Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Forestry topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public Works presents tree replanting plan after Valley Park removals; commissioners receive report
Summary
Staff outlined a plan to replace approximately 26 removed or soon-to-be-removed park and greenbelt trees with about 52 new trees (a 2:1 ratio), provided species recommendations for turf and non-turf areas, and estimated replanting costs; the commission voted to receive the report and provide feedback.
Public Works staff presented a tree replanting plan at the commission’s September meeting following recent safety-driven removals in Valley Park and several greenbelts. The commission voted to receive the staff report and provided feedback on species selection and locations.
Staff said an earlier round of emergency removals in Valley Park followed three public-safety incidents (fallen branches and limbs near commonly used areas). During subsequent inspections, staff identified additional trees in declining health and scheduled further removals. In total staff presented a list of about 26 trees to be removed citywide in the Valley Park/greenbelt program and recommended a 2:1 replacement ratio consistent with the city’s parkway-tree policy where feasible.
A city-certified arborist provided a species list for park (turf) and non-turf greenbelt plantings. For turf areas the arborist recommended species such as Western red bud, netleaf oak and southern magnolia; for non-turf or lower-irrigation greenbelt sites staff proposed species including Chilean mesquite, African sumac and jacaranda (also noting jacaranda’s seasonal litter). Staff said tree placements follow canopy goals (shade priority in picnic and seating areas) and operational constraints such as root and utility conflicts.
Staff provided preliminary cost estimates: replanting about 52 trees in 24-inch boxes would run roughly $23,000–$45,000 depending on species and nursery pricing; removal of the 26 trees was estimated at roughly $35,000. Staff noted a city landscape contract includes a $50,000 contingency that would likely be exceeded and that additional spending authority or alternative contracting for replanting may be required.
Commissioners asked about species selection, canopy goals, tree height and locations that could affect sight lines at vehicle intersections. Staff agreed to revisit a proposed planting at Valley and Gould (identified as Tree #33 in staff materials) after commissioners raised a sight-line concern. Commissioners also asked staff to consider a broader inventory and a longer-term strategy; staff said more tree assessments are underway and that an updated inventory effort will be part of future landscape-contract planning.
The commission voted to receive and file the staff report; staff will incorporate commissioner feedback on species and specific locations before finalizing replanting work and any required budget requests to council.
