HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 415-10TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER
DATE: NOVEMBER 22, 2010
REPORT TYPE: CONSENT
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
CMR: 415:10
SUBJECT: Approval and Authorization for the City Manager or his Designee to
Execute the Attached Contract with HortScience, Inc. (Attachment A)
in the Amount of $159,604 for the Development of an Urban Forest
Master Plan
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 2008, the City received a $66,000 grant from the State (CaIFire) to provide partial funding for
preparation of an Urban Forest Master Plan for the City. Staff issued a Request for Proposals
(RFP) for the preparation ofthe plan in 2010. Staff is recommending selection of HortScience to
prepare the master plan at a cost not to exceed $159,604, based on a work program developed by
staff, Canopy, and the consultants. Staff requests that the City Council authorize the City
Manager to execute the attached contract.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council:
1. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached contract
with HortScience, Inc. (Attachment A) in the amount of $159,604 for the development of
an Urban Forest Master Plan.
2. Approve the use of $93,604 from the City Manager's Contingency Account to fund the
amount not covered by the grant to be replenished by the Public Works, Utilities,
Community Services, and Planning and Community Environment Depmtments during
the FY 2011 mid-year budget review process.
BACKGROUND
The Palo Alto community has long been aware of the need to proactively preserve and enhance
the city's urban forest. In 1993, the City Council appointed a Tree Task Force to make
recommendations and in 1995 the Council adopted their recommendations including:
• The creation of a non-profit tree group. In 1996 Canopy was established to serve as the
community's resource on tree-related matters as well as act as the City's advisor and partner
for tree planting and tree care activities.
CMR: 415:10 Page 1 of5
• The development of a Tree Protection Ordinance. In 1996, the Council adopted the Tree
Protection Ordinance which established criteria for "protected" trees, which cannot be
removed without City approval.
In 1998, the cun'ent Comprehensive Plan was adopted, including several goals, policies, and
programs to preserve, maintain, and enhance the city's urban forest. On Ealth Day 2006,
Council directed staff to create a new Street Tree Management Plan to implement the
Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. .
In 2007, the City collaborated with Canopy to apply for a grant from CALFIRE to help flilld the
development of the Master Plan. In August of 2008, the grant was awarded; however, due to
staffing reductions and state budget constraints, the preparation of the master plan was delayed.
In late 2009, the removal of the street trees on California Avenue fUlther underscored the need
for a master plan. In the spring of2010, the City assembled a team, including staff as well as
Canopy, to oversee the preparation of the master plan.
DISCUSSION
The Urban Forest Master Plan is an important component of the City's Sustainability Program
that will establish the urban forest as an asset that must be preserved and renewed; it will provide
a road map to accomplish that goal. The future of Palo AltQ' s urban forest is seriously threatened
by many factors, such as water restrictions, the installation of fiber optics, and on-going
development that affect Palo Alto's tree canopy every day. A master plan is needed to help the
City conserve, renew, and monitor its urban forest and will identify how to minimize conflicts
between retention of the urban forest and construction of development and infrastructure
projects, as well as the City's continued maintenance and operational needs.
In late July, a Request for Proposals (RFP) was circulated for the preparation of the Urban Forest
Master Plan with the following objectives:
1. Ensure that the City has an accurate and complete picture of its urban forest
2. Establish the urban forest as an asset
3. Establish the importance of the urban forest to the City's sustainability goals
4. Provide a road map for effective and efficient management that employs best practices
and latest advancements
5. Consolidate resources (internal and external)
6. Engage the community as stewards of the urban forest
7. Provide a monitoring plan
Nrnnber of proposals received 4
Nrnnber of firms interviewed 3
Range of proposal amounts $69,000 to $239,000
Proposed length of project 9 months
The review panel for the proposals was composed of the City's Public Works and Planning
arborists and the Executive Director of Canopy. The panel evaluated four proposals and
interviewed three of the bidders. At the interviews, the panel reinforced its expectations that the
docrnnent will provide for inter-departmental protocols as a resource for staff, a thorough
understanding of probable-future-water-conservation mandates, and a flexible response to such
CMR: 415:10 Page 2 of5
environmental changes-including the role of the City's recycled water program. The interviews
established that some components of the Palo Alto Urban Forest Master Plan would be
unprecedented based on the consultants' previous experiences.
Based on their proposal, experience, and interview, HortScience was determined by the panel to
be uniquely qualified to help the City develop a plan for sustaining the urban forest. In the tree
industry, HortScience stands out as one of the world's premier academic and technically
advanced consulting firms. Staff believes that HortScience brings the needed level of
arboricultural expertise to all aspects ofthe project. The panel believes that use of any of the
other consultants would result in City staff needing to prepare at least some components of the
Urban Forest Master Plan, e.g., the urban forest sustainability program and an adaptive
management program for our recycled water program.
HOltScience publications illustrate a match between their expertise and the objectives ofthe
Master Plan. Two pmticularly significant projects completed by Ms. Matheny mld Mr. Clark,
principals of the firm, are:
I. Development of a model for the assessment of urban forest sustainability through a grant
from the USDA Forest Service (Attachment B). Implementing the model for Palo Alto will
provide:
a. A community-specific template for managing the City's urban forest and monitoring
its sustainability
b. A sustainability scorecard that can be used throughout the community to continually
assess progress towards attaining specified goals
2. Development ofthe Water Use Classification of Landscape Species. The proposed work plan
includes a comprehensive analysis of the water use and salt tolerance of tree species. Using
this classification system will provide the City with state-of-the-art information to meet state
goals for water conservation.
Additionally, HortScience is currently under contract with the Utilities and Public Works
Depmtments to provide expertise in the use of recycled water for landscape irrigation.
HortScience's expertise regarding Palo Alto's recycled water challenges will streamline
permitting, alleviate conflicts between depaltments and guide the process to avoid costly
mistakes. Finally, staffs expeltise will be enhanced by working with HortScience on the
project.
Staff has negotiated the attached contract (Attachment A) with HortScience for the development
of an Urban Forest Master Plan that will cost $159,604.
The project will also include:
I. Inter-departmental interviews by the consultant.
2. Significant public outreach, including:
• A community-wide survey to gather input
• A City Council Study Session early in the process to provide broad policy
direction
CMR: 415:10 Page 3 of5
• A City Council Study Session at the end ofthe process to discuss the draft Master
Plan
• Two community meetings to discuss the draft Urban Forest Master Plan
RESOURCE IMPACTS
Funding for the project is provided by:
I. A $66,000 CALFlRE grant; and
2. $93,604 from the City Manager's Contingency Account to be replenished by the Public
Works, Utilities, Community Services, and the Planning and Community Environment
Depmtments during the FY 2011 mid-yearbudget review process.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This project is consistent with the City's sustainability policies and numerous goals, policies and
programs in the Natural Environment and Land Use chapters of the Comprehensive Plan,
including but not limited to:
GOAL N-3: A Thriving "Urban Forest" That Provides Ecological, Economic, and Aesthetic
Benefits for Palo Alto.
POLICY N-14: Protect, revitalize, and expand Palo Alto's urban forest through public education,
sensitive regulation, and a long-term financial commitment that is adequate to protect this
resource.
PROGRAM N-16: Continue to require replacement of trees, including street trees lost to new
development, and establish a program to have replacement trees planted offsite when it is
impractical to locate them onsite.
PROGRAM N-19: Establish one or more tree planting programs that seek to achieve the
following objectives:
• A 50 percent tree canopy for streets, parks, and parking lots; and
• The annual tree planting goals recommended by the Tree Task Force and adopted by the City
CounCil.
PROGRAM N-20: Establish procedures to coordinate City review, pmticularly by the Planning,
Utilities, and Public Works Departments, of projects that might impact the urban forest.
POLICY N-17: Preserve and protect heritage trees, including native oaks and other significant
trees, on public and private property.
POLICY L-70: Enhance the appearance of streets and other public spaces by expanding and
maintaining Palo Alto's street tree system.
POLICY L-76: Require trees and other landscaping within parking lots.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Approval of this contract is not considered a project subject to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
CMR: 415:10 Page 4·of5
PREPARED BY:
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Contract
CURTIS WILLIAMS, Director
Planning and Community Environment
\~w.ck&.p c..( JAMES KEENE 'I ~ City Manager
Attachment B: Model for the assessment of urban forest sustainability
COURTESY COPIES
Catherine Martineau, Canopy
CMR: 415:10 Page 5 of5
CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. Cl1137721
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND
HORTSCIENCE, INC.
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
PROVIDE URBAN FOREST MASTER PLAN
This Agreement is entered into on this 23rd day of November, 2010, by and between the CITY
OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("CITY"), and
HORTSCIENCE, INC., a California Corporation, located at 2150 Rheem Drive, Suite A,
Pleasanton, CA 94566, (PH) (925) 484-0211 ("CONSULTANT").
RECITALS
The following recitals are a substantive portion ofthis Agreement.
A. CITY intends to implement an Urban Forest Master Plan in conjunction with other
environmental initiatives ("Project") and desires to engage a consultant to provide an Urban Forest
Master Plan for this Project. ("Services").
B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise,
qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services.
C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the
Services as more fully described in Exhibit "A", attached to and made a part of this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ofthe recitals, covenants, tenns, and conditions, this
Agreement, the parties agree:
AGREEMENT
SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perfonn the Services described in
Exhibit "A" in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The
performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY.
SECTION 2. TERM.
The tenn of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through August 30, 2011,
unless tenninated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement.
SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is of the essence in the perfonnance of
Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the tenn of this
Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit "B", attached to and made a part
of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for perfonnance are not specified in this Agreement
1 Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010
S :IASDIPURCH\SOLICITA TIONSICURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctsICII13772I-Hort SciencelContract CI I 137721 -
HORTSClENCE. Inc. doc
shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner
based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY's
agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of damages
for delay ifthe extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT.
SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to
CONSULTANT for performance ofthe Services described in Exhibit "A", including both
payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed One Hundred
Fifty Nine 1Ihousand Six Hundred Four Dollars ($159,604.00). In the event Additional Services
are authorized, the total compensation for services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed
One Hundred Fifty Nine Thousand Six Hundred Four Dollars ($159,604.00). The applicable
rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit "C-l ", entitled "FEE and RATE
SCHEDULE," which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement.
Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions
of Exhibit "C". CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services
performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any
work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but
which is not included within the Scope of Services descril:>ed in Exhibit "A".
SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly
invoices to the CITY describing the services performed and the applicable charges (including an
identification of personnel who performed the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable
expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT's billing rates (set forth in Exhibit "C-I "). If applicable,
the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The information in
CONSULTANT's payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall
send all invoices to the City's project manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City
will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt.
SECTION 6. OUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be
performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT's supervision. CONSULTANT represents
that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required
by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services
assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted,
have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications,
insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services.
All of the services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this agreement shall meet the
professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of
similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar
circumstances.
SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of and
in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may
affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform
2
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010
S:IASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER·CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctsICll137721-Hort SciencelContract Cll13772I -
HORTSCIENCE, Inc.doc
Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all
charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services.
SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT shall correct, at no cost to CITY, any and
all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the work product submitted to CITY, provided CITY gives
notice to CONSULTANT. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design
documents to construct the Project, CONSULTANT shall be obligated to correct any and all errors,
omissions or ambiguities discovered prior to and during the course of construction of the Project.
This obligation shall survive termination of the Agreement.
SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. If this Agreement pertains to the design of a public works
project, CONSULTANT shall submit estimates of probable construction costs at each phase of
design submittal. If the total estimated construction cost at any submittal exceeds ten percent (10%)
ofthe CITY's stated construction budget, CONSULTANT shall make recommendations to the CITY
for aligning the PROJECT design with the budget, incorporate CITY approved recommendations,
and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost to CITY.
SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing
the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed by or contracted with
CONSULTANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an
independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the CITY.
SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of
CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or
transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT's obligations
hereunder without the prior written consent ofthe city manager. Consent to one assigrrment will not
be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assigrrment. Any assigrrment made without the approval
of the city manager will be void.
SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING.
DOption A: No Subcontractor: CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the work to
be performed under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the city manager or
designee.
(gJOption B: Subcontracts Authorized: Notwithstanding Section 11 above, CITY agrees that
subconsultants may be used to complete the Services. The subconsultants authorized by CITY to
perform work on this Project are:
CirclePoint, Inc.
CONSULT ANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and f0f any
compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning
compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a
subconsultant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsultants only with the prior approval of
the city manager or his designee.
Professional Services 3
Rev. June 2, 2010
S:IASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER·CM FOLDERSIKATHY\Contra etslCI 1137721-Hort SciencelContraet Cll137721 -
HORTSCIENCE,Ine.doe
SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Jim Clark, Vice
President, as Project Manager, to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and
execution of the Services and to represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day work on the
project. If circumstances cause the substitution of the project manager, or any other key persormel
for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project manager and the assignment of any key new or
replacement personnel will be subject to the prior written approval of the CITY's project manager.
CONSULTANT, at CITY's request, shall promptly remove personnel who CITY finds do not
perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate
or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property.
The City'S Project Manager is Gloria Humble, Planning and Community Environment Department,
250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301, Telephone: (650) 329-2596. The Project Manager
will be CONSULTANT's point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of
the Services. The CITY may designate an alternate project manager from time to time.
SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all work product, including
without limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specifications, calculations, documents,
other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement shall be and remain the
exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULT ANT agrees
that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested
in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual
property rights in favor of the CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its contractors, if any, shall make
any of such materials available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of
the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the
work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work.
SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during
the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT's records pertaining to
matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such
records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement.
SECTION 16. INDEMNITY.
[2J[Option A applies to the following design professionals pursuant to Civil Code Section
2782.8: architects; landscape architects; registered professional engineers and licensed
professional land surveyors.] 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall
protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and
agents (each an "Indemnified Party") from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of
any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all
costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys fees, experts fees, court costs and
disbursements ("Claims") that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or
willful misconduct ofthe CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this
Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party.
Professional Services 4
Rev. June 2, 2010
S:IASDIPURCH\SOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER·CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra e!sICl I I3772l-Hort ScieneelContraet Cll137721 -
HORTSClENCE,lne.doe
D [Option B applies to any consultant who does not qualify as a design professional as defined
in Civil Code Section 2782.8.) 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall
protect, indemnity, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and
agents (each an "Indemnified Party") from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of
any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all
costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys fees, experts fees, court costs and
disbursements ("Claims") resulting from, arising out of or in any marmer related to performance or
nonperformance by CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this
Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party.
16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to
require CONSULTANT to indemnity an Indemnified Party from Claims arising from the active
negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party.
16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT's services and duties by CITY shall not
operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive
the expiration or early termination of this Agreement.
SECTION 17. WAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant,
term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not
be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of
any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision,
ordinance or law.
SECTION 18. INSURANCE.
18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full
force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D".
CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an
additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies.
18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers
with AM Best's Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to
transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT
retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect
during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional
insured under such policies as required above.
18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently
with the execution ofthis Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY's Risk
Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not
be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the
Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification,
CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance
are provided to CITY's Purchasing Manager during the entire term ofthis Agreement.
5
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010
S:IASDIPURCHISOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctslCII 13772I-Hor! SciencelContract CII137721 -
HORTSClENCE, Inc.doc
18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be
construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions
of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be
obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as
a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss
arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired.
SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES.
19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or
in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written
notice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately
discontinue its performance of the Services.
19 .2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of
the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a
substantial failure of performance by CITY.
19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the
City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other
data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to
CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will
become the property of CITY.
19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid
for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on
or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided,
however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT,
CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT's
services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such determination may be made by
the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise ofhislher discretion. The following Sections will
survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4,20, and 25.
19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will
operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement.
SECTION 20. NOTICES.
All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by
certified mail, addressed as follows:
To CITY: Office of the City Clerk
City of Palo Alto
Post Office Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
6
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010
S:IASDIPURCHISOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra e!sICI I I37721-Hort SciencelContract Cll137721 -
HORTSClENCE, Ine.doe
With a copy to the Purchasing Manager
To CONSULTANT: Attention ofJim Clark, Vice President,
at the address of CONSULTANT recited above
SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has
no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would
conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services.
21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement,
it will not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT
certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer
or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions
of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Govermnent Code of the State ofCalifomia.
21.3. If the Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a "Consultant" as
that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Conunission, CONSULTANT
shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the
Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act.
SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section
2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not
discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion,
disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status,
weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the
provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination
Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section
2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment.
SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE
REOUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the City's Environmentally Preferred
Purchasing policies which are available at the City's Purchasing Department, incorporated by
reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste
reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements ofthe City's Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste
best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling
or composting waste. In particular, Consultant shall comply with the following zero waste
requirements:
• All printed materials provided by Consultant to City generated from a personal
computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices,
reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a
minimum 000% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved
by the City's Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional
7
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010
S:IASD\PURCHISOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctslCII 137721-Hort SciencelContract CII137721 -
HORTSClENCE,Inc.doc
printing company shall be a minimum 0[30% or greater post-consumer material and
printed with vegetable based inks.
• Goods purchased by Consultant on behalf of the City shall be purchased in
accordance with the City's Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not
limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and
packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Office.
• Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by the Consultant, at no additional
cost to the City, for reuse or recycling. Consultant shall provide documentation from
the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed.
SECTION 24. NON-APPROPRIATION
24.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of
Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a)
at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year,
or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the
fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This section shall take precedence
in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement.
SECTION 25. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
25.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California.
25.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action
will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of
California.
25.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this
Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that
action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of
legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys' fees paid to third
parties.
25.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the
parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral.
This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties.
25.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply
to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the
parties.
25.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this
Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this
Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect.
8
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010
S:IASDIPURCHISOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER·CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctslCI I I3772I·Hort SciencelContract CII137721 •
HORTSCIENCE, Inc. doc
25.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices,
attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in any
duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be
deemed to be a part of this Agreement.
25.8 If, pursuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, City shares with
CONSULTANT personal information as defined in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5( d) about
a California resident ("Personal Information"), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and
appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Information, and shall inform City
immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security of the system or in the security
ofthe Personal Information. CONSULTANT shall not use Personal Information for direct marketing
purposes without City's express written consent.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized
representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written.
9
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010
S:IASDIPURCH\SOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctslCI I 13772I-Horl SciencelContract CIIlJ772l _
HORTSClENCE. Inc. doc
NOV·Nov . 10. LU 1 U5 11: 49AMJRCHfHo r t Sc i en ce, Inc. 03292302
CITY OF PALO A JTO
City M!II1ager (RCqu'red on contracts oVer
$85,000)
Pumhasing Managel' (Required on contracts
over $25,000)
Contracts Administr tor (Requirod un
contraclq under $25, 00)
APl'ROVRO AS TO FORM:
Senior Ass!. City AU mey
(Required on ContrQ ts over $25,000)
Attachments~
EXHIHrr "1\":
EXH1I3lT "B":
EXHJBIT "C":
EXHIBIT "C·1":
EXHIBIT "D":
SCOPE OF WO\U(
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
COMPENSATION
SCHEDULE OF RATES
TNStJ RANCE llliQUIRBMENTS
To:91925484~No. 1815 P. 2.e:2/2
Professional Services 1 0
Rev June 2, 2010
S:IASO\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\KATHy\Contra cts\Cl1 137721-Hort Science\Contract Cll137721 _ HORTSCIENCE. Inc.doc
EXHIBIT "A"
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES
The key element of the work plan is urban forest sustainability. CONSULTANT shall use the
model for sustainable urban forests developed by HortScience, Inc. as the starting point,
modifYing it to provide Palo Alto with a community specific template for managing its urban
forest and monitoring its sustainability. In so doing, CONSULTANT shall meet all of the
project's objectives, respond to the each of the requested services and provide the project
deliverable.
The model of urban forest sustainability arose from a national project that HortScience
prepared for the USDA Forest Service National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory
Council. The model describes 20 criteria essential to a sustainable urban forest. These
criteria fall into three broad categories (Table I, below): characteristics of the vegetation in the
community, the community framework, and resource management. For each criterion, the model
describes levels of performance -indicators that can be used to assess the current condition. The
model was tested for over 20 cities in the U.S., and has been adapted for use in a number of
countries, states and communities. For example, the model is one of the foundational elements
of Sacramento Tree Foundation's Greenprint Initiative.
CONSULTANT's project approach is based on adapting the model of urban forest sustainability
to Palo Alto, using the following steps:
1. Compile policies and information about Palo Alto's urban forest, leading to
analysis of the current status, challenges and opportunities.
1.1 City Policies & Documents
• Comprehensive Plan (relevant sections).
• Municipal Code (tree & zoning sections).
• Tree Technical Manual.
• Climate Protection Plan.
• USDA N. Calif. Coast Community Tree Guide.
• Cal Green.
• California PUC Section 4799.06-4799.12.
• Utilities Department tree management program.
• Palo Alto Sustainability plan. IdentifY the key connections to the City's
urban forest and its management.
• Tree management (public, private, utility) funding status and history.
• Other City policies, procedures, agreements that relate to tree and urban
forest management.
• Evaluate current and proposed use of recycled water for landscape
irrigation.
• Summarize findings (including where modifications / changes may be
required).
• California PUC Section 4799.06-4799.12.
• Utilities Department tree management program.
• Palo Alto Sustainability plan. IdentifY the key connections to the City's
urban forest and its management.
Professional Services 11
Rev June 2, 2010
S:IASDlPURCH\SOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER·CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra e!SICI I I3772I·Hort SeiencelContract CI I 1J7721 •
HORTSCIENCE.lne.doe
• Tree management (public, private, utility) funding status and history.
• Other City policies, procedures, agreements that relate to tree and urban
forest management.
• Evaluate current and proposed use of recycled water for landscape
Irrigation.
• Summarize findings (including where modifications / changes may be
required). California PUC Section 4799.06-4799.12.
• Utilities Department tree management program.
• Palo Alto Sustainability plan. IdentifY the key connections to the City's
urban forest and its management.
• Tree management (public, private, utility) funding status and history.
• Other City policies, procedures, agreements that relate to tree and urban
forest management.
• Evaluate current and proposed use of recycled water for landscape
irrigation.
• Summarize findings (including where modifications / changes may be
required).
1.2 Department interviews
• Working with the project team, identifY participants to interview, prepare
background information related to urban forest and tree management.
Prep (id participants, prepare script).
• Summarize findings in the context of several questions. Who manages /
interacts with trees in Palo Alto? What conflicts exist between public
agencies with respect to tree management? What opportunities exist?
• Develop recommendations, using relevant examples, for improvement.
1.3 Public Tree Inventory
• Confer with the city's urban forestry staff to review the current tree
management effort, how the inventory is used, strengths and
weaknesses of the existing information, and any needed changes.
• Review current status of TreeKeeper. Evaluate and analyze results.
• Review plan for STRATUM / iTree Streets analysis of existing public
trees. Evaluate and analyze results.
• Review California Urban Forest Council Urban Forest Master Plan
Toolkit for ways to incorporate into Palo Alto's plan.
1.4 Preferred Tree Species list
• Evaluate existing list with reference to tolerance to drought & recycled
water.
• ModifY existing list to reflect changes including expansion of criteria for
use.
• Prepare revised / expanded list.
1.5 Urban forest assessment
• Research methods to assess existing and historical tree canopy
coverage in Palo Alto.
• Research cost and requirements to undertake UFORE / iTree Eco
Professional Services 12
Rev June 2, 2010
S,IASDIPURCHISOLlCITATIONSICURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctslCl1 137721-Hort SciencelContract Cl 1 137721 -
HORTSCIENCE. Inc.doc
analysis in Palo Alto.
• Summarize findings with a goal of providing a historical comparison of
existing tree
2. Create Urban Forest Sustainability tool for Palo Alto. .
• Assess the existing model in the context of Palo
Alto's specific situation. Identify current research and tools applicable to a
sustainable urban forest in Palo Alto such as LEED programs, the Sustainable
Sites Initiative, and California's 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan.
Incorporate into the model. Discuss changes with City staff to assess
practicality.
• Create a revised model of urban forest sustainability specific to the City
of Palo Alto. Modify the model's criteria and performance indicators to
reflect the local conditions. Verify revisions with the project team.
• Test the Palo Alto model to establish the current state of sustainability.
To the extent possible, reflect on the process by which Palo Alto reached
this condition. Identify opportunities and constraints for enhancing urban forest
sustainability in the short-and long-term.
• Review findings with the project team. Revise model as needed.
Provide examples of the model's use in urban forest management (as
noted in the Project Deliverable section ofthe RFP).
• Provide the sustainability tool in a format that can be updated/modified
by the City of Palo Alto.
3. Enhance Public and Private Tree Management
• Identify key issues with project team, based on the analysis of City-wide
policies and procedures.
• Project team to provide situations/topics where inter-department
protocols are needed.
• Develop draft protocols to address existing challenges.
• Review current draft of Public Tree Management Plan and current edition
of Tree Technical Manual. Suggest new topics based on results from
Task #1.1 and 1.2.
4. Public Outreach and Coordination
• Working with the project team, develop outreach strategy, identify
stakeholders and plan for meetings.
• Develop Fact Sheet(s) / Information Brochure(s) regarding managing a
sustainable urban forest. Possible target audiences include citizens,
institutional land-owners, retail nursery and garden centers, and the
development community.
• Consult with City's sustainability manager re: incorporating findings into
City policies & website.
• Create two web pages dedicated to the Urban Forest Management Plan
and regarding trees in Palo Alto in general (species, numbers, history, with
information on how community members can support it).
• Prepare a template and draft powerpoint presentation for the project
team's review.
Professional Services 13
Rev June 2, 2010
S:IASDIPURCHISOLICITATlONSICURRENT BUYER·CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctslCII I3772I·Hort SciencelContract C11137721 •
HORTSCIENCE, Inc. doc
• Undertake two study sessions with the Palo Alto's City Council
5. Develop Urban Forest Master Plan
• Prepare a detailed summary of Palo Alto's Sustainable Urban Forest
model with criteria and performance indicators specific to the community
and practical in nature. The final model will be one that can be modified
over time, utilizing new information as well as results of management
decisions.
• IndentifY the sustainable urban forest "scorecard" as the monitoring model to
be used by City departments and stakeholders with respect to urban forest
management. The scorecard serves as a tool for assessing how decisions
influence urban forest sustainability.
• Finalize Preferred Species List.
• Incorporate the findings into a draft report to be enhanced by CirclePoint
who will: 1) translate/modify technical text to a
non-technical form, 2) standardize text with the City's Sustainability Plan, 3)
enhance plan layout and design and 4) copyedit the document.
• Incorporate cotnments from the Palo Alto project team (prior to further
circulation).
• Incorporate comments from City departments, elected officials and other
stakeholders (distribution to be determined by project team).
• Finalize document. Provide an electronic copy in a format that can be used by
the City.
6. Manage the project
• Attend a kick-off meeting with project team.
• Attend progress meetings with City of Palo Alto team (10 over the courseofthe
project).
• Conduct internal team meetings (4 over the course of project).
• Provide for internal management.
The model incorporates the project's objectives and deliverable in a direct and comprehensive
manner. At the end of the project, the City of Palo Alto will possess to well-founded, locally
adapted tool to assess the current state of its urban forest, provide steps to move forward, and
allow re-assessment in the future.
Table 1:
Table 1. Criteria for a Sustainable Urban Forest.
Professional Services 14
Rev June 2, 2010
S:IASDIPURCHISOLIC1TATlONSICURRENT BUYER·CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctslCI1 137721-Hort SciencelContract C11137721 -
HORTSClENCE, Inc.doc
Vegetation Resource.
Canopy cover
Age -distribution of
trees
Species mix
Native vegetation
Community Framework
Public agency cooperation
Private and institutional
land owners
Green industry cooperation
Neighborhood action
Citizen -government -
business
General awareness of trees
Regional cooperation
Resource Management
City-wide management plan
City-wide Funding
City Staffing
Assessment Tools
Protection of Existing
Trees
Achieve climate-appropriate tree cover,
community-wide.
Pro.vide for uneven age distribution.
Provide for species diversity.
Maintain the biological integrity of
native remnant forests.
Maintain wildlife corridors to and from
the city.
Insure all city departments operate with
common goals and objectives.
Large private landholders embrace city
wide goals and objectives through
specific resource management plans.
The green industry operates with high
professional standards and commits to
city-wide goals and objectives.
At the neighborhood level, citizens
understand and participate in urban
forest management.
All constituencies in the community
interact for the benefit of the urban
forest.
The general public understands the value
of trees to the community.
Provide for cooperation and interaction
among neighboring communities and
regional groups.
Develop and implement a management plan
for trees on public and private
property.
Develop and maintain adequate funding to
implement a city-wide management plan.
Employ and train adequate staff to
implement a city-wide management plan.
Develop methods to collect information
about the urban forest on a routine
basis.
Develop methods to collect information
about the urban forest on a routine
basis.
Species and Site selection Provide guidelines and specifications
for species use, on a context-defined
basis.
Standards for Tree Care Adopt and adhere to professional
standards for tree care.
Citizen Safety Maximize public safety with respect to
trees.
Recycling Create a closed system for tree waste.
Professional Services 15
Rev June 2, 2010
S:IASDIPURCHISOLICITATlONSICURRENT BUYER·CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctsICll137721·Hort SciencelContract Cll137721 .
HORTSClENCE, Inc. doc
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
EXHIBITB
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
Project team assembles background documents.
Project team consults with City staff and elected leaders
regarding the project, interviews, protocol topics, web page
design, and study sessions. Project approved by Council.
Kick-off meeting (week of November 29).
Review documents. Priority to be determined by project
team. Develop survey draft. Prepare first inter
department protocol. Schedule interviews. Research
urban forest assessment information.
Conduct inter-department interviews (after January 12).
Use draft protocol as point of departure. Summarize
findings. Create list of recommendations including
protocol topics. Initial review of Tree Technical Manual &
Public Tree Management Plan. Summarize analysis and
recommendations. Present draft sustainability model for
project team review. Review urban forest assessment
findings. Determine next steps.
First study session with Council. Review project and scope.
Discuss urban forest sustainability model and protocols.
Send protocols for inter-department review.
Present draft Urban Forest Management Plan to project
team for review. Includes Tree Species list.
Present revised draft Urban Forest Management Plan for
review. Present draft brochure/ information sheet.
Finalize Urban Forest Management Plan.
Second study session with Council. Present Plan.
Professional Services 1 6
Rev June 2, 2010
S:IASD\PURCHlSOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctslCII 13772I-Hort SciencelContract CII137721 -
HORTSCIENCE,Inc.doc
EXHIBIT "C"
COMPENSATION
The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services perfonned in
accordance with the tenns and conditions of this Agreement, and completed to the reasonable
satisfaction of the CITY, as described in Exhibit A, Scope of Services, a fixed, not-ta-exceed
price for professional services of One Hundred Fifty Nine Thousand Six Hundred Four
Dollars ($159,604.00). The budget is based on the following task costs:
1. Compile policies and information about Palo Alto's urban forest, leading to
analysis of the current status, challenges and opportunities. $43,940
1.1 City Policies & Documents
1.2 Department interviews
1.3 Public Tree Inventory
1.4 Preferred Tree Species list
1.5 Urban forest assessment
2. Urban Forest Sustainability tool for Palo Alto.
3. Inter-department protocols for tree management.
4. Public Outreach and Coordination.
5. Urban Forest Master Plan.
6. Project management.
Sub-total, labor
Estimated expenses (10%)
Budget Total
$ 7,520
$15,770
$33,530
$32,230
$21,640
$154,630
$4,974
$159,604
Fee of$I,200 per meeting is based on attendance by Jim Clark, project manager and lead
consultant.
CITY reserves the right, at its option, to move budgeted money from one task to
another Task, as the City's Project Manager deems necessary. CONSULTANT can
only reallocate Funds from one task to another upon receiving approval from City's Project
Manager.
CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses,
within this amount. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would
result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at
no cost to the CITY.
Reimbursables
Reimbursables shall include, but are not limited to, the cost of copying plans, outreach
materials, postage, signage or other items not included herein. Travel, computer and phone
charges shall be considered as included in the CONSULTANT overhead costs. Any needed
office spaces or related supplies shall be provided by CONSULTANT and shall be considered
to be included in the Scope of Services above.
Professional Services 1 7
Rev June 2, 2010
S:IASDIPURCHlSOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER·CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra e!sICI I I3772I·Hort SciencelContract CI I I37721 •
HORTSCIENCE, Inc.doc
EXHIBIT "C-l"
SCHEDULE OF RATES
The following hourly rates are effective through December 31, 2010 and subject to
escalation in January 2011.
FIRM
HortScience, Inc.
CirclePoint
POSITION
Professionals
Principal
Consultant
Arborist
Technician
Clerk
Principal
Senior Project Manager
Project Manager
Senior Associate
Associate
Assistant/Coordinator
Clerical
Creative & supportive services
Creative Service Director
Art Director
Senior Graphic Designer
Graphic Designer
CopywriterlEditor
IT Director
IT Support
Accounting Manager
Accounting Clerk
Related Services & Reimbursables
Copies In House $0.10 per page
HOURLY RATES
$165
$140
$85
$85
$40
$240
$180
$140
$120
$95
$75
$60
$200
$150
$85
$70
$100
$175
$75
$130
$70
Color PrintslTransparencies
Duplication -
In House $1.50-$1.75 per copy
Outsourced at cost
Faxes
Postage at cost
Phone at cost
Mileage Per IRS Allowable
Vendor & Sub-consultant Services
$0.60 per page
10% mark up for administration
Professional Services 18
Rev June 2. 2010
S:IASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra c!SICI I 137721-Hort SciencelContract CII137721 -
HORTSCIENCE, Inc.doc
EXHIBIT "D"
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN
AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WI11I AM
BEST'S KEY RATING OF A·:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY'S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS AS SPECIFIED BELOW'
MINIMUM LIMITS
REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT EACH
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE
WORKER'S COMPENSATION STATUTORY
EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY STATUTORY
BODILY INJURY $1,000,000 $1,000,000
GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING
PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE $1,000,000 $1,000,000
PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET
CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE $1,000,000 $1,000,000
LIABILITY COMBINED.
BODILY INJURY $1,000,000 $1,000,000 . EACH PERSON $1,000,000 $1,000,000 . EACH OCCURRENCE $1,000,000 $1,000,000
AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING
ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON·OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE $1,000,000 $1,000,000
BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY $1,000,000 $1,000,000
DAMAGE, COMBINED
PROFESSIONAL LIA81LITY, INCLUDING,
ERRORS AND OMISSIONS,
MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE),
AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000
THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE,
SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT,
THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT
ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING
AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY,ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES,
I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE:
A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN
COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND
B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR
CONTRACTOR'S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY.
C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY'S PRIOR APPROVAL.
II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE.
III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE A.FFORDED TO "ADDITIONAL
INSUREDS"
A. PRIMARY COVERAGE
WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS
A.FFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER
INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS.
B. CROSS LIABILITY
THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL
NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS
Professional Services 19
Rev June 2, 2010
S:\ASDIPURCH\SOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER·CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctsIClI137721·Hort SciencelContract ClllJ7721 .
HORTSCIENCE,lnc.doc '
ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF
THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY.
C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION
I. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER
THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY
AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF
CANCELLATION.
2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYMENT
OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY
WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION.
NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO:
PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
CITY OF PALO ALTO
P.O. BOX 10250
PALO ALTO, CA 94303
Professional Services 2 0
Rev June 2, 2010
S:IASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONSICURRENT BUYER·CM FOLDERSIKATHYlContra ctsICll137721-Hort SciencelContract C11137721 -
HORTSCIENCE, Inc.doc
Journal of Arboriculture 23(1): January 1997 Attachment B17
A MODEL OF URBAN FOREST SUSTAINABILITY
by James R. Clark, Nelda P. Matheny, Genni Cross and Victoria Wake
Abstract. We present a model for the development of
sustainable urban forests. The model applies general
principles of sustainablilly to urban trees and forests. The
central tenet of the model is that sustainable urban forests
require a healthy tree and forest resource, community-wide
support and a comprehensive management approach. For
each of these components, we present criteria and Indicators
for assessing their status at a given point in time. The most
significant outcome of a sustainable urban forest is to maintain
a maximum level of net environmental, ecological, social, and
economic benefits over time.
Creation and management of urban forests to
achieve sustalnabllity is the long-term goal of urban
foresters. The notion of sustainabllity in urban
forests is poorly defined in both scope and
application. Indeed, the question of how to define
sustainabillty, and even whether it can be defined,
is an open one (9, 12). At a simple level, "a
sustainable system is one which survives or
persists" (5). In the context of urban forests, such
a system would have continuity over time in a way
that provides maximum benefits from the
functioning of that forest.
Since there is no defined end point for
sustainabillty, we assess sustainability by looking
backwards, in a comparative manner (5). In urban
forests, we measure the number of trees removed
against those replanted or regenerated naturally.
In so dOing, we assess progress towards a system
that "survives or persists." Therefore, our ideas of
sustainability are "really predictions about the
future or about systems ... (5)."
This paper presents a working model of
sustainability for urban forests. We describe
specific criteria that can be used to evaluate
sustainability, as well as measurable indicators that
allow assessment of those criteria. In so doing,
we accept sustainabllity as a process rather than
a goal. As suggested by Kaufmann and Cleveland
(12) and Goodland (5), we consider social and
economic factors as well as natural science.
Goodland believed that "general sustainability will
come to be based on all three aspects" (social,
economic and environmental). Maser (14)
described sustainability as the "overlap between
what is ecologically possible and what is societally
desired by the current generation", recognizing that
both will change over time.
Therefore, our approach integrates the resource
(forests and their component trees) with the people
who benefit from them. In so doing, we
acknowledge the complexity of both the resource
itself and the management programs that influence
il. We also recognize that communities will vary In
both the ecological possibilities and societal
desires.
Defining Sustain ability
In developing a model of sustainable urban
forests, we first examined how other sustainable
systems were defined and described. Although
we have concentrated on forest systems, other
examples were considered. While some principles
of sustainable systems were directly applicable to
urban forests, others require modification or were
in conflict with the nature of urban forests and
forestry.
The Brundtland Commission Report (21) has
generally served as the starting point for discussion
about sustainable systems. It defined sustainable
forestry as:
"Sustainable forestry means managing our
forests to meet the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs by practicing a land
stewardship ethic which integrates the growing,
nurturing and harvesting of trees for useful
products with the conservation of soli, air, and
water quality, and wildlife and fish habital."
Both Webster (22) and Wiersum (23) examined
this definition from the perspective of forest
management. They recognized that issues of what
is to be sustained and how sustainability is to be
implemented are unresolved. Wiersum ( 23)
18
acknowledged the historical focus on sustaining
yield and its recent broadening to sustainable
management. Webster (22) suggested a need for
focus on the issue of scale: the size of the area or
space to be included.
Further refinements in the Brundtland
Commission's definition of sustainability were
made by Salwasser (16) and Sample (17).
Salwasser (16) described sustainability as:
"Sustainability means the ability to produce andl
or maintain a desired set of conditions or things
for some time into the future, not necessarily
forever."
Salwasser (16) included environmental,
economic and community based components,
acknowledging that sustainability is not simply a
resource matter. He also stressed that the goals
and objectives for forest management cannot
exceed the biological capacity of the resource, now
and into the future.
Sample (17) focused more closely on forest
management, emphasizing the need for shared
vision among diverse property owners. iii a
workshop on ecosystem management, Sample
described sustainable forestry as:
"Management and practices which are
simultaneously environmentally sound,
economically viable and socially responsible."
Some definitions of sustainable forests are not
directly applicable to urban settings. For example,
the description presented at the conference on
Sustainable Forestry (18) included comments
about capacity for self-renewal. Since regeneration
of urban forests must occur in a directed, location
specific manner, use of such a definition is
inappropriate.
Other definitions consider the goal of
sustainable forests in a manner inconsistent with
our concept of urban forests. Thompson et al. (20)
described sustainability as "programs that yield
desired environmental and economic benefits
without wasteful, inefficient design and practices."
While these authors were interested in urban
settings, their approach was limited to municipal
forestry programs rather than city-wide processes
or results. Dehgi et al. (6) focused on California's
native Monterey pine forest and restricted their
definition of sustainability to that system.
Clark et al.: Urban Forest Sustainability
Moreover, their interest was limited to sustaining
the "natural dynamic genetic process." In another
approach, the American Forest and Paper
Association's Sustainable Forestry Initiative (1) is
largely aimed at industrial forest practice and
products. This focus on industrial forestry seems
largely incompatible with urban environments.
Given the examples noted above, the role of
humans in sustainable systems (including forests)
is generally accepted. However, Botkin and Talbot
(2) (as criticized by Webster) argued that
sustainable development of tropical forests
requires non-disturbance by humans. Again, this
idea is incompatible with urban forests.
Applying Concepts of Sustainable Forests to
Urban Forests
In moving the concepts of sustainable
development of forests towards implementation
and practice, Webster (22) raised several
significant questions. We have considered these
questions from the urban forest perspective:
What objects, conditions, and values are to be
sustained?
In urban areas, we focus on sustaining net
benefits of trees and forests at the broadest level.
We are sustaining environmental quality, resource
conservation, economic development,
psychological health, wildlife habitat, and social
well,being.
What is the range of forest activities that
contribute to sustainable development?
Simply put, urban forests require a broad set
of activities, from management of both Single trees
and large stands to education of the community
about urban forests and development of
comprehensive management plans.
What is the geographic scale at which
sustainable development can be most usefully
applied?
Political borders do not respect biology (and
vice versa). Principles of ecosystem management
argue for a scale based on ecological boundaries
such as watersheds. However, cities form discrete
pOlitical, economic and SOCial units. We must
respect the reality that political borders may be
more significant to management than ecological
boundaries. Urban forestry programs work within
Journal of Arboriculture 23(1): January 1997
this geographical framework.
For this project and model, we have chosen to
focus on the city and its geographic limits. While
this approach may violate some of the biological
realities of forest stands, it logically reflects the
jurisdictional boundaries and typical management
units found in cities. The more common alternative
approach, working with ecosystems, is not without
problems of definition and scale (7).
What is the relationship of sustainable
development for (urban forests) to new technology,
effectively applied research and investment in
forest management?
Urban forests stand to benefit tremendously
from new technology, information and investment.
Not only will the ability to select and grow trees in
cities be enhanced, but the ability to quantify the
benefits accrued by their presence will expand.
Wlersum (23) provided an in-depth look at
sustainability in forest systems, noting the long
hist6ry of the concept in forest practice. Many
. would argue that the concept of sustained yield is
not equivalent to sustainable development. Gatto
(9) discusses this fact at length. However, Wiersum
(23) observed the evolution of forest sustainability
towards multiple use, biological diversity, mitigating
climate change and socioeconomic dimensions.
Wiersum summarized four concepts involved with
sustainable forest management as maintenance
or sustenance of:
• forest ecological characteristics
• yields of useful forest products and
services for human benefit
• human institutions that are forest
dependent
• human institutions that ensure forests are
protected against negative external
Institutions.
A similar perspective on sustainable forest
management (13) described the measurable
criteria as:
• desired future condition (the vision of the
forest in the future)
• sustained yield
• ecosystem maintenance
• community (city) stability
19
Keene (13) also noted that these principles can
be practiced in traditional forest management.
Products derived from forests in which sustainable
forest management is practiced may receive a
third-party certification as such, in a manner similar
to certification of organically-grown produce.
Maser, (14), Wiersum (23) and Charles (4) all
argued that a sustainable forest would include
biological, social and economic issues. For
example, from the perspective of a fishery
resource, sustainability is the simultaneous pursuit
of ecological, socioeconomic, community and
institutional goals (4). In Maser's view of ecological
sustainability, the goals and needs of society must
reflect the potential of the resource to meet them.
This idea may be universal for sustainable
development and must certainly be for urban
forests.
This approach can be directly applied to cities,
for we want urban forests to contribute to
environmental, economic and social well-being .
We need not sacrifice one goal in pursuit of
another. Trees reduce atmospheric contaminants
at the same time that they enhance commuhity
well-being. While there may be conflicts in specific
situations (eg. planting trees under utility lines or
using invasive species), in general, all of the broad
goals for urban forest sustainability are compatible
with the others. In this sense, when we focus on
appropriate management of trees and urban
forests, where management activities take place
with community-supported goals and objectives,
we focus on sustaining a broad range of values.
We also concur with Charles' (4) conclusion
that sustainability can only be achieved when:
• Control is local (for fisheries, community
and region-wide)
• Management is adaptive, recognizing the
dynamic resource and its complexity
• Property rights are respected
In summary, a wide range of definitions for
sustainable development have been derived from
the original concept of the Brundtland Commission.
No universally accepted derivation has arisen for
forestry. Despite this problem, progress has been
made in identifying criteria and markers for
success.
20
Characteristics of Urban Forest
Sustalnability
Given the general characteristics of sustainable
systems and the specific nature of urban forests,
we identified 4 principles to which any model of
sustainability must adhere.
1. Sustainablllty is a broad, general goal.
While we may be able to describe the desired
functions of a sustainable urban forest, we cannot
yet design the forest to optimize them. Although
we know that urban forests act to reduce
atmospheric contaminants, we do not yet know
how to design those forests to maximize that
function. However, we accept that existing urban
forests provide these functions to some degree.
Trees in cities serve to improve community well·
being, reduce the urban heat island, eliminate
contaminants from the atmosphere, etc. While
there are costs involved in planting, maintaining
and removing trees in cities, in a sustainable urban
forest the net benefits provided by these functions
are greater than the costs associated with caring
forthe forest. A sustainable urban forest provides
continuity of these net benefits over time and
through space. We therefore have decided to
recognize the general character of sustainable
systems and develop steps that form such a
system in urban areas.
2. Urban forests primarily provide services
rather than goods. Descriptions of sustainable
systems usually focus on the goods that system
provides, i.e. sustained yield. Forests provide fuel
and fiber, agronomic systems provide food and
fiber, fisheries provide food, etc. In such examples,
goods are the primary output.
. In contrast, goods comprise a rather limited
output of the urban forests. The most Important
outputs are services, such as reducing
environmental contamination (from removing
atmospheric gases to moderating storm water
runoff), improving water quality, reducing energy
consumption, providing social and psychological
well-being, providing for wildlife habitat, etc. These
services, or benefits, are provided in two ways: 1)
direct (shading an individual home, raising the
value of a residential property) and 2) indirect
(enhancing the well-being of community residents).
In planting and maintaining sustainable urban
Clark et al.: Urban Forest Sustainability
forests, we should strive for a balance among all
benefits and not maximize the output of one
service at the expense of all others. For example,
one of the benefits that urban forests provide is
wildlife habitat. Maintaining the largest wildlife
habitat possible could conflict with other services,
such as limiting economic development from
property development or creating conflicts with
humans.
3. Sustainable urban forests require human
Intervention. One of the wonderful characteristics
of natural systems is their capacity for self
maintenance. Sustainable forests, farms and
fisheries take advanlage of this fact by harvesting
some limited segment of the resource, often with
a period of rest to allow renewal and replacement.
The Brundtland Commission Report (21), Maser
(14) and Charles (4) emphasized this critical
aspect of the resource to be sustained. For
example, Goodland (10) defined environmental
sustainability as "maintenance of natural capital."
Maser noted that a biologically sustainable forest
is the foundation for all other aspects of a
sustainable system. In forestry, there can be no
sustainable yield, sustainable industry, sustainable
community or sustainable society without a
biologically sustainable resource. As Charles put
it (for fisheries), "If the resource goes extinct,
nothing else matters."
Many (but not all) urban forests are a mosaic
of native forest remnants and planted trees. The
native remnants may have some capacity for self
renewal and maintenance, particularly in
greenbelts and other intact stands. However, the
planted trees have essentially no ability to
regenerate in place. Therefore, we must accept,
acknowledge and act on the fact that urban forests
(particularly in the United States) may have a
limited ability to retain or replace biological capital
(to use Maser's term). This is particularly the case
when we desire that regeneration occur in a
manner appropriate for human benefits. Indeed,
unwanted tree reproduction may actually have a
net cost for control and eradication programs.
Sustainable urban forests cannot be separated
from the activities of humans. Such activity can
be both positive and negative. In the latter case,
creation and maintenance of urban Infrastructure
Journal of Arboriculture 23(1): January 1997
can be extremely destructive and disruptive. In
essence, we superimpose cities atop forests. The
greater the imposition, the less natural the forests
appear and function (D. Nowak, personal
communication).
The adverse impacts of humans can be
mitigated by positive actions such as planning,
planting, and management; all occurring with
common commitment and shared vision. We
cannot separate sustainable urban forests from
the people who live in and .around them. In fact,
we want to meld the two as much as possible.
The implications of this principle are far
reaching. First, urban forests require active,
consistent, continuing management. The accrual
of net benefits can only occur when adequate and
reasonable care is provided. Second, tree
managers (both public and private) must involve
the surrounding community in decisions and
actions regarding urban forests. We do not
suggest abdicating responsibility on the part of tree
managers; we advocate sharing it.
4. Trees growing on private lands compose
the majority of urban forests. While publicly -
owned trees (primarily in parks and along streets
and other rights-of-way) have been the long
standing focus of urban forestry, they comprise
only a portion of the urban forest. An estimated
60 -90% of the trees in urban forests in the United
States are found on privately owned land (see 19;
also G. McPherson, pers. communication).
Therefore, sustainable urban forests depend to a
large degree on sustainable private forests.
If we consider further that trees probably are
not evenly distributed among all private land
holders, then we may also conclude that a small
number of land owners and managers may be
responsible for a large fraction of urban trees. For
example, universities, business parks, corporate
campuses, commercial real estate, autonomous
semi-public agencies, utilities, etc. may manage
large numbers of trees. The success of any effort
at sustainability must include their participatibn and
commitment.
However, small private landholdings,
particularly residential properties, may also
constitute a Significant fraction of community trees.
Their contribution to the urban forest must be
21
considered in any effort towards sustainability.
Defining Sustainable Urban Forests.
Applying these 4 principles leads to the following
definition of a sustainable urban forest:
"The naturally occurring and planted trees in
cities which are managed to provide the inhabitants
with a continuing level of economic, social,
environmental and ecological benefits today and
into the future."
Applying this definition in urban areas requires
accepting 3 ideas:
1. Communities must acknowledge that city
trees provide a wide range of net benefits.
Planting, preserving and maintaining trees is
neither simply a good thing nor an exercise.
Rather, urban forests are essential to the current
and future health of cities and their inhabitants.
2. Given the goal of maintaining net benefits
over time, the regeneration of urban forests
requires Intervention and management by
humans. To quote David Nowak, "people want
and need to direct the renewal process because
natural regeneration does not meet most urban
needs." Therefore, urban forests cannot be
sustained by nature, but by people.
3. Sustainable urban forests exist within
defined geographic and political boundaries:
those of cities. Moreover, sustainable urban
forests are composed of all trees in the community,
regardless of ownerShip.
A Model of Urban Forest Sustainability
Given the 3 premises listed above, we
developed a model of urban forest sustainability
which is founded on three components: 1)
vegetation resource, 2) a strong community
framework and 3) appropriate management of the
resource. Within each component are a number
of specific criteria for sustainability (see Tables 1,
2 and 3).
1. Vegetation resource. The vegetation
resource is the engine that drives urban forests.
Its composition, extent, distribution, and health
define the limit of benefits provided and costs
accrued. As dynamic organisms, urban forests
(and the trees that form them) change over time
as they grow, mature and die. Therefore,
sustainable urban forests must possess a mix of
22 Clark et al.: Urban Forest Sustainability
Table 1. Criteria of urban forest sustainability lor the Vegetation Resource.
Canopy cover
Age distribution
Species mix
Native vegetation
Achieve climate
appropriate tree cover,
community-wide.
Provide for uneven age
distribution.
Provide for species
diversity.
Though the Ideal amount of canopy cover will
vary by climate and region (and perhaps by
location within the community, there Is an optimal
degree of cover for every city.
A mix of young and mature trees Is essential If
canopy cover is to remain relatively constant over
time. To insure sustain ability, an on-going
planting program should go hand in hand with the
removal of senescent trees. Some level of
tree inventorywill make monitoring for this
indicator easier. Small privately owned
properties pose the biggest challenge for
inclusion in a broad monitoring program.
Species diversity is an important element in the
long-term health of urban forests. Experience
with species-specific peSts has shown the folly of
depending upon one species. Unusual weather
patterns and pests may take a heavy
toll in trees In a city. It Is often recommended
that no more than 10% of a clty's tree population
consist of one species.
Preserve and manage Where appropriate, preserving native trees in a
regional biodiversity. community adds to the sustalnability 6f the urban
Maintain the biological forest. Native trees are well-adapted to the
integrity of native climate and support native wildlife. Replanting
remnant forests. with nursery stock grown from native
Maintain wildlife stock is an alternative strategy. Planting non-
corridors to and from the native, invasive species can threaten the ability
city. of native trees to regenerate in greenbelts and
other remnant forests. Invasive species may
require active control programs.
species, sizes and ages that allows for continuity
of benefits while trees are planted and removed
(Table 1).
forest is one that provides a continuous high level
of net benefits including energy conservation,
reduction of atmospheric contaminants, enhanced
property values, reduction in storm water run-off, The vegetation resource of a sustainable urban
Journal of Arboriculture 23(1): January 1997 23
Table 2. Criteria of urban forest sustainability for the Community Framework.
Public agency
cooperation
Involvement of large
private and
institutional
landholders
Green industry
cooperation
Insure all city
departments operate
with common goals and
objectives.
Departments such as parks, public works, fi re,
planning, school districts and (public) utilities
should operate with cornmon goals and objectives
regarding the city's trees. Achieving this
cooperation, requires involvement of the city
council and city commissions.
Large private' Private landholders own and manage most of the
landholders embrace city urban forest. Their interest in, and adherence to,
wide goals and resource management plans is most likely to
objectives through result from a community-wide understanding and
specific resource valuing of the urban forest. In all likelihood, their
management plans. their cooperation and involvement cannot be
mandated.
The green industry From commercial growers to garden centers and
operates with high from landscape contractors to engineering
professional standards professionals, the green industry has a
and commits to city-wide tremendous impact on the health of a city's urban
goals and forest. The commitment of each segment
objectives. of this industry to high professional standards and
their support for city-wide goals and objectives is
necessary to ensure appropriate planning and
implementation.
Neighborhood Action At the neighborhood
level, citizens
understand and
partiCipate In urban
forest management.
Neighborhoods are the building blocks of cities.
They are often the arena where individuals feel
their actions can make the biggest difference in
their quality of life. Since the many urban trees
are on private property (residential or
commercial), neighborhood action is a key to
urban forest sustainabillty.
Citizen -government -All constituencies In the
business interaction community interact for
the benefit of the urban
forest.
Having public agenCies, private landholders, the
green industry and neighborhood groups all share
the same vision of the City's urban forest is a
crucial part of sustainability. This condition is not
likely to result from legislation. It will only
result from a shared understanding of the urban
forest's value to the community and commitment
to dialogue and cooperation among the
stakeholders.
24 Clark et al.: Urban Forest Sustainability
Table 2. Criteria of urban forest sustainability for the Community Framework (continued)
General awareness of The general public Fundamental to the sustainabllity of a city's urban
trees as a community understands the value of forest is the general public's understanding of the
resource trees to the community. value of its trees. People who value trees elect
officials who value trees. In tum, officials who
value trees are more likely
to require the agencies they oversee to maintain
high standards for management and provide
adequate funds for implementation.
Regional cooperation Provide for cooperation Urban forests do not recognize geographic
and interaction among boundaries. Linking city's efforts to those of
neighboring communities neighboring communities allows for consideration.
and regional groups. and action on larger geographic and ecological
issues (such as water quality and air quality).
and social well-being.
There are costs associated with the accrual of
these benefits. Dead, dying and defective trees
may fail and injure citizens or damage property.
Some species may pose a health risk from
allergenic responses. Others may compete with
native vegetation and limit the function of naturally
occurring fragments and systems.
2. Community framework. A sustainable
urban forest is one in which the all parts of the
community share a vision for their forest and act
to realize that vision through specific goals and
objectives (Table 2). It is based in neighborhoods,
public spaces and private lands;
At one level, this requires that a community
agree on the benefits of trees and act to maximize
them. On another level, this cooperation requires
that private landowners acknowledge the key role
of their trees to community health. Finally, in an
era of reduced government service, cooperation
means sharing the financial burden of caring for
the urban landscape,
3. Resource management. In many ways,
this component is not simply management of the
resource but the philosophy of management as
well (Table 3). On one hand, specific policy
vehicles to protect existing trees, manage species
selection, train staff and apply standards of care
focus on the tree resource itself. In contrast,
acceptance of a comprehensive management plan
and funding program by city government and its
constituents allows shared vision to develop.
Cities must recognize that management
approaches will vary as a function of the resource
and its extent. A goal of maintaining native wildlife
habitat may best be achieved. where there is a
strong native forest resource. For some cities, this
is simply not attainable. Similarly, management
of the urban forest must exist in connection to the
larger landscape (such as adjacent forests). For
example, maintenance of intact riparian corridors
requires the cooperation of the managing agency
of the stream.
Achieving Sustainable Urban Forests. A
sustainable urban forest is founded upon
community cooperation, quality care, continued
funding and personal involvement. It is created
and maintained through shared vision and
cooperation with an ever-present focus on
maximizing benefits and minimizing costs. Taken
together, they acknowledge the need for shared
vision and responsibility, for direct intervention with
the resource and for programs of care that are
on-going and responsive. The implementation of
Journal of Arboriculture 23(1): January 1997
Table 3. Criteria of urban forest sustalnabllity for Resource Management.
City-wide management Develop and implement
plan a management plan for
trees on public and
private\ property.
A city-wide management plan will add to an urban
forest's sUstainabllity by addressing Important
issues and creating a shared vision for the future
of the community's urban forest. Elements may
Include: species and planting
Funding
Staffing
Assessment tools
Protection of existing
trees
Species and site
selection
Develop and maintain
adequate funding to
implement a city-wide
management plan.
Employ and train
adequate staff to
implement a city-wide
management plan.
Develop methods to
collect Infor!l1ation about
the urban forest on a
routine basis.
Conserve existing
resources, planted and
natural, to ensure
maximum function.
guidelines; performance goals and standards for
tree care; requirements for new development
(tree preservation and planning); and
specifications for managing natural and open
space areas.
Since urban forests exist on both public and
private land, funding must be both public and
private. The amount of funding available from
both sources is often a reflection of the level of
education and awareness within a community
for the value of its urban forest.
An urban forest's sustainability is Increased when
all city tree staff, utility and commercial tree
workers and arborists are adequately trained.
Continuing education in addition to initial
minimum skills and/or certifications desirable.
Using canopy cover assessment, tree inventories,
aerial mapping, geographic information systems
and other tools, It Is possible to monitor trends in
a city's urban forest resource over time.
Protection of existing trees and replacement of
those that are removed is most often
accomplished through policy vehicles.
Ordinances that specify pruning standards and/or
place restrictions on the removal of large
or other types of trees on public and private
property and during development are examples.
Provide guidelines and Providing good planting sites and appropriate
specifications for species trees to fill themis crucial to sustalnability.
use, on a context-Allowing adequate space for trees to grow and
defined basis. selecting trees that a~e compatible with the site
will reduce the long-and short-term
maintenance requirements and enhance their
longevity. Avoiding species known to cause
allergenic responses is also important in some
areas.
25
26 Clark et al.: Urban Forest Sustainability
Table 3. Criteria of urban forest sustalnabillty for Resource Management (continued)
Standards for tree care Adopt and adhere to
professional standards
for tree care.
Sustainablllty will be enhanced by adhering to the
professional standards such as the Tree Pruning
Guidelines (ISA) and ANSI Z133 publications.
Citizen safety
Recycling
Maximize public safety
with respect to trees.
Create a closed system
for tree waste.
In designing parks and other public spaces, public
safety should be a key factor in placement,
s'eleclion, and management of trees. Regular
inspections for potential tree hazards is an
important element in the management program.
A sustainable urban forest Is one that recycles Its
products by compost/ng, reusing chips as mulch
and/or fuel and using wood products as firewood
and lumber.
Table 4. Criteria and performance Indicators for the Vegetation Resource.
Criteria Performance indicators Key Objective
Low Moderate Good Oplimal
Canopy cover No assessment Visual assessment Sampling cftree Information on Achieve climate-appropriate degree of tree
(I.e. photographic) cover using aerial urban forests cover, community-wide.
photographs. included In crty-
wide geographic
Infonnallon
system (GIS),
Age '. distribution of trees No as,sessment Street tree public -private Included In clty-Provide for uneven age distribution.
in community Inventory ssmplJng wide geographic
(complete or Information
sample) system (GIS),
Species mix No assessment Street tree Clty·wlde Included In clty~ Provide tor species diversity.
Inventory assessment of wide geographic
species mix infonnatfon
system (GIS),
Native vegetation No program of Voluntary use on Requirements for Preservation of Pres9Ne end manage regional biodiversity.
Integration publlo projects use of natlva regional Maintain the blologloallnlegrlty of native
species on a biodiversity remant forests. Maintain wildlife corridors 10
project· and from the city.
appropriate basis
Journal of Arboriculture 23(1): January 1997 27
Table 5. Criteria and performance indicators for the Community Framework.
Criteria
Public agency
cooperation
Involvement of large
private and Institutional
land holders
Green Industry
cooperation
Neighborhood action
Citizen -government·
bUsiness interacllon
General awareness of
trees as community
resource
Regional cooperation
Performance Indicators Key Objective
Low Moderate Good Optimal
Conflicting goals No cooperation Informal working Formal working Insure all city departments operate with
among teams teams wI staff common goals and objectives,
departments coordination
ignorance of issue
No cooperation
among'segments
of Induslry
(nursery,
contractor,
arborlst). No
adherence to
Industry
standards.
No action
ConfHctlng goals
among
constituencIes
Low --trees as
problems; a drain
on budgets
Communities
operate
independently
Education
materials and
advice available
to land~holders
General
cooperation
among nurseries-
contractors ~
arborists, etc.
Isolated and/or
limited no. of
active groups
No Interaction
among
constituencies
Model1'lte --trees
as Important to
community
Communities
share similar
policy vehicles
Clear goals for Land-holders Large private landholders embrace city-wide
tree resource by develop goats and objectives through speCific
private land-comp(ehensive resource management plans.
hOlders; incentives tree management
for preservation of plans (Including
private trees funding)
Specific Shared vision and The green Industry operates with high
cooperative goals including the professional standards and commits to clty-
arrangements use of wide goals and objectives.
such as purchase professional
certificates for standards.
right tree, right
place
City-wide All neighborhoods At the neighborhood level, citizens
coverage and organized and understand and participate in urban forest
Interaction cooperating management.
Informal and lor Formal AU constitUencies in the community interact
general interaction, e,g .. for the benefit of the urban forest.
cooperation tree board wI staff
coordination
High --trees Very high -. trees The general public understands the value of
acknowledged to as vital trees to the community.
provide components of
environmental economy and
services environment
Regional planning Regional planning Provide for cooperation and Interaclton
coordination among neighboring communities and
andlor regional groups.
management
plans
a model for urban forest sustainability would further
redirect the traditional orientation of urban forest
management away from municipal trees to the mix
of public and private trees.
in this task, we have described indicators of
success for each criteria (Tables 4, 5, and 6). A
city that meels the highest level of each indicator
for each criteria would have the best lools and
resources to achieve.sustainabillty. Achieving suslainability for urban forests
involves meeting each of these criteria. To assist Our approach of developing criteria and
28 Clark et al.: Urban Forest Sustainability
Table 6. Criteria and performance indicators for Resource Management.
Criteria Performance Indicators Key Objective
Low Moderate Good Optimal
City-wide management
plan
No plan ExIsting plan
limited In scope
and
implementation
Government Mwlde Citizen -Develop and implement a management plan
plan, accepted government -for trees and forests on public and private
and implemented business resource property.
management plan,
accepted and
Implemented
City-wide funding Funding by crisiS
management
Funding to
optimize exIsting
population
Adequate funding Adequate funding, Develop and maIntain adequate funding to
to provide for net private and public. Implement a clly-wlde management plan.
Increase In to sustain
popl,llatlon and maximum
care potential benefits
City staffing No staff No training Certified arborisls Professional tree Employ and train adequate staff 10
on staff care staff Implement city-wide management platl.
Assessment tools No on-going Partial Inventory
program of
Complete
Inventory .
Information on Develop methods to collect information
urban forests about the urban forest on a rouli(1e basis.
assessment
indicators is patterned after that found in the
Santiago Agreement (11 ) which suggested criteria
and indicators for the conservation and
sustainability of temperate and boreal forests. It
recognized that both quantitative and qualitative
(descriptive) indicators were needed, for not all
criteria could be accurately measured.
Conclusions·
Maser suggested that ecological sustainability
encompasses 4 ideals:
1. Providing a long-term balance between
society and the resource, today and in the
future.
2. Seeking to increase the overlap between
societal desires and ecological
possibilities.
3. Developing assessment tools for both the
resource and its outputs (benefits,
services).
4. Restoring ecosystems.
Our model for urban forest sustainability
adheres to these 4 ideals, placing them in an urban
Included In cHy~
wide GIS
context. It recognizes the nature of society in cities
and encourages partiCipation at the broadest level.
The model also acknowledges the need to foster
regeneration, to provide for the continuity of the
resource. Management of a sustainable urban
forest is based upon a shared vision for the
resource, in which goals and needs are balanced.
Since sustainability is a general goal, we must be
able to assess our progress relative to defined
standards. Finally, we recognize that our actions,
through such activities as development, will
damage forests and their function. We accept the
responsibility of restoration.
Urban trees and forests are considered integral
to the sustainability of cities as a whole (3, 8). Yet,
sustainable urban forests are not born, they are
made. They do not arise at random, but result
from a community-wide commitment to their
creation and management.
Obtaining the commitment of a broad
community, of numerous .constituencies, cannot
be dictated or legislated. It must arise out of
compromise and respect. While policy vehicles
such as ordinances playa role in managing the
Journal of Arboriculture 23(1): January 1997 29
Table 6. Criteria and performance Indicators for Resource Management (continued)
Protection of existing
trees
No policy vehicle
or policy not
enforced
Tree preservation Tree preservation
ordinance present plan required for
Integrated Conserve existing resources, planted and
planning program nahnal. to ensure maximum function.
and enforced all for conservation
projects .... public,
private,
commercial,
residential
and development
Species and site selection Arbitrary species
prohibitions
No consideration Identlfication/prohl On·golng use of Provide guidelines and specifications for
adapted. hfgh~ species use, Including a mechanism for of undesirable bltian of
species undesirable performing evaiuallng the site.
species species with good.
site -species
match
Standards for tree care None Standards for Standards for Standards part of Adopt and adhere to professional standards
public tree care pruning, stOCk, community -wide for tree care.
etc. for all trees vision
Citizen safety Crisis Informal Comprehensive Safety part of cost Maximize public safety with respect to trees.
management Inspectfons hazard (tallure, -benefit program
tripping, etc.)
program
Recycling Simple disposal Green waste Green and wood Closed system --Creale a closed system tor tree waste.
(i.e. land filling) of recycling waste recycllng-no outside
green waste
urban forest, developing cornmitrnent is probably
rnore a function of education, awareness and
positive incentives. This may represent our most
significant challenge: to provide information that
creates cornrnitrnent and guides action.
This is not to Ignore the budgetary requirements
for sustainable urban forests. It has long been our
belief that if education were adequate, funding
would soon follow. Despite the current state of
funding, we must hold to this perspective.
Finally, sustainable urban forests also require
a viable resource base. While urban foresters and
arborists have long felt confident in their ability to
sustain the resource, we rnust acknowledge our
limitations as well as our strengths. The optimal
structure of urban forests, i.e. the arrangement of
trees in a city, remains the subject of research.
Our industry must strive to resolve conflicts such
as quality of nursery stock, appropriate cultural
practices and the match between site
considerations and species selection.
reuse disposal
Literature Cited
1. American Forest and Paper Association. 1995.
Sustainable Forestry Initiative. American Forest
and Paper Association. Washington D.C.
2. Botkin, D. and L. Talbot. 1992. Biological diversity
and forests. N.P. Sharma (Ed.), pp 47-74. In
Managing the world's forests: Looking for balance
between conservation and development. Kendall!
Hall Publishing Co.
3. Center for the Study of Law and Politics. 1991.
Urban Forestry. The Global Cities Project. San
FranciSCO, CA. 112 pp.
4. Charles, A. 1994. Towards sustainabllity: The
fishery experience. Ecological Economics 11 :201
-211.
5. Costanza, R. and B. Patten. 1995. Defining and
predicting sustainability. Ecological Economics.
15:193-196.
6. Dehgl, D., T. Huffman and J. Culver. 1994.
California's native Monterey pine popUlations:
Potential for sustainability. Fremontia 23(1 ):14-23.
30
Forestry
7. Fitzsimmons, A. 1996. Stop the parade. BioScience
46 (2).
8. Gangloff, D. 1995. The sustainable city. American
Forests. May/June 30-34, 38.
9. Gatto, M. 1995. Sustainabllity: Is it a well-defined
concept? Ecologia (Soc. Italian a di Ecollgla) 16:
235-240.
10. Goodland, R. 1995. The concept of environmental
sustainablllty. Annu. Rev. Ecology Systematics 26:
1-24.
11. Journal of Forestry. 1995. Sustaining the World's
Forests -The Santiago Agreement. Criteria and
indicators for the conservation and sustainable
management of temperate and boreal forests.
Journal of Forestry 93 (4):18-21.
12. Kaufmann, R. and C. Cleveland. 1995. Measuring
sustalnability: needed -an Interdisciplinary
approach to an interdisciplinary concept.
Ecological Economics. 15: 1 09-112.
13. Keene, R. 1995. A dlrt-forester's perspective.
American Forests. May/June 18, 60-61.
14. Maser, C. 1994. Sustainable Forestry -
Philosophy, science and economics. St. Lucie
Press. Delray Beach, FL. 373 pp.
15. Nowak, D., R. Rowntree, E. McPherson, S. Slslnnl,
E. Kerkmann and J. Stevens. In preparation. Urban
tree cover analysis. Submitted to Landscape and
Urban Planning.
16. Salwasser, H. 1993. Perspectives on modeling
sustainable urban forest ecosystems. D. LeMaster
and R. Sedjo (ed.). pp 176-181. In: Modeling
Sustainable Forest Ecosystems. Forest Policy
Center. Washington D.C.
17. Sample, V. A 1993a. Building partnerships for
ecosystem management on forest and range lands
In mixed ownerships. Workshop synthesis. Forest
Polley Center. American Forests. Washington D.C.
17 pp.
18. Sample, V. A (editor). 1993b. Defining sustainable
forestry: Conference summary. Forest Policy
Center. American Forests. Washington D.C. 17 pp.
19. Sampson, N., G. Moll and J. Kielbaso. 1992.
Opportunities to increase urban forests and the
potential impacts on carbon storage and
conservation. R. N. Sampson and D. Hair (ed.).
In: Forests and Global Change. Volume 1.
Opportunities for Increasing Forest Cover.
American Forests. Washington D.C:
20. Thompson, R., N. Pillsbury and R. Hanna. 1994.
The elements of sustainability in urban forestry.
California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection. Riverside, CA. 56 pp.
Clark et al.: Urban Forest Sustalnability
21.wCED. 1987. Our common future. (The Brundtland
Commission Report). Oxford University Press.
Oxford England.
22. Webster, H. 1993. Some thoughts on sustainable
development as a concept, and as applied to
forests. Forestry Chron. 69:531-533.
23. Wlersum, K. F. 1995. 200 Years of sustalnabllity
in forestry: Lessons from history. Environmental
Management. 19(3):321-329.
Acknowledgments. Thanks to Greg
McPherson, Dave Nowak, Richard Rideout, Paul
Rles, Ed Macie, and Ray Tretheway for their
comments and suggestions. Funding for this
project was provided by a grant from the National
Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Council
through the U.S.D.A. Forest Service Urban and
Community Forestry Challenge Cost-share
Program (No. G-5-94-20-095).
HortSclence, Inc.
P.O. Box 754
Pleasanton, CA 94566
and
California ReLeaffThe Trust for Public Land
3001 Redhill Avenue
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Zussammenfassung. Das Modell des slch
selbsterhaltenden Stadtwaldes wendet allqemeine
Prinzipien der Selbsterhaltung auf stil.dtische
Bil.ume und Wil.lder an. Sich selbst erhaltende
Stadtwil.lder erfordern eine qesunde Herkunft der
Pflanzen, kommunale UntarstOtzung und ain
umfassendes Management. Die Kriterien und
Indikatoren, um diesen Status zu OberprOfen
werden hler vorgestellt. Dasdeutllchste Resultat
eines sich selbst erhaltenden Stadtwaldes bestehl
darin, einen maxirnalen Grad an umwellbezogenen,
iikologischen, sozialen und okonomischen
VorzOgen zu erreichen.