California Record
Alameda
Environment

Gibbons Drive Tree Preservation

Summary not yet generated for this topic.

Community sentiment

Supportive (5)Opposed (2)

At a glance

Public comments
7
Last 30 days
7

Discussed at 1 meeting in the last 60 days; most recently Oct 20, 2026.

Public comments (7)

SupportiveMarleneOct 20, 2026

Resident of Gibbons Drive urged council to adopt historical protections for the trees.

City Council - Oct 20, 2026 · 0:00 →
SupportivePam LoweOct 20, 2026

Urged the city to designate Gibbons Drive a protected tree canopy to preserve irreplaceable historic trees.

City Council - Oct 20, 2026 · 0:00 →
OpposedLorraine PerryOct 20, 2026

Expressed strong opposition to the 20-year tree removal plan and called the Liquid Amber trees an endangered historic asset.

City Council - Oct 20, 2026 · 0:00 →
SupportiveJohn PerryOct 20, 2026

Supported protecting the Gibbons Drive canopy as a top priority.

City Council - Oct 20, 2026 · 0:00 →
SupportiveLori ZupanOct 20, 2026

Spoke in favor of historical landscape designation for Gibbons Drive, noting strong neighborhood opposition to the city's approach.

City Council - Oct 20, 2026 · 0:00 →
SupportivePeter AstinOct 20, 2026

Highlighted community petition signatures against the city's tree removal plan and urged historical protections.

City Council - Oct 20, 2026 · 0:00 →
OpposedEileen DuboisOct 20, 2026

Questioned why Gibbons Drive is being treated differently from other tree-lined streets and urged flexible engineering.

City Council - Oct 20, 2026 · 0:00 →