My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 06:060
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2006
>
SR 06:060
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/2/2007 4:06:08 PM
Creation date
2/15/2006 4:39:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
2/21/2006
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 06:060
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
385
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Tree Report, Vineyard Townhome Condominiums <br />Pleasanton, CA <br />September 15,2005 <br /> <br />HortScience, Inc. <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />. Structural integrity <br />Trees with significant amounts of wood decay and other structural defects that cannot <br />be corrected are likely to fail. Such trees should not be preserved in areas where <br />damage to people or property is Iikeiy. <br /> <br />. Species response <br />There is a wide variation in the response of individual species to construction impacts <br />and changes in the environment. In our experience, for example, Calif. black walnuts <br />are difficult to preserve, They rarely recover from injuries to the root system. Valley <br />oaks have a moderate tolerance to site disturbance. In contrast, Canary Island pine <br />western sycamore are quite tolerant of site disturbance. <br /> <br />. Tree age and longevity <br />Old trees, while having significant emotional and aesthetic appeal, have limited <br />physiological capacity to adjust to an altered environment. Young trees are belter able <br />to generate new tissue and respond to change. <br /> <br />Each tree was rated for suitability for preservation based upon its age, health, structural <br />condition and ability to safely coexist within a development environment (Table 2). <br /> <br />We consider trees with good suitability for preservation to be the best candidates for <br />preservation. We do not recommend retention of trees with poor suitability for preservation in <br />areas where people or property will be present. Retention of trees with moderate suitability for <br />preservation depends upon the intensity of proposed site changes. <br /> <br />Table 2: Tree Suitability for Preservation <br /> <br />Good <br /> <br />These are trees with good health and structural stability that have the <br />potential for longevity at the site. Eight (8) trees were rated as having good <br />suitability including 3 Heritage trees. <br /> <br />Tree No. <br /> <br />Species <br /> <br />Diameter <br />(in.) <br /> <br />Heritage <br />Tree? <br /> <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />18 <br />21 <br />27 <br />38 <br />57 <br /> <br />Valley oak <br />Valley oak <br />Valley oak <br />Coast live oak <br />Valley oak <br />Canary Island pine <br />Canary Island pine <br />Valley oak <br /> <br />6,5 <br />8,4 <br />9,4,2 <br />5 <br />12 <br />15 <br />17 <br />25 <br /> <br />No <br />No <br />No <br />No <br />No <br />Yes <br />Yes <br />Yes <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.