[CANUFNET] FW: tree canopy target

Fri Jul 1 20:26:19 EDT 2016

Thank you so much Ian for your good dose of urban reality.   Important points you make!

Happy tree filled Canada Day to you too!

Regards,

Laura Dupont, Councillor
City of Port Coquitlam

________________________________
On: 30 June 2016 12:00, "Ian Bruce" <ianbruce at brucetree.com> wrote:
So....not to put a negative spin on all of this positive discussion around canopy cover targets but...

As the owner of a tree care firm in Toronto, I would like to throw out the following comments with respect to our targets here for future canopy:

  1.  In recent years, the consulting arborists in our firm are increasingly  having to represent tree preservation related expectations by the city and for clients, that compete head-on with issues around intensification, re-development and in-fill.  One good example is the city's recent requirement that developers replace long-time surface parking on their empty sites with underground public parking as part of their development proposal.
  2.  Related to the latter but also a problem with providing significant underground parking for high-rise development in areas zoned for intensification, is the trend to underground built form (parking lots) stretching property line to property line on all four sides.  Ultimately when the water-proofing membrane deteriorates and the slab of this underground needs repair, all trees on the site have to be removed and all soil excavated to facilitate re and re.  You can guess what happens when they are done and re-landscaping... a new crop of 50-60 mm. trees or hopefully  larger.  Positive side...excellent opportunity to replace some old worn-out, poorly performing or structurally defective trees or currently less than desirable species (Norway Maple, but don't get me going on that topic) with desirable species of the day, healthy and structurally sound and reflective of the new pallet of built form and site-related constraints. Down-side...large growing shade trees contributing significantly on those sites get replaced by a short-rotation crop because up until now membrane technology promised us 25-35 years of water-proofing life.
  3.  Then there are the "natural" pressures on the existing canopy of EAB, ice storms and the threat of Oak Wilt and Sudden Oak Death.
  4.  Lastly is our mushrooming love affair with redevelopment of old residential sites with small bungalows or war-time houses on, to monster homes that push the zoning limits and threaten large, previously healthy and in many cases structurally sound trees that escaped chronic injury due to their location away from the street.

40%....needs to be considered with a grain of salt in a city land-locked by surrounding existing urban sprawl.

Happy Canada Day Weekend.

iAN

[Inline image 1]

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Vojka Miladinovic <vmiladi at toronto.ca<mailto:vmiladi at toronto.ca>> wrote:

From: Connie Pinto
Sent: June-21-16 3:32 PM
To: 'canufnet at list.web.net<mailto:canufnet at list.web.net>'
Cc: Vojka Miladinovic; 'alan.kemp at nanimo.ca<mailto:alan.kemp at nanimo.ca>'
Subject: tree canopy target

Good afternoon,
My colleague forwarded the inquiry below.

Alan,
We are currently working on the development of a tree planting strategy for the City of Toronto with a target of increasing the tree canopy cover to 40% by 2050-2060.
Our current tree canopy cover is between 26.6% and 28% with approximately 10.2 million trees across the city, 60% of these are on private property.

Toronto's tree canopy target is one of six strategic goals proposed  in the City's Strategic Forest Management Plan<http://www1.toronto.ca/City%20Of%20Toronto/Parks%20Forestry%20&%20Recreation/Urban%20Forestry/Files/pdf/B/backgroundfile-55258.pdf>. Research suggested that '40% tree canopy cover is optimum in cities where the ecological climax community is deciduous forest. This will ensure the sustainability of the urban forest and preserve the ecological functions while maximizing community benefits from trees'.  See also: Assessing Urban Forest Effects and Values: Toronto’s Urban Forest<http://www1.toronto.ca/City%20Of%20Toronto/Parks%20Forestry%20&%20Recreation/Urban%20Forestry/Files/pdf/R/Reports/effects-and-values.pdf>  and Every Tree Counts<http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=5e6fdada600f0410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD&vgnextchannel=9aad60d066169410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD>.

I hope this is helpful.

Good luck,
Connie
---------------
Connie Pinto
Program Standards & Development Officer
Urban Forestry
416-392-0357<tel:416-392-0357>
Toronto.ca/trees<http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=470bdada600f0410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD>

From: CANUFNET [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Alan Kemp
Sent: June-21-16 12:11 PM
To: 'Canadian Urban Forest Network'
Subject: [CANUFNET] tree canopy target

The City of Nanaimo has an Urban Forest Management Strategy. In that Strategy we have a target of increasing our forest canopy to over 30% in the next decade. Of course this is difficult in the urban setting. Our Management and Protection of Trees Bylaw supports this document by requiring tree replacement plans for development, which in general terms works. However, I was asked why 30% or even 35%? What is the scientific reasoning behind that. Although I can explain all the benefits of an urban forest, I could not really give a good science based answer. I have looked through a lot of literature, but don’t seem to be able to give a reasonable answer.

Any suggestions?

Alan Kemp
Urban Forestry Coordinator
Certified Arborist, Certified Tree Risk Assessor
Community Development
City of Nanaimo
250 755 4460<tel:250%20755%204460> (local 4357)
alan.kemp at nanaimo.ca<mailto:alan.kemp at nanaimo.ca>
www.nanaimo.ca/goto/urbantrees<http://www.nanaimo.ca/goto/urbantrees>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20160702/03ac7d14/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 1d-ian_email_signature.png
Type: image/png
Size: 16237 bytes
Desc: 1d-ian_email_signature.png
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20160702/03ac7d14/attachment.png>