Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11.19.2019 P&R Commission Packet Agenda CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR MEETING OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Tuesday, November 19, 2019 7:00 p.m. Welcome to the Regular Meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission. The regular meetings are held on the third Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers at the Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California. If this is your first time, the following is a general outline of our procedures. In accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.5, any writing or document that is a public record, relates to an open session agenda item, and is distributed less than 72 hours prior to a regular meeting will be made available for public inspection at the Parks and Recreation Department in the Municipal Services Building. If, however, the document or writing is not distributed until the regular meeting to which it relates, then the document or writing will be made available to the public at the location of the meeting, as listed on this agenda. Public Comment: For those wishing to address the Commission on any Agenda or non-Agendized item, please complete a Speaker Card located at the entrance to the Chamber and submit it to the Director of Parks and Recreation. Please be sure to indicate the Agenda item number you wish to address or the topic of your public comment. California law prevents the Commission from taking action on any item not on the Agenda (except in emergency circumstances). Your question or problem may be referred to staff for investigation and/or action where appropriate or the matter may be placed on a future Agenda for more comprehensive action or report. When your name is called, please come to the podium, state your name and address (optional) for the Minutes. COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER SPEAKER. Thank you for your cooperation. If you have special questions, please contact the Director of Parks and Recreation. The Director will be pleased to answer your questions when the Commission is not in session. BETTY BATTAGLIA CHAIRPERSON RICHARD HOLT KRISTY CAMACHO VICE CHAIR COMMISSIONER RUTH DeNARDI STEPHEN FIRPO COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER WILLIAM LOCK ROBERT UY COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER SHARON RANALS ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/ DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION Agenda CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING Municipal Services Building Community Room 33 Arroyo Drive Tuesday, November 19, 2019 7:00 p.m. A G E N D A I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Pledge of Allegiance IV. Agenda Review V. Approval of Minutes of the October 15, 2019, Meeting VI. Citizen Participation (Citizen comment on items not agendized/informational only) VII. Beautification Committee VIII. Old Business IX. New Business A. 2020 Special Events Calendar B. July 4, 2020 Fireworks Event C. Orange Memorial Park Ballfield Construction Update D. Urban Forest Master Plan Update E. Civic Campus Fundraising X. Friends of Parks and Recreation XI. Items from Commission XII. Items from Staff A. December Calendar of Events B. Administrative Update XIII. Adjournment Next Meeting: Special Meeting: Monday, December 9, 2019 Regular Meeting: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES FROM TUESDAY, October 15, 2019 I. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 pm A regular meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission of the City of South San Francisco was held on Tuesday, October 15, 2019, at the Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California. II. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Battaglia, Camacho, DeNardi, Firpo, Holt, Lock and Uy Staff: Sharon Ranals, Parks and Recreation Director Greg Mediati, Deputy Director Angela Duldulao, Recreation Manager Morena Gallagher, Administrative Assistant III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Complete IV. AGENDA REVIEW: No changes. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE September 17, 2019, MEETING: No changes and approved by motion as written. Motion: Commissioner Camacho/Second: Commissioner DeNardi VI. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION – None VII. BEATIFICATION COMMITTEE: Deputy Mediati attended the Beautification Meeting this morning. There were not enough members present for a quorum; however, the committee did discuss the Beautification Awards Presentation to City Council, and the Coastal Clean Up event. VIII. OLD BUSINESS: A. Concert in the Park Update: Manager Duldulao recapped the Concert in the Park event. She thanked the commissioners for their support and for those who attended. She also thanked the Parks and Facilities Division staff for all the help with setting up before and the cleaning up after the event. The attendance for the event is estimated at 2,000 people. The El Camino High School Jazz Band was welcomed back. The South San Francisco High School Jazz Band was expected, but at the last minute it was changed to the Marching Band and the Color Guard, which turned out to be very well accepted. We hope to have them return next year. There were two main feature bands, Lydia Pense and Cold Blood, and Marlow Rosado. The Department received several sponsorships, thanks to Vice Mayor Garbarino’s fundraising efforts, that funded the Family Fun Zone for the second year in a row. The Family Fun Zone hosted about 900 participants, who enjoyed features such as bounce houses, a rock wall, petting zoo, train ride and the giant slide. There were also free activities Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes of the Meeting of October 15, 2019 Page 2 in other areas of the park such as Zumba, the Imagination Playground featuring buildable play structures for children, and a silent disco. Many of the cash donors are returning donors from prior years and we are happy to have their consistent support for the event. One of the new donors this year is The Daily Journal, who made an in-kind donation to offset a portion of the cost for advertising in the paper. The other in-kind new donor, Amoura Restaurant, graciously supplied lunch, drinks and snacks for the Parks and Recreation staff, band members and stage crews. Friends of Parks and Recreation hosted a successful beer and wine booth with the support of Matagrano Inc. The support of Matagrano Inc. was very much appreciated; not only did they make a large cash donation they also provided services and supplies for the beer and wine booth. A survey was passed out at the event and was also available online. The results from the survey were positive. The most common remark was that the people enjoyed a day of free activities at the park like the family fun zone, Zumba and the silent disco. Attendees also recommended that staff move the family fun zone activities closer together as well as closer to the main concert area, and to add vendor tables and more food options. Commissioner Lock said he couldn’t attend the event since he was out of town but did hear a lot good feedback from those that attended Commissioner DeNardi did attend the event and thought it was very well done. The food trucks had long lines but suggested to have a few more food trucks to alleviate the wait time for food orders. To increase attendance she suggested moving the date of the event. St. Veronica’s Festival and the Pacifica Fog Fest were the same weekend and both were very well attended. Commissioner Uy attended the event with his children and had a great time. He suggested having more varieties of food trucks. He did note the Fun Zone activities were too far apart. Commissioner Camacho attended the event and really enjoyed it and thought that Parks and Recreation did a great job. She enjoyed watching the SSF High School Marching Band and Color Guards. She suggested moving the Council presentation to the middle of the concert when there are more people there. She also suggested moving the date to not conflict with the other events going on at the same time. She did have feedback from some families indicating that it was too much of a distance from the fun zone, food trucks and the concert. Commissioner Firpo attended the event and observed the silent disco and it looked like it was a lot of fun. He had suggested showcasing other recreation classes for the future events. He did appreciate the survey that was done. ACM Ranals shared that next years’ concert might be held in conjunction with celebrating the City Hall’s 100th Anniversary. She asked the Parks and Recreation Commission how they feel about holding the concert in the downtown area. Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes of the Meeting of October 15, 2019 Page 3 Commissioner DeNardi asked about offering a shuttle bus since parking is limited downtown. She also suggested utilizing local tribute bands. Commissioner Camacho said that she liked the idea to have the concert downtown if it was an Art and Wine festival event. Commissioner Uy agreed with Commissioner Camacho he would like to see it as an Art and Wine Festival format. Chair Battaglia would like to utilize the downtown restaurants at the event. Commission Lock feels that holding the event downtown would put a strain on the Department’s resources and funds. IX. NEW BUSINESS: None X. FRIENDS OF PARKS & RECREATION: None XI. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION: Commissioner Holt attended the Improving Public Places event and noted it was wonderful. Commissioner DeNardi attended the IPP event and the art exhibit by the Cultural Arts Commission, noting it was fantastic and would like to see exhibits like this at the new Civic Center in the future. Commissioner Lock mentioned California Association of Park and Recreations Commissioners and Board Members (CAPRCBM) Executive Director Jim Simpson is resigning and the Association will be looking for referrals for that position. He expressed to Manager Duldulao that he would like to volunteer to hand out the surveys during the concert event in the future. Commissioner Firpo expressed his thanks to Parks and Recreation for the concert event. Commissioner Camacho thanked everyone involved with the Concert in Park and all the little details to make it a successful event. She appreciates getting the weekly updates from the Parks and Recreation Department and finds it to be very informative. She attended the art show with her family and enjoyed it. Chair Battaglia congratulated Deputy Director Mediati for the award from the California Urban Forest Council. She thanked the sponsors for the Concert in the Park and to Vice Mayor Garbarino for being instrumental in getting the sponsors for the event. XII. ITEMS FROM STAFF: ACM Ranals appreciated the feedback regarding the bi-weekly reports shared with the Commission. Chair Battaglia is having trouble with getting the bi-weekly via email. Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes of the Meeting of October 15, 2019 Page 4 Mediati mentioned that the IPP event on November 16 has been changed to November 9, per the Mayor’s request. Manager Duldulao offered the Commission two tickets for the Halloween Extravaganza and one admission to the Fun Run on November 16. She has flyers for these events and also the Holiday Boutique that will be held on November 2. The Oyster Point Dragons is holding a free event on Sunday, October 20. The after school program is holding a poster contest. The theme is “Keep South City Clean” and is asking for one or two Commissioners to judge the contest. Commissioner Uy and Lock both volunteered to judge. Deputy Director Mediati updated the Commission that the leaning light pole at Terrabay Field has been removed and replaced. Irish Town Green construction is done as of today and staff will be opening the soccer fields in the spring ACM Ranals shared that there will be a public meeting at the Corporation Yard lunchroom on November 4 at 6:30 p.m. regarding the designs of the ball field at Orange Park discussing synthetic turf verses natural turf. ACM Ranals shared a possible design for the fields. Buri Buri School Field is coming along and Deputy Mediati had gone out and inspected it and has a few concerns with the soil. XIII. ADJOURNMENT: 8:12 by Chair Battaglia Respectfully submitted by Morena Gallagher, Administrative Assistant I Staff Report DATE: November 19, 2019 TO: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Recreation Manager SUBJECT: 2020 Event Calendar RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Parks and Recreation Commission be apprised of the Parks and Recreation Department’s proposed 2020 event calendar. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION By way of this report, the Parks and Recreation Department is releasing the first draft of its 2020 Event Calendar to be reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission. Most events fall on or near the same day(s) as in the prior year. However, the calendar highlights a few changes the Department is considering for the 2020 event schedule. The calendar is available in Attachment 1. Note that all dates are subject to change. By: _______________________________ Angela Duldulao Recreation Manager attachments v.11.12.2019 ATTACHMENT 1 Parks and Recreation Department 2020 Event Calendar Legend: Tentative City Holiday New/Modified Events January 1 New Year’s Day/Programs Closed 6 Winter Session Classes Begin 24 Middle School Dance 20 Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday/Programs Closed 24 or 31 Valentines Cards for the Troops February 7 Senior Dance Chinese New Year Party 14 Seniors Valentines Special Dance 14 CAC General Art & Karaoke 15 CAC General Art & Karaoke 17 Presidents Day/Program Closed 21-18 Summer Camp Lottery Applications Accepted/Priority Registration 24 Spring Session Registration Begins March 13 Senior Health Fair 14 Summer Camp Registration Begins 23-27 Spring Camp 23 Spring Session of Classes Begins April 1-10 After School Program Lottery Registration/Priority Registration 3-4 CAC Youth Art Show 4 Easter Egg Hunt 13 Junior Giants Registration Begins 17 Senior Volunteer Luncheon 24 Arbor Day TBD Youth Karate Tournament TBD Adult Softball League Begins May 2 Streets Alive! Parks Alive! (cancelled) 2 Farmers Market Opening 4 Summer Session Registration Begins 15 Preschool Graduations 17 Senior Pancake Breakfast 25 Memorial Day/Programs Closed 25 Memorial Day Flag Ceremony 28 Last Day of School @SSFUSD TBD Junior Giants First Pitch Meeting June 1 First Day of Summer Camp 1 Summer Session Classes Begin 11 Junior Giants Begins 19 Outdoor Movie Night in the Park TBD Adult Summer Basketball Begins TBD Junior Giants Coaches Meeting July July is Parks and Recreation Month! 3 Programs Closed 4 Independence Day 4 Oyster Point Fireworks Show 10 CAC Photography Show 11 CAC Photography Show TBD Adult Summer Softball League August 7 Final Day of Summer Camp 10 Fall Session Registration Begins 12 SSFUSD School Begins 21 SSF Senior Picnic 21 Outdoor Movie Night in the Park 30 Cultural Arts BBQ v.11.12.2019 TBD Middle School Fall Sports Evaluation September 7 Labor Day/Programs Closed 8 Fall Session Classes Begin 19 Coastal Clean Up Day 21 Concert in the Park (cancelled) TBD City Hall 100th Anniversary Celebration TBD Middle School Fall Sports Begin October 9 CAC Show: Day of the Dead 10 CAC Show: Day of the Dead 12 Columbus Day/Programs Closed 24 Halloween Extravaganza TBD Middle School Dance November 7 Holiday Boutique 11 Veterans Day/Programs Closed 14 Class Registration for Winter Begins 23 Thanksgiving Fun Run 26 Thanksgiving/Programs Closed 27 Thanksgiving/Programs Closed December 5 Santa Comes to Town 6 IPP Wreath Workshop 21-23 Winter Camp 21-25 Recreation Administrative Offices Closed 24 Christmas Eve/City Offices Closed at Noon 25 Christmas Day/Programs Closed 28-30 Winter Camp 31 New Year’s Eve/City Offices Closed at Noon TBD Nutcracker Staff Report DATE: November 19, 2019 TO: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Deputy Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: July 4, 2020 Fireworks Event RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Parks and Recreation Commission be apprised of the proposed 2020 Independence Day Fireworks Display. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Staff will report verbally on the proposed Independence Day Fireworks Display, to be held on July 4, 2020. Details on the event are evolving at the time of publishing this report. By: Greg Mediati Deputy Director of Parks and Recreation Staff Report DATE: November 19, 2019 TO: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Deputy Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Orange Memorial Park Athletic Field Improvements RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Parks and Recreation Commission be apprised of the status of the stormwater capture project at Orange Memorial Park, and subsequent athletic field replacement. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION In fiscal year 2016-17, City Council approved a cooperative implementation agreement with Caltrans for $9.5 million for the construction of a stormwater capture facility at Orange Memorial Park. More recently, Caltrans has pledged an additional $6 million to expand the size of the project. Additionally in 2017-18, the City Council authorized the Orange Memorial Park Sports Field Renovation Project to improve the existing baseball and softball fields, and perimeter fence, grandstands and pathways. The purpose of the stormwater capture project is to help the City comply with the Regional Water Quality Control Board's (RWQCB) Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) which stipulates a regulatory limit requirement for 100% trash reduction by July 1, 2022, and certain minimum mercury and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) load reductions in waters flowing to the San Francisco Bay. A portion of these load reductions must utilize green infrastructure. The project will also help the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) fulfill its required stormwater pollution prevention obligations, hence their financial assistance with this project. In addition to the regulatory benefits, treated stormwater will be allowed to infiltrate into the groundwater aquifer, and will be retained in an underground cistern used for irrigation throughout Orange Memorial Park, along Centennial Way Trail and Sister Cities Linear Park. A hydrant will also allow this treated recycled water to be used for the city’s water tanker truck, which is used for watering trees throughout the city, and street sweepers and vactor trucks. Staff and consulting engineers with Lotus Water studied several locations for the stormwater capture device. The existing softball and baseball field at Orange Memorial Park was determined to be the ideal location due to its suitable soil structure, geotechnical makeup, elevation, and Staff Report To: Parks and Recreation Commission Date: November 19, 2019 Subject: Orange Memorial Park Athletic Field Improvements proximity to Colma Creek. Lotus Water’s design for the stormwater improvements is 90% complete. Construction for this portion of the project is planned to begin in May 2020, with completion in October 2021 at which time field improvements will immediately begin. During construction, adult softball and youth baseball will be displaced to alternate sites. South San Francisco High School’s baseball team, which uses the baseball field for practices and games, will permanently relocate to a new on-campus field. City staff tasked Verde Design Landscape Architects to design the replacement athletic facility and lead community outreach activities. Verde Design is well known as industry experts in the design and construction of sports facilities. Notable local projects include Beach Chalet Fields, Kezar Stadium and Minnie and Lovie Fields in San Francisco, Red Morton Fields in Redwood City, among many others. On Monday, November 4, staff and Verde Design hosted its first community meeting to solicit preliminary feedback on the design of the field. Topics discussed included potential layouts of the field, which can accommodate softball, baseball and soccer for all ages, field scheduling, lighting, perimeter improvements and the application of synthetic turf in lieu of natural turf, which would allow for significantly more use of the field in all weather conditions. Residents and sports league representatives were unanimously in favor of synthetic turf for this site. The ballfield concepts shared with the public are attached to this report for the Commission’s information. As designs of these fields are drafted, staff will bring these forward to the Parks and Recreation Commission and to the public for feedback. Estimates for construction costs and schedules will be provided as these details become more firm. CONCLUSION Staff recommends that the Parks and Recreation Commission be apprised of the status of the stormwater capture project at Orange Memorial Park, and subsequent athletic field replacement. Feedback from the Parks and Recreation Commission on the designs are welcome. All comments received will be shared with consultants for inclusion in the design development process. By: Greg Mediati Deputy Director of Parks and Recreation ATTACHMENT 1- Ballfield Design Concepts Field ImprovementsSynthetic Turf, andDrainage Replacement30' Tall Chain Link Backstopwith OverhangNew Chain Link Dugout, Typ.November 4, 2019Project No: 1719200(3) 5-Row Bleachers, 50seats eachNORTH010'20'40'60'New Chain LinkDugout, Typ.Conceptual Design - Synthetic TurfOrange Memorial ParkSouth San Francsico, CANew Chain LinkBullpen, Typ.New Asphalt PavingNew Perimeter FenceNew Chain Link Bullpen, Typ.63x110 Yard Soccer FieldYouth Baseball Field withPortable MoundSynthetic Turf Infield45X63 Yard U9-U10Soccer Field, Typ.Entry - Sound Wallwith Planting30' Tall Chain LinkBackstop with Overhang20' Tall Chain LinkProtective Fence AlongDugout and Bullpen, Typ.20' Tall Chain Link ProtectiveFence Along Dugout andBullpen, Typ.(3) 5-Row Bleachers, 50 seatseachField with 20' Backstopand OverhangAdult Softball and YouthBaseball/Softball Field(2) 5-Row Bleachers,50 seats eachExisting Palms to Remain, Typ.Widened SidewalkNew Drinking FountainNew Picnic BenchesNew Shade Tree, Typ.New Picnic Tables, Typ.New Shade Trees, Typ.New Entry SignageNew Benches, Typ. Field ImprovementsTurf, Irrigation, andDrainage Replacement(3) 5-Row Bleachers, 50 seatseachNew Chain Link Dugout, Typ.November 4, 2019Project No: 1719200(3) 5-Row Bleachers, 50seats eachNORTH010'20'40'60'New Chain LinkDugout, Typ.Conceptual Design - Natural TurfOrange Memorial ParkSouth San Francsico, CANew Chain LinkBullpen, Typ.New Asphalt PavingNew Perimeter FencePlanting Area, Typ.New Chain Link Bullpen, Typ.63x110 Yard Soccer FieldNew Infield FinesNew Infield Fines25X35 Yard U6-U8Soccer Field47X63 Yard U9-U10Soccer FieldEntry - Sound WallNew Entry Signage30' Tall Chain LinkBackstop with Overhang20' Tall Chain LinkProtective Fence AlongDugout and Bullpen, Typ.30' Tall Chain Link Backstopwith Overhang20' Tall Chain Link ProtectiveFence Along Dugout andBullpen, Typ.New Shade Tree,typ.New Picnic Table,typ.New Drinking FountainYouth Baseball Field withPortable MoundExisting Palms to Remain, Typ.New Benches, Typ.New Planting AreaAdult Softball and YouthBaseball/Softball FieldEntry - Planting WallWidened Sidewalk Staff Report DATE: November 19, 2019 TO: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Deputy Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Urban Forest Master Plan Update RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Parks and Recreation Commission review the draft Urban Forest Master Plan and provide feedback. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION For many years, the City of South San Francisco has acted as responsible stewards of its urban forest of over 15,000 trees. In 1989, the City adopted a tree preservation ordinance, which recognized the value of the city’s public and private trees, and created guidelines for enforcement of tree preservation and tree care. This ordinance was subsequently updated in 2000 and 2016. South San Francisco has also been distinguished as a Tree City USA for over 30 years. As part of the 2017/18 Capital Improvement Program, the City Council authorized funding for the creation of a citywide Urban Forest Master Plan. The purpose of an Urban Forest Master Plan is to develop a clear set of goals, policies and objectives that will provide direction for the development, improvement and enhancement of the City’s parks, neighborhood and street trees, which collectively serve as the city’s “urban forest.” The plan will serve as a tool to guide tree care and reforestation measures on an immediate, as well as long-term basis. The vision for the Urban Forest Master Plan includes goals for sustainability, species diversity, and greater canopy coverage. The City’s urban forest provides multiple environmental, economic and aesthetic benefits for residents, businesses and visitors. Trees provide shade and reduce energy consumption. They improve air and water quality, provide habitat, spur economic vitality, and impart a distinct character to our city. As part of this work, the City is seeking innovative methods and approaches to develop a city-wide, long term Urban Forest Master Plan that provides recommendations and actions the City can take in the short and long term to improve and enhance the City’s urban forest and respond to environmental and safety issues that can impact the City’s canopy and wildlife habitat. Staff Report To: Parks and Recreation Commission Date: November 19, 2019 Subject: Urban Forest Master Plan Update The scope of the analysis for this plan includes the following: 1. Ensure that the City has an accurate and complete picture of its urban forest, both on public and private lands. The plan incorporates information from the City’s tree inventory. 2. Establish the urban forest as a public resource in a meaningful way. 3. Conduct analysis of canopy coverage and recommend an achievable goal for future canopy coverage. 4. Establish the importance of sustainability in a meaningful way. The plan describes the need to create a more robust and climatically appropriate tree genera and updates the City’s preferred species list. 5. Provide a vision and strategic plan for effective and efficient management of the urban forest – employing best practices and technical standards that reflect the latest advancements in the field. 6. Review and incorporate resources (both within and external to the City), such as existing plans, the municipal code, and other professional resources. 7. Engage the community as stewards of the urban forest through education and encouragement. 8. Include a monitoring plan that will address the effectiveness of the plan. Staff issued a request for proposals for the creation of the Urban Forest Master Plan, and awarded the contract to Davey Resources Group, a subsidiary of Davey Tree Company, in 2018. The contract’s value for the work is $78,488. Davey Resource Group is one of the premier tree care companies in the United States. Regionally, Davey has completed many similar and successful plans, which staff has reviewed for their completeness. Notable local plans include City of Woodland, City of Sacramento, City of Mountain View, and City of Roseville. Over the past year, staff has worked closely with the consulting arborists to draft this plan. During the planning process, consultants reviewed the city’s tree inventory, forestry practices, and met with city stakeholders, including Commissioner Camacho and former Commissioner Garrone, who were selected as the Commission’s representatives for the planning process. A public workshop was also held to gather resident feedback, which is all summarized in the report. CONCLUSION A draft copy of the plan is attached to this staff report for the Commission to review, and provide feedback. Comments received will be shared with consultants and included in the next iteration of the plan, which will be shared with City Council for formal adoption. By: Greg Mediati Deputy Director of Parks and Recreation ATTACHMENT 1- Draft Urban Forest Master Plan CITY OFSouth San Francisco URBAN FOREST MASTER PLAN The planting of a tree, especially one of the long-living hardwood trees, is a gift which you can make to posterity at almost no cost and with almost no trouble, and if the tree takes root it will far outlive the visible effect of any of your other actions, good or evil.” GEORGE ORWELL Prepared by: DAVEY RESOURCE GROUP INC. 6005 Capistrano Ave., Suite A Atascadero, California 93422www.daveyresourcegroup.com CITY OF South San Francisco URBAN FOREST MASTER PLAN Prepared for: CITY OFSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 400 Grand Ave South San Francisco, CA 94080 Acknowledgements  QUOS MODISTIUMQUE EAQUI ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio QUOS MODISTIUMQUE EAQUI ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio QUOS MODISTIUMQUE EAQUI ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio ACIL SINTIBUSDAE Mus aorio Acknowledgements Table of Contents   Executive Summary 1 WHAT DO WE HAVE? 1 WHAT DO WE WANT? 2 HOW DO WE GET THERE? 3 HOW ARE WE DOING? Introduction 6 COMMUNITY South San Francisco History 7 VISION STATEMENT 7 TREE AND CANOPY BENEFITS Air Quality Improvements Carbon Dioxide Reductions Water Quality Improvements Energy Savings Health Benefits Wildlife Habitat Wind Protection Calculating Tree Benefits What Do We Have? 14 HISTORY OF URBAN FORESTRY IN SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 15 John and Tina Previti 16 MICROCLIMATES 18 CLIMATE CHANGE 19 URBAN FOREST RESOURCE Tree Canopy Priority Planting Community Tree Resource 31 URBAN FORESTRY OPERATIONS Services Tree Care Equipment Tree Inventory Management Pest Management Safety Community Engagement and Outreach Sign Hill Funding Interdepartmental Coordination Community Partnerships Development 45 POLICIES AND REGULATION Federal and State Law South San Francisco Municipal Code City Of South San Francisco General Plan City Of South San Francisco Climate Action Plan California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 48 TREE CARE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY 48 CONCLUSIONS Table of Contents  How do we get there? Focus Area: Align urban forest management policy with community expectations and cost efficiency Goal 1: Promote excellent and efficient customer service. Goal 2: Increase uniformity between City policies, documents, and departments. Goal 3: Advance the role of Park Staff in City development projects. Goal 4: Increase collaboration with developers. Goal 5: Provide water to trees efficiently and cost-effectively. Focus Area: Enhance community safety Goal 6: Promote a workplace culture of safety. Goal 7: Promote a safe urban forest. Goal 8: Reduce the risk of fire and mitigate damage caused by fire. Goal 9: Improve public safety. Focus Area: Optimize the environmental, social, economic, and public health benefits of trees and canopy Goal 10: Plan for trees, before planting. Goal 11: Avoid removing trees whenever possible. Goal 12: Reach 22.6% canopy cover by 2040. Goal 13: Decrease tree mortality. Goal 14: Promote good maintenance practices for trees on private property. Goal 15: Review and update Municipal Code as needed. Focus Area: Grow, maintain, preserve, and enhance a sustainable urban forest Goal 16: Increase support for the enhancement of the urban forest. Goal 17: Continue to distribute information about the urban forest to the community. Goal 18: Create a volunteer tree advocacy group. Goal 19: Continue to practice an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach to responding to pests and disease pathogens. How are we doing? 78 MONITORING Annual Plan Review Resource Analysis Canopy Analysis Community Satisfaction 78 REPORTING State of the Community Forest Report What do we want? 51 MANAGING PARTNERS 51 COMMUNITY MEETING 52 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING 53 ONLINE SURVEY 60 PLAN GOALS AND ACTIONS Focus Area: Align urban forest management policy with community expectations and cost efficiency Goal 1: Promote excellent and efficient customer service. Goal 2: Increase uniformity between City policies, documents, and departments. Goal 3: Advance the role of Park Staff in City development projects. Goal 4: Increase collaboration with developers. Goal 5: Provide water to trees efficiently and cost-effectively. Focus Area: Enhance community safety Goal 6: Promote a workplace culture of safety. Goal 7: Promote a safe urban forest. Goal 8: Reduce the risk of wildfire. Goal 9: Manage risk. Focus Area: Optimize the environmental, social, economic, and public health benefits of trees and canopy Goal 10: Plan for trees, before planting. Goal 11: Avoid removing trees whenever possible. Goal 12: Reach 22.6% canopy cover by 2040. Goal 13: Decrease tree mortality. Goal 14: Promote good maintenance practices for trees on private property. Goal 15: Review and update Municipal Code as needed. Focus Area: Grow, maintain, preserve, and enhance a sustainable urban forest Goal 16: Increase support for the enhancement of the urban forest. Goal 17: Continue to distribute information about the urban forest to the community. Goal 18: Create a volunteer tree advocacy group. Goal 19: Continue to pursue an Integrated Pest Management approach when responding to pests and pathogens. Table of Contents  Appendices 79 APPENDIX A: Acronyms 80 APPENDIX B: References 84 APPENDIX C: Industry Standards ANSI Z133 SAFETY STANDARD, 2017 ANSI A300 85 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) Integrated Pest Management, Second Edition, 2016 Integrated Vegetation Management, Second Edition, Randall H. Miller, 2014 Managing Trees During Construction, Second Edition, Kelby Fite and E. Thomas Smiley, 2016 Root Management, Larry Costello, Gary Watson, and Tom Smiley, 2017 Tree Planting, Second Edition, Gary Watson, 2014 Tree Inventories, Second Edition, Jerry Bond, 2013 Tree Risk Assessment, Second Edition, E. Thomas Smiley, Nelda Matheny, and Sharon Lilly, 2017 Tree Shrub Fertilization, Third Edition, E. Thomas Smiley, Sharon Lilly, and Patrick Kelsey, 2013 Soil Management, Bryant Scharenbroch, E. Thomas Smiley, and Wes Kocher, 2014 Utility Pruning of Trees 87 APPENDIX D: Online Community Survey Results 105 APPENDIX E: Soil Volume and Tree Stature 107 APPENDIX F: Alternative Planter Designs Figures 29 FIGURE 1: Most Prevalent Species In South San Francisco 40 FIGURE 2: South San Francisco 2018-2019 Budget 53 FIGURE 3: Responses to “Trees are important to the quality of life in South San Francisco”? 53 FIGURE 4: Responses to “Are there enough trees in South San Francisco”? 54 FIGURE 5: Responses to “Where would you like to see more trees planted”? 54 FIGURE 6: Responses to “What Canopy Goal Should South San Francisco Adopt”? 55 FIGURE 7: “Which benefits provided by trees do you value most? Please select the top three benefits”. 55 FIGURE 8: “Describe your awareness and/or interactions with South San Francisco’s urban forest program. Please check all that apply”. 56 FIGURE 9: “What level of care for public trees would you prefer”? 56 FIGURE 10: “Should the City require professional licensing for tree care providers”? 57 FIGURE 11: “Would you support a higher penalty for unpermitted removals”? 57 FIGURE 12: “What topic about trees interest you? Please select your top three (3)”? 58 FIGURE 13: “What education topics about trees interest you? Please select your top three (3)”. 58 FIGURE 14: “What volunteer/collaborative efforts interest you most? Please select all that apply”. 59 FIGURE 15: “What is your age”? 59 FIGURE 16: “What neighborhood do you live in”? Maps 17 MAP 1: Climate Zone Map 20 MAP 2: Land Cover Summary 21 MAP 3: South San Francisco Parks 22 MAP 4: South San Francisco Zones 24 MAP 5: Planting Priority 26 MAP 6: South San Francisco Inventoried Trees Tables 4 TABLE 1: Summary of Goals and Existing Policies of the Plan Scope and Purpose  The Urban Forest Master Plan (UFMP) serves as a guide for managing, enhancing, and growing South San Francisco’s urban forest and the community tree resource over the next 20 years. Whereas the urban forest includes all of the trees and woody shrubs in South San Francisco, the community tree resource is comprised of publicly managed trees along streets, in parks, and at City facilities. While the UFMP is primarily focused on the stewardship of the community tree resource, the Plan also considers private trees because they contribute significantly to South San Francisco’s livability and environmental quality. In summary, the UFMP aims to: • Recognize best management practices that promote tree health, maximum benefits, and community safety • Promote community outreach, engagement, and advocacy for the urban forest • Develop a more cohesive organizational structure to facilitate collaboration among all departments and staff who impact or affect the urban forest • Nurture an ethic of stewardship for the urban forest among City Staff, community organizations, businesses, and residents • Increase health and resiliency in the urban forest by improving species diversity, and by managing pests and invasive species • Identify baseline metrics and clear goals for urban forest managers The UFMP includes short-term actions and long-range planning goals to promote sustainability, species diversity, and greater canopy cover. The UFMP suggests reasonable time frames for achieving goals, based on available resources and community support. 8 Scope and Purpose 9 WHAT DO WE HAVE? HOW DO WE GET THERE? WHAT DO WE WANT? HOW ARE WE DOING? Executive Summary  South San Francisco’s community urban forest includes an estimated 15,000 public-managed trees along streets and medians, in parks and open space, and around City facilities. Along with their aesthetic contribution, these trees provide valuable and critical services to the community including benefits to air quality, water quality, stormwater management, energy savings, wildlife habitat, and socioeconomics. The Urban Forest Master Plan (UFMP) is a road map which provides long-term management goals and timelines to effectively preserve and enhance the environmental benefits provided by this critical component of infrastructure. The UFMPs structure is based on the understanding of what we have, what we want, how we get there, and how we are doing. This structure, known as adaptive management, is commonly used for resource planning and management (Miller, R.W., 1988) and provides a conceptual framework for the process of improving urban forest management. The plan development process for the UFMP involved a comprehensive review and assessment of the existing urban forest resource, which included composition, value, and environmental benefits. The process explored community values and vision, including those expressed in guiding documents such as the General Plan 2040, the Climate Action Plan, City Ordinance, state law, and other regulatory and policy documents. The process also evaluated funding and the current service levels for both in-house and contracted tree crews. In addition to Park Staff, there are multiple stakeholders, internal and external, who play a role in the planning, design, care, and advocacy of the urban forest. These stakeholders include City departments, utility providers, nonprofit organizations, parks and recreation commissioners, and community members. Each of these stakeholders played a role and provided input for the development of this plan. “When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the universe.” JOHN MUIR 10 Executive Summary WHAT DO WE HAVE? The review process identified challenges facing the urban forest, most notably, climate change. The predominate impact of climate change on the urban forest is its effect on tree species that historically have been successful in the region but now, with rising temperatures and more extreme periods of drought, may no longer thrive in the changing environment. In addition to climate change, the City is still recovering from a financial crisis in the late 2000s. The financial crisis prompted a hiring freeze, resulting in numerous vacant positions as staff retired or left the City. More specifically, the parks tree crews were reduced by a third. Tree care is highly reactive, and as a result, not all trees are receiving adequate care. Despite challenges, the City has numerous opportunities to expand the urban forest. As identified by an Urban Tree Canopy Assessment, the City currently has 8.7% canopy cover, but has the potential to achieve 22.6%. With the support of (1) Council Members and the Parks and Recreation Commission; (2) an Urban Tree Canopy Assessment that includes GIS mapping of the location and extent of South San Francisco’s entire tree canopy (public and private); (3) a Tree Preservation Ordinance that promotes the protection of certain species and sizes of trees throughout the community; and (4) a well-trained and motivated Park Staff, South San Francisco has the tools and information necessary to make well-informed and effective management choices. These management choices will increase the environmental benefits and value from the City’s public trees. South San Francisco’s Urban Forest Benchmark Values Community Urban Forest (Public Tree Resource) Inventoried trees (2018)10,831 trees and 1,505 vacant sites Estimated non-inventoried trees 4,000 trees Species Diversity (Inventoried Trees, 2018) Total number of unique species 165 Prevalence of top ten species 60.4% Species exceeding recommended 10%1 Urban Tree Canopy Cover (Public and Private, 2016) Overall canopy cover 7.2% Overall canopy cover (excluding open water)8.7% Impervious surfaces 58.2% Canopy cover – Parks and Open Space 22.7% Canopy Benefits (Public and Private, 2016) Carbon stored to date 62,113 tons $2.2 million Annual Canopy Benefits (Public and Private, 2016) Annual carbon benefits 3,142 tons $110,772 Annual air quality benefits 39,822 pounds $20,119 11Executive Summary WHAT DO WE WANT? A primary emphasis for the UFMP is to identify adequate resources to ensure that critical tree care needs can be addressed in a timely, cost-effective, and efficient manner. This includes the proactive identification of risk and mitigation measures to promote public safety and reduce liability. The current inventory of City-owned trees does not include all City-trees and does not have a historic record of maintenance. Trees are living organisms, constantly changing and adapting to their environment and increasing in size over time. Because of this, trees have specific needs at various life stages, including training for proper structure when they are young and increased monitoring and proactive risk management when they become mature. Deferring maintenance can have a significant effect on the overall health, structure, value, and lifespan of a tree. In addition, deferred maintenance often results in higher costs and less beneficial results, including increased risk potential. As a result, the UFMP identifies goals for optimizing urban forest programming, existing funding, staffing, and urban forest policy. HOW DO WE GET THERE? The UFMP identifies four focus areas and 19 goals for preserving the health, value, services, and sustainability of South San Francisco’s community urban forest. Each of these goals is supported by comprehensive objectives and actions. Recognizing that community engagement is integral to success, the UFMP includes firm objectives for engaging the community and encouraging partnerships and collaboration. HOW ARE WE DOING? The long-term success of the UFMP will be measured through the realization of Plan goals and demonstrated through increased value and environmental services from the urban forest. The Plan identifies methods of measurement, priorities, potential partners, and estimated costs. Since the UFMP is intended to be a dynamic tool, it can and should be updated in response to available resources and opportunities. One of the greatest measures of success for the UFMP will be its level of success in meeting community expectations for the care and preservation of South San Francisco’s urban forest. Executive Summary  12 Executive Summary Executive Summary  Table 1: Summary of Goals and Existing Policies of the Plan Focus Areas Align urban forest management policy with community expectations and promote efficiency within the Parks Division. Enhance community safety.Optimize the environmental, social, economic, and public health benefits of trees and canopy. Grow, maintain, preserve, and enhance a sustainable urban forest. Goals and Existing Policies Goal 1: Promote excellent and efficient customer service. Goal 2: Increase uniformity between City policies, documents, and departments. Goal 3: Advance the role of Park Staff in City development projects. Goal 4: Increase collaboration with developers. Goal 5: Provide water to trees efficiently and cost-effectively. Goal 6: Promote a workplace culture of safety. Goal 7: Promote a safe urban forest. Goal 8: Reduce the risk of wildfire. Goal 9: Improve public safety. Goal 10: Plan for trees, before planting. Goal 11: Avoid removing trees whenever possible. Goal 12: Reach 22.6% canopy cover by 2040. Goal 13: Decrease tree mortality. Goal 14: Promote good maintenance practices for trees on private property. Goal 15: Review and update Municipal Code as needed. Goal 16: Increase support for the enhancement of the urban forest. Goal 17: Continue to distribute information about the urban forest to the community. Goal 18: Create a volunteer tree advocacy group. Goal 19: Continue to practice an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach to responding to pests and disease pathogens. Primary Objectives • Increase efficiency to respond in a timely manner to community concerns for trees. • Unify guiding documents to transcend departmental changes and address inefficiencies and reduce confusion. • Improve communication and coordination with other City departments. • Increase the role of Park Staff in design review. • Encourage the inclusion of trees in development projects to expand the tree canopy on public property. • Expand tree canopy through new development projects. • Provide water to trees to encourage establishment. • Implement policies and procedures that make that tree work as safe as possible. • Develop a risk management policy/ procedure. • Focus fire mitigation efforts on Sign Hill and other areas of vulnerability. • Maintain trees throughout their lifetimes to improve structure in maturity and reduce the likelihood of structural failures in the future. • Invest in trees for the long-term environmental benefits provided to the community. • Improve the diversity of the urban forest on private property, to create a more resilient urban forest. • Explore alternative designs instead of removals. • Discourage the removal of protected trees. • Improve everyday care of trees, to prevent future removals. • Expand canopy cover to increase environmental benefits. • Educate the community about property owner responsibilities for the care of City trees. • Reduce unethical and/or poor pruning practices and unnecessary removals on private property. • Meet the changing needs of the urban forest and the community through clear and concise and current policy. • Engage the community in urban forestry activities and educational events. • Provide sustainable and adequate resources to sustain the urban forest for future generations. • An educated community increases support and understanding of urban forestry policies and procedures. • Market urban forestry through a variety means to promote participation from all community members • Work with volunteer tree advocates to promote urban forestry events and distribute urban forestry educational materials. • Employ multiple tools and strategies to prevent and/or manage pests and pathogens. 13Executive Summary Introduction  South San Francisco, also known as “South City” by locals, is in San Mateo County on the San Francisco Peninsula. A capital of biotechnology, South San Francisco has attracted various biotechnology companies to the area. South San Francisco experiences a Mediterranean climate with mild winters and dry cool summers, with an average high temperature of 65.9°F and an average low temperature of 50.6°F. The average annual precipitation is 20.6 inches, with most rainfall occurring between November and April (Climate South San Francisco−California, 2018). The City, like much of the peninsula, experiences fog in the mornings and evenings, with glimpses of sunshine throughout the afternoon. COMMUNITY South San Francisco History Separated from the greater San Francisco area by the San Bruno Mountain State and County Park, the City of South San Francisco is marked by the prominent Sign Hill to the north, noting South San Francisco as “The Industrial City,” and reflecting the City’s long history of industry. 1700s The Ohlone Tribe were the first to call the San Francisco Peninsula home, relying on the bay and surrounding hills for fish and game. The arrival of Spaniards in 1769 led to the decimation of the Ohlone. For the remainder of the century, the Mexican government controlled the area and awarded large land grants to its supporters. 1800s In 1835, Señor Don Jose Antonio Sanchez was granted the vast Rancho Buri Buri. Following his death, his children inherited the land. The land changed ownership numerous times, eventually leading to the introduction of ranching in the area (History of South San Francisco, 2017). In 1889, Gustavus F. Swift appointed Peter Iler of Omaha, Nebraska to find a location in California where a meat packing plant could be established. Swift formed South San Francisco Land and Improvement Company and the Western Meat Company (which later would be known as Swift & Co.). These companies attracted industries and workers to the area, thus increasing the area’s population. With the increased population, the area was incorporated in 1908. The area continued to grow during World War II. The growth led to the expansion of residential areas as well as creating a thriving shipbuilding industry. 1900s In 1968, Swift & Co. closed (Spangler, 1968). By 1978, a biotechnology company called Genentech established its headquarters in South San Francisco. Genentech attracted other biotechnology companies to the area and contributed to the City’s new identity, “The Birthplace of Biotechnology” (Genentech, 2018). 2000s Today, South San Francisco is home to the largest biotech cluster in the world. There are over 200 biotech companies making up 11.5-million square feet of biotech space on 500 acres (Biotech in South San Francisco, 2018). 14 Introduction VISION STATEMENT [Josh to provide Dept. Vision/Mission Statement] 15Executive Summary Introduction  Air Quality Improvements Trees improve air quality in five (5) fundamental ways: • Lessening Particulate Matter (e.g., dust and smoke) • Absorbing Gaseous Pollutants • Providing Shade and Transpiring • Reducing Power Plant Emissions by Decreasing Energy Demand Among Buildings • Increasing Oxygen Levels Through Photosynthesis Trees protect and improve air quality by intercepting particulate matter (PM₁₀), including dust, pollen, and smoke. The particulates are filtered and held in the tree canopy until precipitation rinses the particulates harmlessly to the ground. Trees absorb harmful gaseous pollutants like ozone (O₃), nitrogen dioxide (NO₂), and sulfur dioxide (SO₂). Shade and transpiration reduce the formation of O₃, which is created at higher temperatures. Scientists are now finding that some trees may absorb more volatile organic compounds (VOCs) than previously thought (Karl, 2010; McPherson and Simpson, 2010). VOCs are carbon-based particles emitted from automobile exhaust, lawnmowers, and other human activities. TREE AND CANOPY BENEFITS Trees in the urban forest work continuously to mitigate the effects of urbanization and development as well as protect and enhance lives within the community. Healthy trees are vigorous, producing more leaf surface and canopy cover area each year. The amount and distribution of leaf surface area are the driving forces behind the urban forest’s ability to produce services for the community (Clark et al, 1997). Services (i.e. benefits) include: • Air quality improvements • Carbon dioxide reductions • Water quality improvements • Aesthetics & socioeconomics enhancements • Energy savings • Health benefits • Wildlife habitat • Wind protection 16 Introduction Introduction  Carbon Dioxide Reductions As environmental awareness increases, governments are paying attention to global warming and the effects of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. As energy from the sun (sunlight) strikes the Earth’s surface, it is reflected into space as infrared radiation (heat). Greenhouse gases absorb some of this infrared radiation and trap this heat in the atmosphere, increasing the temperature of the Earth’s surface. Many chemical compounds in the Earth’s atmosphere act as GHGs, including methane (CH₄), nitrous oxide (N₂O), carbon dioxide (CO₂), water vapor, and human-made gases/ aerosols. As GHGs increase, the amount of energy radiated back into space is reduced and more heat is trapped in the atmosphere. An increase in the average temperature of the earth may result in changes in weather, sea levels, and land use patterns, commonly referred to as “climate change.” In the last 150 years, since large- scale industrialization began, the levels of some GHGs, including CO₂, have increased by 25% (Greenhouse Gases’ Effect on the Climate, 2018). California’s Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32) passed in 2006 set the 2020 GHG emissions reduction goal into law. In December 2007, the California Air Resources Board (ARB) approved the 2020 emission limit of 427 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂). As of 2007, regulations require that the largest industrial sources of GHG must report and verify their emissions. In 2011, the ARB adopted the cap-and-trade regulation. Under a cap-and-trade system, an upper limit (or cap) is placed on GHG emissions. This cap can be applied to any source, industry, region, or other jurisdictional level (e.g., state, national, or global). Regulated entities are required to either reduce emissions to required limits or purchase (trade) emission offsets to meet the cap. In 2011, the ARB approved four (4) offset protocols for issuing carbon credits under cap-and-trade, including the Forest Offset Protocol (Compliance Offset Protocol Urban Forest Projects, 2011). This Protocol recognizes the key role forests play in fighting climate change. The USDA Forest Service Urban Ecosystems and Social Dynamics Program (EUP) recently led the development of an Urban Forest Project Reporting Protocol. The Protocol, which incorporates methods of the Kyoto Protocol and Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS), establishes methods for calculating reductions, provides guidance for accounting and reporting, and assists urban forest managers in developing tree planting and stewardship projects that could be registered for GHG reduction credits (offsets). The Protocol can be applied to urban tree planting projects within municipalities, campuses, and utility service areas anywhere in the United States. Trees and forests reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide CO₂ in two ways: • Directly, through growth and carbon sequestration • Indirectly, by lowering the demand for energy Trees and forests directly reduce CO₂ in the atmosphere through growth and sequestration of CO₂ in woody and foliar biomass. Indirectly, trees and forests reduce CO₂ by lowering the demand for energy and reducing CO₂ emissions from the consumption of natural gas and the generation of electric power. 17Introduction Water Quality Improvements Trees and forests improve and protect the quality of surface waters, such as creeks and rivers, by reducing the impacts of stormwater runoff through: • Interception • Increased soil capacity and infiltration rate • Reduction in soil erosion Trees intercept rainfall in their canopy, which acts as a mini- reservoir (Xiao et al, 1998). During storm events, this interception reduces and slows runoff. In addition to catching stormwater, canopy interception lessens the impact of raindrops on barren soils. Root growth and decomposition increase the capacity and rate of soil infiltration by rainfall and snowmelt (Xiao et al, 1998). Each of these processes greatly reduces the flow and volume of stormwater runoff, avoiding erosion and preventing sediments and other pollutants from entering streams, rivers, and lakes. Urban stormwater runoff is a major source of pollution for surface waters and riparian areas, threatening aquatic and other wildlife as well as human populations. Requirements for stormwater management are becoming more stringent and costly. Reducing runoff and incorporating urban trees in stormwater management planning have the added benefit of reducing the cost of stormwater management, including the expense of constructing new facilities necessary to detain and control stormwater as well as the cost of treatment to remove sediment and other pollutants. Introduction  18 Introduction Energy Savings Urban trees and forests modify climate and conserve energy in three (3) principal ways: • Producing shade for dwellings and hardscape reduces the energy needed to cool the building with air conditioning (Akbari et al, 1997) • Tree canopies engage in evapotranspiration, which leads to the release of water vapor from tree canopies and cools the air (Lyle, 1996) • Trees in dense arrangements may reduce mean wind speed and solar radiation below the top of the tree canopy by up to ~90% compared to open areas (Heisler and DeWalle, 1988) An urban heat island is an urban area or metropolitan area that is significantly warmer than its surrounding rural areas due to human activities. Trees reduce energy use in summer by cooling the surrounding areas. Shade from trees reduces the amount of radiant energy absorbed and stored by hardscapes and other impervious surfaces, thereby reducing the heat island effect. Transpiration releases water vapor from tree canopies, which cools the surrounding area. Evapotranspiration, alone or in combination with shading, can help reduce peak summer temperatures by 2 to 9°F (1 to 5°C) (Huang et al, 1990). The energy saving potential of trees and other landscape vegetation can mitigate urban heat islands directly by shading heat-absorbing surfaces, and indirectly through evapotranspiration cooling (McPherson, 1994). Individual trees through transpiration have a cooling effect equivalent to two (2) average household central air-conditioning units per day or 70 kWh for every 200 L of water transpired (Ellison et al, 2017). Studies on the heat island effect show that temperature differences of more than 9°F (5°C) have been observed between city centers without adequate canopy cover and more vegetated suburban areas (Akbari et al, 1997). Trees also reduce energy use in winter by mitigating heat loss, where they can reduce wind speeds by up to 50% and influence the movement of warm air and pollutants along streets and out of urban canyons. Urban canyons are streets flanked by dense blocks of buildings, affecting local conditions, such as temperature, wind, and air quality. By reducing air movement into buildings and against conductive surfaces (e.g., glass and metal siding), trees reduce conductive heat loss from buildings, translating into potential annual heating savings of 25% (Heisler, 1986). Three trees properly placed around the home can save $100- $250 annually in energy costs. Shade from trees significantly mitigates the urban heat island effect - tree canopies provide surface temperature reductions on wall and roof surfaces of buildings ranging from 20-45°F and temperatures inside parked cars can be reduced by 45°F. Reducing energy use has the added bonus of reducing carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions from fossil fuel power plants. Introduction  19Introduction19 Several studies have examined the relationship between urban forests and crime rates. Park-like surroundings increase neighborhood safety by relieving mental fatigue and feelings of violence and aggression that can occur as an outcome of fatigue (Planning the Urban Forest: Ecology, Economy, and Community Development, 2009). Research shows that the greener a building’s surroundings are, fewer total crimes occur. This is true for both property crimes and violent crimes. Landscape vegetation around buildings can mitigate irritability, inattentiveness, and decreased control over impulses, all of which are well established psychological precursors to violence. Residents who live near outdoor greenery tend to be more familiar with nearby neighbors, socialize more with them, and express greater feelings of community and safety than residents lacking nearby green spaces (American Planning Association, 2003). Public housing residents reported 25% fewer domestic crimes when landscapes and trees were planted near their homes (Kuo, 2001). Two studies (one in New Haven, CT and the other in Baltimore City and County, MD) found a correlation between increased tree coverage and decreased crime rates, even after adjusting for a number of other variables, such as median household income, level of education, and rented versus owner-occupied housing in the neighborhoods that were studied (Gilstad-Hayden et al, 2015; Troy et al, 2012). A 2010 study investigated the effects of exposure to green space at school on the academic success of students at 101 public high schools in southern Michigan (Matsuoka). The study found a positive correlation between exposure to nature and student success measured by standardized testing, graduation rate, percentage of student planning to go to college, and the rate of criminal behavior. This trend persisted after controlling for factors such as socioeconomic status and race or ethnicity. Conversely, views of buildings and landscapes that lacked natural features were negatively associated with student performance. Health Benefits Exposure to nature, including trees, has a positive impact on human health and wellness through improvements in mental and physical health, reductions in crime, and academic success. A study of individuals living in 28 identical high-rise apartment units found residents who live near green spaces had a stronger sense of community and improved mental health, coped better with stress and hardship, and managed problems more effectively than those living away from green space (Kuo, 2001). In a greener environment, people report fewer health complaints (including improved mental health) and more often rate themselves as being in good health (Sherer, 2003). Other research has revealed lower incidence of depressive symptoms in neighborhoods with greater access to green space (Jennings & Gaither, 2015). Trees shade impervious surfaces and prevent the sun’s rays from hitting them, thus reducing heat storage and later release, which contribute to the urban heat island effect. Tall trees that create a large shaded area are more useful than short vegetation. Trees also contribute to cooler temperatures through transpiration, increasing latent heat storage (the sun’s energy goes to convert water from its liquid to vapor form) rather than increasing air temperature (sensible heat). According to a study conducted by the Nature Conservancy, it is estimated that trees have the potential to reduce summer maximum air temperatures by 0.9 to 3.6° F. Trees help to address public health concerns for both heat and air quality. Globally, an annual investment of $100 million in planting and maintenance costs would give an additional 77 million people a 1° C (1.8° F) reduction in maximum temperatures on hot days (McDonald et al, 2016). “When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the universe.” JOHN MUIR Introduction  20 Introduction Wildlife Habitat Trees provide important habitat for birds, insects (including bees), and other animal species. Their greatest contributions include: • Preservation and optimization of wildlife habitat • Natural corridors for increased movement and dispersal Furthermore, trees and forest lands provide critical habitat (for foraging, nesting, spawning, etc.) for mammals, birds, fish, and other aquatic species. Trees can offer pollinators a valuable source of flowering plants. With an array of flowering trees that provide pollen and nectar in the urban forest, bees are provided with additional food sources. Increasing tree species diversity and richness contributes to greater numbers of bird species among urban bird communities (Pena et al, 2017). Wooded streets potentially function as movement corridors, allowing certain species—particularly those feeding on the ground and breeding in trees or tree holes—to fare well by supporting alternative habitat for feeding and nesting (Fernandez-Juricic, 2001). Greater tree density also contributes to bat activity in urban environments and improves outcomes for both birds and bats (Threlfall et al, 2016). Restoration of urban riparian corridors and their linkages to surrounding natural areas has facilitated the movement of wildlife and dispersal of flora (Dwyer et al, 1992). Usually habitat creation and enhancement increase biodiversity and complement other beneficial functions of the urban forest. These findings indicate an urgent need for conservation and restoration measures to improve landscape connectivity, which will reduce extinction rates and help maintain ecosystem services (Haddad et al, 2015). Wind Protection Trees reduce wind speeds relative to their canopy size and height by up to 50%, and when in dense arrangements up to 90% (Heisler, 1990). When selecting trees for use in areas that frequently experience high winds, several tree attributes can optimize their success withstanding high winds, and therefore the wind reduction benefits they provide. Characteristics such as lower tree stature, dense foliage and wood, pyramidal structure, and branch flexibility lend to high wind resistance. Ensuring the root system and canopy are unimpeded to spread horizontally is also important (Gilman and Sadowski, 2007). An individual tree’s profile interplays with their proximity to other trees and city structures to decrease wind speeds. As there can be many complex variables when studying wind flow dynamics, trees are often a neglected. Nevertheless, trees are a contribute significantly to wind reduction. Recent work shows wind models are more accurate when trees are taken into consideration, and GIS data of city trees provides an opportunity to quantify the effects of trees on wind speeds (Salim et al. 2015). Calculating Tree Benefits Communities can calculate the benefits of their urban forest by using a complete inventory or sample data in conjunction with the USDA Forest Service i-Tree software tools. This state-of-the-art, peer-reviewed software suite considers regional environmental data and costs to quantify the ecosystem services unique to a given urban forest resource. Individuals can calculate the benefits of trees to their property by using i-Tree Design. (www.itreetools.org/design) Owls roosting in a palm tree in Orange Memorial Park. Introduction  21Introduction What do we have?  While Al passed away in 2006 his legacy of Sign Hill is still enjoyed by the community. However, due to growing concerns for fire hazards and wildlife habitat, tree planting on Sign Hill has ceased and Arbor Day activities now occur in City parks. Following concerns by the Historic Society about the removal of palms in Orange Memorial Park, a Tree Preservation Ordinance was adopted by the City Council in 1989. The palms were planted by John Previti, a City gardener, in remembrance of fallen military service members from South San Francisco. For 32 years, South San Francisco has been recognized as a Tree City USA. As part of meeting the standards for this recognition, the City has organized Arbor Day events that include community tree plantings. In 2008, in celebration of the City’s 100th birthday, 100 trees were planted. In more recent years, due to water restrictions brought on by extended periods of drought, tree plantings have not been as robust. However, in 2018 as a result of increased rainfall and recently lifted watering restrictions, the City set out to plant 100 trees but instead planted 250. Tree maintenance has always been the responsibility of the Parks Division. Over time, the Parks Division has shifted back and forth between the Departments of Public Works and Parks and Recreation. Currently, the Parks Division is under the Department of Parks and Recreation. The Division has a tree crew consisting of two tree trimmers and two ground workers. The crew is responsible for pruning (for clearance and visibility), structural pruning, utility pruning, removals, stump grinding, and emergency response. The City maintains contracts with tree care professionals to address pruning and removals of trees in areas that are difficult to access or a crane. HISTORY OF URBAN FORESTRY IN SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO Three hundred years ago, the landscape of South San Francisco and the surrounding area was quite different than it is today. Historically, the area was predominately grassland, dotted with oak chaparral shrublands. Therefore, most trees that exist in South San Francisco were likely planted by someone. Over time, South San Francisco’s urban forest has engendered the support of many advocates within the Parks Department and the general community. One of the most notable volunteers is pharmacist Alphonse “Al” Suebert. For over 40 years beginning in the 1960’s, Al, along with the Beautification Committee, led the planting of trees on Sign Hill for annual Arbor Day celebrations (Wolfe, 2012). Al was a catalyst for developing the trail system throughout the open space and single-handedly planted an estimated 5,000 trees. In 1991, in recognition of Al Suebert’s life commitment to tree planting and conservation in the community, he was awarded the National Arbor Day Foundation Lawrence Enersen Award. 22 What do we have?22 What do we have?  John and Tina Previti In the 1940s, newlyweds John and Tina Previti moved from their hometown of Chicago to South San Francisco, where John landed a position as a gardener with the City’s Parks Department. Tina was disappointed that there were no rows of palm trees in the City, which she had heard was common in California. On a visit to Mission San José de Guadalupe, the couple admired the Canary Island date palms (Phoenix canariensis). John harvested some of the fallen dates from the Mission, sprouted them in paper cups, and nurtured the young seedlings. In 1946, John planted the young trees in a row along Tennis Drive and also gave seedlings to neighbors as gifts (S. Ranals, personal communication, August 8, 2018). It has been noted that the Canary Island palms reflect some of the residents’ Mediterranean heritage, where they had immigrated to South San Francisco. John’s intention with the planting on Tennis Drive was to create a living tribute to South San Francisco veterans who were killed in the line of duty (located near the war memorial at the corner of Tennis Drive and Orange Avenue). The stately and historic row of palms marks the main entrance to the City’s central park. 23What do we have? MICROCLIMATES Like much of California, South San Francisco experiences periods of drought. In addition to periodic drought, the geography has a strong influence over the local climate, with the San Francisco Bay to the east, the Pacific Ocean to the west, and the San Bruno Mountains to the north. Elevations range from 250 feet to 1,314 feet at the summit (San Bruno Mountain Park Natural Features). It is challenging to grow trees in the City because of the dry Mediterranean climate with dominant westerly winds for most of the year along with moderate temperatures and year-round fog. Average hourly wind speeds in South San Francisco are nearly 9 miles per hour (Average Weather South San Francisco). In some parts of the City, there are persistent 20–40 mile per hour winds. Trees can help mitigate the effects of wind. However, individual trees in clusters (i.e., group plantings) can become more vulnerable to windthrow if adjacent trees are removed. The topography of the City also creates pockets of microclimates where some areas have persistent fog year-round, some parts of the City have fog for portions of the day, and other areas are hotter, drier, and windier than the surrounding terrain. Considering the climate variability across the City, the tree species that perform well in these areas can be highly variable and fog may increase the threat of certain pests and pathogens. The different climate zones, illustrated in Map 1, are defined as follows: • Zone 1 – persistent fog • Zone 2 – fog primarily through the afternoon • Zone 3 – fog primarily in the morning • Zone 4 – Urban landscape that experiences more heat and high winds • Zone 5 – Industrial landscape with Bay influence and wind influence Map 1: Climate Zone Map What do we have?  24 What do we have? While these climate zones are a relatively short distance away from one another the types of trees that should be planted in each of these zones is highly variable and zone dependent.Zone 1 is characterized by persistent fog, therefore any sunlight that is present during the day is highly valued. It is important to factor lighting and canopy density when considering trees for this zone. Because sun light is a precious commodity to residents in these areas, tree species that do not block the sun are preferred. While Zones 2 and 3 both experience periods of fog, the time of day that the fog occurs influences the types of trees that are best suited to the area. Zone 3 experiences some fog in the morning, but the afternoon is sunny and has greater potential for warm temperatures. This area can benefit from taller trees with greater canopy density to improve shade and reduce afternoon temperatures. In contrast, Zone 2 has fog through the afternoon, and benefits more from the same tree species that are recommended for Zone 1 as well as species that can tolerate more sunlight. Zone 4 has additional challenges that are primarily derived from the urban environment. Highly urbanized areas generally have more compacted and poorly drained soils. These types of soils encourage the roots of some tree species to become more “aggressive” causing problems with hardscape (such as lifting sidewalks). Additionally, pollutants (air and soil) and other stressors (e.g., temperature and moisture extremes) are more prevalent in urban environments. As a result, careful species selection is especially important for Zone 4 as some trees are better able to withstand these extreme conditions than others. Moisture from the Bay creates a unique conflict for trees in Zone 5. Moisture in this microclimate creates an atmospheric salinity which is not tolerated by all tree species. CLIMATE CHANGE Bay Area’s Mediterranean-type climate and microclimates (areas impacted by regional topography, fog exposure, wind, and heavy urbanization) are important factors to include in climate change projections (Cayan & Peterson, 1993; Kottek et al, 2006). California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment identifies that the Bay Area is already experiencing symptoms of climate change, including: increased maximum temperatures from 1950–2005, less frequent coastal fog, sea level rise, historic El Niño influence, and drought (Ackerly et al, 2018). These symptoms are expected to get worse over the next century. Precipitation is predicted to be characterized by “booms and busts” with very wet and very dry periods (Ackerly et al, 2018). Along with increased temperatures, heat waves have the potential to be especially harmful as much of the Bay Area lacks cooling infrastructure (i.e., air conditioning) and much of the population has never had that exposure (Ackerly et al, 2018). With higher temperatures and heat waves, there will be a greater demand for electricity for cooling purposes, leading to increased energy costs. Because South San Francisco has historically enjoyed mild coastal temperatures year-round, residents might not always appreciate shading benefits of trees. Additionally, residents probably have not considered planting a tree in anticipation of the potential increases in temperatures that might result because of climate change. Recent historic fires in California have increased awareness about communities’ vulnerabilities to fire and how climate change and urban development are contributors to fire risk. In response to these dangers, the management of vegetation, planning, and building standards is critical to fire management. Trees have a role to play in response to climate change, where they can reduce air and surface temperatures by shading and evapotranspiration (Akbari et al, 1997). Strategically planting trees in proximity to buildings can reduce the need for air conditioning, in turn reducing energy usage, air pollution, and associated greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, trees can contribute to stormwater management strategies by reducing the surface area of hardscape as well as impacts from precipitation events. However, climate change also poses a risk for urban forests as many species of trees will be vulnerable to hotter temperatures and longer periods of drought. Some pests and pathogens are also expected to increase with warming temperatures. Increasing species diversity with an emphasis on species that are better adapted to warmer climates and low-water use is critical for maximizing the resiliency of the overall urban forest. What do we have?  25What do we have? URBAN FOREST RESOURCE The development of the UFMP included an assessment of the urban forest, including tree canopy (public and private) and analysis of the community tree inventory (public trees on streets, in parks, and at City facilities). Tree Canopy Tree canopy is the layer of leaves, branches, and stems of trees and other woody plants that cover the ground when viewed from above. Understanding the location and extent of tree canopy is critical to developing and implementing sound management strategies that will promote the smart growth and resiliency of South San Francisco's urban forest and the invaluable services it provides. A tree canopy assessment provides a bird’s-eye-view of the entire urban forest and includes consideration of tree canopy along with other primary land cover, including impervious surface, bare soils, and water. This information helps managers better understand tree canopy in relation to other geospatial data, including: • Distribution of tree canopy within the community • Geopolitical patterns in canopy distribution • Identification of potential planting areas The analysis does not distinguish between trees on public and private property since the benefits of trees extend beyond property lines. The information can be used by urban forest managers to explore tree canopy in conjunction with other available metrics, including geography, land use, and community demographics. This data also establishes a baseline for assessing future change. Land Cover Summary The City of South San Francisco encompasses 11 square miles (7,021 acres) with nearly 1,202 acres of open water. Excluding impervious surface (4,038 acres) and open water (1,204 acres), South San Francisco contains approximately 1,079 acres which have the potential to support tree canopy. The following characterizes land cover in South San Francisco: • 8.7% (508 acres) overall canopy cover (excluding open water), including trees and woody shrubs • 58.2% (4,038 acres) impervious surface, including roads, parking lots, and structures • 25.8% potential canopy cover (excluding open water) • 62,113 tons of stored carbon (CO₂) in woody foliar biomass • $167,686 total annual environmental benefits provided by both public and private trees What do we have?  26 What do we have? Map 2: Land Cover Summary 27What do we have? Tree Canopy by Parks South San Francisco has 25 areas designated as parks, covering 156 acres. Among the top ten largest parks in the City, Sellick Park has the highest percent canopy cover at 50.8%, with a potential canopy cover of 87.8%, followed by Brentwood Park with a 49.7% canopy cover and a potential canopy cover of 84.2%. Both parks highlight an opportunity for additional planting in South San Francisco parks. Overall, tree canopy covers 22.7% of parks and open space areas. The assessment identified an additional 32.2 acres of potential planting sites, indicating that parks and open space areas have the potential to support 43.3% canopy cover. Map 3: South San Francisco Parks What do we have?  28 What do we have?28 Tree Canopy by Zoning Zoning reflects a community’s plan for growth in specific areas. Canopy cover can vary significantly between different zones. Much of the City’s 7,021 acres is assigned a zoning designation, with the exception of seven acres. Low density residential zoned land (1,767 acres) encompasses the greatest area, followed by the Open Space designation (1,125 acres). Low density residential has the greatest amount of canopy at 189 acres (10.7%). Parks and Recreation has the highest canopy cover at 19.9% (45 acres). When open water is excluded, areas zoned as Open Space have the second highest tree canopy cover at 17.2% Map 4: South San Francisco Zones What do we have?  29What do we have?29 Priority Planting South San Francisco has an estimated 1,079 acres of public and private land where additional trees could be planted. Of the 1,079 acres, 376 are identified as high or very high priority planting areas where additional trees will provide the greatest return on investment. To identify potential planting areas, Davey Resource Group (DRG) evaluated areas with pervious surface and no existing tree canopy (i.e., turf, low-lying vegetation, and bare soils) identified by the land cover assessment. DRG then coordinated with City Staff to identify areas where additional trees are undesirable, including sports fields, cemeteries, golf courses, and other sites where tree planting is contrary to planned land use. The remaining areas where prioritized via GIS remote sensing and based on site design and environmental factors (proximity to hardscape, canopy fragmentation, soil permeability, slope, and soil erosion factors). It is important to note that this analysis provides a snapshot of current conditions and may not fully account for some existing young trees. Site visits are necessary to determine suitability as well as the actual number and location of planting sites. The potential canopy cover for South San Francisco is estimated to be 25.8%, which includes priority planting area (1,079 acres) and existing canopy (508 acres). Map 5: Planting Priority What do we have?  30 What do we have?30 COMMUNITY TREE RESOURCE Community trees (publicly managed trees along streets, in parks, and at City facilities) play a vital role in South San Francisco. They provide numerous tangible and intangible benefits to residents, visitors, and neighboring communities. The City recognizes that public trees are a valued resource, a vital component of the urban infrastructure, and part of the City’s identity. As of 2018, the public tree inventory included 10,831 trees. However, some public trees have not yet been inventoried (Staff assumes there are approximately 15,000 community trees). Structure A structural analysis is the first step towards understanding the benefits provided by these trees as well as their management needs. In 2018, South San Francisco’s community tree resource includes 10,831 trees and 165 unique species. Considering species composition and diversity, and relative age distribution (diameter at breast height, also known as DBH), DRG determined that the following information characterizes the community tree resource: • The most prevalent species in South San Francisco is Monterey pine (Pinus radiata, 15.8%), followed by Monterey cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa, 8.4%), blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus, 6.8%), flowering pear (Pyrus calleryana, 6.4%), and Australian blackwood (Acacia melanoxylon, 6.2%) • 65.0% of the population are 12-inches or less in diameter • 10.9% of the population are 24-inches or greater in diameter Map 6: South San Francisco Inventoried Trees What do we have?  31What do we have?31 Species Diversity Maintaining species diversity in an urban forest is essential. Dominance of any single species or genus can have detrimental consequences in the event of storms, drought, disease, pests, or other stressors that can severely affect a public tree resource and the flow of benefits and costs over time. Catastrophic pathogens, such as Dutch elm disease (Ophiostoma ulmi), emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis), Asian long-horned beetle (Anoplophora glabripennis), invasive shot hole borer (Euwallacea sp.), and Sudden Oak Death (Phytophthora ramorum) are some examples of unexpected, devastating, and costly pests, as well as pathogens that highlight the importance of diversity and the balanced distribution of species and genera. In light of significant pests and diseases, many cities are opting to increase diversity to improve resilience. The widely used 10-20-30 rule of thumb states that an urban tree population should consist of no more than 10% of any one species, 20% of any one genus, and 30% of any one family (Clark et al, 1997). While this rule does ensure a minimum level of diversity, it may not encourage enough genetic diversity to adequately support resilience. Therefore the 10-20-30 rule should be considered a minimum goal. Managers should always strive to increase the range of representation among species and genera within an urban forest. The most prevalent species in South San Francisco is Monterey pine (Pinus radiata, 15.8%), followed by Monterey cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa, 8.4%), blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus, 6.8%), flowering pear (Pyrus calleryana, 6.4%), and Australian blackwood (Acacia melanoxylon, 6.2%). The prevalence of Monterey pine exceeds the general rule that no single species should represent 10% of the urban forest resource. Only 23 of the 165 species in South San Francisco’s community tree resource represent greater than 1% of the overall population. However, the top five most prevalent species represent 43.6% of the overall population. Future tree planting should focus on increasing diversity and reducing reliance on overused species. As over-predominant species are removed and replaced, new species should be introduced when possible. New species should be resistant to the known pest issues that currently pose a threat to the region. In addition, consideration should be given to species that withstand higher temperatures and periods of drought. What do we have?  32 Age Distribution Age distribution can be approximated by considering the DBH range of the overall inventory and of individual species. Trees with smaller diameters tend to be younger. It is important to note that palms do not increase in diameter (DBH) over time, so they are not considered in this analysis. In palms, height more accurately correlates to age. The age distribution of the urban forest is a key indicator and driver of maintenance needs. The age distribution of South San Francisco’s public tree resource (excluding palms) reveals that 65.0% of trees are 12-inches or less diameter and 10.9% of trees are larger than 24-inches diameter. Trees greater than 24-inches diameter require more regular inspections and routine maintenance as they mature. Managers can gain a better understanding of the specific risks that individual mature trees pose with regular inspection and risk assessment. Many medium and large-stature tree species still have a lot of growing to do before they reach maturity, with 4,113 trees (38.7%) in the inventory less than six inches in diameter. Training, defined as the selective pruning of small branches to influence the future shape and structure of a young tree, is critical at this stage to prevent costly structural issues and branch failures as these young trees mature into their final size in the landscape. Intermediate aged trees, with a diameter between 7 and 24-inches, represent 48.7% of the inventory with 5,172 trees in total. Similarly, the younger trees would benefit from structural pruning. A high proportion of young, large and medium-stature tree species is a positive indicator for future benefits from the urban forest, since large shade trees typically provide more shade, pollutant uptake, carbon sequestration, and rainfall interception than small trees. Mature trees, trees with a diameter greater than 24-inches, represent 10.9% of the inventory 1,155 trees in total. When trees reach mature stature, they provide the greatest benefits. However, mature trees should be regularly assessed for health and risk factors as they approach or reach the end of their natural lifespan. They may have higher maintenance needs or require removal to reduce risk and liability. Figure 1: Most Prevalent Species in South San Francisco Restyle table fr o m Excel ( display n u mbers as %) 33What do we have? URBAN FORESTRY OPERATIONS The Parks Division within the Department of Parks and Recreation is responsible for planting, maintenance, and protection of all trees within the public right-of-way, parks, and public places. The Division performs the following services: • Tree pruning • Tree removals • Tree planting • Tree irrigation • Tree protection and preservation • Pest management • Community engagement and outreach Urban forestry operations are mainly led by a Parks Supervisor. At one time, the City had three tree crews consisting of six crew members in total. As a result of the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent funding reductions, staff reductions were also made. In 2019, four staff members (two crews) care for about 15,000 community trees. The tree crews also assist with every-day park maintenance activities approximately 2-3 weeks a year. On average, the Parks Division is able to respond to tree-related service requests within two weeks. Tree work is often scheduled daily on a reactive basis to address emergency and priority service requests. Tree crew schedules are typically organized around street sweeping schedules to avoid conflicts with parking, but not all streets have street sweeping signage. Therefore, managing traffic and parking around tree maintenance activities can be a challenge. In conjunction with the Two-County (San Mateo and Santa Clara) Regional Internship Program, the City of South San Francisco has created several paid internship opportunities. For the Parks Division, an Urban Forestry & Parks Operations Intern was added to help maintain and update the City’s tree inventory, identify and record locations for future tree planting, assist with the development of tree pruning grid system maps and with applications for forestry related grant programs. Supplementary to Park Staff, contactors are primarily used for pruning and removal of trees in areas that are difficult to access or require the use of cranes. Contracted tree operations are generally funded through the Parks General Fund or the Common Greens Fund, depending on the location of the work. On-call agreements have improved response times and increased efficiency and coordination. Department of Parks and Recreation Director of Parks and Recreation Deputy Manager of Parks and Recreation Manager of Parks and Recreation Supervisor of Parks and Recreation Arborist Technician Tree Crew I Tree Crew II Tree Trimmer I Tree Trimmer II What do we have?  Redraw diagra m 34 What do we have? SAFETY While tree care is dangerous, proper training and good safety practices can help make the work safer. The City uses a contractor to provide safety training and consulting for all City departments. However, to better address the specific needs for training in arboriculture and tree care operations, Park Staff also attend workshops and safety training through International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) and Western Chapter ISA sponsored events. Park Staff have been proactive in ensuring that tree crew members are trained thoroughly and are provided with all necessary personal protective equipment (PPE). However, there are currently no documented or formalized standard operating procedures (SOP) for safety practices. Climbing equipment (e.g., ropes, saddles, helmets, etc.) and tree pruning tools (e.g., pole saws, hand saws, and chainsaws) are inspected daily by tree crews. Tree crews assess all work sites for potential hazards, energy sources, and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) prior to beginning work. During these “tailgates” and job site meetings, safety concerns are freely discussed, but there are no formal processes to record participation and understanding. TREE CARE EQUIPMENT The City’s Fleet Services Division is responsible for maintaining vehicles and heavy equipment, including determining the anticipated useful lifespan for all equipment. Because of heavy utilization, tree equipment has a shorter lifespan than regular equipment (especially aerial lifts and chippers). Often, there is not enough consideration for the workload or the hours of utilization of equipment used by the tree crew. For instance, the Parks Division has a front loader; however, it is nearing the end of its useful life. Currently, there is only one chipper with a winch that can only be used by one crew at a time (therefore productivity is reduced). Much of the equipment used regularly by tree crews is more than 25 years old and finding replacement parts can be challenging or impossible. In addition, outdated equipment does not always have the latest safety features. For instance, the City’s woodchipper has minimum safety features but does not include secondary safety features, such as feed control bars, bottom feed stops, and emergency pull ropes. In addition, the feeder tray requires two people to lift it, when modern chippers are light enough for one person to lift it safely. What do we have?  Internal decay in trees is not necessarily indicative of structural weakness, nor does it always warrant removal of the tree. In an effort to avoid removing trees solely on detection of internal decay, the City purchased a sonic tomographer. This tool allows for the Park Staff to determine the extent of decay in the tree with colored imagery and scientifically based measurements on loss of strength. In combination with the mapping of the decay and external visual assessments of the tree, Park Staff are better able to assess the risk of a tree and take the necessary actions. When the structural integrity of large trees is unknown, a resistograph can be used to determine structural stability. The resistograph has a maximum drilling depth of 500mm and is paired with a Bluetooth printer that prints out the results so it can be taken into the field. It also holds the information within the unit and can then be downloaded to a computer for further analysis. In conjunction with the sonic tomographer, unnecessary removals of large trees can be avoided, as Park Staff have a better understanding of the internal structure of a tree. 35What do we have? SERVICES Tree Pruning In-house crews are responsible for most pruning, including utility pruning around secondary power lines. All tree crew members are required to have ACRT arborist training, line clearance/rescue certifications, or other equivalent training. In partnership with City GIS Staff, Park Staff have developed a grid pruning schedule that is connected to the City’s GIS mapping system. Currently, this schedule is in the beta testing stages and is intended to provide more efficient scheduling for tree maintenance activities. Some residents request annual pruning of their city trees, which is not always conducive of tree health. Ideally, City trees should be pruned on a five to seven-year maintenance cycle (using a grid system). However, with current tree crew workloads and limited capabilities of the current inventory management software, most grids are pruned partially and not on a predictable schedule. TREE INVENTORY MANAGEMENT A tree inventory for South San Francisco was completed in 2015 (initially conducted in 2010). The inventory does not include all neighborhoods within the City. It also does not include trees in easements, tree wells, or park strips. The inventory also does not distinguish between City trees and privately managed trees, especially trees included in developer’s agreements. Tree Inventory Management Software The current tree inventory software has limited capabilities, particularly with maintenance histories. The software is incapable of being interconnected with city grids, making grid pruning scheduling difficult. What do we have? Screen grab from software 36 What do we have? Tree Removals Preserving a healthy public tree is ideal. Yet, there are situations where a tree should be removed. Reasons for a removal may include but are not limited to concerns for public safety, disease, tree health, structural issues that cannot be corrected through pruning, internal decay, or inappropriate species selection for the site at planting. Residents can submit requests for tree removals by contacting the Parks Division. Staff inspects all trees and evaluates requested removals on a case-by-case basis. There are circumstances where a request for removal of a tree will be approved. However, if a tree is mature and in good health, that tree will be preserved to provide benefits to the community for as long as possible. Trees are not permitted to be removed due to leaf debris, nuisance fruit, tree root interference in aged clay sewage pipes, or blocked views. Wood Chips and Wood Reuse Wood chips from pruned or removed trees are utilized in landscape beds throughout the City, at public buildings, and parks. Some chips are diverted to a landfill, particularly if woodchips include Acacia species, which can be invasive. To divert biomass from the landfill, the City has utilized the wood from trees that are removed to construct benches, raised flower beds, and signs in parks. Staff plans to expand tree reuse opportunities by using an Alaskan mill to create lumber to build new items (benches, etc.). What do we have?  Stump Grinding Following a tree removal, tree crews are scheduled to remove stumps with two stump grinders: a large tow-behind stump grinder and a smaller walk-along stump grinder. 37What do we have? TREE PLANTING Historically, the City has planted an average of 20 to 30 trees annually. Species selection and planting location have not always been considered when planting new trees. For instance, many streets have overhead utilities in the right-of-way over sidewalks and parking strips. Due to federal and state regulations, utilities must maintain clearance around high-voltage power lines. As a result, medium and large-stature trees that were planted below power lines are often heavily pruned and poorly structured. In many cases, these trees are eventually removed. Current policies focus on planting the right tree species in the right place to avoid problems in the future. Staff is also focusing on ways to improve species diversity. In 2018, more than 400 trees were planted (this is more than was planted in the last ten years). Park Staff provides recommendations to residents on selecting trees species. Additionally, residents may purchase trees at wholesale prices through the City’s vendors. When streets are narrow or parcel space is limited, trees often compete with hardscape and the demand for parking space. Municipal Code (Title 20 Zoning) specifies that maximum lot coverage by impervious surfaces shall not exceed 40% of the gross land area. However, enforcement of this requirement has been relaxed and in many neighborhoods planting sites for street trees have been paved over in favor of parking. In an effort to increase the number of street trees, Park Staff have begun reclaiming tree wells and removing concrete where appropriate and where American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance allows. Memorial Tree Planting Program While currently on hold due to an extended period of drought, the Memorial Tree Program (established in 1982) provided residents with an opportunity to purchase a tree for the City in honor or in memory of loved ones. Plaques for the trees that were planted are displayed at the Municipal Service Building. In the past, the program was popular, having provided approximately 350 trees. What do we have?  38 What do we have? Circle 3.0 Through grant funding provided by California’s Initiative to Reduce Carbon and Limit Emissions, Circle 3.0 provided 200 15-gallon trees to Paradise Valley and Peck’s Lot Neighborhoods. This grant also provided another 200 5-gallon trees elsewhere in the City for the 2019 Arbor Day Celebration. Tree Irrigation Currently, two full-time staff members use a water truck to irrigate newly planted trees to aid in their establishment. Despite recent relief from a few relatively wet winters, California is still considerably dry and water is becoming more expensive. Additionally, the water truck used for irrigation requires the driver to hold a Class B driver’s license. This requires a full-time staff member to drive the truck, which increases the cost to irrigate trees. Approximately 500 trees are irrigated manually each week. Treegator® Treegator bags are slow release watering systems for newly planted trees. Easily installed and with no required tools, these green bags are placed at the base of newly planted trees and are refilled with water on a weekly basis. The bags slowly drip 15 gallons of water into the soil, allowing the water to percolate deeper into the soil profile. The City currently has 30-40 Treegator bags on-hand, with another 200 currently in use in the field. The use of Treegator bags have improved tree establishment and reduced mortality rates for newly planted trees. Water Cistern To reduce irrigation costs, there is a proposal to install a cistern under an existing ballfield in Orange Memorial Park. This project has the potential to provide an inexpensive water source for Park Staff to water trees. 39What do we have? When residents submit building permits, the Planning Division is responsible for the review and approval of applications. All departments have an opportunity to review and comment on design plans through Track-it! (an internal use system). During this review period, Park Staff can provide comments on tree placement and species selection and suggest alterations to preserve existing trees. Following approval, Park Staff have an opportunity and responsibility to inspect trees upon installation and to request revisions prior to final sign-off. Park Staff are frequently called upon from Public Works to inspect tree and hardscape conflicts. Trees roots can lift sidewalks and create a need for sidewalk repairs. In some cases, trees that are causing problems with sidewalks are in poor condition and are removed. In other circumstances, Park Staff coordinates with Public Works Staff to make sidewalk repairs and avoid tree removal through root pruning. Similarly, to tree and sidewalk conflicts, Park Staff frequently respond to concerns about tree roots and sewage lines. Residents with old, cracked, clay sewer pipes often experience issues with tree roots exploiting existing cracks in sewer lines to get water. This occurrence can result in sewage back-ups into homes. While the tree roots can exacerbate the problem, in all cases trees are taking advantage of already corrupted lines, which need to be replaced. In such instances, Park Staff will not remove a healthy City tree that has impacted sewage lines. Root pruning will only be performed in instances where tree roots have crushed sewage lines. TREE PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION Tree removals are not uncommon in South San Francisco. Be that as it may, Park Staff strive to protect and preserve trees whenever possible. Through collaboration with other City Departments, Park Staff provide solutions to any tree-related conflicts with existing or future infrastructure. Park Staff are responsible for reviewing applications for tree permits. A permit is required to prune or remove any tree protected by the Tree Preservation Ordinance. However, not everyone is aware (or compliant) with the requirement to obtain a tree permit and trees are often illegally pruned or removed. For Capital Improvement Projects (CIP), Park Staff promote alternative solutions to the removal of healthy and well-established trees within project boundaries. Engineering uses a construction management software called e-builder for real-time collaboration on active CIPs. When included, Park Staff have an opportunity to review designs and the ability to recommend design changes to protect such trees. If a tree is recommended by Park Staff for preservation, Tree Protection Zones (TPZ) can be added directly into the design specifications. As part of this process, Park Staff setup TPZ on CIP construction sites and regularly inspect compliance with the TPZ. For more information on Tree Protection Zones see Appendix F. What do we have?  40 What do we have? Pest Management Like any urban forest, South San Francisco has pest problems. With a changing climate, a highly mobile population and proximity to a large port of entry for international trade, South San Francisco has some characteristics that make the community especially vulnerable to potential introduced pests. As such, the Parks Supervisor is required to hold a Qualified Applicator License to appropriately respond to pest problems. Additionally, Park Staff regularly consult a Pest Control Advisor (PCA), who is also an arborist, to get recommendations for pest management strategies. Although polyphagous shot hole borer is not currently a problem in South San Francisco, research suggests that there is potential for the pest to spread to northern California. As a result of a wide host-range, many species of trees in South San Francisco are vulnerable to this invasive pest (Mitchell, 2019). Similarly, citrus greening (Candidatus liberibacter asiaticus), a bacterial disease that causes bitter, hard fruit production, is among the most concerning pest as it threatens the viability of California’s citrus crop. While citrus species represent less than 1% of the public tree population, many residences in South San Francisco grow citrus trees. Due to quarantines in place to protect California’s citrus crop, infected trees must be destroyed and disposed of appropriately (Grafton- Cardwell et al, 2019). The result of either polyphagous shot hole borer or citrus greening would be significant losses to canopy on both public and private property. At this time, there are no major active threats to South San Francisco’s urban forest. Existing pests that require management to control include: Pocket Gophers As of late, South San Francisco has been contending with pocket gophers (Thomomys bottae) gnawing on tree roots which damages and kills trees. Gophers have extensive burrow systems that are characterized by crescent or horseshoe shaped mounds that can cover an area that is 200 to 2,000 square feet (Salmon, 2009). Park Staff have primarily managed this pest through trapping. Staff recently incorporated an integrated pest management (IPM) strategy including carbon monoxide fumigation and natural enemies, utilizing owls to reduce the pocket gopher population. Park Staff have assembled “owl houses” in Orange Memorial Park and in other parts of the City to encourage nesting of owls within the City. Pine Bark Beetles With recent periods of drought, Monterey pines (Pinus radiata) and other pine species in South San Francisco have been susceptible to native bark beetle species. Generally, native bark beetles attack only the most stressed pines; however, with higher population densities, they can attack and kill healthier trees (Swain, 2015). With continued dry conditions, these beetles have the potential to be even more destructive. There are few treatments for bark beetle infestations. Preventative maintenance practices are the best tools for combating these pests, including: removing trees as infestations are detected, pruning trees in the colder winter months when the insects are less active, and irrigating trees (Swain, 2015). Insecticides are available for highly valued, uninfected host trees, but Park Staff have not used this method (Seybold, 2011). Myoporum Thrips Myoporum thrips (Klambothrips myopori) is an invasive species from New Zealand that has been a problem for Myoporum plants in South San Francisco (Bethke and Bates, 2013). Thrips feeding damage stunts, curls, and discolors leaves. Additionally, the new branch growth becomes distorted, typically folding downward. When thrips are persistent, death can occur even in well-established plants (Bethke and Bates, 2013). Park Staff have managed the pest primarily by avoiding planting Myoporum species and by pruning infested terminal shoots and removing and disposing of infected shoots. Sudden Oak Death Sudden oak death (Phytophthora ramorum) is a plant pathogen that infects susceptible trees, such as coast live oak (Querus agrifolia). While this pest is not currently a problem in South San Francisco, the presence of fog makes host species more susceptible to this pathogen as the moisture assists in the spread of the infection (Parke and Lucas, 2008). 41What do we have? COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND OUTREACH Community engagement opportunities are available during the annual Arbor Day celebration. At the events, Park Staff actively work with volunteers to plant trees properly and distribute educational information on trees. Important tree information can be accessed through the Parks Division Tree webpage. The site advertises tree planting events and other community engagement activities. Information on the Tree Preservation Ordinance is summarized on the webpage for ease of access. Links are also available with information on tree permit applications and definitions for pruning and trimming as defined by Title 13 of Municipal Code. The webpage also includes information to help guide residents about species of trees that are recommended for the local environment. Park Staff periodically update the webpage to include links to external education materials, including information about species selection, proper tree care, benefits of trees, and homeowner tree care accidents. In addition to the Parks Division webpage, Park Staff promote and share volunteer opportunities and other tree care information through social media, emails, and newsletters. Sign Hill Sign Hill, a historic sign and prominent landmark in South San Francisco, can be seen from most parts of the City and is important to community members. While the sign is a nod to the history of industry in the community, today, the hillside is a popular hiking destination, with panoramic views of the San Francisco Bay and Peninsula (66 acres of open space). Although naturally the hill would have few trees and be dominated mostly by grasses, community members have planted an assortment of trees over the years on the hill, including citrus trees and an avocado tree. However, eucalyptus, cypress, pines, and acacia species dominate much of the hill side and are known to be particularly flammable. What do we have?  42 What do we have? With many introduced species, there are concerns about the impact on native grass species. To protect the habitat, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ordered tree planting to cease on the hill. Several neighborhoods border Sign Hill, which is concerning for Wildfire Urban Interface (WUI), the area where houses meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland vegetation (Radeloff et al, 2005). With recent California fires, creating a defensible space around structures has been heavily discussed in communities that are near forested areas. There are active efforts to reduce ladder fuels, fuel that can carry a fire burning in low-growing vegetation to taller vegetation, in Sign Hill areas that are adjacent to homes (Menning and Stephens, 2007). Tree maintenance on hills is challenging to manage, as steep grades make moving tree removal equipment into project areas both difficult and expensive. To address some vegetation management in these areas, Parks has purchased a slope mower (a “green climber”) which can operate remotely and can better handle the open space’s steep slopes. While the green climber can assist with reducing some of the ladder fuels, larger dead trees will still need to be removed according to standard forestry maintenance practices. In an effort to be proactive City Staff contracted with Davey Resource Group Vegetation Management Services to formulate a Cooperative Forest Management Plan to address the specific management needs for the area. Park Staff identified management priorities and objectives for Sign Hill and Davey Resource Group identified corresponding management strategies to achieve Park Staff desired results. The primary objective for Sign Hill is to create defensible space around structures, such as the homes adjacent to the open space. As funding comes available, another objective is to reduce the fuel load. In the event of a fire, this strategy would allow for low- intensity fire that may be more easily managed to benefit the overall health of the forest and reduce risk to infrastructure. Along with creating defensible spaces around structures, Park Staff identified the creation of sheltered fuel breaks along roads and near trending ridgelines throughout the open space as an objective. Other secondary objectives are to create a healthier forest to improve and maintain watershed protection and recreational opportunities for the community, reduce susceptibility to bark beetles and other pests and diseases, and promote diverse habitat to promote wider wildlife diversity and browse material for deer and other species. To achieve management objectives, some important management measures should be implemented. Management Measures include 1) restore to a healthier and fire resilient state through fuel reduction, 2) remove competing vegetation to increase vertical and horizontal spacing, and 3) remove dead or dying trees and selectively thin forested areas. Specific strategies to employ to reduce fuels include 1) not removing healthy trees greater than 12-inches diameter, 2) removing dead or dying trees of any size class, 3) 50-70% of brush and slash shall be masticated or removed and chipped (achieve residual tree density of 50 to 100 trees per acre (20-foot spacing)), 4) dead surface fuel depth shall be less than three inches, 5) retaining standing dead trees for wildlife habitat and 6) retaining dominant and co-dominant trees except where removal of co- dominant trees is needed to improve forest health and fire safety and as determined by an RPF. Some considerations for vegetation management include: • Avoid ground-based equipment on slopes over 40% or on unstable ground. If such conditions exist material should be removed by hand and removed to areas with slopes less than 40% • Avoid use of equipment under saturated soil conditions • Use mulch to provide effective erosion control • Install erosion control structures along roadsides • Reduce fuels by removing small diameter trees and brush to create vertical and horizontal separation between the ground and lowest branches • Improve wildlife habitat through fuel reduction • Improve access to remote areas to improve overall aesthetics and recreation opportunities 43What do we have? Summary of Annual Funding The total 2018-2019 municipal budget for South San Francisco is approximately $105 million. The Parks and Recreation Department has a budget of over $16 million (of which approximately $462,134 is the annual budget for the tree crew). Park Impact Fee Developers are required to provide three acres of park space per 1,000 people. However, there is no current requirement to provide trees. Tree Permit Fees Tree permit application fees are $100. This money is set aside for tree plantings. In addition to the application fee, unreturned $350 tree replanting deposits are also allocated towards tree plantings. Tree removal permit fees are refunded when tree replanting requirements are met. FUNDING Stable and predictable funding is critical to effective and efficient management of the urban forest. Trees are living organisms, constantly growing and changing over time and in response to their environment. There are a number of factors that affect tree health and structure, including nutrition, available water, pests, disease, wind, and humidity. While it might seem like most changes to trees take a long time to occur, some specific maintenance is critical at certain stages of life. For instance, young trees benefit greatly from early structural pruning and training. Minor corrections that are simple can be applied with low costs when a tree is young. However, if left unattended they can evolve into very expensive structural issues and increase liability as trees mature (at which point it may be impossible to correct the issue without causing greater harm). Over-mature trees often require more frequent inspection and removal of dead or dying limbs to reduce the risk of unexpected failure. A stable budget allows urban forest managers to program the necessary tree care at the appropriate life stage when it is most beneficial and cost effective. What do we have?  Figure 2: South San Francisco 2018-2019 Budget Redraw diagra m 44 What do we have? INTERDEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION All City departments can confirm with Park Staff if a tree is a city- owned tree, through the tree inventory database. This allows staff to identify which trees are City-owned. However, communication between departments is inconsistent and Park Staff have not always been included in construction and design discussions that involve trees or could potentially incorporate trees. This disconnect reduces the ability for Park Staff to provide effective input on issues that could affect the urban forest. Forestry operations could further benefit from increased access to heavy and specialty equipment. As a result of budget’s being specific to each City department, heavy equipment is most often assigned to a specific department. Interdepartmental collaboration and the establishment of equipment sharing protocols has the potential to increase Park’s ability to perform tree care operations more cost-effectively and efficiently. Planning The Planning Division is responsible for approving and inspecting development projects in the public right-of-way. The Division recommends trees for inclusion in plans as much as possible. Following project completion, Planning provides a post- construction inspection for compliance with design plans. If the requirements are met, the Planning Division will provide a “final sign-off” on the project. The inspection includes reviewing the location of trees that have been installed; however, it does not include a review of irrigation installation (and programming) or other landscape materials. Public Works The Public Works Department is responsible for maintaining and repairing sidewalks. Heaving sidewalks are common throughout the City, creating concerns for ADA compliance. In many instances, lifting sidewalks are a result of inappropriate tree species selection and tree wells that do not have adequate soil volume to support root growth. Public Works contacts Park Staff for repairs for sidewalks, sewers, and lighting that involve any cutting or removal of tree roots, branches, or entire trees. Engineering The Engineering Department is responsible for maintaining the public infrastructure within the public right-of-way and for the oversight for Capital Improvement Projects (CIP). Engineering works with Park Staff to address clearance for streets, sidewalks, lights and signage; visibility for pedestrians on walkways and around bulb outs; compliance with the ADA; and request input from Park Staff on CIP during joint coordination meetings. Prior to planting trees along streets and in center medians, Park Staff work with Engineering to avoid line-of-sight issues, conflicts with lights and signage, and ADA compliance. Code Enforcement Code Enforcement is responsible for investigating concerns regarding compliance with the Municipal Code. Currently Code Enforcement is within the Department of Public Works. The most common complaints received about trees are overgrown trees and illegal removals of trees designated as protected under the Tree Preservation Ordinance, heaving sidewalks, fire concerns, and property boundary disputes. Code Enforcement generally responds to complaints within a range of 24-hours to 14 days. 45What do we have? South San Francisco Unified School District South San Francisco Parks and Recreation Department has a joint use agreement with South San Francisco Unified School District. The agreement outlines maintenance activities for portions of school property that provide benefit to the greater community (e.g., ballfields). Historically, the School District has not observed the Tree Preservation Ordinance even though local schools have removed high numbers of trees without replacing them. With a significant amount of acreage, trees on school property have the potential to provide benefits to more than just the children who attend those schools. Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) In California, all utility providers are subject to General Order 95; Rule 35 Vegetation Management (California Public Utilities Commission, revised 2012) and FAC-003-2 Transmission Vegetation Management (NERC) which outline requirements for vegetation management in utility easements. These requirements include clearance tolerances for trees and other vegetation growing in proximity to overhead utilities. Trees located under utility lines should be directionally pruned by trained, authorized line clearance personnel only to provide clearance and/or reduce height. Selecting small-stature tree species that are utility friendly for planting sites in utility right-of- way can minimize the need for these maintenance activities. PG&E shares responsibility with tree crews in pruning trees around secondary lines. In past projects, PG&E removed trees above gas lines and provided funding to mitigate (plant) trees in other areas. Bay Area Air Quality Management District In 1955, the California Legislature created the Air District as the first regional air pollution control agency in the country. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District has a 24-member Board of Directors composed of locally elected officials from each of the nine Bay Area counties who oversee policies and adopt regulations for the control of air pollution within the district. Bay Area Open Space Council The Bay Area Open Space Council is a regional network of 75 nonprofits, public agencies, businesses, and individuals that work to maintain thousands of miles of trails and steward over one million acres of publicly accessible parks. Cities in the Bay Area that are members include San Francisco, American Canyon, San Jose, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek. The Council also engages in advocacy for regional conservation funding. California Public Health Advocates California Public Health Advocates promote health and work to eliminate health disparities by transforming neighborhoods into places that nurture well-being through education, research, and policy recommendations. Change Lab Solutions Change Lab Solutions is a public health advocacy group that works to increase the interaction between public health officials, cities, and regional planning officials through education and the facilitation of roundtable discussions. COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS Design Review Board (DRB) Every project that is new or breaking the roofline of a structure and adds 50% or more to existing structure must go through the Design Review Board (DRB). The DRB includes two landscape architect appointees who review landscape plans. For the DRB to recommend project compliance, the project must meet development standards. The DRB reviews and recommends species of trees and the location of trees included in a project. Technical Advisory Group (TAG) The Technical Advisory Group (TAG) is an internal group that meets once a month to review applications. Representatives from each department provide input on design plans. Park Staff have an opportunity to help review tree species selection and placement. Parks and Recreation Commission The Parks and Recreation Commission consists of South San Francisco residents who are appointed by the City Council. Members serve as advocates for parks and recreation needs of the community, oversee programs and facilities, provide direction to staff, and serve as the appeal body for the City’s Tree Ordinance. Improving Public Places Group In partnership with the Parks and Recreation Department, the Improving Public Places Group hosts several cleanup days as well as flower and tree planting events throughout the year. This group assists with planting, maintaining, cleaning litter, minor trimming, weeding, spreading mulch, and coordinating special event projects. What do we have?  46 What do we have? DEVELOPMENT Development brings new real estate and economic opportunities for communities. However, development sometimes comes at a cost to trees, either through removals or reduced space for potential future plantings. Like much of California, South San Francisco has experienced significant development, particularly with a growing number of biotechnology companies. Developers, through conditions of approval and developer agreements are responsible for landscaped areas with trees. For example, developers provide landscaping and trees for center medians and areas adjacent to city streets. Developer agreements are often unclear about the responsibility of the care of trees planted by developers in the public right-of- way, as well as species selection. Developers may not be aware of the important role they have in the expansion and preservation of the urban forest, benefiting the community outside of the footprint of the development project. Some potential opportunities for developers to help with the urban forest include payment of impact fees as part of developer agreements and providing volunteers and supplies for tree plantings. Additionally, another opportunity for developers would be for them to participate in a “adopt a park or street median” programs. POLICIES AND REGULATION City policies and regulations provide the foundation for the urban forestry program. They outline requirements and specifications for the planting, installation, and care of South San Francisco’s public trees and provide the regulatory framework for the protection and preservation of the urban forest assets as well as the enforcement of activities and issues that impact the community's trees. The development of South San Francisco's Urban Forest Master Plan included a comprehensive review of City policies, development and construction standards, ordinances and other regulations that apply to the urban forest. The following provides a summary of the review process and key findings. FEDERAL AND STATE LAW Endangered Species Act Signed in 1973, the Endangered Species Act provides for the conservation of species that are endangered or threatened throughout all or within a significant portion of their range, as well as the conservation of the ecosystems on which they depend. The listing of a species as endangered makes it illegal to "take" (i.e., harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or attempt to do these things) that species. Similar prohibitions usually extend to threatened species. Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) Passed by Congress in 1918, this Act defines that it is unlawful to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, possess, sell, purchase, barter, import, export, or transport any migratory bird, or any part, nest, or egg or any such bird, unless authorized under a permit issued by the Secretary of the Interior. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act can impact forestry operations during times when birds are nesting, which may delay work in order to avoid violating the MBTA. What do we have?  California Urban Forestry Act Section 4799.06-4799.12 of the California Public Resources Code defines a chapter known as the California Urban Forestry Act. The Act defines trees as a “vital resource in the urban environment and as an important psychological link with nature for the urban dweller.” The Act also enumerates the many environmental, energy, economic, and health benefits that urban forests provide to communities. The purpose of the Act is to promote urban forest resources and minimize the decline of urban forests in the state of California. To this end, the Act facilitates the creation of permanent jobs related to urban forestry, encourages the coordination of state and local agencies, reduces or eliminates tree loss, and prevents the introduction and spread of pests. The Act grants the authority to create agencies and mandates that urban forestry departments shall provide technical assistance to urban areas across many disciplines (while also recommending numerous funding tools to achieve these goals). Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) To promote the conservation and efficient use of water and to prevent the waste of water, a Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) was adopted in 2009 and later revised in 2015. The Ordinance requires increases in water efficiency standards for new and retrofitted landscapes through the use of more efficient irrigation systems, greywater usage, and onsite stormwater capture. It also limits the portion of landscapes that can be covered in turf. 47What do we have? Title 8: Health and Welfare Prohibits dead, decayed, diseased or hazardous trees on private property that create an unsightly appearance or are dangerous to public safety and welfare or detrimental to neighboring property or property values. Title 10: Public Peace, Morals and Safety Prohibits the removal and vandalism of trees on park property and restricts the parking of bicycles against trees. Title 13: Public Improvements Defines protected trees and provides definitions for “pruning” and “trimming.” The Title restricts the abuse or mutilation of protected trees. Title 13 defines the responsibility of property owners to care for protected trees and authorizes the removal, pruning, or trimming of protected trees in emergencies. The Title authorizes the director or designee to make decisions on protected trees and requires the replacement of protected trees, including issuing fines for violations. The Title sets requirements for the planting and maintenance of trees for new developments and for property that is already developed. Title 13 establishes an appeal process and authorizes the use of penalties for violations. Title 14: Water and Sewage Authorizes enforcement officials to require the removal of dead trees to prevent pollutants from entering the City storm sewer system. The Title also requires the use of design strategies on-site to conserve natural areas, including existing trees. Title 15: Building and Construction Provides a definition for trees. Title 19: Subdivisions Provides a minimum number of trees per plot and spacing specification required by the street tree ordinance of the City. Requires the replacement of street trees for public improvement projects as a condition of the approval and acceptance of a project. Title 20: Zoning Title 20 establishes lot and development standards, including the use of trees in the landscape and limits the coverage of a lot by impervious surfaces. Landscape plans are required to accurately show existing trees and specify soil depth to achieve reasonable success of trees with a paved environment and the use of trees in tree screens in downtown and residential districts. The Title requires the practical preservation of existing trees. It also provides some standard for the protection of trees from construction vehicles and equipment and excavated soils under the canopy of any trees on a site which are to be preserved. Title 20 provides guidelines for pruning (for clearance and visibility of street trees) and prohibits the use of signs in the public right-of- way that harm street trees. California Solar Shade Control Act Passed in 1978, California’s Solar Shade Control Act supported alternative energy devices, such as solar collectors, and required specific and limited controls on trees and shrubs. Revised in 2009, the Act restricted the placement of trees or shrubs that cast a shadow greater than ten percent of an adjacent existing solar collector’s absorption area upon the solar collector surface at any one time between the hours of 10am and 2pm. The Act exempts trees or shrubs that were: • Planted prior to the installation of a solar collector • Trees or shrubs on land dedicated to commercial agricultural crops • Replacement trees or shrubs that were planted prior to the installation of a solar collector and subsequently died or were removed (for the protection of public health, safety, and the environment) after the installation of a solar collector • Trees or shrubs subject to City and county ordinance Public Park Preservation Act The Public Park Preservation Act of 1971 ensures that any public parkland converted to non-recreational uses is replaced to serve the same community. SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL CODE South San Francisco Municipal Code has eight titles that provide considerations for trees, including: Title 6, Title 8, Title 10, Title 13, Title 14, Title 15, Title 19, and Title 20. Title 6: Business Regulations Provides restrictions for the placement of news racks near trees. What do we have?  48 What do we have? CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL PLAN The South San Francisco General Plan is a document adopted by the City Council that provides the following: • A vision for South San Francisco’s long-range physical and economic development • Strategies and specific implementing actions that will allow this vision to be accomplished • A basis for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with Plan policies and standards • Authorization for City departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will enhance the character of the community, preserve and enhance critical environmental resources, and minimize hazards. • The basis for establishing and setting priorities for detailed plans and implementing programs, such as the Zoning Code, the Capital Improvements Program, facilities plans, and redevelopment and specific plans. Chapter 3.1 Downtown recommends using emphatic street trees to help link the downtown area with the BART station. Chapter 4.3 Alternative Transportation Systems and Parking suggests the use of street trees as part of frontage improvements for new development and redevelopment projects. Chapter 7.1 Habitat and Biological Resources Conservation identifies threats to historic vegetation, including oak woodlands and significant stands of trees in South San Francisco, and provides guidelines for the conservation of these natural resources. Chapter 8.4 Fire Hazards specifically identifies strategies to mitigate fire hazards through tree maintenance. City of South San Francisco Climate Action Plan Chapter 5 of the City of South San Francisco Climate Action Plan defines and lists non-native species and shade trees with high water usage as favorable for reducing the impact of climate change, but unfavorable for adapting to climate change. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) CEQA requires state and local agencies to identify the significant environmental impacts of proposed projects that meet specific criteria and actions to avoid or mitigate those impacts where feasible. TREE CARE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY Private property owners can hire contractors to prune private trees. However, some tree care companies are not professionally licensed or may not be knowledgeable about tree physiology and best management practices (BMPs) for tree care (such as the consequences of topping trees). While superficially the topping of trees may be objectionable because of the aesthetic, the bigger concern with the practice is that it makes individual trees more vulnerable to pests and disease. In some cases, private trees that are infested with pests or pathogens pose a threat to the urban forest, including public trees. Trees that are topped can also become structurally unsafe when their crowns grow back. In addition to concerns about the maintenance of trees on private property, there are concerns about the decreased availability of planting space on private property as a result of property owners hardscaping their lots. While Title 20 of the Municipal Code restricts the percentage of impervious surface on private lots, violations are evident across the community. The Tree Preservation Ordinance provides protections for specific species and sizes. However, this ordinance is not enforceable on school property. As a result, trees on school property are frequently removed and never replaced. What do we have?  CONCLUSIONS Considering an existing canopy cover of 8.7% (excluding open water) and a potential canopy cover of 22.6%, South San Francisco has ample room to grow the urban forest. Areas slated for development (residential and commercial) will eventually represent a mixture of land cover that includes both hardscape (impervious surface) and tree canopy. It is important to recognize that impervious surfaces and canopy cover can co-exist in many instances, especially with appropriate design standards. Canopy that extends over hardscape features, including parking lots, streets, and structures can add to the overall amount of canopy cover and reduce the ratio between canopy cover and impervious surfaces. In addition, shade provided by tree canopy can demonstrably extend the lifespan of materials used in the construction of hardscape features (McPherson et al, 2005). Another opportunity for expanding tree canopy cover is through collaboration with the South San Francisco Unified School District. Although many trees have been removed on school properties, there is a potential to plant new, more appropriate, tree species that will benefit students as well as the community. The City currently has an inventory of nearly 15,000 public trees. The Urban Forest Resource Assessment summarizes the composition of this community resource. The urban tree canopy assessment provides a landcover layer that identifies the location and extent of existing canopy (public and private), establishes a baseline for monitoring overall tree canopy cover throughout the community, and augments the City’s GIS database. Tree protection regulations promote the preservation and protection of some large or unique tree species. A well-trained and dedicated Park Staff can provide leadership and expertise to provide stewardship of the urban forest. All these factors listed above provide the foundation and tools necessary to make meaningful and effective management choices about the urban forest and illustrates the investment that South San Francisco has made in this resource. The information provides a basis for developing community goals and urban forest policies and establishes benchmarks for measuring the success of long-term planning objectives over time. 49What do we have? Increased interdepartmental coordination for planning and resource sharing will promote greater efficiencies for urban forestry operations. Improving standards for planting sites, including consideration of soil volume, minimum dimensions, and alternative designs, will improve environmental conditions for trees in support of community canopy goals. The urban forest is a living resource subject to environmental and cultural stressors, including pests, disease, extreme weather and climate change, pollution, and accidental damage. While it is impractical to protect and preserve every tree, actions and strategies that increase overall resilience can ensure that the community continues to receive a stable flow of benefits. Strategies that increase forest resilience include increasing species diversity, planting the right tree in the right location, regular inspection and maintenance, and management of pests and disease. A complete inventory of public trees and a comprehensive inventory management system are vital components for urban forest management. Ideally, inventory management software should provide a geospatial data interface to track the location, species, condition, size (DBH), and maintenance needs of every public tree. A system that allows managers to track tree history, create work orders, and create grid-based pruning cycles will improve program efficiency and provide information and support for budget requests and scheduling work for tree care. Requirements and standards for trees can be found in multiple chapters and sections of the Municipal Code and can be difficult to locate and interpret. Where confusion exists, codes should be revised to reduce ambiguity and subjectivity. Community support for the urban forest is critical for sustainable programming and the realization of long-term goals. Engaging community members through workshops, online resources, and volunteer projects builds an educated community that sees value in protecting this resource for future generations. South San Francisco’s Arbor Day celebration and other tree planting events are especially important for cultivating a greater sense of ownership and stewardship for the urban forest. Partnering with volunteer and nonprofit groups could help facilitate further community engagement and provide support for education and outreach event campaigns. The urban forest webpage should continue to provide important links and fact sheets that summarize key messages to increase community member’s knowledge-base about trees and the urban forest. For 32 years, South San Francisco has achieved Tree City USA status, reflecting the City’s commitment to responsibly care for trees through tree care ordinances, dedicated funding, and annual observances of Arbor Day. Beyond this recognition, Park Staff are motivated to improve the existing urban forestry program and ensure that the urban forest is preserved and protected for future generations. With a changing climate and an increasing risk of introduced pests and disease pathogens, Park Staff are acutely aware of the challenges and potential vulnerabilities that urban trees face. Because the urban forest is a dynamic, growing, and ever-changing resource, it requires sound and proactive management to fully realize its maximum potential. The urban forest is a public asset that has the potential to increase in value and provide benefits. Stakeholder interviews and a review of operations identified a number of opportunities and challenges facing South San Francisco’s urban forestry program over the next couple of decades, including maintaining adequate resources (staffing, funding, and equipment), increasing forest resiliency, climate fluctuations, inventory management, revisions to the Municipal Code, community engagement, and volunteer coordination. With limited staffing and equipment, the care of public trees is currently reactive. Care is focused on clearance pruning and response to hazardous and emergency situations. Urban trees are a living resource that benefit from timely maintenance to address health and safety needs and encourage strong structure. Proactive inspection and maintenance promotes tree longevity, maximizes benefits, and helps manage risk potential. Best management practices (BMPs) suggest a 5-7-year maintenance cycle for all public trees. Mature, over-mature, and trees in high-use locations (e.g., retail zones, parks, etc.) often require more frequent maintenance to maintain clearance and minimize risk. The Parks Division ensures that tree care staff follow BMPs and industry standards, including standards for safety and professional training. However, there is currently no documentation for operating procedures or standard policies for training, tailgates, and job-site safety briefings. Developing a policies and procedures manual will provide documentation of standard operating procedures and ensure that policies are clearly outlined for existing and future tree care staff. What do we have?  50 What do we have? To better understand how the community values urban forest resource and to provide residents and other stakeholders an opportunity to express their views about management policy and priorities, public input opportunities on the UFMP were provided. The UFMP development process included a community meeting and an online survey in addition to a presentation to the Parks and Recreation Commission. MANAGING PARTNERS While awareness may vary, many individuals and departments within the City share some level of responsibility for the community urban forest, including planning for, caring for, and/ or affecting the policy of urban forest assets. City partners were invited to participate in an interview and discussion about their role and perspective for the urban forest as well as their views, concerns, and ideas for the UFMP. These interviews provided important information about the current function of the Urban Forestry program and potential for improvement. Concerns, requests, and suggestions from all stakeholders were of primary interest and were provided full consideration in the development of the UFMP. Managing Partners • Department of Public Works • Engineering Division • Finance Department • Parks Division • Parks and Recreation Commission • Improving Public Places Committee • Planning Division • Friends of the Urban Forest • Code Enforcement • Fire Department What do we want?  Key concepts gathered through the stakeholder interview process include the following: 1. Community members often request maintenance that does not support tree health. Education on the benefits of trees and individual tree health will help foster greater community support for the urban forest and hopefully address violations of the Municipal Code. 2. Forestry has historically not been included in department communications that can potentially impact trees but can be included moving forward. 3. Trees are primarily valued for aesthetics; privacy screening, greening, and property value improvements. 4. Loss of canopy cover as a result of climate change, extended periods of drought, poor species selection, and development is the biggest challenge looking ahead to the future. 5. There is a strong desire to have an active and engaged community group whose goal is to preserve and protect the urban forest. 6. More interdepartmental coordination is needed as it pertains to trees, plantings, and removals, etc. 51What do we have? Most participants indicated support for a proactive management approach for caring for public trees. This approach would include cyclical maintenance with regular inspection and pruning of public trees. Participants indicated that they would need more information about any changes to the Municipal Code that would require professional licensing for tree care providers operating within the City. Community members did not support higher penalties for illegal removals. Questions posed to participants about the best methods of outreach and topics for education indicated that community members appreciate multiple methods of outreach and engagement and are interested in a wide range of educational topics. Among the collaborative efforts proposed to participants at the meeting, providing high school credits to improve youth engagement was well supported. Although participants were not asked directly about the benefits of trees that are valued most by the community, many expressed support for trees for noise abatement capabilities, since some homes are in close proximity to San Francisco International Airport. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING [TBD] COMMUNITY MEETING A community meeting was held on Tuesday, March 26, 2019, from 6:30 pm to 8:00 pm at the City Council Chambers. The meeting was advertised through social media, City emails, City website, and City newsletters. The meeting was attended by 22 community members, four of which were City Staff. The meeting included a presentation about the community’s urban forest and current program status. Following the presentation, attendees participated in a discussion and planning session to identify goals and objectives for the Plan. Attendees were asked to provide their expectations for public tree maintenance and locations for additional tree plantings. Participants were also asked to share their opinions on 1) effective education and outreach, 2) the best opportunities for providing educational materials and outreach activities, 3) the professional licensing requirement for tree care providers within the City, 4) higher penalties for unpermitted removals, and 5) collaboration opportunities. Community meeting participants overwhelmingly supported a canopy goal of 22.6% (potential canopy cover) and did not support a goal of a no net loss (to maintain the current level of 8.7% canopy cover). Similarly, the majority favored additional plantings along streets and in park strips, followed by additional plantings at schools, but did not support opting for no additional plantings of trees. What do we have?  52 What do we have? ONLINE SURVEY An online survey, available from March 26th to May 6th, provided additional opportunity for public input into the UFMP development. The survey was available, via a link on the City of South San Francisco’s website, Parks and Recreation Department social media pages, and through City emails. The survey included a series of 18 questions, including questions about views on tree benefits, education and outreach, requiring licensing for tree care professionals, increasing penalties for unpermitted tree removals, and collaboration activities. Seventy-five people responded to the survey during a six-week period. The Buri Buri/Alta Loma and Avalon/Brentwood/Southwood neighborhoods had the most responses. The complete survey and results (including comments received) are presented in Appendix D. Over 89% of respondents identified “very true” when asked if trees are important to the quality of life in South San Francisco. Figure 3: Responses to “Trees are important to the quality of life in South San Francisco”? Figure 4: Responses to “Are there enough trees in South San Francisco”? When asked if there are enough trees in South San Francisco: Figure 5: Responses to “Where would you like to see more trees planted”? Survey respondents were asked to identify where they would like to see more trees planted: Figure 6: Responses to “What Canopy Goal Should South San Francisco Adopt”? When asked which canopy goal the City of South San Francisco should adopt: The respondent that selected “other” identified through the comment box “not sure”. The following summarizes common comments provided in the optional comment box for additional comments about canopy cover: 1) suggestions for increased canopy coverage along main thoroughfares and 2) concerns for removal of trees or lack of planting of trees on private property or in new development. What do we want?  53What do we want? Figure 9: “What level of care for public trees would you prefer”? A comment box was provided to allow for additional comments regarding the care of public trees. The following summarizes the most common comments: 1) additional staff to care for trees, 2) additional educational material, and 3) concerns for the level of care in neighborhoods and along specific streets. Figure 10: “Should the City require professional licensing for tree care providers”? Online survey respondents were asked to provide their level of support for the City requiring professional licensing for tree care providers: What do we want?  Figure 7: “Which benefits provided by trees do you value most? Please select the top three benefits”. Survey respondents were asked to choose the top three benefits that trees provide that they value most. Respondents that selected “other” identified the following categories: 1) all of the benefits are valued, 2) wind buffers, and 3) as play space for children. A comment box was provided to allow for additional comments on the benefits of trees. Comments primarily echoed the aesthetic benefits of trees but also included the category of trees wind buffering capabilities. Figure 8: “Describe your awareness and/or interactions with South San Francisco’s urban forest program. Please check all that apply”. To help gauge the public’s perception of urban forestry operations, respondents were asked to describe their awareness and/or interactions with South San Francisco’s urban forestry program: Among respondents who selected “other” there was no commonality in opinions expressed. 54 What do we want? Figure 11: “Would you support a higher penalty for unpermitted removals”? Respondents were also asked about their support of higher penalties for unpermitted removals: Figure 12: “What topic about trees interest you? Please select your top three (3)”? Online survey participants were asked to identify which methods of outreach and education they prefer: Figure 13: “What education topics about trees interest you? Please select your top three (3)”. To understand which educational topics the community is interested in, the survey requested that respondents indicate their top three (3) preferred educational topics: Participants who selected “other” shared their comments that education for general care and maintenance of mature trees was desired. In addition to understanding interests in educational topics, the survey asked about interest in volunteer/collaborative efforts: Figure 14: “What volunteer/collaborative efforts interest you most? Please select all that apply”. Participants who selected “other” indicated interest in collaborating with schools. What do we want?  55What do we want? Figure 15: “What is your age”? Community members that participated in the online survey were asked to provide their age range: Figure 16: “What neighborhood do you live in”? Community members were asked to provide which neighborhood they live in: The online survey provided a comment box at the end of the survey to allow for additional feedback. Comments primarily identified concerns over inappropriate past species selection, requests for additional plantings in specific areas, concerns for lack of trees in certain developments, and questions about appropriate placement of trees near buildings and hardscape. What do we want?  56 What do we want? ALIGN URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT POLICY WITH COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS & COST EFFICIENCY Increasingly, there is more scientific data on the benefits that trees provide to communities. Increased knowledge on the benefits of trees promotes a greater appreciation for the urban forest. Optimization of urban forestry funding and programming allows the City to meet and exceed community expectations and increases cost-efficiency for managing the resource. Goals • Promote excellent and efficient customer service. • Increase uniformity between City policies, documents, and departments. • Advance the role of Park Staff in City development projects. • Increase collaboration with developers. • Provide water to trees efficiently and cost-effectively. ENHANCE COMMUNITY SAFETY Enhancing community safety related to trees should focus on two areas: 1) tree maintenance, and 2) worker safety. In general, the risk that trees pose to the public is minimal. However, tree care should always strive to make trees even safer to reduce risk to the community. Additionally, tree maintenance can also be dangerous. Therefore, the City should look for opportunities to improve the safety of staff responsible for caring for trees. Goals • Promote a workplace culture of safety. • Promote a safe urban forest. • Reduce the risk of wildfire. • Manage risk. OPTIMIZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS OF TREES AND CANOPY Trees are a valuable community asset and an integral part of the infrastructure. The environmental, social, economic, and public health benefits provided by trees and canopy are directly related to the distribution of leaf surface and tree canopy. As trees mature, the benefits that are provided to the community increase. GROW, MAINTAIN, PRESERVE, AND ENHANCE A SUSTAINABLE URBAN FOREST The urban forest provides numerous benefits to the community. Although it might be tempting to plant as many trees as possible, it is prudent to grow and enhance the urban forest in a sustainable manner. It is important to ensure not only that trees are planted but also that they can be maintained throughout their lifetimes. Goals • Plan for trees, before planting. • Avoid removing trees whenever possible. • Decrease tree mortality. • Promote good maintenance practices for trees on private property. • Review and update Municipal Code as needed. Goals • Increase support for the enhancement of the urban forest. • Continue to distribute information about the urban forest to the community. • Create a volunteer tree advocacy group. • Continue to pursue an Integrated Pest Management approach when responding to pests and pathogens. What do we want?  57 What do we want?  PLAN GOALS AND ACTIONS Based upon a review of the current Urban Forestry program and resources (What Do We Have?) and input from the community and stakeholders, the Plan identifies 19 goals that are organized under four areas of focus. These goals represent the Community’s vision for the urban forest. The goals and actions are intended to adequately manage the City’s urban forest in a timely, cost- effective, and efficient manner. Through the collaborative stakeholder and community input process, the Plan identifies four major guiding principles (focus area): 1. Align urban forest management policy with community expectations and cost efficiency 2. Enhance community safety 3. Optimize the environmental, social, economic, and public health benefits of trees and canopy 4. Grow, maintain, preserve, and enhance a sustainable urban forest FOCUS AREA: ALIGN URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT POLICY WITH COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS AND COST EFFICIENCY Increasingly, there is more scientific data on the benefits that trees provide to communities. Increased knowledge on the benefits of trees promotes a greater appreciation for the urban forest. Optimization of urban forestry funding and programming allows the City to meet and exceed community expectations and increases cost-efficiency for managing the resource. Goal 1: Promote excellent and efficient customer service. Trees are a community asset. Park Staff are responsible for providing quality, efficient, and cost-effective services for public trees. It is also expected that they are responsive, courteous, and fair to community members. Goal 2: Increase uniformity between City policies, documents, and departments. Inconsistencies across City policies, documents, and departments creates confusion between departments and the community. Policy uniformity promotes strong and efficient policy that aligns with community expectations. Goal 3: Advance the role of Park Staff in City development projects. Park Staff are stewards for all urban trees that currently exist or have the potential to be planted in the City. Staff should be engaged in conversations about development projects that could affect or add trees. Goal 4: Increase collaboration with developers. New development provides an opportunity to expand the urban forest through the addition of trees at project sites. Increasing collaboration between Park Staff and developers creates the opportunity for Staff to educate developers on 1) the value of trees to projects and the community and 2) the importance of selecting appropriate species and providing the necessary care to maintain those trees over their lifetime. Goal 5: Provide water to trees efficiently and cost-effectively. All trees, especially newly planted ones, need some level of water to thrive. Identifying efficient and cost-effective means for watering trees is critical for their health. Additionally, achieving this goal is imperative for meeting community expectations regarding efficiently managing this community asset. 58 What do we want? FOCUS AREA: ENHANCE COMMUNITY SAFETY Enhancing community safety related to trees should focus on two areas: 1) tree maintenance, and 2) worker safety. In general, the risk that trees pose to the public is minimal. However, tree care should always strive to make trees even safer to reduce risk to the community. Additionally, tree maintenance can also be dangerous. Therefore, the City should look for opportunities to improve the safety of staff responsible for caring for trees. Goal 6: Promote a workplace culture of safety. When all City Staff share core values and behaviors that promote safety, everyone, including the community, is safer. Goal 7: Promote a safe urban forest. Tree-related incidences that result in damage to property or injury to persons occur infrequently but can happen. With regular inspection and maintenance, the risks that trees pose to the public are reduced, along with people’s anxieties about trees. When community members feel safe around trees, they are more likely to respect and desire their inclusion in the urban landscape. Goal 8: Reduce the risk of wildfire. In the last decade, California has experienced catastrophic losses as a result of wildfire. With prolonged periods of drought and a changing climate, wildfire is likely to continue to be a threat to communities that neighbor the wildland urban interface. The risk of living in these areas can be reduced through numerous wildfire mitigation strategies. Goal 9: Manage risk. When trees are well-maintained throughout their lifetimes, the risks trees pose to the public are reduced. FOCUS AREA: OPTIMIZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS OF TREES AND CANOPY Trees are a valuable community asset and an integral part of the infrastructure. The environmental, social, economic, and public health benefits provided by trees and canopy are directly related to the distribution of leaf surface and tree canopy. As trees mature, the benefits that are provided to the community increase. Goal 10: Plan for trees, before planting. When proper consideration is given to planting trees, future removals can potentially be avoided. Selecting the right tree for the right place increases the ability for a tree to reach maturity and ensure that it has ample space for canopy and root growth. Goal 11: Avoid removing trees whenever possible. Trees take a long time to grow and the benefits that they provide increase as the mature. Therefore, tree removals should be avoided whenever possible to ensure all trees provide the maximum potential benefits. Trees that pose an unacceptable risk to public safety or the overall urban forest should be removed and replaced with a suitable species. Goal 12: Reach 22.6% canopy cover by 2040. South San Francisco has the potential to support a canopy cover of nearly 23%. Through a community survey and at community meetings, community members indicated support for a canopy goal of 23%. Goal 13: Decrease tree mortality. Like all living things, trees have a finite lifespan, though some are longer lived than others. Managers play an important role in reducing mortality rates through proactive tree maintenance practices, education, and discouraging the removal of existing trees. Goal 14: Promote good maintenance practices for trees on private property. Although the City is not directly responsible for the care of trees on private property, all trees are an important component of the urban forest. Education and outreach to encourage best management practices for trees on private property should be done to support the wellness and benefits of the overall urban forest. Goal 15: Review and update Municipal Code as needed. As a community grows, its needs can change. The Municipal Code should be periodically reviewed and revised to refine and identify requirements to support the urban forest and canopy cover goal. What do we want?  59What do we want? What do we want?  FOCUS AREA: GROW, MAINTAIN, PRESERVE, AND ENHANCE A SUSTAINABLE URBAN FOREST The urban forest provides numerous benefits to the community. Although it might be tempting to plant as many trees as possible, it is prudent to grow and enhance the urban forest in a sustainable manner. It is important to ensure not only that trees are planted but also that they can be maintained throughout their lifetimes. Goal 16: Increase support for the enhancement of the urban forest. The urban forest is more likely to be preserved and maintained by a community that understands the benefits that the urban forest provides. Educating the community on urban forest benefits creates an environment for the community members to advocate for the urban forest. Goal 17: Continue to distribute information about the urban forest to the community. The Parks Division should continue to distribute educational material and educate the public on the urban forest and tree care. Goal 18: Create a volunteer tree advocacy group. Growing, maintaining, and educating the community about the benefits of the urban forest can be greatly enhanced when volunteers are engaged. Volunteers can serve as advocates for the urban forest. Goal 19: Continue to pursue an Integrated Pest Management approach when responding to pests and pathogens. Pests and disease will always be a threat to the urban forest. Having a pest management strategy will make the urban forest more resilient and able to withstand diseases and pest infestations. The strategy should incorporate the use of multiple tools for preventing pests and managing current pest problems. 60 What do we want? The goals and actions proposed by the Urban Forest Master Plan are organized by guiding principles: 1. Align urban forest management policy with community expectations and cost efficiency 2. Enhance community safety 3. Optimize the environmental, social, economic, and public health benefits of trees and canopy 4. Grow, maintain, preserve, and enhance a sustainable urban forest Each guiding principle is supported by measurable goals, existing policies, and specific actions that are intended to guide South San Francisco’s urban forest programming over the next 25 years, providing the foundation for annual work plans and budget forecasts. Many goals and actions support more than one focus area. For each action, the UFMP identifies a priority, a suggested timeframe for accomplishing the action, an estimated cost range, and potential partners. Priority is identified as: • High− An action that is critical to protecting existing community assets, reducing/managing risk, or requires minimal resources to accomplish • Medium− An action that further aligns programming and resource improvements that have been identified as desirable by the community, partners, and/or urban forest managers, but that may require additional investment and financial resources over and above existing levels • Low− An action that is visionary, represents an increase in current service levels, or requires significant investment The estimated cost is categorized in the following ranges: • $ (TBD as goals are finalized) • $$ (TBD as goals are finalized) • $$$ (TBD as goals are finalized) The UFMP is intended to be a dynamic tool that can and should be adjusted in response to accomplishments, new information, changes in community expectations, and available resources. In addition to serving as a day-to-day guide for planning and policy making, the UFMP should be reviewed regularly for progress to ensure that the actions and sub actions are integrated into the annual work plan. How do we get there?  61How do we get there? Goal 1: Promote excellent and efficient customer service. Performance Measure: Known duration between maintenance activities for every tree in inventory. Rationale: Trees are an asset valued by the community. Holding Park Staff to a high standard elevates the level of care for trees on both public and private property. Risk: If the community is not satisfied with the level of service provided for public trees, then support for forestry programming is diminished. Benefit: When trees receive the highest standard of care in an efficient time frame, trees in the urban forest and the community are better served. Objective: Increase efficiency to respond in a timely manner to community concerns for trees. Actions: 1. Explore creating a position for a dedicated City arborist. 2. Continue to use interns to update inventory of City trees. 3. Explore water trucks that do not require CDL Class B Driver’s License to reduce the need for full-time staff to water newly planted trees. 4. Set pruning cycle based on maintenance and risk management needs. 5. Launch GIS Grid Pruning System. 6. Create a user-friendly interface to determine tree ownership (City tree/private tree). a. Use MyTreekeeper® or similar mobile application that identifies City trees. 7. Update tree inventory as maintenance occurs. a. Update inventory to include all trees that are the responsibility of the City. b. Conduct a Resource Analysis to quantify the benefits that City-owned trees are providing to the community. Cost Priority Timeframe How do we get there?  FOCUS AREA: ALIGN URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT POLICY WITH COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS AND COST EFFICIENCY $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 62 How do we get there? Cost Priority TimeframeGoal 2: Increase uniformity between City policies, documents, and departments. Performance Measure: Number of policies, documents, and departments that cross-reference the UFMP. Rationale: Having a uniform policy reduces confusion between departments and community members and transcends departmental changes. Risk: When policies have inconsistencies, setting a high standard of care is difficult. Benefit: Uniformity promotes a strong and efficient policy that aligns with community expectations. Objective: Unify guiding documents to transcend departmental changes and address inefficiencies and reduce confusion. Actions: 1. Ensure that UFMP goals are considered in all overarching planning and visionary documents as revisions and updates occur. a. General Plan as it is revised. b. Climate Action Plan as it is revised. Objective: Improve communication and coordination with other City departments. Actions: 1. Share the Urban Forest Master Plan among City departments following completion. 2. Communicate internally to develop standards for all departments. 3. Participate in cross-training activities to create understanding of other departmental roles. 4. Increase communication with code enforcement to increase enforcement of tree preservation ordinance. a. Continue to follow current code enforcement model and facilitate discussions with Public Works to determine mitigation measures for tree complaints. b. Explore new code enforcement policies. 5. Coordinate with other departments to establish procedures for sharing equipment interdepartmentally. How do we get there?  FOCUS AREA: ALIGN URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT POLICY WITH COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS AND COST EFFICIENCY $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 63How do we get there? Cost Priority Timeframe How do we get there?  FOCUS AREA: ALIGN URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT POLICY WITH COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS AND COST EFFICIENCY Goal 2 (continued): Increase uniformity between City policies, documents, and departments. Performance Measure: Number of policies, documents, and departments that cross-reference the UFMP. Rationale: Having a uniform policy reduces confusion between departments and community members and transcends departmental changes. Risk: When policies have inconsistencies, setting a high standard of care is difficult. Benefit: Uniformity promotes a strong and efficient policy that aligns with community expectations. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 64 How do we get there? Cost Priority Timeframe How do we get there?  FOCUS AREA: ALIGN URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT POLICY WITH COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS AND COST EFFICIENCY Goal 3: Advance the role of Park Staff in City development projects. Performance Measure: Number of trees planted through City projects and increased survivability of trees planted in City projects. Rationale: City development projects offer another opportunity to improve public places through tree plantings. Risk: Potential planting sites could be lost without Park Staff input. Benefit: Adding trees to City projects increase the benefits provided to the community through public spaces. Objective: Encourage the inclusion of trees in development projects to expand the tree canopy on public property. Actions: 1. Participate in Technical Advisory Group meetings to advocate for the inclusion of trees in City development projects. 2. Participate in joint coordination meetings between Engineering and Parks and Recreation. 3. Determine if there is potential to include trees in all City and development projects. 4. Create a formal review process for project planning that includes consultation with forestry. Require sign-off at all steps during the review process, including when trees are installed. 5. Review Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) to ensure the inclusion of trees. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 65How do we get there? Goal 4: Increase collaboration with developers. Performance Measure: Increased canopy cover in new developments. Rationale: Development projects provide an opportunity to expand tree canopy. Risk: Park Staff may not collaborate with developers to create opportunities to incorporate trees into new developments. Benefit: Trees planted in new developments not only increase property values, but also increase the benefits provided by the urban forest to the overall community. Objective: Expand tree canopy through new development projects. Actions: 1. Explore the expansion of existing park impact fees to support tree plantings when new development projects occur. 2. Consider the creation of a tree impact fee, similar to the existing park impact fee, that would provide funding for trees based on number of constructed units. 3. Explore Adopt-a-Park or Adopt-a-Median program to partner with developers. 4. Identify processes for transfer of responsibility for the care of trees and requirements for that transfer to the City within developer agreements. 5. Expand developer agreements to include tree plantings that contribute positively to community benefits. How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: ALIGN URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT POLICY WITH COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS AND COST EFFICIENCY $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 66 How do we get there? Goal 5: Provide water to trees efficiently and cost-effectively. Performance Measure: Reduced staff hours in watering trees. Rationale: While water is becoming more scarce and costly, trees need water to survive. Continuing to look for more efficient cost- effective watering solutions which will help to ensure that young trees get established. Additionally, cost-effective watering solutions will ensure that the cost of caring for these young trees is not cost prohibitive, thus discouraging future plantings. Risk: Increased mortality rates in young trees. Benefit: Reduced mortality rates in young trees and reduced labor and water costs. Objective: Provide water to trees to encourage establishment. Actions: 1. Collaborate with the department responsible for flushing water lines, in order to utilize that water that otherwise goes down the storm drain. 2. Require separate valves for irrigated landscapes and trees. 3. Continue to use TreeGator® bags and other water efficient systems to water trees. 4. Continue to explore the potential for a water cistern in Orange Memorial Park. 5. Look for additional funding sources. 6. Partner with residents/property owners to assist with watering street trees. How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: ALIGN URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT POLICY WITH COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS AND COST EFFICIENCY $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 67How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: ENHANCE COMMUNITY SAFETY Goal 6: Promote a workplace culture of safety. Performance Measure: Reduction in accidents and time for workers recovery from work related accidents. Rationale: Tree work is dangerous. Promoting a culture of safety results in reduced workplace accidents, less down-time, and greater productivity. With every staff member engaging in safe behaviors, everyone (even the community) is safer. Risk: Unsafe practices and lack of understanding of safety policies make even those who are complying with safety procedures vulnerable. Benefit: Fewer accidents and claims against the safety, as a result of improved public safety. Objective: Implement policies and procedures that make that tree work as safe as possible. Actions: 1. Develop a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) Manual for tree care operations. a. Include sections on safety training, tree removal policies, and tree maintenance. b. When crews go to a site, have a standard assessment or “tailgate” to identify hazards that exist for each job. c. As personnel are trained, require signoffs from supervisor to ensure understanding. d. Require that tree maintenance be performed according to best management practices and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) 300 standards. 2. Continue to support forestry worker safety. a. Seek out safety trainings provided by consultants that are familiar with Arboriculture. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 68 How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: ENHANCE COMMUNITY SAFETY Goal 7: Promote a safe urban forest. Performance Measure: The number of claims against the City involving trees. To decrease the number of claims against the city. Rationale: Many different circumstances can result in tree failure. While not all tree failures can be prevented, many can be mitigated through proactive management and regular inspections. Risk: Injury to persons or damage to property is costly. When residents perceive trees as a risk to public safety, those residents are less likely to be supportive of including trees in the urban landscape. Therefore, fewer trees will be widely accepted by the community or many may be unnecessarily removed. Benefit: Community members feel safer around trees and want more included in the urban landscape. Objective: Develop a risk management policy/procedure. Actions: 1. Include inspection cycles, inspection protocols, and thresholds. 2. Set risk thresholds and prioritize removals or other maintenance based on safety. 3. Develop a protocol for regular inspection of equipment, including signoffs from supervisor. 4. Review all equipment to ensure they meet minimum safety standards. 5. Coordinate with fleet services to develop life cycles for arboriculture equipment. 6. Explore alternative equipment repair and replacement program. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 69How do we get there? Goal 8: Reduce the risk of fire and mitigate damage caused by fire. Performance Measure: Improved defensible spaces around structures and reduction in ladder fuels. Rationale: California has had historic fires over the last decade. Many of these fires were in urban areas. South San Francisco has identified areas that are vulnerable to fire. To reduce the risk of living in the wildland urban interface, the City is working to mitigate potential fire hazards. Risk: Given the right conditions and lack of premediated response to fire, fire is a risk to the community. Fire can result in devastating losses to property and life. Benefit: Reduced vulnerability to fire. Objective: Focus fire mitigation efforts on Sign Hill and other areas of vulnerability. Actions: 1. Adopt the City of South San Francisco California Cooperative Forest Management Plan. 2. Reduce ladder fuels and create defensible space in proximity to structures. 3. Plant trees to not interfere with emergency response, such as, planting too close to fire hydrants and too close to fire escapes. How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: ENHANCE COMMUNITY SAFETY $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 70 How do we get there? Goal 9: Improve public safety. Performance Measure: Reduction in claims related to damage and injury caused by City trees. Rationale: Trees rarely cause injuries and damage property; however, the City has a responsibility to maintain trees to reduce the minimal risk that trees pose to the public. Risk: If trees fail, people can get hurt and property can be damaged. Benefit: Trees that are maintained on a regular cycle are often healthier and are less likely to fail and cause injury or damage to property. How do we get there?  Cost Priority TimeframeObjective: Maintain trees throughout their lifetimes to improve structure in maturity and reduce the likelihood of structural failures in the future. Actions: 1. Create a pruning cycle schedule and communicate this schedule to the community. 2. Identify and repair or remove trees that pose a threat to life and property on an ongoing basis. 3. Communicate planting designs with Engineering to ensure safety and avoid line-of-sight problems. FOCUS AREA: ENHANCE COMMUNITY SAFETY $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 71How do we get there? Goal 10: Plan for trees, before planting. Performance Measure: Greater health and longevity of individual trees and reduced mortality/tree removals. Rationale: Trees take a long time to grow and are a long-term investment. If a tree is planted in a space that is too small or too large for a space or is not well suited for the local climate and soil conditions, the potential benefits that that tree could have provided to the community are lost. Risk: Premature death of trees. Benefit: Fewer removal of trees and maximized community benefit. Objective: Invest in trees for the long-term environmental benefits provided to the community. Actions: 1. Set emphasis on right tree in the right place. a. Matching tree species to local microclimate. b. Reducing hardscape and utility conflicts. c. Matching tree species to soil and water conditions. d. Matching tree species to planter size and intended use. 2. As design standards are updated, include minimum tree well sizes. a. Require that planting sites are designed and constructed to provide the soil space requirement that will reasonably support the mature size of the tree species intended for the site. See Appendix F for soil volume and planter designs. b. Explore the use of strata-vaults, structural soils and other soil volume designs to increase space and healthy soils for trees. c. Formalize planting distances from water meters, fire hydrants, or other public utilities. 3. Explore expanding existing tree wells. a. Review impervious surface coverage at the parcel level. Reclaim pervious surface as appropriate. 4. Require that all plans include irrigation plans and planting specifications. 5. Revise Municipal Code 20.300. a. Include tree planting requirements for single-family homes and remodels. How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: OPTIMIZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS OF TREES AND CANOPY $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 72 How do we get there? Goal 10 (continued): Plan for trees, before planting. Performance Measure: Greater health and longevity of individual trees and reduced mortality/tree removals. Rationale: Trees take a long time to grow and are a long-term investment. If a tree is planted in a space that is too small or too large for a space or is not well suited for the local climate and soil conditions, the potential benefits that that tree could have provided to the community are lost. Risk: Premature death of trees. Benefit: Fewer removal of trees and maximized community benefit. Objective: Improve the diversity of the urban forest on private property, to create a more resilient urban forest. Actions: 1. Use “tree tags” to increase awareness of the value and benefits of trees. a. Consider including: 1. Species 2. Annual 3. Replacement value 2. Create a program to provide free or reduced cost trees for private property for single-family homes or duplexes. 3. Incentivize tree planting on private property, particularly in high and very high priority planting areas. How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: OPTIMIZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS OF TREES AND CANOPY $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 73How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: OPTIMIZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS OF TREES AND CANOPY Objective: Explore alternative designs instead of removals. Actions: 1. Explore alternative sidewalk designs to allow space for trees and compliance with ADA and avoid tree removal. a. Detouring walkways around trees, ramping over roots, and grinding down displaced sidewalk panels to reduce tripping hazards without causing undue harm to critical roots. b. Alternative sidewalk materials 1. Crushed granite 2. Gravel sub-base and other structural soils 3. Other structural cells (Strata Cells or Silva Cells 4. Interlocking concrete paver products 5. Flexipave, a system similar to rubber sidewalks 6. Alternative tree grate structures 7. Polygrate, a recycled plastic form of tree grate 2. Revisit Municipal Code to include provisions for tree planting in development of single-family and duplex homes with additions. 3. Revisit zoning ordinance to include minimum standards of maintenance of landscaping and replanting requirements or allow for tree mitigation fees to provide a tree elsewhere in the City. 4. Standardize the use of Tree Protection Zones in all city development projects. a. See Appendix G 5. Protect valuable trees during construction. 6. Require a ratio of impervious surface to tree canopy cover in new developments. Goal 11: Avoid removing trees whenever possible. Performance Measure: Reduced number of removals. Rationale: Trees take a long time to grow. While the needs for land use change and sometimes trees are prohibitive of a desired use, considerations should be given to preserving trees for all projects. Risk: Removals that could have been avoided through alternative design solutions and repairs. Benefit: The potential for all trees to reach maturity and provide the optimal amount of benefits to a community. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 74 How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: OPTIMIZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS OF TREES AND CANOPY Goal 11 (continued): Avoid removing trees whenever possible. Performance Measure: Reduced number of removals. Rationale: Trees take a long time to grow. While the needs for land use change and sometimes trees are prohibitive of a desired use, considerations should be given to preserving trees for all projects. Risk: Removals that could have been avoided through alternative design solutions and repairs. Benefit: The potential for all trees to reach maturity and provide the optimal amount of benefits to a community. Objective: Discourage the removal of protected trees. Actions: 1. Revise Municipal Code Title 13. a. Provide specific protections for publicly owned trees along streets and in parks. b. Clarify when tree permits are required. c. Redefine “pruning” consistent with ANSI 300 standards. d. Redefine “trimming” to define specific tasks that adjacent property owners are allowed to perform on protected trees. e. Review fee structure for violations to account for the replacement costs for mature trees. 2. Collaborate with the South San Francisco Unified School District to encourage the protection of existing trees and the replacement of trees that have been removed. a. While the South San Francisco Unified School District is exempt from the Tree Protection Ordinance, according to University of Illinois study of more than 400 children, visible access to trees and nature reduced student anxiety and symptoms of ADD/ADHD and improve test scores (2011) $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 75How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: OPTIMIZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS OF TREES AND CANOPY Objective: Improve everyday care of trees, to prevent future removals. Actions: 1. Revise Municipal Code Title 13 a. Clarify the responsibility of tree maintenance. 1. Set minimum irrigation standards for residents 2. Revise definition of trimming to avoid excessive pruning and to prohibit residents from using ladders to prune anything that cannot be reached from the ground b. Define a minimum standard of care for regular tree maintenance and replanting requirements. Goal 11 (continued): Avoid removing trees whenever possible. Performance Measure: Reduced number of removals. Rationale: Trees take a long time to grow. While the needs for land use change and sometimes trees are prohibitive of a desired use, considerations should be given to preserving trees for all projects. Risk: Removals that could have been avoided through alternative design solutions and repairs. Benefit: The potential for all trees to reach maturity and provide the optimal amount of benefits to a community. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 76 How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: OPTIMIZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS OF TREES AND CANOPY Goal 12: Reach 22.6% canopy cover by 2040. Performance Measure: Increased canopy cover. Rationale: The benefits that an urban forest provides to the community are directly related to the expanse of tree canopy cover and leaf surface area. The greater the tree canopy cover, the greater distribution of benefits to the community. Risk: No expansion or even loss of canopy cover may result in a reduction or stagnation in the benefits provided to the community by the urban forest. Benefit: Expansion of tree canopy increases the benefits provided by trees and can be realized by more areas of the community. Objective: Expand canopy cover to increase environmental benefits. Actions: 1. Create a planting plan, which identifies specific planting priorities for different areas of the City. a. Consider planting priority areas in planting plans. b. Consider planting priorities identified by the community. 2. Utilize best management practices for planting and maintaining trees. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 77How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: OPTIMIZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS OF TREES AND CANOPY Objective: Educate the community about property owner responsibilities for the care of City trees. Actions: 1. Complete the tree inventory to include all City-owned trees. a. Regularly update the inventory to include condition and address symptoms of stress whenever possible to reduce rapid decline and potential death of trees. b. Use an inventory management software to prioritize maintenance needs and prevent loss of trees that which are exhibiting symptoms of decline. 2. Increase education around watering trees (even during periods of drought). 3. Utilize the quarterly Parks and Recreation Guide to educate the public about forestry events and educational items. 4. Revisit mitigation fees for replacement of trees that have been illegally removed. a. Consider the use of the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers Guide for Plant Appraisal 10th Edition to design fee structure. Goal 13: Decrease tree mortality. Performance Measure: Reduced mortality rates. Rationale: Trees are a valuable component of the urban infrastructure, and when trees die prematurely, the investment in that infrastructure is lost. Risk: If efforts are not made to reduce tree mortality, the investment in the time and labor to plant and care for a tree is lost. Benefit: Reductions in tree mortality provide the opportunity for all trees to reach maturity and offer the most community benefits. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 78 How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: OPTIMIZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS OF TREES AND CANOPY Goal 14: Promote good maintenance practices for trees on private property. Performance Measure: Expansion of tree canopy on private property. Rationale: Trees on private property are an important part of the urban forest. While the City does not care for these trees, Park Staff have an opportunity to educate private property owners about the benefits that trees provide directly to the property and to the community. Improvements in the care of trees on private land makes public trees less vulnerable to pests and pathogens. Risk: Loss in benefits provided to the community from privately owned and maintained trees. Benefit: Improved care of private trees and reductions in removals on private property make the urban forest more resilient to pests and better able to provide benefits to the whole community. Objective: Reduce unethical and/or poor pruning practices and unnecessary removals on private property. Actions: 1. Collaborate with the School District to improve forestry practices on school property. 2. Explore requiring tree care companies operating within City limits to have professional licensing. 3. Explore providing a list of tree care professionals to the community. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 79How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: OPTIMIZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS OF TREES AND CANOPY Objective: Meet the changing needs of the urban forest and the community through clear and concise and current policy. Actions: 1. Explore the creation of an ordinance that defines responsibility when tree roots impact sewage pipes. 2. Unless tree roots are determined by the City Arborist to have crushed sewage pipes or lifted sewage pipes, the City is not responsible for sewage pipe repairs. 3. Revisit ordinance that identifies that sidewalk repairs are the responsibility of the City if the damage is caused by trees within the right-of-way. Goal 15: Review and update Municipal Code as needed. Performance Measure: Number of reviews and revisions. Rationale: Communities evolve and the rules and laws that govern the City should change to better meet community expectations. Risk: If the Municipal Code is not revised, outdated rules that to not protect the urban forest will leave the urban forest vulnerable. Benefit: Municipal Code changes can better protect, preserve, and enhance the urban forest. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 80 How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: GROW, MAINTAIN, PRESERVE, AND ENHANCE A SUSTAINABLE URBAN FOREST Goal 16: Increase support for the enhancement of the urban forest. Performance Measure: Participation in forestry programming. Rationale: An educated and engaged community is more likely to support and advocate on the behalf of the urban forest. Risk: Apathy towards the urban forest may result in loss in benefits provided by the urban forest to the community. Benefit: A community that supports the urban forest protects the urban forest and the benefits that it provides to the City. Objective: Engage the community in urban forestry activities and educational events. Actions: 1. Facilitate tree plantings with community groups on private property and in parks. 2. Develop a presence at local farmers markets. 3. Coordinate engagement activities with local schools. 4. Offer workshops on a variety of tree care topics. 5. Develop a relationship with local biotech companies to encourage biotech employee participation in tree planting events. 6. Maintain the City webpage to include tree educational materials. a. Provide downloadable fact sheets b. Provide responses to Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) c. Provide a summary of tree ordinances $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 81How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: GROW, MAINTAIN, PRESERVE, AND ENHANCE A SUSTAINABLE URBAN FOREST Objective: Provide sustainable and adequate resources to sustain the urban forest for future generations. Actions: 1. Explore the use of a Park Bond to supplement existing General Fund appropriations available for tree maintenance activities. 2. Explore community support for Park District overlay that would provide dedicated funding to parks and urban forestry. 3. Consider the creation of a tree impact fee, similar to the existing park impact fee, that would provide funding for trees based on number of constructed units. Goal 16 (continued): Increase support for the enhancement of the urban forest. Performance Measure: Participation in forestry programming. Rationale: An educated and engaged community is more likely to support and advocate on the behalf of the urban forest. Risk: Apathy towards the urban forest may result in loss in benefits provided by the urban forest to the community. Benefit: A community that supports the urban forest protects the urban forest and the benefits that it provides to the City. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 82 How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: GROW, MAINTAIN, PRESERVE, AND ENHANCE A SUSTAINABLE URBAN FOREST Goal 17: Continue to distribute information about the urban forest to the community. Performance Measure: Participation in forestry programming. Rationale: Reaching out to the community through a variety of avenues increases participation in forestry programming and advocacy for the urban forest. Risk: When people are unaware of forestry programming, they cannot participate in educational outreach activities. Benefit: A better-educated community will likely be more engaged in caring for the urban forest. Objective: An educated community increases support and understanding of urban forestry policies and procedures. Actions: 1. Continue to distribute information to the community through the quarterly Parks and Recreation Guide. 2. Continue to use social media to engage the community. Objective: Market urban forestry through a variety means to promote participation from all community members. Actions: 1. Continue to distribute information to the community through the quarterly Parks and Recreation Guide. a. Market the accomplishments of the program, i.e. Arbor Day events and other tree plantings. b. Continue to coordinate with Improving Public Places Group for volunteer recruitment. 2. Continue to use social media to engage the community. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 83How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: GROW, MAINTAIN, PRESERVE, AND ENHANCE A SUSTAINABLE URBAN FOREST Objective: Work with volunteer tree advocates to promote urban forestry events and distribute urban forestry educational materials. Actions: 1. Collaborate with Improving Public Places (IPP) committee or other existing volunteer groups to create a community urban forest volunteer group. 2. Explore partnering with Friends of the Urban Forest. 3. Explore offering high school credits to incentivize participation from youth. Goal 18: Create a volunteer tree advocacy group. Performance Measure: Participation in forestry programming. Rationale: A tree advocacy group allows for Park Staff to have a larger pool of volunteers to depend on for tree planting events and other educational and volunteer activities. Risk: Without a dedicated group of volunteer tree advocates, Park Staff may have difficulty managing the urban forest. Benefit: A dedicated group of volunteer tree advocates ensures that the urban forest has support from the community, increasing the protection and preservation of the benefits that the urban forest provides to the community. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 84 How do we get there? How do we get there?  Cost Priority Timeframe FOCUS AREA: GROW, MAINTAIN, PRESERVE, AND ENHANCE A SUSTAINABLE URBAN FOREST Goal 19: Continue to practice an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach to responding to pests and disease pathogens. Performance Measure: Reduction in the loss of trees associated with pests and pathogens. Rationale: When managing pests there is not a “one size fits all” approach to management and prevention. The urban forest is more resilient to pests and disease, when multiple tools are used. Benefit: Using comprehensive information about pests in combination with pest control methods promotes economical management of pests and disease. Objective: Employ multiple tools and strategies to prevent and/ or manage pests and pathogens. Actions: 1. Continue to diversify the urban forest. a. Continue to choose species that are better suited to the local climate. b. Continue to avoid planting species of trees that are susceptible hosts to pest problems. c. Continue to incorporate native species into planting palettes. d. Continue to use drought tolerant species. e. At a minimum, pursue species diversity goals that meet the 10-20-30 rule, but strive for even greater diversity among genera. 2. Continue the use of natural enemies (i.e. owls). 3. Continue monitoring and identifying pest issues. 4. Continue to respond to pests based on economic threats. $= $$= $$$= $$$$= 85How do we get there? How are we doing?  With appropriate care and planning, the urban forest is an asset that has the potential to increase in value over time. As young trees mature and their leaf surface and canopy grow, so too will the overall benefits and value from the community’s urban forest. The objectives and strategies of the UFMP are intended to support this process in an appropriate manner that encourages the sustainable stewardship of community trees with consideration for safety, cost efficiency, and community values. The UFMP includes strategies for measuring the success of the Plan over time. MONITORING Through talking with community partners and those within the urban forestry program, a set of goals were created to meet the strong demand for protecting and enhancing the urban forest, as stated in the community vision. The success of these goals is largely dependent on creating objectives and strategies to meet the targets outlined in the UFMP as well as monitor the progress of these action steps. ANNUAL PLAN REVIEW The UFMP is an active tool that will guide management and planning decisions over the next 20 years. Its goals and actions will be reviewed annually for progress and integration into an internal work plan. The UFMP presents a long-range vision and target dates are intended to be flexible in response to emerging opportunities, available resources, and changes in community expectations. Therefore, each year, specific areas of focus should be identified, which can inform budget and time requirements for Urban Forest Managers. RESOURCE ANALYSIS With a Resource Analysis, South San Francisco can identify quantitatively the value of the composition of public trees, the annual benefit provided to the community, replacement value, and benefit versus investment ratios. With this information, South San Francisco can improve health (condition), species diversity, annual benefits, and overall resource value of its tree resource. When a resource analysis is conducted every five years, the City can illustrate progress and success towards Plan goals. A five-year Resource Analysis review is a possible way to monitor progress on efforts to increase diversity through a list of tree species appropriate for a variety of different spaces and landscapes. CANOPY ANALYSIS With the recent Urban Tree Canopy (UTC) assessment, South San Francisco has a baseline tree canopy for the entire urban forest, which allows for continued monitoring of trends in the canopy cover on private property. COMMUNITY SATISFACTION Plan results will be measurable through increased benefits and value in the community tree resource and the preservation and eventual increase in canopy cover over time. Attainment of the objectives and strategies will support better tree health, greater longevity, and a reduction in tree failures. However, one of the greatest measurements of success for the UFMP will be its level of success in meeting community expectations for the care and preservation of the community tree resource. Community satisfaction can be measured through surveys and will be evidenced by public support for realizing the objectives of the Plan. Community satisfaction can also be gauged by the level of engagement and support for forestry programs. REPORTING Completion of this Plan is the first step towards achieving the vision for South San Francisco’s urban forest. Continual monitoring, analysis, and revisions will help forest managers keep stakeholders informed and engaged. By organizing data into specific components (for example; Urban Forest Reports, Community Satisfaction Surveys), it will be possible to revise specific areas of weakness and buttress areas of strength. Revisions to the Plan should occur with major events, such as newly discovered pests or diseases, or significant policy and regulation changes. A complete formal revision should occur in unison with major municipal projects, such as the comprehensive Master Plan. It is important to remember that the South San Francisco Urban Forest Master Plan is a living document that should adapt to new conditions. STATE OF THE COMMUNITY FOREST REPORT The purpose of the report is to provide structural and functional information about the urban forest (including the municipal forest) and recommend strategies for its proactive management, protection, and growth. 86 How do we get there? Appendices  APPENDIX A: ACRONYMS ANSI: American National Standards Institute BPM: Best Management Practices CAP: Climate Action Plan CIP: Capital Improvement Projects DED: Dutch Elm Disease EAB: Emerald Ash Borer GHG: Greenhouse Gas GIS: Geographic Information System ISA: International Society of Arboriculture IPM: Integrated Pest Management MBTA: Migratory Bird Treaty Act PPE: Personal Protective Equipment TRAQ: Tree Risk Assessment Qualified UFMP: Urban Forest Master Plan UTC: Urban Tree Canopy WUI: Wildfire Urban Interface APPENDIX B: REFERENCES Ackerly, David, Andrew Jones, Mark Stacey, Bruce Riordan. (University of California, Berkeley). 2018. San Francisco Bay Area Summary Report. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Publication number: CCCA4-SUM-2018-005. Akbari, H., D. Kurn, et al. 1997. Peak power and cooling energy savings of shade trees. Energy and Buildings 25:139–148. Average Weather in South San Francisco. Weather spark. Retrieved on May 15, 2019. Retrieved from: https://weatherspark.com/y/568/ Average-Weather-in-South-San-Francisco-California-United-States-Year-Round Bethke, J.A. and L. Bates. 2013. Myoporum Thrips. How to Manage Pests: Pests in Gardens and Landscapes. UC IPM. Retrieved from: http://ipm.ucanr.edu/PMG/PESTNOTES/pn74165.html Biotech in South San Francisco. 2018. Retrieved from: http://www.ssf.net/our-city/biotech/biotech-in-ssf Cayan, D.R. & Peterson, D.H. (1993). Spring climate and salinity in the San Francisco Bay Estuary. Water Resource. Res., 29, 293–303. City of South San Francisco. Retrieved June 11, 2018, from http://www.ssf.net/our-city/biotech/biotech-in-ssf Clark JR, Matheny NP, Cross G, Wake V. 1997. A Model of Urban Forest Sustainability. J Arbor 23(1):17-30. Climate South San Francisco–California. 2018. U.S. climate data. Retrieved from: https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/south-san-francisco/california/united-states/usca1987 Compliance Offset Protocol Urban Forest Projects. 2011. California Environmental Protection Agency: Air Resources Board. Retrieved from: https://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/capandtrade10/copurbanforestfin.pdf Dwyer, et al. Assessing the Benefits and Costs of the Urban Forest. Journal of Arboriculture 18(5): September 1992. Ellison, D. et al. 2017. Trees, forests and water: Cool insights for a hot world. Global Environmental Change. Volume 43. Pages 51-61. ISSN 0959-3780.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.01.002. Retrieved from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378017300134 Fernández-Juricic, Esteban. 2001. Avifaunal use of Wooded Streets in an Urban Landscape. Conservation Biology. Volume 14, Issue 2, pages 513-521. Retrieved from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98600.x Genentech. (2018). Choosing South City. Retrieved June 11, 2018, from https://www.gene.com/stories/choosing-south-city Gilman, E. F., & Sadowski, L. (2007). choosing suitable trees for urban and suburban sites: site evaluation and species selection. University of Florida, IFAS Extension. https://hort.ifas.ufl.edu/woody/documents/EP310.pdf 87Appendices McDonald et al. 2016. Planting Healthy Air: A global analysis of the role of urban trees in addressing particulate matter pollution and extreme heat. The Nature Conservancy. Retrieved from: https://thought-leadership-production.s3.amazonaws.com/2016/10/28/17/17/50/0615788b-8eaf-4b4f- a02a-8819c68278ef/20160825_PHA_Report_FINAL.pdf McPherson, E. 1994. Cooling urban heat islands with sustainable landscapes. In R. Platt, r. Rowntree, & P. Muick (Eds.), The ecological city (pp. 151–171). Amherst; University of Massachusetts Press. McPherson, E. and J. R. Simpson. 2010. The tree BVOC index. Elsevier. Environmental Pollution. 159. 2088–2093. Retrieved from: https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/mcpherson/psw_2011_ mcpherson006.pdf Menning and Stephens. 2007. Fire Climbing in the Forest: A Semiqualitative, Semiquantitative Approach to Assessing Ladder Fuel Hazards. Society of American Foresters. West. J. Appl. For 22(2). Retrieved from: https://nature.berkeley.edu/stephenslab/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Menning-Stephens-Ladder- fuels-WJAF-07.pdf Miller, R. W. 1988. Urban Forestry: Planning and Managing Urban Greenspaces. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Mitchell, Jessika. 2019. Shothole Borer. Davey Resource Group’s Treesources. Retrieved from: http://www.davey.com/environmental-consulting-services/resources-news/shothole-borer/ Parke, J. L., and S. Lucas. 2008. Sudden oak death and ramorum blight. The Plant Health Instructor. DOI: 10.1094/PHI-I-2008-0227-01 Pena JCdC, Martello F, Ribeiro MC, Armitage RA, Young RJ, et al. (2017) Street trees reduce the negative effects of urbanization on birds. PLOS ONE 12(3): e0174484. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174484 Planning the Urban Forest: Ecology, Economy, and Community Development. 2009. American Planning Association. Edited by Schwab, James. Retrieved from: https://planning-org-uploaded-media.s3.amazonaws.com/legacy_resources/research/forestry/pdf/555.pdf Radeloff et al. 2005. The Wildland-Urban Interface in the United States. Ecological applications. 15(3). Pp. 799−805. Retrieved from: https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/journals/pnw_2005_radeloff001.pdf Salim, M. H., Schlünzen, K. H., & Grawe, D. (2015). Including trees in the numerical simulations of the wind flow in urban areas: should we care?. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 144,84-95. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167610515001178 Gilstad-Hayden et al. 2015. Greater tree canopy cover is associated with lower rates of both violent and property crime in New Haven, CT. Landscape and Urban Planning. Volume 143. Pages 248-253. ISSN 0169-2046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.08.005. Retrieved from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204615001607 Grafton-Cardwel, Dr., Daugherty, Dr., Jetter, Dr., & Johnson, R. (2019). ACP/HLB Distribution and Management. University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Retrieved from https://ucanr.edu/sites/ACP/ Greenhouse Gases’ Effect on the Climate. 2018. U.S. Energy Information Administration. Retrieved from: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.php?page=environment_how_ghg_affect_climate Haddad, et al. 2015. Habitat fragmentation and its lasting impact on Earth ecosystems. Science Advances. 1. e1500052. 10.1126/sciadv.1500052. Heisler GM. 1986. Energy Savings with Trees. J Arbor 12(5):113–125. Heisler GM., and DeWalle, O.R. 1968. "Effects of windbreak structure on wind flow: Agriculture Ecosystems and Environments, 22123, pp. 41-69. Heisler, G. M. (1990). Mean wind speed below building height in residential neighborhoods with different tree densities. ASHRAE Transactions. 96 (1): 1389-1396., 96(1), 1389-1396. https://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/jrnl/1990/nrs_1990_heisler_001.pdf History of South San Francisco. 2017. Retrieved from: http://www.ssf.net/home/showdocument?id=128 Jennings, V.; Gaither, C.J. Approaching Environmental Health Disparities and Green Spaces: An Ecosystem Services Perspective. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015, 12, 1952-1968. Kottek, M., Grieser, J., Beck, C., Rudolf, B. & Rubel, F. (2006). World map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorol. Zeitschrift, 15, 259–263. Lyle, J.T., 1996. Regenerative design for sustainable development. John Wiley & Sons. Kuo, F.E. and Sullivan, W.C., 2001. Environment and crime in the inner city: Does vegetation reduce crime? Environment and behavior, 33(3), pp.343-367. Matsuoka, Rodney. 2010. Student performance and high school landscapes: Examining the links. Landscape and Urban Planning. 97. 273-282. Appendices  88 Appendices Appendices  Salmon, T. P. 2009. http://ipm.ucanr.edu/PMG/PESTNOTES/pn7433.html San Bruno Mountain Park Natural Features. County of San Mateo Parks Department. Retrieved on 18 February 2019. Retrieved from: https://parks.smcgov.org/san-bruno-mountain-park-natural-features Sherer, P.M., 2006. The Benefits of Parks. San Francisco, CA: The Trust for Public Land. Spangler, R. (1968). Scheduled to Close: Swift & Co. Plant Was a Boon to SSF. Reproduced for Historical Society Newsletter: Industrial City Echos, September 2010. Retrieved from: http://www.ssf.net/home/ showdocument?id=156 Swain, Steven. 2015. Pines, Drought and Beetles. Pests in The Urban Landscape. Retrieved: https://ucanr.edu/blogs/blogcore/postdetail.cfm?postnum=18800 Threlfall, Caragh & Williams, Nicholas & Hahs, Amy & J. Livesley, Stephen. 2016. Approaches to urban vegetation management and the impacts on urban bird and bat assemblages. Landscape and Urban Planning. 153. 28-39. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.04.011. Troy, Austin; Grove, J. Morgan; O'Neil-Dunne, Jarlath. 2012. The relationship between tree canopy and crime rates across an urban-rural gradient in the greater Baltimore region. Landscape and Urban Planning. 106: 262-270. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (2011, September 19). For kids with ADHD, regular 'green time' is linked to milder symptoms. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 9, 2019 from www.sciencedaily.com/ releases/2011/09/110915113749.htm Wolfe, Kamala Silva. 2012. “Peninsula Progress: Time to Preserve All of Sign Hill”. San Bruno Mountain Watch. Retrieved from: http://www.mountainwatch.org/news-clippings/2016/1/18/peninsula-progress- time-to-preserve-all-of-sign-hill Xiao, Q., McPherson, E.G., Simpson, J.R., Ustin, S.L. 1998. Rainfall Interception by South San Francisco's Urban Forest. Journal of Arboriculture. 24(4): 235-244. APPENDIX C: INDUSTRY STANDARDS ANSI Z133 SAFETY STANDARD, 2017 Reviews general safety, electrical hazards, use of vehicles and mobile equipment, portable power hand tools, hand tools and ladders, climbing, and work procedures. ANSI A300 ANSI A300 standards represent the industry consensus on performing tree care operations. The standards can be used to prepare tree care contract specifications. ANSI A300 Pruning Standard-Part 1, 2017 ANSI A300 Soil Management-Part 2, 2011 ANSI A300 Support Systems Standard-Part 3, 2013 ANSI A300 Construction Management Standard-Part 5, 2012 ANSI A300 Transplanting Standard-Part 6, 2012 ANSI A300 Integrated Vegetation Management Standard-Part 7,2012 ANSI A300 Root Management Standard-Part 8, 2013 ANSI A300 Tree Risk Assessment Standard. Tree Failure-Part 9, 2017 ANSI A300 Integrated Pest Management-Part 10, 2016 Includes guidelines for implementing IPM programs, including standards for Integrated Pest Management, IPM Practices, tools and equipment, and definition. 89Appendices Appendices  BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT, SECOND EDITION, 2016 Provides a comprehensive overview of the basic definitions, concepts, and practices that pertain to landscape Integrated Pest Management (IPM). The publication provides specific information for designing, planning, and implementing an IPM program as part of a comprehensive Plant Health Care (PHC) management system, including topics such as: • IPM Concepts and Definitions • Action Thresholds • Monitoring Tools and Techniques • Preventive Tactics • Control Tactics • Documentation and Recordkeeping INTEGRATED VEGETATION MANAGEMENT, SECOND EDITION, RANDALL H. MILLER, 2014 A guide to the selection and application of methods and techniques for vegetation control for electric rights-of-way projects and gas pipeline rights-of-way. Topics included: safety, site evaluations, action thresholds, evaluation and selection of control methods, implementing control methods, monitoring treatment and quality assurance, environmental protection, tree pruning and removal, and a glossary of terms. MANAGING TREES DURING CONSTRUCTION, SECOND EDITION, KELBY FITE & E. THOMAS SMILEY, 2016 Describes tree conservation and preservation practices that help to protect selected trees throughout the construction planning and development process so that they will continue to provide benefits for decades after site disturbance, including planning phase, design phase, pre-construction phase, construction phase, and post- construction phase. ROOT MANAGEMENT, LARRY COSTELLO, GARY WATSON, AND TOM SMILEY, 2017 Recommended practices for inspecting, pruning, and directing the roots of trees in urban environments to promote their longevity, while minimizing infrastructure conflicts. Special companion publication to the ANSI A300 Part 8: Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Management–Standard Practices (Root Management) TREE PLANTING, SECOND EDITION, GARY WATSON, 2014 Provides processes for tree planting, including site and species selection, planting practices, post-planting pruning, and early tree care. Other topics included are time of planting, nursery stock (types, selection, and handling), preparing the planting hole, planting practices, root loss and new root growth, redevelopment of root structure, pruning, palms, after planting, final inspection, and a glossary of terms. TREE INVENTORIES, SECOND EDITION, JERRY BOND, 2013 Provides considerations for managing large numbers of trees considered as individuals rather than groups and serves as guide for making informed decisions that align with inventory goals with needs and resources, including inventory goals and objectives, benefits and costs, types, work specifications, and maintaining inventory quality. TREE RISK ASSESSMENT, SECOND EDITION, E. THOMAS SMILEY, NELDA MATHENY, AND SHARON LILLY, 2017 A guide for assessing tree risk as accurately and consistently as possible, to evaluate that risk, and to recommend measures that achieve an acceptable level of risk, including topics such as: risk assessment basics, levels and scope of tree risk assessment, assessing targets, sites, and trees, tree risk categorization, risk mitigation (preventive and remedial actions), risk reporting, tree related conflicts that can be a source of risk, loads on trees, structural defects and conditions that affect likelihood of failure, response growth, and description of selected types of advanced tree risk assessments. TREE SHRUB FERTILIZATION, THIRD EDITION, E. THOMAS SMILEY, SHARON LILLY, AND PATRICK KELSEY, 2013 Aids in the selection and application of fertilizers for trees and shrubs, including essential elements, determining goals and objectives of fertilization, soil testing and plan analysis, fertilizer selection, timing, application, application area, rates, storage and handling of fertilizer, sample fertilizer contract for commercial/ municipal clients. SOIL MANAGEMENT, BRYANT SCHARENBROCH, E. THOMAS SMILEY, AND WES KOCHER, 2014 Focuses on the protection and restoration of soil quality that support trees and shrubs in the urban environment, including goals of soil management, assessment, sampling, and analysis, modifications and amendments, tillage, conservation, and a glossary of terms. UTILITY PRUNING OF TREES Describes the current best practices in utility tree pruning based on scientific research and proven methodology for the safe and reliable delivery of utility services, while preventing unnecessary injury to trees. An overview of safety, tools and equipment, pruning methods and practices, and emergency restoration are included. 90 Appendices Appendices  APPENDIX D: ONLINE COMMUNITY SURVEY RESULTS SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO–COMMUNITY SURVEY Introduction–South San Francisco Urban Forest The trees planted throughout the City of South San Francisco, on both public and private property, are its “urban forest.” Scientists have found that urban forests provide many environmental and health benefits. The City of South San Francisco has contracted with Davey Resource Group, Inc. to develop an Urban Forest Master Plan (UFMP) to support the urban forest and the benefits that it provides to the community. The Plan will provide a vision for the future of the city's urban forest and goals for maintenance, planting, and management to be implemented over the next 20 years. Your response to the following questions will help us more clearly understand community values and will help guide the development of the UFMP. This survey should take you 5 to 10 minutes to complete. Thank you for your participation. 1. Trees are important to the quality of life in South San Francisco. Response %Response Count Very True 89.33%67 True 9.33%7 Not Sure 1.33%1 Not True 0.00%0 Definitely, not true 0.00%0 Total 75 Trees provide numerous benefits to the community and the environment. Understanding which benefits are most appreciated by residents can help guide long-term management strategies. 2. Which benefits provided by trees do you value most? Please select the top three (3) benefits. Response %Response Count Improved air quality 70.67%53 Bird, butterfly, other wildlife habitat 60.00%45 Privacy/Screening 42.67%32 Energy savings 32.00%24 Increased property values 22.67%17 Reduced Greenhouse Gases 16.00%12 Improved human health 16.00%12 Reductions in stormwater 12.00%9 Improved water quality 12.00%9 Shade 4.00%3 Noise buffering 4.00%3 Aesthetics 2.67%2 Other (please specify)1.33%1 • All of the above • Good for kids to see, play hide & seek, & climb • Wind buffer Total 75 91Appendices Appendices  3. Optional. Use this space to provide additional comments on the benefits of South San Francisco’s trees. • Who is going to fix the sidewalks when the roots crack the concrete? • Trees create a haven for relaxation and reflection. It is vital for our physical and emotional to be closer to nature. I would love to see a door to door tree program in the Brentwood park neighborhood so we can truly make a literal neighborhood full of “woods” ( ie: rosewood, wildwood, Northwood). It would be so nice to come home from the hustle and bustle and feel a sense of calm in a nicely wooded neighborhood. • Taking the time now to plan for planting trees to off-set the air quality and pollution due to extensive new development and increased populations is an investment in our city for current and future generations. • They improve the aesthetics • I like to win the city would let you plant one at your home and they would do the maintenance on the tree • Stop building • When I was 10 and 11 years old Mr. E. De Monty was our teacher, we planted the trees on the hills to reprove the environment. • Sense of wellbeing, beauty • Get rid of the eucalyptus trees! • Look at google earth from a certain height and you notice our City looks grey and most other affluent City's look green. Tree lined streets can provide shade, and wind buffers. • Trees add a nice touch to the city. No eucalyptus trees please • The Sunshine Gardens neighborhood could especially use more trees, however long time residents who care little for aesthetics will unlikely be motivated to plant a tree in their front yard, especially if they think their water bill will increase. Will these "city trees" be watered by the city? Promoting the program requires careful targeting to these uninformed folks. • Trees add beauty • It will improve the beauty of the city. SSF. Is bleak compared to the test of the peninsula. Increase self worth of population, help block the wind in some cases. Increase property values. Might encourage residents to take care of outdoor space rather than parking on the lawns, might pick up garbage rather than toss in front of house • Will give residents more pride in their community • Large trees help diffuse the high winds we have. Should've been thought out better at Orange Park for example where the wind just whips through the playground. • We collect rainwater. We channel the water to storm drains, We pay the state to dump the water into the bay. If we cannot keep the rainwater where it falls by providing local reservoirs, why can't we at least use the water to keep our parks green? • Trees are therapeutic on many levels. • Trees along streets, property lines and open space must be maintained, trimmed, inspected annually • Trees not only add to well being of the city and its population they also increase the aesthetics of the city. Palo Alto, Redwood City and Burlingame are beautiful cities and their trees are 100% responsible for that beauty. • Increased trees in general can help improve our health, quality of life, slow traffic and increase overall well being of the community. Choosing native species and cultivars increases ecological benefits and bio diversity. • Improved quality of life to be able to walk tree lined streets. • N/A • It makes the city look friendlier and softer, not just buildings • Have always wanted my neighborhood to have tree’s planted on sidewalks. Live in Mayfair village area. Would make our city look much more beautiful and give our wildlife a place to rest/live. • So many neighborhoods seem to lack trees so I appreciate the city designing more trees into new and existing places • I'm sad that so many trees have fallen/have been cut down recently but I understand that people are nervous about big trees near their homes. I have one up the hill behind me that makes me nervous every time we have moderate winds and I don't know what to do about it since it's not my tree. • Beautify the surroundings • Help provide buffer from wind • Happy to see a future improved So. San Francisco. • I am saddened that it seems the city, in response to extended drought chose to the people that "brown is the new green" instead of encouraging drought resistant plants. 92 Appendices Appendices  Canopy Goals and Tree Planting Nearby communities have the following canopy cover: • City of Mountain View has 17.7% • City of San Jose has 15.4% • City of San Francisco has 13.7% • Daly City has 5% South San Francisco trees are providing 8.7% canopy cover. Considering impervious surface and open water, the potential for canopy in South San Francisco is 22.6%. Existing canopy cover in South San Francisco varies by zoning and land use: • Parks have an average 22.7% • Parks and Recreation zone has 19.9% • Open Space with 17.2% • Low-density residential areas have an average of 10.7% • Commercial designations have an average 5.4% 4. Are there enough trees in South San Francisco? Response %Response Count Yes, there are enough trees 4.23%3 No, there are not enough trees 85.92%61 There are too many trees 0.00%0 Not sure 9.86%7 Total 71 (4 skipped) 5. Where would you like to see more trees planted? Select your top three (3). Response %Response Count Parks and open space 42.25 30 Medians 43.66 31 Industrial areas 15.49 11 Commercial areas 50.70 36 Private property 32.39 23 Green roofs 4.23 3 Streets and parking strips 52.11 37 New developments 42.25 30 No additional trees 0.00 0 Other (please specify) 7.04 5 • Brentwood shopping center • Schools (2 responses) • I would like to see those ugly pine trees on Junipero Serra cut down and that whole highway be redone. • On the hill and mountain Total 71 (4 skipped) 6. What canopy goal should South San Francisco adopt? Response %Response Count 22.6% (potential)76.06 54 15%19.72 14 10%1.41 1 No net-loss, maintain the current level of canopy cover 8.7% 1.41 1 Other (please specify)1.41 1 • Not sure Total 71 (4 skipped) 93Appendices Appendices  7. Optional. Please use this space for any additional comments about canopy cover in South San Francisco. • If you plant trees near the side walk the city should be responsible for the repairs. • 22.6% does not seem realistic, but increasing canopy coverage along main thoroughfares, such as along 101, South Airport, Westborough, Gellert, Hickey, Orange, El Camino etc would help with air pollution, aesthetics and overall health for residents. • No comment • Stop building • Empty lots owned by the city without development plans should be forested. • I wish there was a center where we can monitor and show the public about the improvements and benefits of air quality due to the addition and care of plants in our community. • Visit other communities in the Bay Area. Ask yourself why South San Francisco must always take a backseat to these other places. We are told that our residents are not the correct "demographics" for improvements. What does that mean? • Trees with blossoms • An area of concern is the current removal requirements for trees on private property, as well as annual maintenance of existing trees on city property, in residential areas. I cannot be responsible for costs associated with city trees that cause problems to sidewalks, injury to others and be coninuting responsible to notify you when there is a potential problem! • There is definitely not enough canopy cover in SSF. • I appreciate canopy cover but I hope the planners take into account the reality of earthquakes and the resulting potential damage if the "right" canopy is not selected. • N/A • The cities mentioned in the previous questions are south of SSF and get more sun and heat so I can see why people wouldn't require quite as many trees here--we never see the sun. • Junipero Serra pine trees got to go. What about dogwood trees or maples. That whole strip needs to be redone and refreshed. Look at how nice the trees are in Burlingame or Stanford. • For the protection of people especially when raining • Incentives for residents to plant trees would be great! Sunshine gardens has very few trees and could benefit from more! • Residents used to have to maintain some portion of "green space" in front of individual homes but it seems too many areas are being paved over or covered in rocks. Tree Protection Maintenance practices can impact tree health. Topping and other improper practices can harm trees, introduce pests, create safety issues, and prematurely kill trees. Proper tree care preserves tree health and structure and promotes greater benefits over time. City Ordinance No. 1271-2000 requires a permit for the removal of City trees and trees designated as "protected" on private property. Currently, the maximum penalty for an unpermitted removal is $1,000. However, this amount rarely covers the value of the tree and the cost for replacement. 8. Would you support a higher penalty for unpermitted removals? Response %Response Count Yes 49.30 35 No 28.17 20 Not sure 22.54 16 Total 71 (4 skipped) 9. Should the City require professional licensing for tree care providers? Response %Response Count Yes 50.70 36 No 23.94 17 Not sure 25.35 18 Total 71 (4 skipped) 94 Appendices Appendices  10. Describe your awareness and/or interactions with South San Francisco’s urban forest program. Please check all that apply. Response %Response Count I was aware that the City responds to tree emergencies. 43.66 31 I have seen City crews working on trees.66.23 47 I have used the City website or called for tree information. 21.13 15 I did not know that the City had a program to care for trees. 36.62 26 I have read about the program in City-wide newsletters. 25.35 18 I have participated in Arbor Day and volunteer planting events. 29.58 21 Other (please specify)7.04 5 • I just found out through recently about South city’s urban forest program, and would like to participate. • I called the tree department about a tree in my front yard that is threatening the street light electrical cord, and the woman I spoke with basically said that it was my responsibility to maintain the tree. I am confused about why she would decide for the city that damage to the wire isn’t a priority. I am disappointed that she refused to send someone to my house to prune the tree. I will be calling about this issue again • Never once has my request been responded to appropriately within two weeks! • On my street on Fairfax way the trees are overly pruned. It’s damaging to the trees, and the trees never get the opportunity to develop a canopy. Therefore, it’s not only visually unappealing, the trees provide no shade and can’t be used as homes for birds/wildlife. • I saw the adopt a tree info in newsletter Total 71 (4 skipped) 11. What level of care for public trees would you prefer? Response %Response Count Minimal/Reactive–prune for visibility, sidewalk/ street clearance, addressing service requests and immediate hazards Proactive–cyclical maintenance, regular pruning/ inspection 11.27 8 Tree Health Care–optimal tree care to address structure, pests, diseases, etc. 52.11 27 Other (please specify)35.21 25 • Get rid of the pine trees. They are a nuisance 1.41 1 Total 71 (4 skipped) 95Appendices Appendices  12. Optional. Please use this additional space for any comments about the care of trees. • I have seen other cities have interactive websites with information on trees that will grow well in the area, have information on tree maintenance resources, and even downloadable booklets. That may be worthwhile for South San Francisco. • No comment • Guidance on how homeowners and renters can maintain trees, including a rental program for tools. • Stop building • Hire more staff for the tree care! • I would appreciate more education on this subject. • As I said before I think the city has an obligation to maintain trees around electrical wires that are owned by the city, on residential/commercial/city property, it behooves the city to prune trees to avoid further electrical damage costs. • If we impose too many restrictions on private protection and removal of trees it will deter residents from planting • Tree selection is the key. • I hope that you are caring for the trees in the Westborough area. Lived there since 1971. Saw a tree grow up. Unfortunately, it covers the beautiful view I once had but appreciate its majesty. Concern - hope the City is caring for all trees' good health. If the tree in the green area behind my house dies, my house is in the line of its drop. • Please address the overly, unnecessary pruing of all the trees on Fairfax Way. • N/A • Why did all the trees along Juniper Serra median get cut down? They didn't hurt visibility. If anything, the new plantings are going to be a visibility problem. • Take a drive down Stanford or parts of Burlingame, Hillsborough and get some ideas about making south San Francisco aesthetically pleasing. Btw, the plants and trees on Junipero Serra and King across the street from that apartment complex are very nice. • Everyone should participate • I think the city should hire more employees to maintain our Urban Forest. EDUCATION AND OUTREACH The City organizes annual Arbor Day events and other tree planting events. 13. What education topics about trees interest you? Please select your top three (3). Response %Response Count Species selection 78.26 54 Basic pruning for young/small trees 65.22 45 Irrigation and watering 40.58 28 Benefits of trees 33.33 23 How to plant a tree 31.88 22 How to water a tree during drought 23.19 16 • How to maintain mature trees, root growth that breaks pipes and sidewalks, how to move trees. 2.90 2 • How to care for trees Total 69 (6 skipped) 14. What methods for education/outreach do you prefer? Please select your top three (3). Response %Response Count Web or App-based (electronic)66.67 46 Workshops 46.38 32 Public tree plantings (Arbor Day, etc.)40.58 28 Engagement through schools 40.58 28 Farmers Market (urban forestry info booth)33.33 23 Pamphlets, Newsletters (hard copy)30.43 21 Self-guided tours or demonstration gardens 27.54 19 Other (please specify)0.00 0 Total 69 (6 skipped) 96 Appendices Appendices  15. What volunteer/collaborative efforts interest you most? Please, select all that apply. Response %Response Count Volunteer Opportunities 75.36 52 Stewardship Program/Community Foresters 53.62 37 Company Sponsorship’s (Adopt a Park/Adopt a Median) 42.03 29 Other (please specify)4.35 3 • Collaborate more with the schools because they have large amounts of property to plant more trees on, and have a large community of parents, teachers, staff, and our next generations (the students). • A number if parents and I volunteer at Monte Verde Elementary. With proper training, we would be happy to share our knowledge through our gardening program. • not sure at this time Total 69 (6 skipped) About You 16. What is your age? Response %Response Count 35-44 36.23 25 45-54 20.29 14 55-64 17.39 12 65+15.94 11 25-34 8.70 6 18-24 1.45 1 Under 18 0 0 Total 69 (6 skipped) 17. What neighborhood do you live in? Buri Buri/Alta Loma Response %Response Count Avalon/Brentwood/Southwood 17.39%12 Westborough 17.39%12 Sign Hill/Stonegate 11.59%8 Other (please specify)8.70%6 • Lower Parkway Heights 8.70%6 • Old Town 7.25%5 • Magnolia avenue and tamarack, this is the stop place for all buses taking pictures of Sign Hill 5.80%4 • Chestnut and Miller 5.80%4 • B street 4.35%3 • Pecks lot 4.35%3 Serra Highlands 4.35%3 Paradise Valley/Hillside 1.45%1 Sunshine Gardens 1.45%1 Winston Manor/West Winston Manor 1.45%1 Downtown/Lindenville/Village Way/South Airport 0.00%0 Orange Park/Francisco Terrace 0.00%0 Terrabay 0.00%0 Baden/Commercial/Mayfair Village 0.00%0 Tanforan/Mayfair Village 0.00%0 East of 101 0.00%0 Parkway 0.00%0 Parkway Heights 0.00%0 El Camino/Treasure Island 0.00%0 Terrabay 0.00%0 Brentwood 0.00%0 Treasure Island 0.00%0 97Appendices Appendices  Alta Loma 0.00%0 Paradise Valley/Hillside 0.00%0 Old Town 0.00%0 South Airport 0.00%0 Stonegate 0.00%0 Village Way 0.00%0 Mater Delorosa 0.00%0 Mission Road 0.00%0 Brentwood 0.00%0 County Club 0.00%0 Southwood 0.00%0 Francisco Terrance 0.00%0 Los Cerritos South Linden South Maple San Francisco High School Oyster Point Marina Total 69 (6 skipped) Optional. Please provide any additional comments or feedback. • No comment • I have major allergies and know many cities want only Male trees planting to avoid the mess of flowering, fruiting and trees that drop onto cars, sidewalks and cars. I also would like help in dealing with mature trees that cross over property lines and drop sap and leaves onto neighbor property because of wind. Many property owners who rent homes refuse to maintain mature trees or repair fences that mature trees lean against to ruin. I want the City to provide clear rules and guidance that homeowners and tenants can abide by. • Stop building • Can the Eucalyptus trees in Orange park be replaced with other large species? San Bruno Park off of Crystal Springs has some beautiful trees but not sure their species. • Please add a park to Sunshine Gardens. • Are there free workshops currently offered for volunteers and the community? • Would like to see more deciduous trees planted in street medians and public spaces. Also a more overall professional landscaping job done in our public spaces and streets! • "Please let me know about any plans to promote residential trees in Sunshine Gardens. I will help if I can. Kathryn Van de Kamp 1041 Sunnyside drive 415-235-1777" • I used to be on the Beautification Committee and became more aware of urban beauty through the committee. • "An onsite workshop. Get a volunteer homeowner. Go to a treeless site, there are many to choose from, select location, show how to check for underground interference (pipes, sewer), select tree with particular emphasis on maximum size and height, maybe use chalk to mark, discuss wind issues,discuss debris issues so people know before selecting. Make one of those speeded up YouTube videos. • Return to site for hands on planting, staking. Monitor and show photo on website once per year through maturity. People can visualize what tree will be like in 5 to 10 years and select accordingly. • Another way would be to develop an experimental garden in Orange Park. Stake out a row for a species of tree or shrub. Plant one in the row each year or two for 5 or 10 years. Until the plant reaches maturity or decline. People can visualize what that cute little one gallon plant will look like in years (and maybe avoid planting it 12 inches from house or 6 inches from sidewalk!)" • Thank you for the opportunity to provide input • Mayfair could benefit with street trees as the original cherry blossoms planted in the 60's have all but died out. • N/A • Would love more trees in our neighborhood, feel neglected. • Please cut down the ugly pine trees on Junipero Serra between Hickey and Westborough and redo that whole median. Add a lane, new trees like maples or dogwoods, and even a walkway. Also a lot of the homes in south San Francisco don’t have trees because the city planners decades ago picked the wrong trees—obviously they were clueless. Hopefully, you guys can do a better job and plant trees in our neighborhood. • More privilege for those who volunteer • With all the new developments the city should require developers to plant a certain amount of trees with each development. • Old, existing and removed tree roots seem to be causing problems in our area because of the close proximity of our buildings. I would like to know some guidelines about planting near buildings. • Please give Randolph some much needed attention, the city is hiring outside companies for the care ,and it’s not good. 98 Appendices Appendices  APPENDIX E: SOIL VOLUME AND TREE STATURE Tree growth is limited by soil volume. Larger stature trees require larger volumes of uncompacted soil to reach mature size and canopy spread (Casey Trees, 2008). APPENDIX F: ALTERNATIVE PLANTER DESIGNS Stormwater tree pits are designed to collect runoff from streets, parking lots, and other impervious areas. Stormwater is directed into scuppers that flow into below-grade planters that then allow stormwater to infiltrate soils to supplement irrigation. 99Appendices Appendices  Structural soil is a highly porous, engineered aggregate mix, designed for use under asphalt and concrete as a load-bearing and leveling layer. Poor spaces allow for water infiltration and storage and Bioswales are landscaped drainage areas with gently sloped sides designed to provide temporary storage while runoff infiltrates the soil. They reduce off-site runoff and trap pollutants and silt. 100 Appendices Appendices  also root growth. Sidewalks use pillars or structured cell systems to support reinforced concrete, increasing the volume of uncompacted soil in subsurface planting areas and enhancing both root growth and stormwater storage. Pervious pavements allow stormwater and oxygen to infiltrate the surface, promoting tree health and groundwater recharge 101Appendices URBAN FOREST MASTER PLAN2019 Staff Report DATE: November 19, 2019 TO: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Civic Campus Fundraising and Grant Update RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Parks and Recreation Commission receive an update on the status of the fundraising campaign and possible grant funding for the new Community Civic Campus. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Measure W, a half-cent sales tax, was passed in November of 2015. Following its passage, the City identified several projects targeted at delivering services advertised in the measure. One of the primary projects is the construction of the new Community Civic Campus. The project will replace the Main Library and Municipal Services Building with modern facilities to be located on El Camino Real and Antoinette Lane near Chestnut Avenue, including a new Police Headquarters, new main Library and Parks and Recreation joint facility, parking lot, and park. The City will finance the capital projects through a combination of available funds and the sale of bonds to be repaid over 30 years, the life of the tax measure (expires March 1, 2046), with revenue generated by the sales tax. As the Commission is aware, the City retained the SmithGroup as the master architects and Kitchell as the project managers. Jake Gilchrist, recently promoted to Capital Project Director, is the lead staff person in charge of the project. In the early planning phase of the project the City evaluated a number of factors, including site constraints, desired square feet and amenities, projected construction costs, bonding capacity, and total available funding. This resulted in the commitment of $200 million dollars from City sources, with a total project budget of $210 million, leaving a funding gap of $10 million. It should also be noted that funding for some of the desired park improvements, including the synthetic turf playfield, two playgrounds, walking path, and native garden are not included in the current project budget. The estimated cost of these elements is approximately $4 million. Rather than trying to construct the entire campus at one time, it was decided that the project would be phased, with the Police headquarters to constructed first, and fully funded by the City from the sources noted above. This phase is currently out to bid, with a due date of December 10, 2019; the Library/Parks and Recreation building is scheduled to go out to bid June 1, 2020. Staff Report To: Parks and Recreation Commission Date: November 19, 2019 Subject: Civic Campus Fundraising and Grant Update Fundraising It was decided that the City should pursue grants and engage in fundraising in an effort to raise $10 million to close the gap for the building, as well as for park amenities. The City engaged a professional fundraising consultant to evaluate the feasibility of this funding target, research potential donors, and make recommendations to guide this effort. The consultant determined that $10 million is an ambitious, but realistic goal. It was decided that the South San Francisco Library Foundation, the structure of which was established prior to the passage of Measure W in the hopes of raising funds for a new main library, would serve as the non-profit body to oversee aspects of the fundraising effort and act as fiscal agent. Members who were appointed to the Library Foundation include Kumkum Gupta, the current Chair; Mayor Matsumoto; City Manager Mike Futrell; Library Board members Diane Huddleston and Pat Fitzpatrick; Gene Mullin; Paul Formosa; Tony Clifford; and Sharon Ranals. Library Director Valerie Sommer staffs the board. Following the recommendation of the fundraising consultants, the need for dedicated fundraising administrator was identified. Adam Elsholz, Assistant Library Director, accepted this assignment; his duties as Assistant Library Director are being “back-filled” by Shawntee Santos, who was appointed as the Acting Assistant Library Director. Erin O’Brien, Recreation Supervisor, was recently asked to serve with Adam as co-lead for the fundraising endeavor. A summary of some of the accomplishments to date include: • Consultant feasibility study; • MOU with Library Foundation; • Consideration of a naming procedure with the City Council Sub-committee • Draft fundraising plan • Production of a campaign booklet (attached); • Trifold brochure (attached); • City Hall banner; • Retractable banner; • Website, including payment processing through Stripe and DonorBox – www.ssfgives.org; • Funders gathering event at Main Library (10/29); • Kick off event at City Hall (11/12). The strategy for the fundraising effort, based on consultant recommendations, has developed a three-pronged approach: 1) Major donations in the range of $500,000 and above, have been pursued one on one by the City Manager and Mayor; In this category proposals have been submitted to Genentech; Amgen; Kaiser Permanente (interest expressed in contributing to the park); See’s Candies (interest expressed in contributing to the teaching kitchen); Biomed Realty; Kilroy; and YouTube/Google. Several of these sources have expressed strong interest, with firm commitments pending. 2) Mid-range business, non-profit, County, and individual donations in the range of $10,000 and up to be pursued by fundraising administrators with support from the Library Foundation and staff; In this category proposals and/or applications have been provided, or are in development: Sunlight Foundation ($75,000 awarded); Bothin Foundation; Atkinson Foundation; Tri- Staff Report To: Parks and Recreation Commission Date: November 19, 2019 Subject: Civic Campus Fundraising and Grant Update Counties Bank; Summerhill; Safeway; David and Lucile Packard Foundation; Gellert Foundation; Petit Pot; South City Scavengers; PG&E; California Life Sciences Association; Supervisor David Canepa; Supervisor Dave Pine.; Silicon Valley Community Foundation. 3) Inclusive donor drive to encourage grass-root contributions of any amount. This effort will be ongoing and will continue through design and construction. Approximately $4,200 has been collected to date in this category. Final determination of the level of contribution required for naming rights, and guidelines for duration and renewal; how to acknowledge contributions at what levels (such as a donor plaque inside the building, inclusion of names on the project program, etc.) are still under consideration, but will be finalized and approved by City Council. Grants and Other Sources Parks and Recreation staff submitted a $4 million application to the California Department of Natural Resources under Proposition 68 for funding for the park. Based on the grant guidelines, the project is not as competitive as others since one of the significant criteria is that the project be located within a disadvantaged area. However, the funder did request a site meeting, and has asked for additional information from staff, so clearly our application has not been eliminated. Announcements are expected by Spring of 2020. Independently of the efforts described above, the Friends of Parks and Recreation, Friends of the Library, and the Parks and Recreation and Library departments have been collecting modest funds to put toward the new facility for several years. Sources include vending machine revenue, small fundraisers, etc. One additional source of funding to note is revenue generated from the Summerhill development on El Camino Real at Chestnut Avenue. It is standard practice to require that developers or contractors pay a fee for the use of public property for staging or egress during a construction project. Summerhill is paying such a fee for the use of the section of Centennial Way adjacent to their development. For the next 18 – 24 months this section of the trail will be closed, with trail users detoured. Funds generated for this use will be approximately $80,000, and will be set aside to be put toward park improvements across the street at the Civic Campus site. The intention is to provide a benefit to the public to partially mitigate the inconvenience of having this section of the trail closed for so long. It should be noted that the developer will also be required to fully restore the area to its original condition. . CONCLUSION The fundraising and grant opportunities described in this report will not only help to fund elements of the Civic Campus project which are “below the line” of items within the project’s base budget, but also provide a very meaningful opportunity for businesses, non-profits, and individuals to contribute and support this very exciting opportunity. Hopefully many of these relationships can also be leveraged to create ongoing partnerships for the successful operation of the community center. Staff will continue to keep the Commission apprised of fundraising efforts and outcomes. Campaign for the new South San Francisco Community Center and Library Donor Wall All donations will be memorialized in the new Community Center. Gifts of $1,000 or more will be recognized prominently on the Donor Wall, at the above giving levels. Naming Opportunities For significant gifts, plaques may be placed in the room or special area acknowledging you, your family, your business, or another you wish to recognize. For more information regarding naming opportunities, contact Adam Elsholz, Capital Campaign Manager, (650) 877-8538. While the Bay Area offers tremendous opportunity, participating in today’s economy requires building new skills and knowledge. The new Community Center and Library is an investment in our future, an after-school destination for kids, and a gathering place for everyone. Science & Tech Discovery Center Children's Library & Classroom Homework Center & Study Rooms Teen Zone Art, Dance, and Music Classrooms Fitness & Exercise Programs 1.3 Acre Park & Playground Performance Art & Cultural Gathering Spaces Conference and Workshop Venues Patron $20-$999 Supporter $1,000 - $4,999 Friend $5,000 - $9,999 Sponsor $10,000 - $49,999 Partner $50,000 - $99,999 Benefactor $100,000 - $299,999 Director’s Circle $300,000 - $999,999 President’s Circle $1 Million and above Donor Recognition To make this dream a reality, voters approved a sales tax measure in 2015, providing more than 90% of the funding for the project. The SSF Gives Capital Campaign will provide an additional $10 million to equip the Community Center and Library with contemporary learning resources. In the heart of the Northern Peninsula, at the corner of El Camino Real and Chestnut Avenues, South San Francisco’s new Community Center and Library will shine as a beacon of opportunity for all. Lega cyLeave Y o u r FundingWhat am I ? Please make your check payable to the South San Francisco Public Library Foundation and mail to: SSF Public Library Foundation 840 West Orange Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Name/s (Please print as you would like to be acknowledged.) Address City State ZIP Telephone E-mail Check enclosed Please bill my credit card: (circle) Visa Master Card Discover AmEx Credit Card #: Expiration Date: Name as it appears on card: If you work for a company participating in a Matching Gift Program, you may be able to double your gift. Please contact your personnel department. Your gift will be acknowledged in our publications and, if more than $1,000, on a donor recognition wall. Cardholder signature Date:(for credit card) My gift will be matched by (if applicable) Thank You! YES! I want to support the new Community Center and Library! $ Discover What We Can Do Together To offer a future with opportunity for all, South San Francisco is building a new 75,000 square foot Community Center and Library. Your donation will help build a spacious new home for our beloved community services and programs. *for online donations, visit: SSFGives.org The South San Francisco Public Library Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, ID#47222989 I would like to remain anonymous. PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT EVENT CALENDAR Month: December 2019 Day Date Event Time Location Orange Pool Sunday 1 Wreath Workshop (IPP sponsored) 9:00 a.m. & 1:00 p.m. Fernekes Building Monday 2 IPP Meeting See’s Candy Sip & Shop 5:30 p.m. 7pm – 9pm Corp Yard See’s Candy-Airport Blvd Tuesday 3 Council Reorg 6:00 pm MSB-Social Hall 4 5 Friday 6 7 Santa Comes To Town Flags at Half-Staff (Pearl Harbor Day) 11:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. City Hall 8 9 Tuesday 10 Wednesday 11 City Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. MSB-Council Chambers Thursday 12 13 14 15 16 Tuesday 17 18 Thursday 19 Senior Holiday Luncheon with free Gift Wrapping 11:30 a.m. – 1:30 p.m. Magnolia Center Friday 20 “The Nutcracker” Ballet 7:00 p.m. SSF High School Saturday 21 “The Nutcracker” Ballet 1:00 p.m. & 7:00 p.m. SSF High School 22 Monday 23 Menorah Lighting 6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. City Hall Steps Tuesday 24 City offices close at Noon Wednesday 25 Christmas – City offices closed 26 27 28 29 Monday 30 Tuesday 31 City offices close at Noon CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: October 17, 2019 TO: Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Sharon Ranals, Assistant City Manager / Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Bi-Weekly Update October/November Event Reminders Halloween Extravaganza Saturday, October 26 5:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Municipal Services Building  $6 per person, ages 3 and up Advanced ticket sales available at www.ssf.net/rec-catalog or at the Parks & Recreation Department. Holiday Boutique Saturday, November 2 10:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. Municipal Services Building  Free Veterans Swim Free Friday – Sunday, November 8 – 10 Visit www.ssf.net/aquatics for schedule Orange Pool  Free pool admission for veterans Thanksgiving Fun Run Saturday, November 16 Begins and ends at Genentech  $21 (18 and older pre-registration) $31 (18 and older event day registration) $6 (ages 13 – 17) Free (ages 12 and under) Advanced registration available at www.ssf.net/rec-catalog or at the Parks & Recreation Department. Concert in the Park Recap Concert in the Park, the City’s largest annual event produced by the Parks and Recreation Department, took place on Saturday, September 28 and was enjoyed by nearly 2,000 individuals. From 11:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., guests were treated to a variety of activities and food and beverage offerings in between performances by the El Camino High School jazz band, South San Francisco High School marching band, Lydia Pense and Cold Blood, and Marlow Rosado. See Attachment 1 for the program, which lists food and drink vendors, as well as activities provided throughout the day. Thanks to Vice Mayor Rich Garbarino’s fundraising efforts, the Department received $10,100 in sponsorships that allowed the event to host a Family Fun Zone for the second year in a row. (City Council is expected to formally recognize and approve these donations later this month.) The Family Fun Zone hosted nearly 900 participants who enjoyed features such as bounce houses, a rock wall, petting zoo, train ride, giant slide, and obstacle challenge. In addition, free Bi-Weekly Update October 17, 2019 Page 2 of 3 activities in other areas of the park included Zumba, the Imagination Playground featuring buildable play structures for children, and silent disco. Food offerings included six food trucks from different genres, and a Snack Shack in the Family Fun Zone that was hosted by the Childcare Program’s Full of Fun group, a program dedicated to serving teens and young adults with disabilities. The Snack Shack featured child-friendly snacks and ice cream bars, and served as a fundraiser for Full of Fun. The Friends of Parks and Recreation once again hosted a booth selling beer and wine, and worked in collaboration with Matagrano, Inc. to provide an assortment of beverages for purchase. Funds raised at this booth benefit the Friends of Parks and Recreation. Local brewery, Armstrong Brewing Co. also hosted drink sales at the Concert. While the Recreation, Park Maintenance, and Facility Maintenance Divisions of the Department often collaborates on events throughout the year, the extensive scope of Concert in the Park is an opportunity to highlight the way in which the divisions support one another year round. The Recreation Division is responsible for the overall format of the event, and planning and executing all of the event logistics. The Maintenance Divisions played a critical role in the weeks leading up to the event, during the event, and after the Concert to maintain the event site as well as deliver event supplies. Likewise, this event involved collaboration among the City Departments. In particular, Parks and Recreation staff met with members of the Police and Fire Departments to discuss enhanced safety measure for the Concert given recent incidents of mass shootings at similar outdoor events. Overall, 100 staff, vendors, and volunteers were present on Concert day to support the event. While roles and responsibilities are delineated, staff in all areas were prepared to take on tasks wherever needed to ensure a smooth-running event. Staff has issued both a paper and an on-line survey seeking feedback about Concert in the Park. The paper survey was available at the Concert, and the link was shared via the printed program and continues to be pushed through social media and the Parks and Recreation online newsletter. Staff welcomes feedback from Councilmembers who attended the event. Please feel free to share your ideas directly with Recreation Manager, Angela Duldulao, at angela.duldulao@ssf.net or complete the online survey at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ssfconcert. November 14 – Professional Development Program for Artists On Thursday, November 14 from 7:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., the Cultural Arts Commission will be co-hosting a free professional development program for artists on the topic of Representation: Approaching Art Galleries. This workshop is being offered in collaboration with the San Mateo County Arts Commission. It will be held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Services Building. Staff is pleased to bring this free training opportunity to local artists. Free tickets to the workshop can be obtained at https://www.eventbrite.com/e/75394479919. Bi-Weekly Update October 17, 2019 Page 3 of 3 Upcoming Art Exhibit / Performances by Cultural Arts Commissioner PaulaClaudine Hobson-Coard Councilmembers are invited to attend the following art exhibit and performances by Cultural Arts Commissioner PaulaClaudine Hobson-Coard. ART EXHIBIT Four original paintings by artist, PaulaClaudine Hobson-Coard Hosted by: Art Liaisons, Gail Sjoman Exhibit runs from September 7th for 3 months. All original paintings are for sale. Come out and support a local artist! Philz Coffee 2116 Broadway in Redwood City, CA MUSIC SHOW: LOVE STRUCK BAND Performing at Park Chalet SF on Saturday, October 19th, 3-6pm Located at: 1000 Great Highway, San Francisco, CA No Cover Charge www.parkchalet.com/live-music-calendar/2019/9/8/love-struck-k29c6 https://soundcloud.com/lovestruckband - audio www.lovestruckband.com - band website Tickets are $6.00 per person for ages 3 and up. Tickets go on sale October 1, 2019 at the Recreation Office at 33 Arroyo Drive Or online at www.ssf.net/rec-catalog until October 18. Limited tickets will be available at the door. For questions, please call the Recreation office at (650) 829-3800. 5:00 p.m.- 5:30 p.m. Not-So-Scary Haunted House 5:00 p.m.-8:00 p.m. Entertainment Game Room Snack Bar Haunted House* *(Line closes at 7:30 p.m.) VETERANS SWIM FREE City of South San Francisco's Parks and Recreation Department Friday November 8th: Adult Lap Swim: Adult Rec Swim: Family Night Swim: 5:30am-9:15am 10:45am-1:15pm 7:00pm-8:30pm Saturday, November 9th: Adult Lap Swim: Open Rec. Swim: 7:30am-8:45am 1:15pm-2:45pm Sunday, November 10th: Adult Lap Swim: Adult Rec. Swim: Open Rec. Swim: 7:30am-9:15am 9:25am-11:25am 12:45pm-2:15pm "This is just our way of saying "Thank You," for your sacrifice, contribution and services! - SSF Parks and Recreation Department ORANGE POOL 1 West Orange Ave., (at Tennis Drive) South San Francisco, CA 94080 Aquatics Program | (650) 875-6973 | www.ssf.net/rec Runners, Walkers, Families & Kids Welcome! Race will begin at 340 Point San Bruno Blvd, South San Francisco. Race will start at 9:00am sharp! Registered participants will receive a t-shirt and be entered in a drawing to win some great prizes. Refreshments will also be provide for participants. Trophies and medals will be awarded after the run. For further information and additional registration forms, please call (650) 829-3800. Sponsored by:  WAIVER AND RELEASE OF LIABILITY DO NOT SIGN THIS DOCUMENT BEFORE YOU READ IT AS IT CONTAINS A WAIVER AND RELEASE OF LIABILITY TO WHICH YOU WILL BE BOUND. I agree that my participation in the City of South San Francisco’s Thanksgiving Fun Run is voluntary and that I assume all risk of injury, illness, damage or loss to me or to my property that might result from my participation. I further agree (on behalf of myself and my family members, personal representa- tives, heirs, executors, administrators, agents and assigns) to release and discharge the City of South San Francisco and its officers, employees, and agents, from any and all claims, liability, loss, penalties, expenses and costs (including attorney’s fees), or causes of action (known or unknown) (collectively, “Liability”) arising out of my participation, except to the extent that such Liability is caused by the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the City. I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE CAREFULLY READ THIS WAIVER AND RELEASE AND I FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT, BY SIGNING BELOW, I AM WAIVING ANY RIGHT THAT I MAY HAVE TO BRING A LEGAL ACTION OR TO ASSERT A CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY FOR NEGLIGENCE. ________ _____________________ _______ (Date) (Participant Signature) / (Parent/Guardian Signature if under 18 years) 46th Annual Thanksgiving Fun Run • Saturday, November 16, 2019 • 9:00 am Mail form and entry fee to: SSF Department of Parks & Recreation ATTN: Fun Run 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA 94080 Make Checks Payable to: City of South San Francisco ___________________________________________________________________ (Name) _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Address) (City) (Zip) _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Email) (Phone) (Birthdate) Sex ____(M) ____(F) Age on date of race _____________________ $21.00 Pre-Registration (Until November 9, 2019) $31.00 Race Day Registration (8:00am - 8:45am) $6.00 Children/Teens 13 years - 17 years $0.00 Children 12 years and younger ► I will be running with a TEAM (A TEAM is defined as five people or more.) Name of 5K Run Team: _______________________________________ South San Francisco 46th Annual Thanksgiving Fun Run Saturday, November 16, 2019 9:00am Start & Finish at: 340 Point San Bruno Blvd. South San Francisco For more information call: (650) 829-3800 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: October 24, 2019 TO: Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Sharon Ranals, Assistant City Manager / Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Bi-Weekly Update Parks Update Hillside Ballfield Light Pole Replacement Project For several weeks, Parks staff has been working with Interstate Grading and Paving to replace a hazardous light pole at Hillside Ballfield. We are pleased to report that the new light pole has been installed and the footing of the old light pole has been demolished. Additionally, irrigation has been restored to start the rehabilitation of the field. The remaining fencing will be removed shortly while the cooler temperatures will expedite the rehabilitation of the lawn. Irish Town Green Update After being released from PG&E site control, the Parks Division has been focusing on restoring Irish Town Green into soccer practice fields. The Department’s project to install an accessible pathway around the playing field has been completed and staff is pleased with the final results. Turf rehabilitation is under way and staff looks forward to having these fields opened for play by the spring season. Dog Park Update For the past few weeks, Parks Division staff had been waiting on replacement parts for the recently installed dog park drinking fountain that was damaged. Staff is pleased to report that parts have been received and the fountain has been repaired. The Department also received used dog obstacle course equipment as a donation from The Pawington. We are currently working on rehabbing these items and hope to install these in the dog park in the near future. Bi-Weekly Update October 24 2019 Page 2 of 3 Centennial Way Bike Repair Stations Parks staff have installed four bike repair stations along Centennial Way Trail. These are strategically located at the following locations, where the trail intersects major streets: Spruce Avenue Plaza, Orange Avenue Plaza, Mission Road Plaza, and the South San Francisco BART station trail entrance. These repair stations are intended to assist riders if they encounter issues with their bike on their ride or commute, and are complete with an air pump and common repair tools. This project was organized by various staff as a project for the City’s internal LEAP Academy, and championed and fundraised by Mayor Matsumoto. Ballfield Maintenance Update At Avalon Park, the backstop and infield fence has been repaired. New fence fabric and rails have been installed throughout the infield and the backstop. At Buri Buri Park, staff have met with a contractor to make plans to address drainage issues in both dugouts at this field. Staff is anxious to move forward with this before the rainy season. Sign Hill Restoration Work The Parks Division recently began habitat restoration work on Sign Hill led by the Department’s grant-funded Natural Resource Specialist. This project is being built from the ground up, with great progress. Working with Information Technology Department staff, staff has created a GIS map for data collection, work planning, and progress tracking. Staff has started work in the field focusing on removing fennel seed banks and eradicating invasive ice plant. A comprehensive history of Sign Hill is also being compiled. GIS Maps for Sign Hill Restoration Work Bi-Weekly Update October 24 2019 Page 3 of 3 Ice Plant patch before removal Ice Plant patch after removal Facility Maintenance Update Orange Park Restroom Painting Facility Maintenance staff made improvements to the Orange Memorial Park restrooms in anticipation of the Concert in the Park event. Staff sanded and removed the rust from the doors and gave them a fresh coat of paint. They also adjusted the doors and hardware to make sure they were operating properly. Fernekes Building Roof Maintenance As part of routine roof maintenance, Facility Maintenance staff has been working on the Joseph Fernekes building roof. Staff has been removing the debris and power washing the flat roof membrane. They will then apply a fresh coat of EPDM liquid rubber coating. Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer (EPDM) roofing is a thermoset membrane roof material. It is the most common material used to create rubber roofs, and is widely used in commercial and residential applications. Fire Sprinkler Repairs Facility Maintenance staff is continuing fire sprinkler maintenance and repairs. Staff has hired a certified contractor, National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), to perform quarterly inspections and repairs. The inspection report noted areas where the systems have deficiencies. Some of the deficiencies can be corrected with cleaning of the loaded sprinkler heads so that they can perform without obstruction. At the Main Library and Corporation Yard, the sprinkler heads are starting to corrode and need to be replaced. The fire sprinkler contractor is working on replacing these sprinkler heads this week. Artist Studio Window Repairs Parks staff discovered another broken window at the Artist Studios at Orange Memorial Park. The window was boarded up to temporarily protect the space. Facility Maintenance staff removed the old window, ordered replacement glass from a local vendor and installed the new window. CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: October 31, 2019 TO: Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Sharon Ranals, Assistant City Manager / Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Bi-Weekly Update Halloween Extravaganza Recap On Saturday, October 26, the Parks and Recreation Department hosted a successful Halloween Extravaganza for over 900 guests. For an admission fee of $6 per person for ages 3 and up, guests enjoyed a game room with prizes, costume contest, magic show by Magical Nathaniel, snack station hosted by the Department’s Civic Ballet volunteers, and many other activities including crafts led by the South San Francisco Library. The Department’s Childcare Program staff led the creation of the “haunted mansion” which received nearly 950 visits! One of the challenges that arose in the final days leading up to the event was the PG&E Public Safety Power Shutoff affecting certain areas of South San Francisco. While the Municipal Services Building’s address was not on the list of affected buildings, staff coordinated extra safety precautions and created an action plan should the power go out before or during the event. Thankfully, the event was not affected by a power outage. Honorable mention goes to the 50 volunteers who are made up of youth as young as 10 years old to adults. These volunteers are critical to the event’s success each year by hosting the games in the game room. This year was the first year the Department highlighted a new format for the game room. For many years, guests played games to win tickets which were redeemed for prizes. In an effort to minimize the crowding that often takes place near the end of the event when guests redeem tickets for prizes, and as an Bi-Weekly Update October 31, 2019 Page 2 of 4 attempt to be more cost effective, staff this year eliminated the model of earning tickets for prizes. Instead, participants won a small prize for each game played. Staff has issued a satisfaction survey and is still awaiting the final results. Preliminary responses and verbal feedback indicate that many guests appreciated this change and enjoyed the event overall. CAC Recommends Purchase of Two Sculptures – Artists John Carroll and HybyCozo At the Thursday, October 17, 2019 Cultural Arts Commission (CAC) meeting, the CAC voted to approve a recommendation to City Council to purchase two sculptures listed below. Councilmembers are asked to please send your comments or objections to Angela Duldulao, Recreation Manager, at angela.duldulao@ssf.net by Thursday, November 21 by 5:00 p.m. Upon hearing no objections from City Council, staff will move forward with further examining the full cost of the sculpture including shipping and installation. If satisfactory, staff will begin negotiating a purchase of the sculptures from the artists and will return to a City Council meeting to approve the Art Purchase Agreements. More information about each of the sculptures is available in Attachment 1. Sculpture #1 - Modern Industrial Era Artist: John Carroll Estimated Cost*: $4,500 Suggested location: 102 Grand Avenue @ Airport Boulevard jocogallery.com Sculpture #2 - Geometric Lanterns, Strung Overhead Artist: HybyCozo Estimated Cost*: $7,500 Suggested Location: Old Breezeway at 321 – 329 Grand Avenue www.hybycozo.com * Estimated cost of sculptures do not include shipping and installation. #1 #2 Bi-Weekly Update October 31, 2019 Page 3 of 4 Art Gallery Exhibit Recap and Extended Exhibit in MSB Atrium Window The Cultural Arts Commission presented the final 2019 Art Gallery Event on Friday and Saturday, October 11 and 12, at the Municipal Services Building. Included were art works in watercolors, paintings in other media, graphics, sculpture, and for the first time, recycled art. Fifty-five works by 25 local artists were exhibited. Entries were judged by Guy Magallanes. Sixteen artists were awarded in four categories. The fifth category, sculpture, did not receive the minimum number of participants to be judged. The finalists were acknowledged at the October 17 Cultural Arts Commission meeting. An extended exhibit of fourteen award-winning works is currently on display in the MSB atrium display window until mid-November. There was also a musical performing arts presentation in conjunction with the Friday night opening of the exhibit. The ten-member Diversity Glee choir group, directed by Commissioner Florida Ventura, performed popular musical selections. This was followed by an energetic performance by local artist, Manuel Catania, who had the enthusiastic audience clapping as he sang Elvis Presley’s hits. 2020 Art Gallery Schedule The Cultural Arts Commission sponsors a series of annual art gallery exhibits designed to showcase the creativity of local and Bay Area artists. 2020 event dates are as follows: • February 14 and 15 – General Art Show & Karaoke Night (February 14 only) • April 3 and 4 – Youth Art Show Bi-Weekly Update October 31, 2019 Page 4 of 4 • July 10 and 11 – Photography Exhibit • August 30 – Cultural Arts BBQ Fundraiser • October 9 and 11 – Dia de los Muertos/Day of the Dead Art Show. Updated information will be posted on www.ssf.net/culturalarts a few months prior to the event. Utility Box Mural Project The following two utility box mural projects have been completed: “Sister Cities” By artist team Finny Balboa & Tiffany Von Walter Location: South Spruce Avenue and Centennial Way “Native Plants of SSF” By artist Marina Krauss Location: Hillside Boulevard and Linden Avenue Nearing completion are the utility boxes on Chestnut Avenue and Hillside Boulevard by Megan Pagano, and Westborough Boulevard and Gellert Boulevard by Charlene Casuga. The Utility Box Mural Project allows artists and creative community members the opportunity to highlight and share their artistry, while creating pleasant public spaces and deterring graffiti. Donations of paints and supplies for this project are courtesy of Kelly-Moore Paints in South San Francisco. Attachment 1 Attachment 1 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: November 7, 2019 TO: Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Greg Mediati, Deputy Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Bi-Weekly Update Parks Update Buri Buri Field Maintenance Update Parks staff is continuing infield improvements at Buri Buri Park Ballfield. Sod cutting the arc of the infield has been completed as well as turf, infield fine mix and soil removal. The next steps will be to repair and extend the irrigation heads to the requested infield dimensions, and add new soil and infield mix. Once complete, staff will install new sod, which will bring the new infield arc in approximately 10 feet. Staff has also contracted with Bay Area Paving to perform dugout resurfacing and drain repairs, beginning November 12. Scoreboard Rehabilitation Project Staff has hired a painting contractor to restore the scoreboards at Alta Loma Park and Avalon Park. The scoreboards are being repainted in their original color to give them a cleaner and newer appearance. Bi-Weekly Update November 7, 2019 Page 2 of 4 Wind Storm Cleanup As a result of very strong wind storms, Parks staff has been busy cleaning broken tree limbs and leaf litter. Many parks such as Orange Memorial Park, Sellick Park, Westborough Park and Avalon Memorial Lots received a good deal of additional staff time devoted for cleanup. Additionally, the tree crew has been assigned to care for fallen branches and damaged trees caused by the strong winds. Hillside Ballfield Repairs Contractors removed the temporary fence at Hillside Ballfield, which was installed around the hazardous light pole that was recently removed and replaced. Now that construction is completed, the irrigation lines have been inspected and repaired from minor construction damage. Irrigation has since been restored, and the turf has already started to green up. Ongoing gopher trapping, broad leaf weed removal, fertilizing and aerating will take place in the coming weeks prior to the rainy season. Halloween Extravaganza Exterior Site Preparation New for this year, Parks Division staff volunteered to decorate the exterior of the Municipal Services Building for the annual Halloween Extravaganza event. Staff built stands and fences with actual dead tree branches attached to give a realistic spooky effect to the entrance of the building, consistent with the event’s theme, “Haunted Mansion.” Staff also installed colored uplights, fog machines, and cobwebs throughout the entrance. This display was very popular and used by many residents for photographs. Bi-Weekly Update November 7, 2019 Page 3 of 4 Facility Maintenance Update City Hall Concrete Repairs Building Maintenance staff and contractors completed repairs to the concrete pathway from City Hall to the Grand Library. The pathway damage was caused by tree roots and construction equipment during the Grand Library remodel project. The pathway deteriorated enough to become a tripping hazard and needed to be replaced. Working with a concrete contractor, staff removed the entire pathway and landing and replaced it with a new concrete pathway. Bi-Weekly Update November 7, 2019 Page 4 of 4 Grand Library Patio Repairs Three years ago, the Grand Library was remodeled which included installation of a new concrete patio. Soon after the concrete patio was installed the contractor painted the patio. Unfortunately, the paint and the concrete did not hold up very well. The painted surface was slippery when wet and the paint started to peel. There was also spalling on the concrete. Working with a concrete contractor, staff stripped all the paint from the patio and repaired the spalling concrete. The contractor then stained the concrete, rather than painting it. They also added slip resistant sealant to the stain to make it safe for Library patrons and staff when the patio is wet. Fire Sprinkler Repairs Building Maintenance staff is continuing fire sprinkler maintenance and repairs. Staff has contracted with a certified contractor, National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), to perform quarterly inspections and repairs. The inspection and subsequent report noted areas where the systems have deficiencies. As noted previously, some of the deficiencies can be corrected with cleaning of the loaded sprinkler heads, so that they can perform without obstruction. At the Corporation Yard, the sprinkler heads are starting to corrode from the elements and need to be replaced. This past week, the fire sprinkler contractor needed a large lift to reach and repair some of the damaged sprinkler heads in the mechanics garage and Parks Division mower room. CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: November 14, 2019 TO: Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Greg Mediati, Deputy Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Bi-Weekly Update December Holiday Closure Schedule From Monday, December 23 through Friday, December 27, the following community centers will be closed to the public except for the purpose of Winter Camp and Adult Day Care programming as noted below. This is planned in conjunction with the City’s official holiday closure of a half day on December 24, and all day on December 25. During the closure, full-time recreation staff who are not supporting open program will have the option to come to work or may take time off using their allotted leave time as permitted by their supervisor. Community Center Closures (December 23 – 27, 2019) o Joseph A. Fernekes Building • Childcare Administration o Magnolia Center • Senior Services Administration & Program (3rd Floor) • OPEN: Adult Day Care (2nd Floor) - Dec. 23, 26, 27 o Municipal Services Building • Parks and Recreation Department Administration • Rentals and Classes Program Administration o Orange Pool • Aquatics Administration o Terrabay Gymnasium and Recreation Center • Sports Administration • OPEN: Childcare Winter Camp - Dec. 23, 27 o Westborough Recreation Building Childcare Program Closures (Monday, Dec. 23 – Friday, Jan. 3) o Preschool: Siebecker, Westborough, Little Steps o After School and REAL Program: Buri Buri, Monte Verde, Ponderosa, Spruce, Martin, Los Cerritos • SSFUSD schools are closed during this period Unlike last year, Orange Pool will not be closing during the month of December this year. The primary purpose for closing the pool for a month is to drain the pool of all of its water, clean and Bi-Weekly Update November 14, 2019 Page 2 of 4 scrub the bowl, and perform any other required maintenance directly related to the pool that may be required at the time. Along with the work mentioned, re-filling the pool and calibrating the water to the required state standards (pH, free chlorine, etc.) takes approximately 2-3 weeks. This type of maintenance is only needed approximately every two years. The pool will be closed to the public the week of December 23-27 along with other recreation administrative offices. During this week, Aquatics staff will deep clean locker rooms and restrooms (power wash floors, walls, etc.) as well as file applications, pool chemical logs, and reports that were completed throughout the year. October Power Outage Effects on Recreation Programs From the evening of Saturday, October 26 through Monday, October 28 PG&E implemented a Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) that affected certain neighborhoods in South San Francisco. Recreation programs operating out of the Westborough Recreation Building and the Monte Verde After School Program were affected. At the Westborough Recreation Building, a private rental scheduled on Sunday, October 27 from 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. was moved to the Municipal Services Building Atrium. As soon as staff learned of the potential PSPS, the event permit holders were put on notice that their event might have to be cancelled. Thanks to the fast and efficient work of Rentals Program staff to clean out the MSB after Saturday’s Halloween Extravaganza, staff was able to offer an alternative event space, which was very much appreciated by the permit holder. On Monday, October 28, the Westborough Preschool was closed and all recreation classes were cancelled for the day. Classes included Kenpo Eskrima for adults and children, Kinder Class, Yoga, and Private Piano Lessons. Also on Monday, October 28, staff offered before and after school care at Monte Verde Elementary School despite the power being out. This decision was made in support of the school district’s decision to keep the school open. The only change to the program was that parents had to pick up their children by 5:00 p.m. instead of 6:00 p.m. so that the program could close before sundown. In all instances, staff was prepared for the PSPS with extra lanterns and continuously monitored status updates about the PSPS. Decisions affecting Recreation programming were made on a day by day basis. Staff worked quickly to notify patrons about program changes via phone, e-mail, social media, and the City website. Civic Ballet Nutcracker The South San Francisco Civic Ballet’s annual Nutcracker production will be held on Friday, December 20 and Saturday, December 21 at South San Francisco High School. This year there will be three separate performances; two evening shows and one matinee: Friday at 7:00 p.m., and Saturday at 1:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. Over 200 South San Francisco Civic Ballet students have already begun preparation for the production. Please contact Recreation Manager, Angela Duldulao at angela.duldulao@ssf.net or (650) 829-3827 for two complimentary tickets for the show of your choice. Bi-Weekly Update November 14, 2019 Page 3 of 4 Middle School Dance The first middle school dance for the school year was held at the Terrabay Gymnasium and Recreation Center on Friday, October 11. Students from Alta Loma, Parkway, and Westborough Middle Schools were invited to attend. One hundred and sixty students attended the dance. Sports Coordinator Bill Stridbeck coordinated the evening along with 15 chaperones from the Sports, Aquatics and Childcare Programs, and one uniformed police officer. The music was supplied by Spintronix Entertainment, which has been the DJ at these dances for many years. The dance went from 6:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Parent pick up was from 9:00 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. Students who pre-paid before the dance were able to enter through a fast pass line. Ninety-five students pre-paid and were able to take advantage of the quicker entrance into the dance. The cost to get into the dance early was $8.00 in comparison to paying $10.00 at the door that night. Overall, the dance was very successful and the students were well-behaved. Once the students enter the dance, they cannot leave the building. Parents must physically come into the gym after the dance to pick up their child. The dance can be a little overwhelming for many sixth grade students, but on this night, the event had the highest number of sixth graders attend the first dance of the year. The next dance will be on January 24, 2020 and the Department expects about 200 students as word gets around the schools on how much fun everyone had. New Chair Lift and Stairs at Orange Pool Orange Pool received and installed a new chair lift on Friday, November 1. The old chair lift was operational when lifting swimmers in and out of the water; however, due to electronic damage, it did not rotate left or right so lifeguards needed to manually move the chair for swimmers. After much research on how to repair the chair, it was determined that the most economically sound decision would be to purchase a new chair lift. With the new chair lift, patrons are now able to lift themselves in and out of the water without assistance from lifeguards and pool staff. In addition to the new chair lift, staff has ordered new stairs to help ease patrons in and out of the water. Staff made several repairs over time to the old stairs and finally determined they had reached their end of life. The new stairs should arrive to the pool by mid to late November. It should be noted, public pools are required to provide ADA access to swimming pools, which the chair lift provides. Stair access in and out of the water is not required by state code, but has proven to be an invaluable addition to the program, particularly for people who might be physically challenged by using the ladders to get in and out of the pool. Bi-Weekly Update November 14, 2019 Page 4 of 4 Winter 2020 Activity Guide – Year in Review The Winter 2020 Activity Guides will be mailed out the week of November 18, 2019. In addition to an array of class offerings, the Winter Activity Guide will also feature the Parks and Recreation Department’s 2019 Year in Review. The Year in Review is an opportunity to share with the community a few highlights of the many projects and activities provided by the Parks and Recreation Department. Winter class registration begins for South San Francisco residents on Monday, December 2, 2019. Winter classes will begin the week of January 6, 2020. Outreach Efforts Recreation staff participated in the following resource fairs in October: • October 8: San Francisco State Recreation, Parks & Tourism (RPT) Career Fair (San Francisco State University) • October 12: San Mateo County Transition to Independence Fair (TIF) (El Camino High School) • October 26: Family & Resources Fair (Community Learning Center, SSF)