Seeing the Urban Forest Through the Trees

October 20, 2022, Feature, by Paul Stewart and LaDonna Baertlein

nov 22 feature seeing the urban forest through the trees 410

For an enhanced digital experience, read this story in the ezine.

Five best practices for a thriving, equity-driven urban tree canopy

The experience a person has walking down a street in any given city on a hot summer day can tell you a lot about the status of its urban tree canopy.

In many communities, there are neighborhoods where the sun beats down onto a sizzling pavement unadorned by any meaningful foliage, creating waves of heat that assail pedestrians from above and below. In other neighborhoods, large, well-groomed historic trees offer an idyllic experience that lends character and invites people to linger. The difference in the pedestrian experience can change in a short city block — sometimes even property to property.

As more cities recognize the impacts of the collective community and urban forest on everything from public health and equity to climate resilience, municipalities nationwide are committing to increasing their urban tree canopies. However, as many communities can tell you, it is one thing to set a goal; it is quite another to put the proper structure in place to see those goals through.

Recognizing the growing imperative to better understand and support a healthy, equitable canopy for the community, the city and county of Denver engaged nationally-recognized landscape architecture, urban planning and design firms Dig Studio and Design Workshop, along with master’s program students from the University of Colorado, to conduct research into best practices for enhancing equitable and sustainable outcomes in urban forestry.

The student research had two primary goals: to learn promising practices being used in other cities to support more equitable urban forestry programs, and to learn how inter-agency and external collaboration might strengthen and clarify roles and responsibilities for urban forestry programs. Fifty-three stakeholders were interviewed from 15 cities and national organizations as part of this initial effort.

From there, the group conducted interdepartmental interviews to identify opportunities and challenges, diving deeper into cities that the student research revealed closely aligned with the challenges Denver faces. This culminated in four city representatives from Portland, Oregon; Boise, Idaho; Cincinnati; and Pittsburgh being invited as guests to share forestry best practices at a spring 2022 workshop with City of Denver department leaders, nonprofits, city council members and community stakeholders.

The results of this effort are now available online and have applicability in communities big and small across the country.

Among the most vital takeaways are five key steps cities can take to increase collaboration and accountability, secure appropriate funding and partnerships, and ultimately build the framework for a more equitable canopy that benefits all residents.

Increase Inter-agency Coordination

Many cities interviewed identified challenges with inter-agency alignment of guidelines and standards between forestry, public works, stormwater and utilities. The most common conflict zone was consistently the right-of-way. Where there is limited area from curb to building face, competition for space impedes the ability to support tree infrastructure with ideal soil volumes.

Making things even more challenging, many cities do not have rules and regulations for the right-of-way that include a green infrastructure zone, creating a mismatch between the rules and regulations of public works and wastewater agencies.

So, how can cities better coordinate and align priorities between their agencies? One exciting example of a partnership to increase urban tree canopy in a long-term, sustainable manner came from Boise. In 2014, City of Boise, Capital City Development Corp (Boise’s Urban Renewal Agency, or URA) and the County Highway Department collaborated to develop streetscape standards that addressed green infrastructure goals and incorporated trees as living infrastructure. Within these standards, suspended paving systems provide the ideal conditions for urban trees to thrive with expanded root zones and uncompacted soil.

The unique partnership between the varying agencies puts the URA in charge of implementing streetscape projects and coordinating with private development within the URA boundary, which had a funding stream established for that purpose. Stormwater responsibility lies with the County Highway District and the city public works department, while the parks department assumes maintenance responsibility for the suspended pavement systems. The clear division of responsibilities, budgets for right-of-way infrastructure and funding through a URA offer lessons for other communities struggling with these same challenges.

Define Accountability

Some of the biggest challenges when it comes to urban tree canopy is clarity of maintenance responsibilities. Put simply, whose job is it to maintain the trees on the sidewalk? As cities grow and change, the public realm is profoundly impacted by whether the integration of an urban tree canopy — with clear roles and responsibilities — is part of the development conversation.

Where urban forestry rules and regulations are not well-defined, or where building codes are misaligned with right-of-way allocations for green infrastructure, the tree canopy often becomes an afterthought, inconsistently applied across an urban fabric.

The available planting area in most cities is concentrated on private property, which poses a challenge for government agencies around tree planting and maintenance strategies. Often a city forestry agency is not part of the decision-making process to ensure trees are equally prioritized in right-of-way allocations. The tree canopy requirements and responsibilities for management of these trees vary wildly between municipalities, ranging from no responsibility for trees on private property, to full maintenance responsibilities and in certain instances, funding sources. While there was no “right answer” identified, the point is that clarity of roles and responsibilities is vital in ensuring the consistency of the canopy.

Get Creative With Funding Sources

Municipalities seeing the most consistent strategy and impact on their urban tree canopy are often those that have a dedicated funding source. Cincinnati has a right-of-way linear frontage property tax assessment on all property types, which provides funding for internal forestry crews and equipment for maintenance. In 2019, Portland convened a task force to research the political viability of various funding options for equitable service and funding levels for parks and forestry, with voters approving the levy in 2020. “Before going out to the voters, we put together an Alternative Funding Task Force to test the political viability of a ballot measure, and to weigh the pros and cons of various funding options,” says Jenn Cairo, Portland city forester and urban forestry manager. “A five-year local option operating levy was tailored according to voter preferences and approved in 2020. Portland is proud to be among U.S. cities that now have a dedicated funding source that supports enhancement of the urban tree canopy, among other priorities. Since the Parks Levy is not a permanent funding source, Portland Parks is continuing to explore funding options, and in summer of 2022 has convened a community member Ballot Initiative Task Force to advise on funding options and next steps.”

Some cities are responding to the challenge of balancing widespread development with investment in the urban tree canopy by providing creative financing and maintenance strategies. In Denver, a partnership between the city, the Downtown Denver Partnership and private donors funded the Urban Forest Initiative to support private investment in the urban forest by providing grant funds for tree installation within the downtown district. In Pittsburgh, the city receives fees to support its urban tree canopy maintenance from Lamar Advertising for billboard advertising in the right-of-way. This kind of creativity and public/private/nonprofit coordination have proven time and again to yield the greatest impact on the urban canopy.

Harness the Power of Partnerships

Along these same lines, many communities benefitted from partnerships with nonprofits to advance their urban tree canopy goals. From fundraising and volunteer coordination for tree planting initiatives to citizen education on the care and maintenance of trees, biofuel management and distribution, and training the next generation of urban forestry stewards, as the examples showed, it truly does take a village to nurture the tree canopy.

In Denver, The Park People nonprofit works with communities to plant trees and improve parks by raising funds and managing programs that provide residents with free and low-cost trees for public and private property. Mile High Tree Champions, in partnership with Denver Parks and Recreation, supports Denver-area businesses with turnkey tree planting projects designed specifically for their companies, while the Community Forester program trains people as active stewards of The Park People.

Focus on Equity

In all these efforts, if the distribution of trees isn’t viewed through the lens of equity, communities will never truly realize the full benefits of a robust urban canopy. Across geographies and climates in the United States, under-investment in street trees in certain areas has created conditions of inequity between residents. Per the Tree Equity Score Map project, the poorest communities have 41 percent fewer trees than wealthier areas, contributing to high heat island conditions, lowered air quality, less permeability for stormwater runoff, higher energy costs and lack of quality in the public realm.

Several communities have pivoted to respond and focus on this condition, with concerted effort to plant, establish and maintain trees within communities with low tree canopy coverage. In Pittsburgh, nonprofit partnerships have led the way in initiatives to balance urban canopy coverage. Tree Pittsburgh spearheaded an urban forest master plan in collaboration with the city, with a clear goal to prioritize urban forestry efforts in underserved neighborhoods. And the Pittsburgh Shade Tree Commission’s equitable street tree investment strategy identifies low-income/low-canopy neighborhoods to prioritize investment in tree planting and maintenance in those neighborhoods.

Look Around as You Look Ahead

As Denver and countless other cities are grappling with challenges ranging from climate change to health and equity, the research and dialogue they have led with communities across the country has shown there is much we can learn from one another. Together, we all have a part in greening our urban environments and building a thriving tree canopy. Realizing and working toward this greater common good cannot happen a moment too soon.

Paul Stewart, ASLA, PLA, LEED AP, is Principal at Dig Studio. LaDonna Baertlein is Senior Associate, Director of Business Development at Dig Studio.