Why Gibbons’ Trees Matter

Commission on Persons with Disabilities

Wednesday, October 14 • 6:30 p.m.
Send your written comment before noon Wednesday, October 14.

Join in person at City Hall, or via Zoom. You must register to obtain the Zoom link before joining the meeting. 

Email button not working?

WHAT WE STAND TO LOSE

The City of Alameda Public Works Department has drafted a Gibbons Drive Sidewalks and Trees Plan (the “Plan”) that could eliminate up to 45 “remarkably healthy”, mature Liquidambar trees along Gibbons Drive over the next six years—wiping out 40% of our iconic canopy. Even more alarming, the current draft leaves open the possibility that our entire population of over 112 historic trees could be completely gone within 16 to 21 years.

While we fully support safe and accessible sidewalks, removing these historic trees should be an absolute last resort. Viable, tree-friendly alternatives exist, such as strategically repairing or upgrading our existing sidewalks and curbs (many sections of which are 35 to 60 years old). We can have safe sidewalks and retain this canopy without resorting to the City's current plan to replace a century-old canopy of 70–100-foot trees – the largest and most iconic canopy of trees in Alameda – with 8–10-foot saplings that could create an environmental deficit taking generations to recover. The City's own plan acknowledges that the benefits of mature trees are lost immediately, while replacement trees will provide those benefits only as they mature. And the City's own adopted Climate Action and Resiliency Plan 2, Climate Change Emergency Resolution, and draft Urban Forest Plan direct the City as a matter of policy to preserve and grow the City's canopy as much as possible. The proposed tree removal framework enables exactly the opposite, and requests removal of existing Planning Board oversight to do so. 

The environmental consequences of losing these mature trees are severe:

Carbon and Air Quality Loss: USDA guidance notes that a single mature tree (70–100 feet in height) absorbs roughly 48 pounds of carbon dioxide annually. Removing these trees would eliminate thousands of pounds of annual carbon absorption and strip away a natural filtration system that currently removes up to 60% of street-level air pollution, such as car exhaust, according to research out of Lancaster University.

Increased Localized Heat: EPA reports shaded asphalt like that on Gibbons remains 20°F to 45°F cooler than peak temperatures of unshaded surfaces. Without this canopy of trees, the temperatures for people and wildlife will rise dramatically and significantly alter the natural airflow and cooling relied upon during the summer.

Flooding and Erosion Risks: Mature canopies like those on Gibbons absorb 15% to 27% of annual rainfall (see EPA sources below). Their roots also take up water and help rain soak into the soil. Together, this mature canopy and extensive root system could well keep tens of thousands of gallons of water each year out of storm drains, helping to prevent flooding and erosion. Stripping these trees removes those protections, increasing flooding and erosion risks already heightened by changes in climate that the City is seeking funding to address.

Ecological Damage: The loss of the canopy will negatively impact local biodiversity and habitat corridors for migratory birds, raptors, and other wildlife that live there. Furthermore, sudden exposure to strong sun and heat will dry out topsoil and lead to severe leaf scorch and death for understory plants adapted to the shade canopy, further accelerating negative environmental impacts. (See UC Agriculture and Natural Resources.)

We need your voice to show city officials that the community demands a solution that preserves both accessibility and this vital urban forest. We need your voice to ensure that the City does not approve a plan without accountability. Ensure that assurances like “feasible,” “reasonable,” “practical” and “possible” have clear, measurable definitions to protect this stunning, hardworking canopy, and that required board reviews and public accountability are not stripped from the process. Tell them judgment calls are not a substitute for calculating and limiting actual canopy and continuous canopy losses that the environment and all those that live within it will experience. Take time now to ask the City to revise the current plan, strengthen public oversight, and make the commitments of tree preservation and Alameda's Climate Action and Resiliency Plan (the adopted CARP 2) and Emergency Resolution on climate change commitments we can hold them to.

1. Write to City Leadership Today. Urge them to reject the current Plan as written and adopt a more preservation-focused approach while exploring alternative sidewalk and curb repair methods that keep our mature trees intact as long as possible. A tree removal framework is not a sidewalk plan. Request more community input now that we are more fully informed. Request that your email be placed into the public record. Email the Commission on Persons With Disabilities, and show up in person Wednesday evening, October 14, 6:30 P.M., or register to attend by Zoom. 

Commission on Persons With Disabilities

People with disabilities deserve safe, accessible sidewalks and the shade, beauty, cleaner air and protection from heat that the mature canopy provides. Ask the Commission to insist on funded, scheduled repairs that deliver safe access while preserving mature trees with clear, measurable requirements and continuing existing oversight. A tree-removal framework is not a sidewalk-repair plan.

Ask the Commission to vote no on the recommendation, or to continue the action on the plan until a future meeting when a plan with appropriate protections and supporting evidence are in place, and to reject proposals to weaken protections or eliminate reviews. 

Send your written comment before noon Wednesday, October 14. Ask that they be delivered to the board and entered into the public record.

Write now to ada@alamedaca.gov, copying Lilian Jewell, ADA Coordinator, at ljewell@alamedaca.gov.

City Council

Urge the City Council to reject the current Plan as written; require clear, measurable criteria for terms defining the difference between preservation and removal - like, "feasible," "reasonable," "practical," and "possible"; and adopt a preservation-focused approach while exploring alternative sidewalk and curb repair methods that enable everyone to enjoy this beautiful, hard-working canopy while keeping our mature trees intact as long as possible. A tree removal framework is not a sidewalk plan.

citycouncil-list@alamedaca.gov

2. Attend the upcoming meetings held at
Alameda Council Chambers
3rd Floor of City Hall
2263 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501. 

Join your neighbors in person or via Zoom to voice your concerns (check each meeting schedule web page for Zoom details – the Zoom link is normally posted three days prior to each meeting here: City meeting calendar — click on the applicable meeting agenda and see “Zoom registration”):

Commission on Persons with Disabilities: Wednesday, October 14 at 6:30 p.m.

Find the Commission’s Zoom details

City Council: Tuesday, December 1 at 7:00 p.m. (per staff report; to be confirmed when agenda issued)

We agree that the sidewalks and curbs need to be repaired. We don’t agree with the aggressive draft plan submitted allowing minimal assessment before staff may opt on a judgement call to cut down these majestic trees to make repairs. Require staff to
- document the exhaustion of all options required in the City's Master Street Tree Plan, draft Urban Forest Plan, and Tree Removal Policy;
- show why none of the options will work using clearly defined, standard and measurable criteria for determining whether those options were feasible, reasonable, practical or possible;
- calculate the data on cumulative impacts of its decisions such as those to the large continuous canopy relied upon by wildlife, local biodiversity, and climate change mitigation;
- provide assessments showing compliance of the proposed actions with the City's climate change policies (e.g., the adopted Climate Action and Resiliency Plan (CARP2) and its Emergency Resolution on Climate Change)
- make these documents public and decisions open for appeal before a publicly accountable body - before any steps toward a non-emergency removal take place;
- require any sidewalk and infrastructure work be approved, funded and scheduled first - before any steps are taken to remove one of the remaining healthy trees
We must act now before these historic and iconic trees are lost forever.

Thank you for standing up to Save Gibbons Trees for the future.

Alamedans for Gibbons Trees

MORE WAYS TO HELP / SOURCES

You can also sign the petition or visit Help Shape the Plan. Questions? GibbonsTrees@gmail.com. Be sure to whitelist this email address. 

Research & Resources has more on sidewalk alternatives, the plan and the evidence.

SEE MORE

Read more about the environmental impact, or download the flyer to print and share.

Are you a visual learner? See more by following us at SaveGibbonsTrees on Instagram and Facebook.

Sources include:

City of Alameda — Gibbons Drive Sidewalks and Trees Plan, October 2026.

HortScience | Bartlett Consulting — Gibbons Drive Sweetgum Assessment, December 2025.

Residents’ Gibbons Drive Sidewalk & Tree Cross-Reference Analysis.

City of Alameda — Master Street Tree Plan and Tree Removal Policy.

USDA — The Power of One Tree: The Very Air We Breathe.

U.S. EPA — Benefits of Trees and Vegetation.

U.S. EPA — Stormwater to Street Trees, using USDA Forest Service data.

U.S. EPA — Using Trees and Vegetation to Reduce Heat Islands.

City of Alameda — proposed Planning Board resolution and October 12 staff report.

University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, Statewide IPM Program — Sunburn.

Lancaster University — Maher and colleagues’ study of roadside trees and particulate pollution, 2013.