My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PARKS AND RECREATION
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2025
>
TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/7/2025 10:21:11 AM
Creation date
2/6/2025 3:41:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
2/13/2025
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
86
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
122 | CITY OF PLEASANTON URBAN FOREST MASTER PLAN <br />STATUS OF THE URBAN FOREST PUBLIC AND PRIVATE TREES <br />Neighborhoods <br />Among the 77 neighborhoods within the analysis <br />boundary, 72 experienced an increase, in absolute <br />canopy change percentage terms, ranging from 0.7% <br />to 22.7%, with Ruby Hill recording the largest increase <br />at 22.7%. Only one neighborhood, Jensen Tract, <br />saw a decrease of 0.2%. The average canopy across <br />neighborhoods increased from 23.0% in 2012 to 29.8% <br />in 2022. These results provide valuable insights for <br />the City to focus efforts on targeted areas that require <br />canopy enhancement. <br />Parks <br />Of the 48 parks within the analysis boundary, 39 <br />experienced an increase ranging from 0.8% to 22.5%, <br />while nine parks experienced a decrease ranging <br />from 0.2% to 19.8%. Vintage Hills Park saw the largest <br />increase at 22.5%, whereas Civic Park experienced the <br />largest decrease at 19.8% due to the loss of the mature <br />American Elm trees to Dutch Elm disease. The average <br />canopy cover across all parks was 36.5% in 2012 and <br />41.9% in 2022. <br />Potential Reasons for Canopy Cover Increase <br />The results reveal an overall increase in canopy cover <br />across all examined delineations from 2012 to 2022. <br />Table 2-5. Canopy Cover by Tree Maintenance District <br />Tree <br />Maintenance <br />District <br />Canopy <br />Cover <br />Percent <br />(2012) <br />Canopy <br />Percent <br />(2022) <br />Absolute <br />Change <br />1 22.8%27.6%4.8% <br />2 22.7%29.8%7.1% <br />3 14.9%24.3%9.4% <br />4 13.9%17.9%4.0% <br />5 21.1%25.4%4.3% <br />6 21.8%25.4%3.6% <br />7 22.7%26.1%3.4% <br />8 24.0%26.2%2.2% <br />9 12.4%18.8%6.4% <br />10 19.6%25.8%6.2% <br />11 9.6%15.9%6.3% <br />12 15.1%30.0%14.9% <br />13 16.4%21.1%4.7% <br />17 7.9%16.6%8.7%
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.