When it comes to trees, the golf course's loss may be Arastradero Preserve's gain.
As Palo Alto officials plow forth with a complete overhaul of the city's municipal golf course in the Baylands, they are considering ways to mitigate the loss of 500 trees, which would have to be axed as part of the overhaul. One strategy, which the city is now refining, is to plant new trees in other parts of the city. Assistant Community Services Director Rob de Geus said Tuesday night that Arastradero is a leading candidate for the canopy influx.
De Geus told the Parks and Recreation Commission on Tuesday that city officials had consulted with its partners in the nonprofit community, including Acterra and Canopy, on coming up with strategies to mitigate the tree loss. Arastradero became a leading candidate because it once boasted an oak woodland. Many of the trees were chopped down when the preserve became a horse ranch. Now, the plan is to get live oaks back to Arastradero, de Geus said.
The reconfiguration of the golf course, which is set to begin next spring, was prompted by a regional effort to boost flood protection around the volatile San Francisquito Creek. The plan, which is spearheaded by the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority, targets the particularly vulnerable area between U.S. Highway 101 and the San Francisco Bay. It includes building a levee on the Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course.
Even though the creek-calming plan would only require the reconfiguration of six or seven holes, Palo Alto officials decided to use the occasion to do a full-scale overhaul, one that would impact just about the entire 18-hole course and emphasize its Baylands location. The reconfiguration would also make room for three athletic fields and a gym.
De Geus stressed on Tuesday that even with the tree removal, the project would have significant environmental benefits. The managed turf area would be reduced by 40 percent, from 135 acres to 81.3 acres, according to the draft Environmental Impact Report for the golf reconfiguration. In addition, nonnative plants and trees would be replaced with native grasses, the report states. Reducing the space that has to be irrigated, fertilized and mowed and converting it to natural areas "vastly improves the Baylands ecosystem in that area," de Geus said.
Even so, going native comes at a price – chiefly, trees. The subject became a hot topic at the June 26 meeting of the Planning and Transportation Commission, where several commissioners wondered why so many trees had to be removed. Forrest Richardson, who is designing Palo Alto's new golf course, told the planning commission that most of the trees pegged for removal are "in very poor health and very marginal." He also noted that the design team has identified the course's "iconic" trees and will preserve 80 percent of them.
The Parks and Recreation Commission briefly discussed the subject Tuesday night and agreed to form an ad hoc committee, consisting of Commissioners Deirdre Crommie and Stacey Ashlund, to work with staff on identifying possible locations for new trees.
"We've never been entirely comfortable with that," Chair Ed Lauing said of the tree removal. "They're taking a lot of trees."
De Geus agreed and said that while the restoration of the native habitat in the Baylands is one mitigation for the tree loss, another mitigation would be to replant trees in other parts of the city within a decade.
"We're actually saying, this is good and great, but we also want to replace the entire canopy loss within 10 years," de Geus said. "A lot will happen on the golf course, but the new golf course and Baylands isn't a good place for a lot of the trees."
While many of the new trees are currently slated to take root in the foothills, a final determination has yet to be made. Arastradero, de Geus said, is "not a done deal." Ashlund suggested that some be planted in urban areas, including pocket parks and prominent medians, such as along El Camino Real.
The reconfiguration project is scheduled to undergo another review in front of the Planning and Transportation Commission on July 31. The meeting will be focused on the draft Environmental Impact Report, which has a comment period that ends on Aug. 1.
Comments
Green Acres
on Jul 24, 2013 at 12:26 am
on Jul 24, 2013 at 12:26 am
How about helping us turn the property at Maybell into a community orchard, like Gamble Gardens only for trees? Saves around 100 EXISTING mature trees right there, a last remnant of historic orchard, trees that will otherwise be torn out, too, and creates a resource for the schools.
(PAHC may have misjudged and missed their funding application deadline anyway - the city staff report says the zoning ordinance doesn't go into effect until 31 days after the 2nd reading, which is end of July, and with a referendum, even later, but their deadline was July 3, and a basic requirement was having their zoning in place. Neighbors aren't likely to stop at the referendum, either, because the overdevelopment of that area affects children's safety.)
Community Center
on Jul 24, 2013 at 8:16 am
on Jul 24, 2013 at 8:16 am
To PA Arborist and Canopy: Please make sure that the new trees are of varieties that are least likely to cause allergies
Los Altos
on Jul 24, 2013 at 11:26 am
on Jul 24, 2013 at 11:26 am
Adding evergreen oaks to Arastradero is not appropriate. The park would benefit from deciduous oaks such as Valley Oaks and Blue Oaks which are threatened and more suitable to the site.
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 24, 2013 at 5:26 pm
on Jul 24, 2013 at 5:26 pm
Adding more trees to the newly reconfigured golf course will make it more challenging. Add them back.
If Arastradero Preserve were a good place for more Live Oaks, then those fence protected small trees should be doing well. They aren't.
In fact, the city just burned down a few Oaks during it's controlled burn at Arastradero Preserve.
Crescent Park
on Jul 24, 2013 at 7:38 pm
on Jul 24, 2013 at 7:38 pm
The staff and the Golf Advisory have spent much time dealing with the tree issue.
First the trees that are currently on the course were planted by the city and not all have done well. Many trees have simply died or fallen down or been blown down. Most of the trees need to be replaced with trees better suited to the area. These better suited trees will produce a better canopy then the ones slated for removal.
It should be noted that if the golf course was not there than nature would not have grown many trees. Just look north and south of the course and count the trees. It won't take many fingers and toes.
Crescent Park
on Jul 25, 2013 at 6:33 am
on Jul 25, 2013 at 6:33 am
At the meeting at the Golf Course a couple of weeks ago, several of us objected to the removal of so many trees and also questioned offsite mitigation - especially at the Enid Pearson Arastradero Preserve. No mention is made in this article about the suggestion of planting some of the lost trees in Byxbee Park, which has very few trees and will have even less if the Energy Compost facility is built.
Charleston Meadows
on Jul 26, 2013 at 11:36 am
on Jul 26, 2013 at 11:36 am
The replacement trees can be larger trees that have very large area of roots cut from the nursery site so that the trees "hit the ground running."
Developers bring in these mature trees for landscaping, so we know that the size of the replacement trees is a matter of cost. Let's build the cost into golf course redesign as a matter of honesty.
Also, replacing the trees over ten years is dishonest. Start with day one, as the organizational memory can fail, and the tree replanting can be forgotten.
Again, the cost must be budgeted and funded up front as part of the redesign. Let's stand up for the trees, like they do for us everyday.
Thanks,
Tim Gray 650 493-3000
College Terrace
on Jul 26, 2013 at 12:00 pm
on Jul 26, 2013 at 12:00 pm
> No mention is made in this article about the suggestion of planting some of the lost trees in Byxbee Park, which has very few trees and will have even less if the Energy Compost facility is built.
I agree that the Arastradero Preserve should be reforested with native live oaks...it is a natural restoration. The landfill (Byxbee Park) is not such a good fit, because live oaks were never a major part of that wetland. However, given the choice of an irrational anaerobic digestion fiasco, or live oaks, I vote for live oaks, at least a few of them...and especially if they are planted on the undedicated park lands.
There is no need to plant large trees from nurseries...it is a waste of precious public funds...just plant seedling, and keep them watered for while...they will take off, because they are native trees.
Gunn High School
on Jun 6, 2017 at 2:38 am
on Jun 6, 2017 at 2:38 am
Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?