Laserfiche WebLink
Preliminary Arborist Report August 18, 2016 <br /> 6455 Owens Drive , Pleasanton Page 3 <br /> Low: Trees in poor health or with significant structural defects that <br /> cannot be mitigated. Tree is expected to continue to decline, <br /> regardless of treatment. The species or individual tree may <br /> have characteristics that are undesirable for landscapes, and <br /> generally are unsuited for use areas. <br /> Descriptions of each tree are found in the Tree Assessment and approximate locations <br /> are plotted on the Tree Assessment Map(see Exhibits). <br /> City of Pleasanton Urban Tree Protection Requirements <br /> The Pleasanton Municipal Code Chapter 17.16 controls the removal and preservation of <br /> Heritage trees within the City. Heritage trees are defined as: <br /> 1. Any single-trunked tree with a diameter of 18 inches or more measured four <br /> and one-half feet above ground level; <br /> 2. Any multi-trunked tree of which the two largest trunks have a diameter of 18 <br /> inches or more measured four and one-half feet above ground level; <br /> 3. Any tree 35 feet or more in height; <br /> 4. Any tree of particular historical significance specifically designated by official <br /> action; <br /> 5. A stand of trees, the nature of which makes each dependent upon the other <br /> for survival or the area's natural beauty. <br /> Heritage trees may not be removed, destroyed or disfigured without a permit. <br /> Description of Trees <br /> Twelve (12)trees, representing two species, were evaluated (Table 1). The monoculture <br /> represented is not ideal for a thriving landscape, however the tree species selection was <br /> typical of those found in Tri-Valley landscapes. <br /> Across all species, 50% of trees were in good condition, 20%were in fair condition and <br /> 30%were in poor condition. All trees on the site were planted. <br /> Table 1. Condition ratings and frequency of occurrence of trees <br /> 6455 Owens Drive, Pleasanton, CA. <br /> Common Scientific Name Protected Total <br /> Name Poor Fair Good <br /> (1-2) (3) (4-5) <br /> Cupressus <br /> Italian cypress sempervirens - - 4 - 4 <br /> Callery pear Pyrus calleryana 4 1 2 1 8 <br /> Total 4 1 6 1 12 <br /> branches, significant structural defects that cannot be abated. <br /> 1 -Tree in severe decline, dieback of scaffold branches and/or trunk; most <br /> of foliage from epicormics; extensive structural defects that cannot be <br /> abated. <br /> 0- Dead <br /> 5. Rating the suitability for preservation as"high", "moderate"or"low". <br /> Suitability for preservation considers the health, age and structural condition <br /> of the tree species, and its potential to remain an asset to the site. <br /> High: Trees with good health and structural stability that have the <br /> potential for longevity at the site. <br /> Moderate: Trees with somewhat declining health and/or structural <br /> defects than can be abated with treatment. The tree will <br /> require more intense management and monitoring, and may <br /> have shorter life span than those in 'high' category. <br />e shocked if any one of us didn't get nasty grams from <br /> then on and I agree with Commissioner O'Connor that that intersection is already horrible. So <br /> you may be talking two more cars to 13 and you're on Owens, and if you block Hopyard we're <br /> going to be hearing it forever and I would hate to vote in favor of a project that would do that. <br /> Again, my comment about the plans labeled "Owens Court." Starbucks has a base for your <br /> evaluation as Bernal. I do worry that that is not comparable for the traffic and my only comment <br /> to that is I avoid that Starbucks because of its location and its circulation pattern. So I'm not <br /> being counted in there because it's so deep and so tricky to get through that parking lot to get <br /> to that Starbucks buried in there that I think we're misrepresenting what we might see here <br /> with the prominent freeway access and the volume of traffic going down Hopyard. <br /> Excerpt: Planning Commission Minutes, September 28, 2016 Page 19 of 20 <br />lanning Commission <br /> Page 11 of 19 <br />