R9P-Discuss Making The Urban Forest A City Of Miami Beach Priority -Tobin-g MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jimmy Morales, City Manager
FROM: Ed Tobin, Commissior#
DATE: June 101h,2015 (
SUBJECT; Agenda item for June 1Oth, 2015 City Commission Meeting
Please place on the June 1Oth ,2015 Agenda for City Commission Meeting a discussion
regarding making the urban forest a City of Miami Beach priority.
Attached please find informational materials.
lf you have any questions please do not hesitate to call our office.
il
We ore comniit.ed lo providing exceilatl pubtic service onc:i so{ety to aJi v,hc live, work. and pioy irt our vibranl. trapical, historic canmunity lA'l
estBe
DE
on
Agenda lten R?Po*.-EFl('739
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE URBAN FOREST tN CLIMATE CHANGE RESILIENCY
Prepared by Sheryl Gold for Commissioner Ed Tobin - June 3'd,2015
Definition of the urban forest: trees and vegetation in and around a town or city
environment.
As confirmed by President Obama's recent Climate Change Action Plan Natural
Resources lnitiative, green infrastructure, such as the urban forest, plays a
key role in resiliency planning. (link)
Trees provide a multiple of environmental, economic, social and health benefits:
provide oxygen, clean the air, sequester CO2 emissions, lower temperatures, conserve
energy, mitigate urban heat islands, improve stormwater management by preventing
water runoff and soil erosion, increase property values, provided habitat for wildlife,
beautify and add pride to communities; provide shade for walkability, bikeability,
livability; improve business traffic,
absorb noise, reduce glare, provide wind breaks, provide protection from skin cancer,
provide spiritual and creative inspiration.
(link)
The CMB has a serious tree canopy deficit. The canopy is 15% vs. the 30 or
40% desirable coverage. Most cities in the U.S. are at 30-35%. While the city
has planted 5,000 trees in the last 7 or 8 years, it also lost 2,500 trees in the
2005 hurricanes. So while the city committed to Million Trees Miami goal of
doubling the canopy to 30% by 2020, the city has barely moved the needle.
The city lacks the basic tools and policies and plan for how to stop the ongoing
mass destruction of the mature tree canopy and how to plant new trees.
while engineered solutions are important to stop the flooding, they are only
one component of a climate resiliency plan. For the past two years, the focus
has been entirely on installing pumps and pipes, and ,most recently, elevating
streets. Natural resources are missing from the resiliency planning.
The drainage projects are responsible for hundreds, and what will become,
thousands of trees lost. Projects must be designed from the outset to preserve
existing mature trees and leave space to plant new trees. Protected bike lanes
and shade tree canopy must be incorporated into newly designed streetscapes.
The Administration says it needs a directive from the commission in order to make
the urban forest a priority. This must happen, sooner, rather than later, before
the city ends up with dry streets and no trees.
The ongoing mass destruction of the mature tree canopy must be immediately stopped.
Most importantly, a comprehensive climate resiliency action plan that includes
the urban forest must be developed and overseen by an executive who is tasked
'la 1
740
with the responsibility of balancing gray and green infrastructure, as the city
prepares for the serious challenges of SLR and rising temperatures and more severe
weather events.
lmmediate steps: The Mayor and eommission must direct the Administration to make
the urban forest a priority. Re organization of the city's greenspace management efforts
and responsibility for the tree canopy.
For further information see:
Protecting and Developing the Urban Tree Canopy, U.S. Mayors Conference 2008
www. usmavors. orq/trees/treefi nal repo rt-2008. pdf
Sustaining America's Urban Trees and Forests, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, June 2010
www.fs.fed.us/openspace/fote/reports/nrs-62-sustaininq americas ,urban.pdf
Slar
741
WHY PLANT TREES: THE BENEFITS OF TREES IN URBAN AREAS
The following information was compiled from various studies and publications.
It clearly illustrates the multitude of valuable benefits provided by urban trees.
Trees improve our environment, enhance our quality of life, provide shelter and
food for wildlife, and beautify the sometimes harsh cityscape. With a little care
and protection, they will provide benefits for many, many years. Given the
beauty and usefulness of urban trees, it makes sense to plant new trees and
protect the trees we already have.
Trees lmprove Air Ouality
Although different studies provide different estimates of the amount of
pollutants trees remove, the message is obvious: trees are avery effective tool
in the battle against air pollution.
' Urban trees improve air quality in four ways: by absorbing pollutants
such as ozone and nitrogen oxides through leaf surfaces; by intercepting
particulate matter (e.9., dust, ash, pollen, and smoke); by releasing
oxygen during photosynthesis; and by transpiring water and shading
surfaces, which lowers local temperatures and reduces ozone production.
' Some major air pollutants and their primary sources:o Sulfur Dioxide (SOz) Coal burning for electricity/home heating
produces about 60 percent of sulfur dioxide in the air, and the
refining and combustion of petroleum products produce aboutZl%
of the SOz.o Ozone (Or) Ozone and another oxidant, peroxyacetylnitrate (PAN),
are produced mainly from the emissions of automobiles and
industries. High concentrations of O: and PAN often build up where
there are many automobiles.o Nitrogen oxides - Automotive exhaust is probably the largest
producer of nitrogen oxides.o Particulates - These are small (<10 microns) particles, for example,
those emitted in smoke from burning fuel, particularly diesel. They
can cause respiratory problems.
' The total pollution removal by trees during 1994 was estimated for four
large cities:o New York: 1821 tons removed, a value of $9,500,000o Philadelphia: 1031 tons removed, a value of $5,15L,000o Baltimore: 499 tons removed, a value of $2,709,000o Boston: 278 tons removed, a value of $1,509,000
All results were similar when adjusted for the amount of tree cover in
I
tlat
742
each city.
' Trees in Atlanta are estimated to remove 19,000,000 pounds of air
pollutants each year, an annual value of $47,000,000. ln Chattanooga, a
smaller city, trees remove 5,300,000 pounds of pollutants annually, a
value of $ 12,800,000.
a
a
Between L974 and 1996, Chattanooga's tree cover declined 16.5%. These
lost trees would have removed 2,600,000 pounds of air pollutants each
year, a value of $6,200,000 annuatly.
A computer model of conditions in Atlanta estimated that a20% loss of
tree cover would produce a 14% increase in ozone.
The U.S. Forest Service estimated that over a 5Oyear lifetime, a tree
generates $31,250 worth of oxygen, provides $62,000 worth of air
pollution control, recycles $37,500 worth of water, and controls $31,250
worth of soil erosion.
ln Southern California cities, the annual value of air pollutant uptake by
trees ranged from $5 to $20 per tree. Larger trees provided higher
benefits.
!n one urban park (about 500 acres), trees each day removed 48 pounds
of particulates, 9 pounds of nitrogen dioxide, 6 pounds of sulfur dioxide,
and 2 pounds of carbon monoxide (a $136 per day value based upon
pollution control technology).
Parking lot trees shade and reduce heat buildup on asphalt surfaces and
vehicles, thereby reducing hydrocarbon emissions from gasoline that
evaporates out of leaky gas tanks and worn hoses. These evaporative
emissions are a principal component of smog.
One sugar maple (12" trunk diameter) along a roadway removes the
following amounts of heavy metals from the atmosphere during one
growing season: 60 mg cadmium,140 mg chromium, 820 mg nickel, and
5200 mg lead.
Trees can reduce concentrations of street-level particulates by up to 60Yo.
Three hundred trees can counterbalance the amount of pollution one
person produces in a lifetime.
Trees Reduce Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
' Heat from Earth is trapped in the atmosphere by high levels of carbon
dioxide (COz) and other heattrapping gases creating a phenomenon
known as the "greenhouse effect." About half of the greenhouse effect is
caused by COz. Trees can reduce atmospheric COz in two ways: during
photosynthesis, trees remove (sequester) COz from the atmosphere and
store the carbon as cellulose in trunks, branches, roots, and leaves; and
trees shade buildings and act as wind screens, thereby reducing the
.,
sln
743
demand for heating and air conditioning, and reducing emissions
associated with power generation.
' Shading of homes and office buildings may reduce air conditioning needs
by up to 30%, thereby reducing the amount of fossil fuels burned to
produce electricity.
' One tree that shades a home in the citywill save fossil fuel and reduce
COz buildup as much as L5 forest trees.
' Approximately 800 million tons of carbon are stored in U.S. urban
forests, with a $22 billion equivalent in control costs.
' Planting trees remains one of the cheapest, most effective means of
drawing excess COz from the atmosphere.
' A single mature tree can absorb carbon dioxide at a rate of 48 pounds
per year, and release enough oxygen into the atmosphere to support 2
human beings.
' lf every American family planted just one tree, the amount of COz in the
atmosphere would be reduced by one billion pounds annually. This is
almost 5% of the amount that human activity pumps into the atmosphere
each year.
Trees Protecl Our Water
' Urban trees reduce stormwater runoff and water pollution in three ways:
leaves and branches intercept and store rainfall, thereby reducing runoff
volumes and delaying the onset of peak flows; root growth and the
decomposition of leaves and other organic matter increase the infiltration
of water into the soil, thereby reducing overland flow; and tree canopies
reduce the impact of raindrops on soiI surfaces, thereby reducing
erosion.
' For every 5% of tree cover added to a community, stormwater runoff is
reduced by approximately 2%.
' ln Modesto, California each street and park tree reduces stormwater
runoff by about 845 gallons per year. The value of this benefit is $6.76
per tree per year. A typical medium-sized tree in coastal Southern
California provides about $4.72 in stormwater benefits per year.
' Research by the U.S. Forest Service found that in a l-inch rainstorm over
12 hours, interception of rain by the canopy of Salt Lake City's urban
forest r:educed surface runoff by about 11.3 million gallons, or 1.7%,
providing a $226,000 savings for runoff-water control costs. This value
would increase with increased forest cover.
' Every gallon of water intercepted by trees during a 12-hour storm saved
two cents in control costs.
' Trees act as natural pollution filters. Their canopies, trunks, roots, and
blan
744
associated soil filter out polluted particulate matter from water flow.
Reducing the flow of stormwater reduces the amount of pollution that is
washed into sewers and drainage areas. Trees use nutrients like nitrogen,
phosphorus, and potassium byproducts of urban living which can
pollute streams and other bodies of water.
' Trees reduce topsoil erosion, prevent harmful pollutants in the soil from
washing into waterways, slow stormwater runoff, and ensure
replenishment of groundwater supplies by improving water infiltration
into the soil.
Trees Save Energy
' Urban forests modify local climate and reduce energy use in buildings in
three ways: shading reduces heat absorption by surfaces;
evapotranspiration converts water in plants to vapor, thereby cooling the
air; and trees reduce wind speed.
' Florida Power and Light (FPL) reports an average cooling cost saving of
$485 per home each year for single family detached residences that have
trees planted at the west and south and that provide shade for air
conditioning units.
' Trees help to cool cities and reduce the effect of urban heat sinks, which
are typically 6' toLgo warmer than the surrounding area. Abo.ut 30% ot
the air quality problems in cities are attributed to "heat island"
conditions, so by negating the effects of "heat islands," trees also reduce
air pollution.
' A tree can be a natural air conditioner. The evaporation from a single
large tree can produce the cooling effect of ten room-size air
conditioners operating 24 hours per day.
' The shade of properly placed trees can save homeowners up to 58% on
daytime air conditioning costs, and mobile home owners up to 65%.lt
applied nationwide, planting trees by currently unshaded buildings could
reduce our nation's consumption of oil by 500,000 barrels per day.
' The maximum potential annual savings from energy-conserving
landscapes around a typical home ranged from a low of 13%in Madison
to a high of 38% in Miami. Projections suggest that 100 million additional
mature trees in U.S. cities (3 trees for every unshaded single family home)
could save over $2 billion in energy costs per year.
' According to a U.S. Forest Service estimate, wellpositioned trees around a
conventional house can produce an annual savings of 20%to 25%for
energy use, as compared to a house in a wideopen area (USFS
meteorologist Cordon Heisler).
'laq745
Trees lncrease Traffic Safety
' Trees can enhance the effect of traffic-calming measures, such as
narrower streets, extended curbs, and roundabouts. Tall trees make
streets "feel" narrower, and closely spaced trees give the perception of
speed (they go by very quickly), resulting in slower driving speeds. A
street without trees may be perceived as wide and free of hazards,
thereby increasing speeds. lncreased speed leads to more accidents.
' Trees can serve as a buffer between moving vehicles and pedestrians.
' Street trees forewarn drivers of upcoming curves. Drivers who see tree
trunks curving ahead will slow down before actually seeing the road
curye, and will approach the curve more cautiously.
Trees lmprove Economic Sustainability
' A community's urban forest is an expression of its pride and spirit. A
healthy urban forest gives visitors a positive first impression of the
community.
' Consumer surveys have found that people prefer commercial
streetscapes with trees. Compared to no-tree business districts, well-
landscaped districts have significantly higher priced goods and increased
patronage.
' Trees enhance a community's economic stability by attracting businesses
and tourists.
' People linger and shop longer along treelined streets.
' Apartments and offices in wooded areas rent more quickly and have
higher occupancy rates than similar facilities in areas without trees.
' Businesses that lease office space in developments with trees find their
workers are more productive and absenteeism is reduced.
' A survey found that people were willing to pay an average of $1.60 more
to use parks with trees, as compared to parks without trees. People place
a high value on trees in spaces used for recreation and relaxation.
Trees lncrease Real Estate Values
' Research on the aesthetic quality of residential streets has shown that
trees are the single strongest positive influence on scenic quality. Well-
rnaintained trees increase the "curb appeal" of properties.
' A study of the efflect trees have on residential property values found that
each large front-yard tree raised the sale price by L%.This increase in
property value resulted in a significant increase in the city's property tax
revenues.
laq
746
' Various studies have reported that trees can increase property values
from 5%tor'%, as compared to properties without trees (depending on
species, maturity, quantity and location).' A L976 study that evaluated the effects of several different variables on
homes in Manchester, Connecticut found that street trees added about
$2686 or 6% to the sale price of a home.' A more recent study indicated that trees added $9,500, or more than 18
percent, to the average sale price of a residence in a suburb of Rochester,
New York.
Trees Provide Sociological Benefits
' Two University of lllinois researchers (Kuo and Sullivan) studied the effect
of trees and greenery on the daily lives of residents of chicago's
Robert Taylor Housing Project (the largest public housing development in
the world). They found that:o Residents living in "greener" surroundings reported lower levels of
fear, fewer incivilities, and less aggressive and violent behavior.o Residents who lived in apartments with nearby trees had
significantly better relations with and stronger ties to their
neighbors.o Levels of aggression and violence were systematically lower for
individuals living in green surroundings than for individuals living
in barren surroundings.o The greener a building's surroundings were, the fewer crimes were
reported. This held true for both property crimes and violent
crimes.o Vegetation may deter crime in poor urban neighborhoods by
increasing residents' use of outside spaces, thereby increasing
informal surveillance, and by mitigating residents' mental fatigue,
thereby reducing the potential for violence.o The presence of trees and greenery can potentially reduce social
service budgets, decrease police calls for domestic violence,
strengthen urban communities, and decrease the incidence of child
abuse.
Chicago officials heard this message, and the city government spent $LO
million to
plant 20,000 trees-a decision influenced by researchers' findings,
according to the
Chicago Tribune.
' Studies have shown that hospital patients who can see trees through their
windows recover much faster and with fewer complications than similar
u
",{r,,
747
patients without such views.
' Psychiatric patients are more sociable and less stressed when trees and
greenery are visible and nearby.
' A Texas A&M study indicates that trees help create feelings of relaxation
and well being.
' A U.S. Department of Energy study reports that trees reduce noise
pollution by acting as buffers and absorbing 50% of urban noise.
pfal
748
EACT SHEBT: Building community
resilience by strengthening America's natural
resources and supporting green
infrastructure
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
October 8,2014
Contact: nress@ceq.eop.gov
FACT SHEET: Building community resilience by strengthening America's natural
resources and supporting green infrastructure
President Obama has made it clear that we have a moral obligation to our children and future
generations to leave behind a planet that is not polluted and damaged. That is why, as part of his
effort to combat climate change, the President launched a Climate Action Plan last year to cut
carbon pollution, prepare communities for the impacts of climate change, and lead international
efforts to address this global challenge.
The Climate Action Plan recognizes that even as we act to curb the carbon pollution that is
driving climate change, we must also improve our ability to prepare for the climate impacts we
are already seeing across the country. States, cities, and communities depend on America's
bountiful natural resources, and climate change is putting many of these vital resources at risk.
By investing in smart strategies for conserving and restoring our lands and waters, we can help
make communities more resilient to climate impacts while slowing the harmful effects of carbon
pollution. Similarly, investments in green infrastructure can help communities better prepare for
the impacts of climate change while also improving water quality and community health.
That's why today, the Administration is announcing new executive actions and a series of private
and public sector commitments that will improve the management of our natural resources in the
context of a changing climate and support investment in green infrastructure.
Enhancing the resilience of America's natural resources and the communities that depend
on them
Todiy, as called for in the President's Climate Action Plan, the Administration is announcing
a Climate and Natural Resources Priority Agenda that represents a first of its kind,
comprehensive commitment across the Federal Government to support resilience of our natural
resources. It identifies a suite of actions the Federal Government will take to enhance the
resilience of America's natural resources to the impacts of climate change and promote their
ability to absorb carbon dioxide. The agenda, which was called for in the President's Executive
Order on Climate Preparedness, was developed jointly by Federal agencies and is informed
by the President's State. Local. and Tribal Leaders Task Force on Clirnate Preparedness and
Resilience and other stakeholder engagement.
"lal749
The actions outlined in the agenda focus on protecting important landscapes and developing new
science, planning and tools to foster climate-resilient lands and waters; enhancing U.S. carbon
sinks such as forests, grasslands, wetlands and coastal areas; promoting innovative 21st century
infrastructure that integrates natural systems into community development, including green
storm water infrastructure; and modernizing Federal programs, investments, and services to build
resilience and enhance carbon storage. For a full list ofthe actions Federal agencies will take,
including timelines, click here.
To complement the agenda, the Administration is announcing new executive actions and a series
of private, public, and nonprofit sector commitments that support resilient natural resources and
the communities that depend on them.
New executive actions to support resilient natural systems:
A New Model for Climate Coastal Vulnerability Assessments: The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) is releasing the results of its screening-level vulnerability assessments for
coastal projects, which find that roughly one third of USACE coastal projects are vulnerable to
climate change. These assessments can be used as a model for other agencies when screening
vulnerability.
Rapid Assessment Tools for Carbon Sequestration Potentials: USACE is announcing the first
rapid, quantitative estimates of existing carbon sequestration and sequestration potentials on the
more than 20 million acres of land and water it manages. These areas include reservoirs with
potential to sequester large amounts of carbon per unit area.
Tall Wood Competition: In an effort to support sustainable forestry, reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, and increase opportunities for rural America, the Department of Agriculture will
launch the U.S. Tall Wood Building Competition to design and demonstrate high-rise building
construction using innovative wood products. Selected teams of architects, engineers, and
developers will receive funding to support incremental costs of pioneering wood construction
techniques to address engineering and code variance needs.
$23.8 Million in projects to build resilient coastal communities: Through its Sea Grant
Program. NOAA will provide $15.9 million to support over 300 projects around the nation that
help build resilient coastal communities and economies. Through university, state and other
partnerships, Sea Grant will supplement the Federal funding with an additional $7.9 million in
non-federal matching funds, bringing the total investment to more than $23.8 million.
Coastal Salt Marsh Restoration: Yesterday in Cape May, New Jersey, Secretary of the Interior
Sally Jewell announced a $1.9 million agreement between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
the American Littoral Society to restore 1.5 miles of shoreline at Reed Beach, part of a $15
nlillion investment to restore coastal salt marshes in New Jersey.In addition to flood control
benefits, salt marshes are vital wildlife habitat serving as a nursery for 75 percent of
commercially harvested fi sh.
Private and public commitments to support resilient natural systems:
tlfz1
750
Targeting blue carbon: To better understand how oceans and coastal ecosystems store and
sequester carbon - so-called "blue carbon," - Restore America's Estuaries is launching a new
assessment of coastal blue carbon opportunities in Tampa Bay, Florida. The study will be funded
by the Tampa Bay Environmental Restoration Fund, with additional support from NOAA and
DOI.
Restoring Galveston Bay estuary: The Galveston Bay Foundation, Restore America's Estuaries,
and Accenture are initiating a new partnership to advance estuary restoration in Galveston Bay
and reduce greenhouse gases. The project will result in more than 30 acres of salt marsh
restoration, a new private investment framework to support Galveston Bay restoration and
conservation, advance climate adaptation strategies, and support green jobs and skills training.
Creating a mapping tool for forest carbon: To maximizethe carbon impact of forest conservation
in local communities, the Trust for Public Land will develop a new mapping tool on the Esri
platform to help local governments,land trusts, and other community-based users identify forest
properties with high carbon stocks and assess the strategic value of these properties for climate
resilience, such as protecting public drinking water supplies.
Investing in wood products: The Binational Softwood Lumber Council and the Softwood
Lumber Board projects that the softwood lumber industry will invest $20 million over the next
two years in programs that utilize wood as a lower carbon-footprint building material. To give a
sense of what that can mean for carbon storage, this year, the softwood lumber industry invested
nearly $10 million to fund programs that support the shift from carbon-intensive building
products like steel and concrete to wood products, resulting in an estimated 131,000 metric tons
of additional stored carbon and 280000 metric tons of avoided carbon emissions according to
lifecycle analysis by the wood products industry.
Engaging family forest owners: The American Forest Foundation (AFF) is announcing a $10
million, flve year campaign funded by a diverse public private partnership including individual
donors, private foundations, and Federal and state government to reach and engage a quarter of a
million of America's family and individual forest owners. Through this effort,AFF will train and
support family and individual landowners in promoting climate friendly stewardship of their
forests, many of which are located in the highest priority carbon landscapes in the country.
Investing in natural infrastructure: Through its Resilient Landscapes Initiative, the Open Space
Institute (OSI) will invest $10.7 million and leverage as much as $53.5 million over the next 2.5
years to conserve land through purchase and easements in as many as 14 eastern states, from
Maine to Alabama. Applying science developed by the Nature Conseryancy, OSI will identify for
its investments lands that are likely to facilitate wildlife adaptation to climate change, and reduce
the potential risk of flooding and drought.
Informing Conservation Planning: The Open Space Institute is announcing $95,000 in grants to
four northeastern organizations to integrate climate science into conseryation planning.
Additionally, in partnership with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Northeast Landscape
Conservation Cooperative, OSI will invest $100,000 in developing and disseminating climate
science through a series of guidance documents and tools for local officials.
el"')
751
Engagins communities to qrow urban forests: To improve the health and resilience of
urban communities through service, the Alliance for Community Tlees is committing to
engage over 26p00 volunteers to plant more than 50,000 trees in the month of October for
National NeighborWoods Month.In addition,American Forests will assist six cities -
Austin, Chicago, Hartford, Miami, Oakland and Washington D.C. - to assess the impact of
climate and other factors on each city's urban forest, educate the public on the role of
urban forests in improving community resilience, and strategically plant trees to mediate
the heat-island effect and sequester carbon.
Restoring damaged forest areas: Arbor Day Foundation will plant an additional 20 million trees
to improve the health and resilience of public forest lands by July 1,2019.The Foundation
focuses on restoring trees and enhancing climate resilience in areas of national and state forests
damaged by insects, disease, and wildfires.
Delivering trees to reduce energy use: Through its Energy.Saving Thees program, by July
1,20L5,Arbor Day Foundation will deliver more than 140,000 trees to utility customers.
According to the program, these trees will reduce customers'summer air-conditioning
energy consumption by as much as20Vo as the trees mature.By 2025rthese trees will
reduce energy consumption by as much as264 million kilowatt-hours and accomplish as
much as 391000 metric tons of carbon dioxide sequestration and avoided emissions.
Launching an Urban Conservation Initiative: The Nature Conservancy and the Center for
Whole Communities are launching a partnership to build a network of 13 cities to help
address the impacts of climate change and improve environmental health in urban areas
through focusing technical assistance on the use of natural infrastructure. Work will be
focused on coastal and flood resilience, urban forests, water source protection, and
environmental leadership.
Supporting coastal resilience: The Nature Conservancy will expand its coastal resilience tools
and assistance program to Virginia, California, North Carolina, and Baja California in Mexico to
help planners, businesses, and officials make decisions that utilize natural systems as adaptation
solutions to improve climate resilience.
Expandine a Coastal Resilience App: The Nature Conservancp with its partners, is
expanding the deployment of its award-winning app, Coastal Defense, which helps decision
makers identify areas at risk of coastal erosion and inundation from wave action and storm
surge and determine appropriate strategies for utilizing natural and built systems to
improve resilience. New regions to use the app include South Florida, New Jersey, North
Carolina, Virginia, the Caribbean, and sites in the Gulf of Mexico.
Reducing flood risk in Puget Sound: The Nature Conservancy, Puget Sound Partnership, and the
Washington Department of Ecology are accelerating actions within their Floodplains by Design
partnership to restore habitat and reduce flood risk in Puget Sound's major river corridors. As
part of this effort, a new agreement with CH2M Hill, with funding from the Boeing Company,
will measure the benefits of natural infrastructure design.
rI f.n
752
Investing in Climate Adaptation: The Wildlife Conservation Society's Climate Adaptation Fund,
with support from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, is announcing the award of $2.5
million to support 13 on-the-ground adaptation actions specifically designed to increase the
resilience and adaptive capacity of terrestrial, freshwater and coastal ecosystems across the
United States. Non-profit grantees will leverage an additional $2.5 million in private and public
support for science-based projects that anticipate and respond to potential climate change
impacts, while yielding sustainable, long-term conservation outcomes.
Restoring forests in the Lower Mississippi Delta: With support from the Walton Family
Foundation and the McKnight Foundation, the Trust for Public Land will deliver outreach and
technical assistance to private landowners interested in restoring carbon-rich bottomland forest to
flood-prone agricultural lands in the Lower Mississippi Delta. This announcement puts the Trust
on track to meet its target to achieve an additional 3J50 acres of Lower Mississippi private lands
reforestation and permanently conserve 3 200 acres of bottomland forest over the next two years,
leading to more than2.l million tons of CO2 sequestration and storage (the equivalent of taking
442900 cars offthe road for one year).
Advancing green infrastructure to improye community resilience
At a July meeting of the President's State, Local and Tribal Leaders Task Force on Climate
Change Preparedness and Resilience, the Administration announced the Green Infrastructure
Collaborative, in which seven Federal agencies committed to expanding the use of green
infrastructure techniques such as rain gardens, permeable pavements, rain water harvesting, land
conservation and wetland protection to improve natural management of stormwater. The
Administration reaffirmed its commitment to implement this initiative, along with additional
stormwater management assistance, in the Climate Natural Resources Priority Agenda released
today.
Additionally, todayr 26 public and private sector organizations announced they are joining
the Administration's Green Infrastructure Collaborative. Through activities including
research, outreach, information.sharing, tool development, and technical assistance, the
new members are committing to work towards improving stormwater management and
expanding the use of green infrastructure techniques in communities across the country.
These new members of the Collaborative represent the private, public, and nonprofit
sectors, ranging from environmental organizations to academic institutions and
professional associations to utilities and municipalities.
Through the Collaborative, all member organizations have pledged to work together to
highlight the broad community benefits of green infrastructure including improving air
quality, reducing energy use, mitigating climate change, and increasing resilience to climate
change impacts. The organizations joining the Green Infrastructure Collaborative today
are:
American Rivers
American Society of Civil Engineers
(Sld1
753
Clirnate Change Effects on Cities
City managers are feeling the effects of climate
change now. Fortunately, green infrastructure
can help improve communiff resilienry. De-
pending on where a community is located, cli-
mate change poses different threats to critical
infrastructure, water quality, and human
health:
Flooding: Heavy doumpours have increased in
frequency and intensity in the last 5o years, and
are expected to become more frequent and in-
tense as global ternperatures continue to rise.
Consequently, flood risk is likely to increase
dramatically across the United States. The aver-
age loo-year floodplain is projected to increase
by 45a/o by the year zroo, while annual damages
fiom flooding are predicted to increase by S75o
million. *
Did you know?
Drought: In some areas of the country, de-
creased precipitation associated with climate
change will further stress already fragile local
water supplies, especially in the southwest.
Urban Heat: Climate change will likely lead to
more fiequent, more severe, and longer heat
waves during summer months. The Ciry of Chi
cago, for exampie, expects to see the number of
days over roo"F increase by roughly 3o days per
year under "high'greenhouse gas emissions
scenarios. Under lower emissions scenarios,
Chicago's new average summer heat index is
expected to increase to around 93"F by the end
of the century - similar to current summer con-
ditions in Atlanta, CA. '"
Coastal damage and erosion: As global tem-
penturegcontinlg-tg.,c-lig rb,peale"vel,s_ylJll-!l<e-
ly continue to rise, storm surges will likely be
amplified, and heavystorms will occur with
greater frequenry and intensity. A-ll ofthese
changes are expected to exacerbate shoreline
erosion and damage to coastal infrastructure.
*FEMA. (zo9). The Impact of Climate Change and Popula-
tion Growth on the National Flood Insurance Program
Through aoo. Prepared by AECOM.
**From: Reducing Damagefrom Localized Flooding: A Guiele
for Communities, Federal Emergency Management Agenry,
(zoo5). Report #5rr.
*** Clricogo Climate Change Action Plon - Climate Change
and Chicago: Projections and Potential Impoctq Executwe
Summary (Moy t8, zoo9).
ffi
ffi
:STo of the $t billion in onnualflood damages
in the U.S. can be linked to starmwater.**
754
Manage Localized Flooding
How does it rsork? By reducing stormu?ter runoffand protectilSl floodplains,
green infrastructure can help manag,e both localized and riverine floods.
Plan it. Cornmunities n'tay want to conduct hydrologic and hydraulic (H&li)
modeling to identily a set olgreer.r and gray inti'astructure practices that will
meet desiled flood reduction and *'ater qualiry goals. When preserving open
space througl:out a rvatershed, cornmunities may $.ant to talg.et areas lcith lvell
drained, u.ater-absorbing soils.
Build it. Several cities have launched programs to consene land in or around
the floodplain to n'lanage riverine flooding. Geographic-information-based mod-
els can heip estinrate the flood damaq,e benefits of green infrastructure, compal'e
these benefits to the cost oI'land acquisition, and target investmerrts in consena-
tion tolr'ards the n:ost cost-effective areas. Urban site-scale practices carr also be
sited to eflbctively rnitigate Iocalized flooding.
Buitd Resilience to Drought
How does it work? B). allorvins rainwater to soak into the ground, rain gar-
dens and gleerl streets can help replenish local groundwater reserves. On indi-
vidrral properties, r'ainrvater han'esting techniques such as rain barrels and
cisterns can reduce dernand ftrr potahle water.
PIan it. Beconring a drought resilient communily means m.lking the most of wa-
ter lvhen it is available, *15 well as storing it for later within deep groundrvater
resep?s. Start by prioritizing areas in your community rvhere it nrakes sense to
l:cate infiltration-based fealures. Proper siting rifgreen inftastructure should be
considered to prolect gr'ound rvater supplies. Fol exarnple, avoid in6ltrating large
*** q(antities"of lvater in contamination-hof spotror on-steep slopes:
Build it. Cornmunities may $,ant to consider incentives or iocal requir€mellt$ to
encourage on-site rainn ater harvesting and use. By using rainlvater stored ir"r cis-
terns to irrigalc. landscaping in public parkr, schools or municipal buildings, cit-
ies can reduce or eliminate the need to purchase potable water fi'orn out of town.
Captured rainwater can also be used in the home for llushing.
rlhT
755
Ilratect the coast
How does it work? Coastal plants and reek use rratural pro-
cesses to slou. cloq,n sr:diment anci encourage vegetative
grorvth. Increased vegefatiorl can protect eroding m.rrsh edges
and mitigatc sea level rise. In (olltrast to hard structures such
as bull<heads ald sea ualls, veeetative shorelines provide rnr.rl-
tiple ecosystem benefits snch as improved u'ater qualir),and
aquatic habitat.
Plan it. Sefore moving foru.ald u.ith youl coastal improvernent
project, conduct a site assessment. This process includes deter-
rninirrg the type of shoreline you possess (slope of bark), the
late at t'hich the shoreline is eroding, the forces tl'rat ale erod-
ing the shoreline, ry*pe of substlate, arrd salinily levels.
Build it. Living shor:elines can be a mixture of strrctulal an<l
organic materials, sr.rch as lrative n'etland plants, stone arld
rock slructures, oyster reefs, submerged aquatic r.egeration,
Use less enersy managing water
How does it work? Treating and moving lvater and wastet ater
takes a lot o[energy. B], reducing rainwater flox's into sewer
syste rlrs, r echarging .-rq u i flers .1 nd cons en'ilt g $'a te r, green infra-
stnlcture can significantly reduce municipal eneroy- use.
Plan it. Start by prioritizing n here to place distributed green
infiastlucture plactices in yor.rr communiry* for m.rximum rain-
h?ter storage and in6ltration. Comrnunities rvith eombined
sanitary anci stormwater se\{ers may u ant to r.rse hydrologic
and hy'draulic (H&Hi modeling to idcnti$ ideal colnbinations
of green ancl gray infi'astructure n'ithin a given treati:tent area.
Build it, After projc'cts are in the ground, cities, may rvant to tie
eliergy efficiency savings back to redueed demar:d at local polr-
er plants. EPA re,centll: dev--eloped a tosl eall.ed AVERT
(Avoided Emissions and geneRation Too! to do just this. Using
county-wide datasets, AVER f can help estimate emissions re-
ductions at electric porver plants from energy efficiency ol re-
r: ewable energ:y- upgra des.
t4a1
756
Reduce urban heat island effect
How does it work?'l'recs, gleen rool's, and veg-
etative co!.?r can help reduce the urban heat
island efl-ect b.v shading building surfaces, de-
flecting radiation from the sun, anci relc'asing
moisture into the atrlosphere.
Plan it. Althougl-r space in urb.rn areas is lim-
ited, small green infrastruclule practices can
easily be iutegrated into grassy or barren areas,
vacant lots 01'street rights ofway. Green rools
are an i<leal heat island reduction stlateg).since
the1. provide br:th dii'ect and ambient cooling
effects.
Build it. Make rrees busitess as usual in your
cornmunit,v. Require green i nfrastructure im-
proveruents as part oI'regular street upgrades
to ensure continued investment. klake lvater
quality practices do double dutl by adding
trees in or alound infiltration-based practices
such as roadside pianters to help boost road-
side cooling and shading.
Lon,er building energy use
How does it work? Through shading, wind-
brea k, and evapotrarrspilation, trees, greerr
loofs and vegetative cover can lorver arnbient
air tenperatures in urban areas, Iessenilg the
need to tul'n up the AC in summer rnonihs.
Louisville, Kentucky recently began a
conopy ossessment to determine how the city can
use trees to address urbqn heat, stotmwater man-
agement and other concerns. "Knowing where we
lack canopy, dawn to the street and address level,
will help our eforts exponentially." says Mayor
Greg Fischer. Photo credit: Love Louiwille Trees
PIan it. Communities may finci it useful to esti-
nrate cooling arld energy ef{iciency bene6ts
plovided by tlees and green roofs. Using USFS's
publicly ar.ailable i:illee suite, the Mid-America
Regional Council (MARC) recentll, produced a
study that quanlifies nrultiple beuefits from
urban trees in the Kansas City ar-ea. By mapping
existing canolry concentrations, MARC u,as
able to estimate the monetary r.alue ol'buiiding
energ), efficiel:cy gains fi'om tree canopy in the
reginn.
r'" .::i*.
,rlrl757
!fiffilfl far URBAN HORTTC ULTURE
University of Washington, College of Forest Resources HUMAN DIMENSTONS Of r}lr UrSeN:rr,otrsr
Positive Effects on Consumer Behavior!
Ti'ees in Business Districts:
District 1 - No trees or accessory vegetation
Diitrict 3 . Wit,r trees and aecessory yegetation
Three Shopping Districts
Consumer Cues and Messages?
Trees are good for business! A recent study confirms
that consumers respond positively to shopping environ-
rnents having a healthy urban forest. Across our nation,
many revitalizing business districts are working hard to
create vibrant, vital consumer environments, Why should
trees be a part of an action plan? Healthy and well-
maintained trees send positive messages about the appeal
of a district, the quality of products there and what
customer service a shopper can expect. They are an
important component of any program to attract shoppers
and visitors. Revitalizing districts must address urgent
needs of security, sanitation, parking and marketing.
Attention to trees is a necessary part of any improve-
ments program. And having the positive environment
created by trees may actually ease some of the other
issues. American Forests, a national tree non-profit,
suggests a goal of 15 percent tree canopy cover in busi-
ness districts; most retail environmertrin-the-U5; trar,ne-S
percent or less. Research results suggest that investing in
trees is good for the business bottom line!
Research Project
The national study, conducted by the University of Washingtofl, used
survey questionnaires to investigate public perceptions about the
role of trees in revitalizing business districts, Surveys were sent to
selected districts in cities of the Pacific Northwest,Austin, Los
Angetes, Chicago, Pittsburgh and Washington D.C. Business owners
and managers were invited to participate, and their responses were
compared to survey responses from nearby residents, their potential
patrons and shoppers,
Distriet t .'Uyith treee, ne acce3sor, .vegetation
7olffi
758
Our surroundings, both outdoor and indoo4 affect the course of our daily lives. The physical
features of a setting set up how we move and get around in any space. ln addition, elements of an
environment sends subtle cues that influence our attitudes and behavior within a place. Ttris study
evaluated how the character of a place influences how shoppers respond to a business district.
People were asked a series of questions about their likes/dislikes and behavior within three hypo-
thetical business districts (front page). Betow are highlights of the research resutts.
Place Perceptions
Four categories of perceptions emerged from survey
participants' ratings of the three business districts:
Amenity and Comfort
lnteraction with Merchants
Quality of Products
Maintenance and Upkeep
Consumers' ratings on each of the categories was
significantly higher for districts that had street trees and
other landscape improvements! For instance,Amenity
and Comfort ratings were about 80% higher for a tree
lined sidewalk compared to a non-shaded street. Also,
Quality of Products ratings were 307o higher in districts
having trees over those with barren sidewalks. lnterac-
tion with Merchants items included customer service
issues; ratings were about 15% higher for districts with
trees.
Patronage Behavior
Actions follow our impressions of a place. Respondents
were asked to give opinions of their behavior within the
three shopping districts, including travel time, travel
distance, duration of a visit, frequency of visits
and willingness-to-pay for parking. Again, trees
make a difference! Considering ALL behaviors, higher
measures were reported in the districts having trees.
For instance, respondents claimed they would be willing
to pay more for parking in a well landscaped business
district, This suggests greater revenues from shaded
parking would offset the costs of parking space loss, a
frequent objection to trees by merchants.
Pricing Patterns
Do trees influence how much people are willing to pay
for goods? Contingent valuation methods were used to
assess how amenity values relate to customers'price
valuations. Survey respondents were asked to specify a
price for each of 15 items in a "basket of goods" in the
business districts. Three categories of goods -
convenience, shopping, specialty - were included.
The survey participants consistently priced goods
significantly higher in landscaped districts! Prices were,
on average, about 11% higher for products in the
landscaped compared to the no-tree district. This was
true of low-price, impulse-buy convenience goods (e,g.
lunch sandwich, flower bouquet), as well as bigger ticket,
comparison-shopped items (e.g. sports shoes, new
glasses). Given the low profit margins of most retail
businesses, trees appear to provide a significant "amenity
margin."
Acknowledgements:
RESEARCH FUNDING: National Urban and Community ForestryAdvisory Council, Horticultural Research
lnstitute and the USDA Forest Service
PRorEcr D|RECToR: Kathy L.Woll Ph.D., kwolf@u,washington.edu
For more information. contact.,.
Center for Urban Horticutture, University of Washington, Box 354115, Seattte,WA 98'lg5-4115
Phone: (206) 616-5758; Fax: (206) 685.2692
KL WOLF - NOVEMBER 1998 ,'lat
759
GTAG PRESENTATION - Sustainability Committee - May 21,2013
NATURAL CAPITAL
GTAG - Who we are; our mission; examples of our advocacy work
NATURAL CAPITAL
We have been working for a very long time on how to engage MB residents and elected
ofiicials in supporting our Urban Forest, most specifically, street trees.
While we have had some successes - afterall, every tree counts -- we are troubled that
leaders and policymakers who we can consider informed, are still referring to trees only
in aesthetics terms - despite all our efforts to educate about the many environmental,
social and economic benefits of trees. This combined with extraordinarily challenging
times that require innovative, holistic approaches to mitigating climate change and rising
sea levels, led me to today's presentation.
I decided it is no longer effective merely to list all the many benefits of trees, such as
moderating temperatures
providing shade
improving air quality by absorbing carbon dioxide
removing dust and other particles
conserving water
harboring wildlife
increasing the quality of life for residents
increasing property values
lowering energy consumption and costs
providing safety benefits for drivers
decreasing urban noise
protecting us from UVB rays and skin cancer
and helping mitigate global warming and flooding
The value of nature, including our urban forest, is astonishing. While 20th century
conservation was all about protecting nature FROM people, now there are are folks in
the environmental movement that would like the future to be about protecting nature
FOR people.
The hottest sustainability topic of 2013 is NATUML CAPITAL - quantifying the values
of nature, in order to motivate greater and more cost effective investments; and how
businesses, governments and financial institutions account for nature as a material
asset. As an example, The Natural Capital Project, aims to integrate the values of
nature into all major decisions affecting the environment and human well being. lt
partners with countries and NGOs, as well as local governments such as Santa Cruz
and Monterey counties, on climate change and beach erosion.
,, ln
760
Despite their vital importance, ecosystem services, in this case, those provided by the
urban forest -- are generally taken for granted, scarcely monitored and, in many cases,
are undergoing degradation and depletion. I can give you several examples, close to
home.
1)lt is very difficult to monitor our state of the urban forest without a tree inventory, that
serves as a baseline. After advocating for such an inventory for 13 years, we are
inching closer. But we will need a commitment of funds that do not presently exist to
do it right. Other cities across the country have had such an inventory for years.
2) The Collins Canal, where over 400 protected mangrove trees were destroyed along
with all the upland vegetation along the canal;. You might be interested to know that
mangrove trees are "carbon sinks" and actually are far more effective at absorbing
co2 than rain forests.
3) 30 mature live oaks were destroyed south of fifth street. Although the city replaced
them with a similar number of trees, it will take decades for them to provide the same
benefits as the original trees. Both cases of environmental destruction were
associated with public works projects that involved bike path installations. You may
be increasing bicycling and reducing emissions, but at the same time destroying the
very trees that were providing carbon sequestration. At what cost? lt is
counterproductive because the projects are not evaluated holistically.
And what will happen to the trees that were only planted a few years ago in the Lincoln
Lane parking lots when the city decides to sell or lease the lots for development? More
tree destruction and replacement with immature trees.
Back to NATURAL CAPITAL and how it applies to green infrastructure. Basically, the
city has never put a priority on green infrastructure; and it still does not do so. Just look
at the sections of the Sustainability Plan and you will see that it does not get the priority
it deserves. lt is one of the few sections that has little, to no description. lt is my hope
that by assessing in monetary value, the specific economic benefits of trees in cities,
green infrastructure will become an important asset that is worthy of investment in MB.
Scientists have measured the treemendous returns that trees provide for people in
cities. Adequate resources for both planning and management of urban green is
necessary if our city wants to optimize the values and benefits of the urban forest.
Here are some facts that I believe you will find enlightening:
1. a 25 ft. tree reduces annual heating and cooling costs of a typical residence by
8 - 12%. Also, buildings and paving in city center (i.e. convention center p lots)
create a heat island effect. A mature tree canopy reduces air temperatures by
5 to 10 degrees, influencing the internaltemps of nearby buildings.
2. Atypicd person consumes about 386 lbs of oxygen per year. A healthy tree, say
*b1
761
a 32 ft. tall tree, can produce about 260 lb. of oxygen annually; two trees supply
the oxygen needs of a person each year. A mature tree absorbs from 120-240lbs. of
small particles and air pollution. For example, in Sacramento, this represents a
value of $28.7 mil
3. The canopy of a street tree absorbs rain, reducing the amount of water that will fall
on pavement and then must be removed by a storm water drainage system. ln one
study, 32 feet tall street trees intercepted rainfall, reducing storm water runoff by 327
gallons. Trees must be an important component of any storm water master plan.
4. lna surveyof one southern community,T4o/o of the public preferred to patronize
commercial establishments whose structures and parking lots are beautified with
trees, landscaping. Shoppers will spend 9.12o/o more if large trees are on the site. Yet
we have developers who continue to get approval for zero lot
line setbacks; vifiually no green infrastructure and still insist that trees interfere with
store signage.
5. Weyerhauser surveyed real estate appraisers and 86% of them agreed that
landscaping added to the dollar value of commercial real estate. 92o/o also agreed that
landscaping enhances the sales appeal of commercial real estate. Why is the city
reluctant to impose a percentage of green infrastructure in every commercial project?
It would benefit the residents, the community and the businesses!
6. Severalstudies have analyzed the effects of trees on actual sales prices of
residential properties. Homes with equivalent fetures; in one area a 6% increase in
value was found to be associated with the presence of trees. Another study showed
that tree size affected values of more costly homes. 5-20% increae in residential
value , according to close proximity to natural open space. The presence of larger
trees add 3-15o/o to home values.
7. Regarding Unimproved property value, there was a 30% difference in appraised
value based on the amount and variation of tree cover.
Mark Williams has calculated the dollar benefits of a city tree so that you can relate this
to MiamiBeach.
Now that we understand that green infrastructure is a valued material asset, how do we
make sure that we make the right decisions to invest in its planning, preservation and
and maintenance.
1. Commitment to increase shade canopy to 30% - we do not have an action plan to
get there. why? because the reforestation plan is only one piece of the puzzle.
The majority of the planning of our canopy is controlled through Planning ClP, Public
Works. Greenspace is brought it at the tail end of the process...when it is time to
plant.
2Tt':
762
2. Tree Ordinance - show 2001 article saying it was forthcoming. MARK GIVES
UPDATE
3. Landscape Ordinance - has not yet been initiated
Adopt new policies that mandate o/o?ea of green infrastructure in all projects,
residential, commercial or public. Any new developments must be designed with
building setbacks that provide space for green infrastructure. Examples of two new
projects approved with no space
for greenspace: 17th st./west hotel and 17th street and michigan.
Stop the ongoing destruction of mature trees before it happens- i.e. Lincoln Lane p
lots; each developer gets approvals to remove mature trees rather than planning the
project design around them
5. Stop the planting of wrong tree in wrong location - i.e. GO bond projects; wrong soil
conditions; inferior stock. Example of Collins Canal landscape plan; originally wrong
species.
6. Stop the wideninq of streets which eliminates the space for large street trees - GO
Bond developments. !n other words, designs, building setbacks must incorporate
space for green infrastructure. Adopt new planning policies regarding mandating a
o/o"ea of green in all private
7. Centralize the planning, maintenance functions
The problem in our city is there is no overarching policy and too many
different departments and boards are involved in planning our greenspace.
ln fact, the only department that is not significantly involved in the planning
process is the Greenspace Management Division. GTAG recommended adding
a landscape architect position to all land use boards but it was rejected.
So you have a board like HPB, that weighs in on green infrastructure, as it
wrongfully did on the Collins Canal, that doesn't
even have a professional sitting on the board.
B. lt is long past due to approach things holistically - green infrastructure,
below ground improvements, above ground construction, etc.; now more than
ever green infrastructure should be used to complement traditional infrastructure
for flood mitigation.
9. Tree inventory - organizing to do it but the city needs to allocate additionalfunding
to make it possible. there is a shortfall of $30,000. We are way behind the 8 ball.
There is no efficient way to plan green infrastructure if there is no base line inventory
from which to work. Mark report.
11. Collins Canal - need high level staff at city and county levels to work out solutions;
){/a1
763
need politicalwill. Right now everything is at a low level bureaucratic level.
12. Convention center - There is a need for substantial green space (different from
Public Space) with native shade trees, not palm trees laced together for shade; we
have an opportunity to create a world class park using Singapore and other
progressive cities as models.
Just as we evaluate other developer plans, we will be doing the same with the CC.
We have considerable concerns with the berm proposed by South Beach ACE.
We think it will be high maintenance; it will be inaccessible to segments of the
population
(i.e. elderly, disabled). Our other concern is that they said there were 28 acres of
green space. This isn't really the case..as there are a lot of plazas, hardscapes.
Also, they said this acreage was put aside for "future flexibility'' if the city wants to
develop something else in the future. This is like saying we're giving you Central
Park, but only temporarily, because it will be up for grabs for future development.
13. We have entire sections of the city with little to no trees/vegetation because of
commercial projects that do not incorporate green space. i.e. success of Palau
negotiations
14. RCAP:
- lncorporate naturalcapital in climate adaptation planning (ltem NS-4 on RCAP).
Who is responsible for this?
- Need CMB climate adaptation task force consisting of members of the scientific
community (academicians and NGOs)
- Need multi disciplinary approach to the Regional Climate Action Plan.
ln reviewing the Natural Systems actions, it is not clear to me who is responsible
for imptementing these actions. At what stage, will there be a meeting of the various
departments, including Greenspace, to involve them and take advantage of their
expertise? For example, who is factoring in the impact of salt water intrusion on
our urban forest and our ability to maintain and restore our tree canopy?
The city must take back the swales (ROW). This is not private property. The only
way we will be able to make an action plan to increase the canopy is have the
public space available for planting trees. This is become a highly political issue.
Our elected officials dont want to tell people that they must remove their illegal
statuary, structures, hedges and inappropriate trees even though this is land
belongs to the public. i.e. Coral Gables has a ROW committee consisting of
members of various depts. that evaluate permit applications. lf approval is not
given, the owner must remove, at their expense, the illegal item.
. Allocate funds for educating the public about Florida-Friendly Landscapes that use
less water, create wildlife habitats, protects watenruays, soil and conserve energy.
15.
16.
1(at
764
All of these actions require POLICY CHANGES, ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES and
additional RESOURCES. Untilgreen infrastructure is approached as a valuable asset,
worthy of investment, it will continue to be an afterthought in the planning of our city.
We have an opportunity to change this.
lf I can leave you with a simple message....we must recognize the valuable asset we
have and we must organize and institute new policies to make sure green infrastructure
plays a critical in planning for a sustainable future. There is a saying "the best time to
plant a tree was 20 years ago; the second best time is now."
I hope you will support our efforts to finally make green infrastructure a priority.
Thank you.
,rh
765
Kane. Dessiree
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
sheryl gold [shergoldcom @gmail.com]
Wednesday, June 03, 2015 2:45 PM
Kane, Dessiree
That Tree on the Corner May Be Worth More Than Your House - Next City
That Tree on the Corner May Be Worth More Than Your House
Pittsburgh | 02/ l8/2A13 4:52pm I p
Nate Seltenrich lNext Citv
Pittsburgh estimates its hee cover provides $2.4 million a year in benefits. Credit: Flickr user Dougtone
In 2005, Pittsburgh had 31,000 trees on 900 miles of streets. Which may seem like a decent amount, until you
realize the ideal number of street trees for a city that size is 60,000.
This was a problem - one of many faced by the cash-shapped city - and so Pittsburgh decided to consider its
trees like it would any other asset: By measuring their benefits in terms of cold, hard cash.
At a time when cities across the nation are slashing street tree funding in order to balance shained budgets,
Pittsburgh's tum to monetizing the urban forest has become increasingly relevant. Trees in an urban setting,
whether in sidewalks, medians, yards or parks, have benefits beyond grving shade.
And these benefits translate into dollars and cents: Trees filter air and water, sequester carbon, offer habitat and
shade, reduce the urban heat-island effect, boost property values, buffer storms, and even provide a source of
energy through waste wood and mulch, among other services.
To calculate the value of Pittsburgh's street trees, a non-profit called Friends of the Pittsburgh Urban Forest
(now Tree Pittsbureh) turned to a modeling program called i-Tree, released in 2006 by the U.S. Forest Service
in partnership with Davey Tree company. Now in its fifth iteration, the free program allows cities and other
users to describe the benefits of trees in language clear enough for those who can't tell an ash from an aspen.
Recently, the Forest Service released a mobile version of the program.
After inputting raw data from the inventory in i-Tree, Tree Pittsburgh found that the city's street trees - strictly
those planted in sidewalks and medians - provided $2.4 million worth of environmental and aesthetic value
every year. (A 2011 analysis of Pittsburgh's total tree cover, which involved sampling more than 200 small
plots throughout the city, showed a value of between $10 and $13 million in annual benefits based on the entire
urban forest's contributions to aesthetics, energy use and air quality.) The values take into account energy
savings from shade, impact on the city's air and water, and the boost in property values associated with leaff
neighbors.
Given the city's annual expenditures of $850,000 on street tree planting and maintenance, Tree Pittsburgh
concluded that the city received $3 in benefits for every dollar it invested in street trees. That math helped
4,,
766
convince the city that upfront investment in trees was worthwhile, and so last suillmer Pittsburgh released a
detailed rnaster plan for maintaining and expanding its urban forest over the next two decades.
"The data has been extremely valuable," said Matthew Erb, Tree Pittsburgh's director of urban forestry. "The
data is really the backbone of our master plan. Without that data, it would be kind of generic recommendations
that you could apply to any city's master plan."
I-Tree is based on a model first developed by Forest Service researcher Dave Nowak in the late 1990s, derived
from research he began in the late '80s. Nowak's goal from the beginning, first as a Ph.D. student at UC
Berkeley studying Oakland's urban forest, and later as a consultant for cities including Chicago and New York,
was to provide a statistical basis for understanding the function of trees within a given city. His goal was not to
protect urban forests by assigning them a dollar value per se, but rather to allow planners to see how changes to
the urban forest can affect citywide environmental quality.
"'W'e're tryrng to help managers or politicians or mayors make informed decisions - and not just pull a number
out of a hat - and develop the best design so you get the best return," Nowak said.
I-Tree has grown considerably more complex since its launch, yet the underllng concept remains the same:
You tell us about your trees, and we'll use various multipliers to quantiff what they do for you.
For example, the program uses an estimated social cost per ton of carbon emitted in the U.S. to assign a value to
the carbon sequestration performed by urban forests. And it uses a GlS-based tool from the Environmental
Protection Agency called BenMAP to calculate the economic benefits of reductions in air pollution.
For i-Tree version six, due out in mid-2014, Nowak hopes to add new modules that tabulate benefits related to
air temperature, ultraviolet radiation and habitat for select bird species. Also contributing to these improvements
are another five or six Forest Service researchers and six Davey Tree employees, who focus on the program's
front end. The two entities - one private, one public - have partnered on the project for more than a decade.
Their work is catching on. I-Tree software has been downloaded more than 10,000 times by users in the U,S.,
according to Scott Maco, Davey's managil of ecosystem services. This includes city officials in places like
New York, Milwaukee, and Chattanooga. The program also has a market abroad.
o'That international component is growing at quite a rapid clip," Maco said, pointing to clients in Canada,
Australia, Brazll and Chile. Nowak is planning to develop new platforms for India and China.
Back in Pittsburgh, proving the case for investments in urban forestry has even led to a slight uptick in funding,
Erb said, at a time when many cities are seeing quite the opposite.
Tags: environment, pittsburgh, epa, green infrastrucfure, urban forest, trees, itree, davey tree, dave nowak
Tweet Share on instapaperRead Later Share on emailEmail
What do you think? Join the conversation.
DISQUS seems to be taking longer than usual. Reload?
Please enable JavaScript to view the <a hreF"http://disqus.com/?ret-noscript")comments powered by
Disqus.</a>
4r<
767
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
768