Laserfiche WebLink
Preliminary Arborist Report August 18, 2016 <br /> 6455 Owens Drive , Pleasanton Page 4 <br /> Eight Callery pear were present and ranged in size from 9"to 20". Pears#103 and 111 <br /> were in good condition with codominant trunks, multiple attachments,typical form and <br /> structure and good vigorous growth (Photo 1 and 2). Callery pear#111 was in fair <br /> condition with codominant leaders at 10'. The southern side of the canopy was growing <br /> into tree#110. Tree#112 also in fair condition with minor dieback in the canopy but <br /> typical form and structure. Tree#112 was located off-site and was 7". <br /> t " <br /> sl ,>,:. 44 ''0,'r, <br /> t f • <i . �. ,.:1,, <br /> ti J <br /> "C- t-7'S IV! VA t ' . ' le ''''''',,,,. <br /> IF ... <br /> ig" <br /> _, <br /> Photo 1 (above).— Callery pear#103 was in _w . <br /> good health and condition. - <br /> Photo 2 (right). —Callery pear#110 was in good health and condition. <br /> Four pears (#106— 109)were all but <br /> r dead with very little live foliage (Photo <br /> `,,• . \i 3). This group of trees ranged in size <br /> �#' k r <br /> from 8"to— 10" in diameter. Tree#106 <br /> had wounds that had not healed <br /> ;,'t'! ".,. properly. Tree#107 had a weak <br /> r -,.'-*!e-,.1 . '- t� e `'t '`t c codominant branch attachment. <br /> aFP 4'�- . " stt 'o't:. `., . F,� Photo 3. Trees#106 and 107 were all <br /> , x ;• 1' t`•._ but dead (below). <br /> :. v:y'; <br /> t <br /> T,` ` Four Italian cypress trees(#101, 102, <br /> t , 104 and 105)were in good condition. <br /> ,. epeThe Italian cypresses were young trees <br /> 4.70/ •_ ranging in diameter from six to eight <br /> — <br /> i z ,, . inches. All four trees had good upright <br /> Q 1 y am <br /> form and structure with good vagarious <br /> growth. However, trees#101 and 102 <br /> yIIIMhad a meatal tree-tie embedded in the <br /> trunk(Photo 4, next page). <br /> c'V'. <br /> 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 />