, perimeter landscaping along Yount Street, and an entryway into the school.
• Section 2 The garden and play area are on the school property's northwest corner, ending where the school buildings begin.
• Section 3 This line of trees runs from the end of Area 2 down to the northeast corner.
• Section 4 The middle of the school property runs north to south, with the buildings and asphalt on the west side and the playing fields on the east side. Trees demarcate the area and include a few trees adjacent to the classrooms.
• Section 5 Trees mark the creek from the northeast to the southeast corner at Finnell Road.
• Section 6 The last section runs along Finnell Road from east to west, bordering the ball field, dugout, and concession stand.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 2 | Page
This screenshot of the area gives a view of the entire property.
Section One: The Point of Entry
These three trees are Monterey Pines, reaching the end of their life span. Besides the deteriorating condition of these three trees, Monterey Pines can only respond to pests, diseases, and stress by increasing their sap flow. This dependence on turpentine-based sap makes for flammable trees. Removing these trees makes perfect sense. We can start afresh with the important entryway to the buildings.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 3 | Page
Close to City Hall, southwest corner—the Deodar Cedar in the left photograph is too big for this location. The street trees and landscape need pruning and cleaning up.
Just before turning into the school entrance, the landscape illustrates three problems.
Trees growing through fences constitute a significant drawback on the entire property.
The first tree in the left photo cannot escape the fence restrictions; remove it. The dead Monterey Pine near the parking lot is in the right photo. The oak on the corner is sustainable but needs pruning to reduce the spread.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 4 | Page
The flowering cherry is dead in the left photo, and remove the volunteer tree near the fence. This landscape area needs attention and planning.
This planting area is the focal point of the front area. I favor keeping the tree in the left photo and both trees in the right photo. The carob tree needs side reduction. This area requires landscape design input as the property's focal point.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 5 | Page
This photo shows the two islands in the parking lot, plus a triangular planting area just outside Area Two—minimal needs to be done, such as a bit of tree pruning and landscaping.
This young crepe myrtle is fine in its
present location—next to the already
mentioned three pine trees. The tree is
fine, but the opening in concrete should be
increased with redwood benches installed
for sitting. Redwood material can be
salvaged from trees removed in the town.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 6 | Page
Section Two: The Garden Area
This section is small and has crowded conditions due to the neighboring fenceline and an overabundance of trees. Ideally, this area serves as a community garden and a play area for people. Because of the tree sizes, some thinning is necessary. I have made my removal selections based on future sustainability.
This photo illustrates the potential for a community garden. I would keep the crabapple to the left and remove the citrus growing in a raised box.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 7 | Page
The photo to the left illustrates a common
theme—the fenceline between the school
property and the neighbor to the north causes
conflict with common trees. This is a Glossy Privet
(weed) growing through the fence. There are
three trees in the lower photo—a London Plane
Tree, a Redwood Tree, and a Lombardy Poplar. I
favor the removal of the Redwood Tree and
significant pruning on the two deciduous trees.
The Redwood tree is already too big and the
neighboring Redwoods are doing the job already.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 8 | Page
This volunteer Valley Oak has no future or place between the fence and the constructed beds.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 9 | Page
Section Three: The Northern Fence Line
This linear area starts with the school building just past the garden and play area. The area suffers from trees planted on both properties that are too close to the fence. Some trees away from the fence better serve the function of property screening and shade.
There are three Coast live oaks against the fence; remove these. The existing cottonwood needs side reduction pruning. The photo on the right reveals a co-dominant ironbark eucalypt as well as another cottonwood, multi-stemmed, in need of safety pruning. The three oaks stuck in the fence must be removed, but the neighboring property owner must be consulted before the work begins.
Four fence oaks exist on the left; none are sustainable but may be on neighboring property. The photo to the right shows three oaks; the first oak has a good structure and may be sustainable.
The second Coast Live Oak has a poor structure and is growing into the fence. The third oak, a Valley Oak, is leaning but can be sustained.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 10 | Page
A Coast Live Oak, a Valley Oak, a Coast Live Oak, and a Valley Oak are all in the fence and not sustainable.
Section Four: The Middle Section Between the Asphalt and the Playing Field
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 11 | Page
One Coast Live Oak and five Raywood Ashes—all sustainable These two photos show three Raywood Ashes and one Olive tree; the second Raywood Ash is in both photos. All four trees are sustainable.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 12 | Page
Four olives are pictured here, and the olive to the right is photographed twice. All sustainable.
Eight olives are along the slope and to the right near the white building—all sustainable.
The right photo shows the three Fruitless Mulberrry Trees-- Morus alba.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 13 | Page
The ‘Hands Tree,’ a Tanoak, sits near the classrooms and has historical value for the school site.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 14 | Page
Section Five: The Eastern Line of Trees along the creek to the southeast corner
These photos show the northeast corner and the oaks on the creekside of the fence.
The walnut tree to the left sits in
Hopper Creek. This tree is 90%
dead and should be removed.
There is very low risk due to the
lack of targets, but cleaning up the
creek area is essential to the
overall aesthetics.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 15 | Page
The above six photos present the difficulties inherent with creek plantings, fence interference, and jurisdictional questions. Professional maintenance is needed on these trees.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 16 | Page
The difficulty with these oak trees is their location in the creek and over the fence. The leaning oak and palm tree must be addressed.
Section Six: The Southern Line of Trees along Finnell Road and the baseball diamond, dugout, and concession stand.
The Tan Oak, Notholithocarpus
densiflorus, is not the most
desirable tree. Tan Oaks are not
true oaks and are considered
weed trees by some. Here, I think
the palm tree and the leaning oak
require removal. Leave the tan
oak for its upright form and
placement, which is
advantageous.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 17 | Page
The southeast corner includes four Valley Oaks and a Mexican Pine, all sustainable with some minor deadwood pruning.
Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 18 | Page
Coast Live Oaks fill this stretch along Finnell Road and from the bridge to the staff parking lot. Some less desirable trees, such as those already growing into the fence Assessing Trees at the School Property in Yountville, CA Tony Wayne Wolcott Consulting 19 | Page
material and those in poor condition, are likely removal candidates. Pruning to eliminate or significantly reduce the multi-stemmed trees is highly recommended. The last photo taken on March 20 reveals an Arizona Cypress, Hesperocyparis arizonica, in a misplaced location; removal is the only solution.
Conclusion
There are 108 trees assessed in this report. I have left out a few trees inside the classroom area. Many sustainable trees require some pruning to reduce the risk of falling branches.
There are about 18 trees recommended for removal. These removals do not include trees along the eastern boundary close to the creek. Trees with boundary issues to neighboring properties also were not included in the removals.
I suggest the Town of Yountville strike an ad hoc committee to work on the school landscape. Dedicated workers can accomplish a great deal in a short period. This project is an excellent idea to build confidence in the community and a vested interest in the makeover of the school grounds. Turning the garden site into an available community garden space would be easy and a great start. People could learn proper pruning techniques and how to plant and maintain trees. I would help with this.
Signed: Tony Wayne Wolcott
On Call Arborist
Town of Yountville
Date: March 20, 2024
E