[CANUFNET] Boulevard Plantings

Fri Mar 28 10:56:43 EDT 2008

Hi all,
    Indeed, it seems the space for trees on individual lots is shrinking with the move toward densification.  Densification, of course, is aimed at reducing overall environmental impacts, or individual ecological footprints, through the ability, for instance, to provide for effective public transit (more potential users per square kilometre), less energy consumption per residential unit etc.

    Perhaps, as urban foresters wanting to participate in the urban planning process, we need to inform ourselves as to the environmental values that planners, engineers and others believe occur with densification and then be able to articulate the potential impacts to the urban forest for their consideration.  And particularly the impacts to the potential, or lack thereof, future urban forest that could occur through new tree planting in these newly built out areas.

    In order to articulate the impacts to the urban forest perhaps we need to emphasize an end goal, perhaps a tree canopy cover standard, that can be measured.  Also, perhaps we need to be knowledgeable about the real space requirements to provide for healthy trees and articulate these in standards, specifications, plans, and planning discussions with other stakeholders.   How many of us regularly affirm and assert the standard soil requirements of a tree as expressed in cubic meters, something that engineers can often nod an understanding to since it is measurable.  Do we realistically describe the root crown area requirement in terms of square meters or canopy size requirement in terms of height and breadth?  Are they in technical documents similar to the Engineering Standards documents that most towns and cities have.

    Perhaps a worthy research project would be to measure, or realistically project, the tree canopy cover in the different residential zones (RF7, RF9 etc), and break it down to private and public property contribution.  

   I advocate as often as possible the need to provide adequate and realistic space for large canopy public property trees and forests as they represent the best case scenario for providing for urban green infrastructure that will be beneficial to all.   

Greg Ward 
Manager, Urban Forestry and Environmental Programs 
City of Surrey, B.C. 
604 501 5170 

'Nature matters, 
protect, enhance, enjoy' 

-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net]On Behalf Of Jeremy Gye
Sent: March 27, 2008 7:58 AM
To: 'Canadian Urban Forest Network'
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Boulevard Plantings

Here is a related consideration from a broader landscape perspective on the topic of tree planting on public property.  We are experiencing a lot of in-fill development in our more developed areas and greenfield development in the peri-urban areas with a significant net-loss of urban forest.  As lot sizes diminish and house sizes dramatically increase, the opportunies for adequate tree replacement on private lots are falling.  This seems to me to point the way toward increased emphasis on acquiring, perhaps reconfiguring boulevards and meridians, in order to plant more on public lands.  Any thoughts on this build-out trend?  Implications for future plantings? maintenance? resources?

Jeremy Gye
Urban Forest Stewardship Initiative - Greater Victoria

  _____  

From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Ian Wilson
Sent: March-26-08 12:55 PM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Boulevard Plantings

Hi Guy,

sounds like you have a bit of a challenge ahead of you.  Here's a few comments as to our practices in Kelowna, BC:

- Do you only plant where residents are receptive and skip those that are not?  Do you plant trees where residents request them not to be? 

In the past, we sometimes planted trees whether the resident wanted them or not.  We no longer do that, because sometimes the tree ends up getting vandalized or poorly cared for.  Now we send out a letter and ask, and don't force them to accept a boulevard tree - this approach seems to be appreciated by the residents.  Later on if they change their minds or the the house is sold, we are open to going back and doing additional in-fill planting if we have the necessary resources.

- Do you conduct a survey of an area and plant if a certain % of affirmative is reached? 

Our focus is planting on arterial and collector roads.  We only plant on local / residential streets if a majority of the households on the street can agree that they want street trees.  We leave it up to them (a volunteer who lives there) to canvas the neighbourhood and show that there is support for planting.  If this planting initiative comes from the neighbourhood, then they seem to take a more active role in caring for the trees.

- What about planting on municipal property with no boulevard strip directly in front of residents home?

We do plant on the city right-of-way where there is no boulevard strip, we have quite a few trees in these types of plantings.  In some sense this creates even more of a sense of ownership and you have fewer problems with infrastructure (sidewalks) and the trees do well because of the expanded root volume.  Sometimes there is "too much" ownership however as the resident may decide to improperly prune the tree themselves, so we occasionally have to remind them that they can't prune the trees on the right-of-way.

Some cities have also successfully given away free (or subsidized) trees to homeowners which must be planted behind the city right of way on private property.  Sometimes the owner has to sign a contract to water and care for the tree.  The advantage is that the city has some control over what is planted and the citizens get the benefits of the tree without having to pay for maintenance.  But you also lose some control over long term maintenance.

We are currently working to change our subdivision bylaw so that in new subdivisions, the developer has to plant a certain number of trees on private properties, so we again get the benefits without the additional maintenance.

Ian Wilson

City of Kelowna

-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Guy Martin
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 11:58 AM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network
Cc: Len Walters
Subject: [CANUFNET] Boulevard Plantings

Hello all,

We have currently been planting trees on city owned boulevards. Basically a strip of turf 1-2 meters wide between the sidewalk and the road...this is in residential areas.

As you can imagine we have encountered both positive and negative comments from various homeowners. In the past we have planted our properties and boulevard strips without much of a problem and have just gone ahead and done so.

The road we are currently or rather I should say were working on, also happens to be the Mayor's road (election year), and he is getting heat from some neighbors. 

We are now sending out a letter informing that we are doing this albeit it is late and rather obvious that this is going on.

This is not a new development but an established area that has decent tree cover now, larger estate lots that will most likely be zoned for a higher density in the next 10 or so years, with tree removal occurring then, so it would be nice to have our street trees established.

I would like to inquire what other municipalities do or have done for this type of scenario.

Do you plant trees where residents request them not to be? 

Do you only plant where residents are receptive and skip those that are not?

Do you conduct a survey of an area and plant if a certain % of affirmative is reached? 

What about planting on municipal property with no boulevard strip directly in front of residents home?

Any insight on this problem is welcome!

Thanks,

Guy Martin

City of Langley

Parks Department

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20080328/e795e0ba/attachment.htm>