Page 1 of 253

FUTURE MELBOURNE (ECO-CITY) Agenda Item 5.1 COMMITTEE REPORT

CITY OF MELBOURNE URBAN FOREST STRATEGY 10 July 2012

Presenter: Ian Shears, Manager Urban Landscapes

Purpose and background

1. The purpose of this report is to provide the Future Melbourne Committee with an assessment of the public consultation on the draft Urban Forest Strategy undertaken between November 2011- April 2012 and to seek endorsement of the revised draft Urban Forest Strategy (Strategy) (refer Attachment 2) and the Urban Forest Diversity Guidelines (Guidelines) which support the Strategy (refer Attachment 3).

2. At its 8 November 2011 meeting the Future Melbourne Committee endorsed the draft Urban Forest Strategy for public consultation.

Key issues

3. The Strategy and the Guidelines have now been revised to reflect the comments and feedback received during the consultation period. A detailed report on consultation feedback is attached (refer Attachment 4).

4. An extensive engagement process was undertaken on the draft Strategy and Guidelines from 9 November 2011 until 31 March 2012 to seek feedback from the community, agencies and stakeholders.

5. Feedback revealed that the community predominantly support the Strategy and Guidelines. However, it must be noted that many comments received during the consultation pertained to expressions of preference on the topic of species origin which was not pertinent to consultation on the Strategy.

6. The Strategy and Guidelines received widespread academic and industry support both locally, nationally and internationally.

7. Several experts were commissioned to assist with the further development of the Strategy document based on the outcomes of the consultation including Dr Dave Kendal and Cynnamon Dobbs, PhD candidate, both from Australian Research Centre of Urban Ecology (ARCUE) at University of Melbourne, Dr Peter May, May Horticulture and Anna Egan, PhD candidate, University of Tasmania.

8. Fuller detail on the proposed Tree Precinct Plans, which form a critical element of the implementation of this strategy, has been included in the Strategy.

Recommendation from management

9. That the Future Melbourne Committee:

9.1. note the Consultation Report and the outcomes of community engagement activities; allow a further public comment or submissions on the revised City of Melbourne Urban Forest Strategy and Urban Forest Diversity Guidelines until 30 July 2012 and request a further report to the 14 August 2012 Committee meeting; and

9.2. notify all submitters to date of the Committee’s consideration of the revised City of Melbourne Urban Forest Strategy and Urban Forest Diversity Guidelines.

Attachments: 1. Supporting Attachment 2. Draft Urban Forest Strategy 3. Diversity Guidelines 4. Community Consultation Report for the Draft Urban Forest Strategy

Page 2 of 253

Attachment 1 Agenda Item 5.1 Future Melbourne Committee 10 July 2012

SUPPORTING ATTACHMENT

Legal

1. No direct legal issues arise from the recommendation from management.

Finance

2. There is an operational budget allocated to the Urban Forest Strategy which covers costs incurred through the running of community engagement events and the consultation online forum.

Conflict of interest

3. No member of Council staff, or other person engaged under a contract, involved in advising on or preparing this report has declared a direct or indirect interest in relation to the matter of the report.

Stakeholder consultation

4. The City of Melbourne Parks and Gardens Advisory Committee have provided valuable input into the identification of issues to be addressed by the Strategy and have provided feedback and direction at various stages in its development.

5. An extensive engagement process was undertaken from 9 November 2011 until 31 March 2012 to involve the community and all interested stakeholders in the further development of this Strategy.

6. A range of methods were employed during the engagement process to ensure that consultation and communications were as wide-reaching as possible. This included a series of community meetings, an Urban Forest Forum, ten precinct based community meetings were held where a combined 110 community members and representatives from residents groups attended.

7. Direct briefings and presentations on the Strategy were provided to Friends of the Elms, University of Melbourne, the Victorian Centre for Climate Change Research, State Government, Landcare, the National Urban Forest Alliance, VicHealth, and Australian Institute of Landscape Architects.

8. A permanent online forum was developed to provide information and a fulltime ‘online forum’ for the duration of the consultation. This online forum received 4,249 individual visitors who made a combined total of 11,991 site visits with 20,316 page views. The Strategy was downloaded 818 times from the site and over 19,000 words in submissions and commentary was generated by 177 commentators.

9. Information was also available online at the City of Melbourne corporate website which received 7,000 hits, with 5,000 unique views.

10. A short video was developed to highlight the key issues and provide a brief overview of the Strategy. This video was viewed over 2,500 times.

11. An Urban Forest Forum was held in the Town Hall on 30 November 2011 and 135 members of the community attended this event.

12. Several experts were commissioned to assist with the further development of the document based on the outcomes of the consultation. They include:

1 Page 3 of 253

12.1. Dr Dave Kendal, ARCUE, University of Melbourne and Dr Peter May have further developed and refined the diversity goals;

12.2. Cynnamon Dobbs, PhD candidate, ARCUE, University of Melbourne, has undertaken further assessment and modelling of the composition of the urban forest; and

12.3. Anna Egan, PhD candidate, University of Tasmania has more comprehensively articulated the history of Melbourne’s urban forest.

13. A detailed Consultation Report is attached (refer attachment 4).

Relation to Council policy

14. The Urban Forest Strategy relates to and is consistent with the following policies and strategies:

14.1. Future Melbourne – Eco City;

14.2. Open Space Strategy (2012);

14.3. Arden MacAulay Structure Plan & North Melbourne Structure Plan (2012);

14.4. Southbank Structure Plan (2010);

14.5. Climate Change Adaptation Strategy (2009); and

14.6. Total Watermark; City as a Catchment (2008).

Environmental sustainability

15. Environmental sustainability issues have been a priority in the development of this document. The implementation of the recommended actions and targets within the strategy will bring about multiple environmental benefits, including increasing the longevity of tree life, increasing canopy coverage and vegetation throughout the municipality, lowering air pollution, increasing carbon storage and sequestration, capture and reuse of stormwater, removing pollutants from water, reducing energy expenditure during summer months and periods of extreme heat, mitigating the urban heat island and adapting the municipality to climate change.

2 Page 4 of 253

Urban Forest Strategy Making a great city greener 2012-2032

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest Page 5 of 253 Page 6 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012 Page 7 of 253 A message from the City of Melbourne

The City of Melbourne is renowned for its heritage-listed iconic parks, gardens, reserves and boulevards. They have formed an essential part of Melbourne’s identity for more than a century.

However, the circumstances for our urban forest are changing. Many of our trees are now reaching the end of their natural life span and the past decade of drought has accelerated decline for these and many of our other trees. We expect to lose 39 per cent of the trees within our landscape within the next two decades.

This strategy embraces the opportunity to generate a new legacy for Melbourne and create the forest of the future for new generations. This document sets out how our urban forest will become diverse, robust and resilient in the face of current and future challenges. We know that climate change and increasing density and growth within our city will place new pressures on our urban forest, but the targets we have set in this document will meet those challenges.

An increasing body of evidence and research informs us that urban forests and green space are vital to supporting a healthy community as well as providing a means to adapting to climate change.

This strategy sets a bold target of doubling our canopy cover by 2040 so that we can provide a greener and cooler city for those who live, work and play in our municipality. Most importantly, it articulates how we can enhance our urban forest to reflect and respond to the needs of the community and the city.

We have worked with our community and key stakeholders for two years to generate this strategy. We are confident that it will strategically plan for our future urban forest while maintaining and enhancing Melbourne’s existing and much loved character.

Robert Doyle Cr Cathy Oke Lord Mayor Future Melbourne (Eco-city) Committee Chair

2 Making a great city greener 2012-2040 Page 8 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012 Contents

1 Introduction 5 2 Executive Summary 7 3 Background & Context 9 3.1 What is an Urban Forest? 9 3.2 Benefits of the Urban orestF 10

3.2.1 Environmental benefits 11 3.2.2 Community benefits 12 3.2.3 Economic benefits 13

3.3 Evolution of Melbourne’s Urban Forest 14

3.3.1 Historical development 14 3.3.2 The urban forest today 19 3.3.3 Policy context 25

4 Issues & Challenges 27 4.1 Ageing tree population 28 4.2 Water 30 4.3 Climate change 32 4.4 The urban heat island effect 34 4.5 Population increase and urban intensification 36 4.6 Towards our Future Forest 38

5 Principles & Strategies 40 5.1 Our priorities 40 5.2 Principles 40 5.3 Strategies 41

5.3.1 Increase canopy cover 42 5.3.2 Increase urban forest diversity 44 5.3.3 Improve vegetation health 46 5.3.4 Improve soil moisture and water quality 48 5.3.5 Improve urban ecology 50 5.3.6 Engage with the community 52

6. Implementation Framework 55 6.1 Green Governance 55 6.2 Priority Implementation Actions 56 6.3 Measurement, monitoring and review 60 6.4 Funding resources 61

Glossary 62 Selected References 63

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest 3 Page 9 of 253 Vision

The City of Melbourne’s urban forest will be resilient, healthy and diverse and will contribute to the health and wellbeing of our community and to the creation of a liveable city.

A future ‘greener’ Melbourne - artist’s impression

4 Making a great city greener 2012-2040 Page 10 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012 1 Introduction

This is the City of Melbourne’s first Urban Forest Over the next 20 years and beyond, Melbourne will experience Strategy. It is the product of a collaborative a changing climate, becoming increasingly warmer and drier, and likely to more frequently experience extreme heat and process, developed over two years with a large inundation. This strategy foresees that Melbourne will continue number of stakeholders including local and to be one of the world’s most liveable cities and that the urban international academics, interest groups and the forest will play a critical role in creating and maintaining the broader community in Melbourne. integrity of its urban landscapes. One of the important attributes of the urban forest is to compensate for the predicted increases At the core of this strategy is a vision to create a resilient, in temperature by providing shade and cooling. Increased healthy and diverse forest for the future. That creation canopy coverage throughout the city will minimise the urban begins by building upon the present and the past. The City of heat island effect and improve thermal comfort at street Melbourne is renowned for its historical parks, gardens and level for pedestrians. Increased water sensitive urban design boulevards. The parks and gardens around the eastern, southern incorporated into the landscape will play an important role and northern edges of the Central City and the spacious in managing frequent inundation and providing essential soil boulevards of St Kilda Road, Flemington Road, Royal Parade and moisture for healthy vegetation growth, as well as enhancing the Victoria Parade leading into the Hoddle Grid are distinguished ecology of the city. for the formality of their design and the consistency of their treed avenues. These iconic elements contribute greatly to the Urban growth will see significant residential, worker and visitor city’s character and they are integral to its social and cultural life. populations within the city and intensification of built form. An It is important to ensure that the forest of the future maintains associated growth in the urban forest, ‘green infrastructure’ and the essential character of our urban forest that Melbournian’s ‘ecosystem services’ of the city will respond to these increases, love. reduce the cost of grey infrastructure and improve the quality of the urban environment. Urban forests and associated ecosystem The City of Melbourne is currently facing three significant services will also yield further benefits for future communities, challenges: climate change, population growth and urban attracting more people to live, work and visit our city. heating. These challenges will place significant pressure on the existing built fabric, services and people of the city. A healthy To achieve this vision the principles outlined in this strategy urban forest will play a critical role in maintaining the health and will guide decision-making to create our future forest. The liveability of Melbourne. strategy highlights proactive and adaptive management, and will transform an asset that has a current amenity value estimated at Through the development of this strategy, the City of Melbourne $700 million and a future value that is potentially priceless. recognises the importance of a holistic, ‘whole-of-forest’ approach to understanding and managing this invaluable resource. Many of the venerated landscapes of Melbourne were created well over 100 years ago in a different climatic and social environment. A significant number of our trees are nearing the end of their lives and landscapes are struggling to adapt to a changing climate. Now is the time to design and plant the Resilient forest of the future in a way that respects Melbourne’s unique landscapes character, responds to climate change and urban expansion, and underpins the health, liveability and wellbeing of the city livability and and its inhabitants. sustainability

The goal of this strategy is to guide the transition of our landscape to a future forest that is diverse, resilient and Community responsive to the varied needs of the community and of the city health, wellbeing and it will promote healthy ecosystems. Its intended outcomes and values are supported by three primary purposes – to create resilient landscapes, community health and wellbeing and a liveable, sustainable city. Central to this is the vision to ‘make a great city greener’ – to become a city within a forest rather than a forest Three themes underpin the purpose of this strategy for the within a city. evolution and longevity of our future forest

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest 5 Page 11 of 253

Our urban forest is undergoing unprecedented change. The recent period of drought combined with water restrictions We often think of the trees as the lungs of our city, but has triggered irreversible decline for many of our trees. This they are also, in some ways, our heart and soul. The whole has coincided with the decline of Melbourne’s significant community owns our trees and our future trees…There are and symbolic Elms and other ageing trees. Modelling shows few political, budget or policy decisions that must deliver that within the next ten years, 23 per cent of the current tree for people in 100 years. In politics, so much is driven by the population will be at the end of their useful lives and within artificial three- or four-year election cycle. Not this plan. Our twenty years this figure will have reached 39 per cent. trees are too important. Robert Doyle, Herald Sun 9 January 2011 The City of Melbourne is addressing these changes head on by looking at retention of existing trees and planning the urban forest of the future. To guide future planting a series of tools and programs have been, and continue to be, developed. Building the urban forest as a living ecosystem will rely on smart species selection to deal with goals such as improving biodiversity and habitat, improving soil moisture retention, reducing stormwater flows, improving water quality and re-use, increasing shade and canopy cover, reducing infrastructure conflicts and ensuring our urban forest provides the maximum benefits for our communities.

Urban forestry is entering a new era in Australia and this strategy highlights how critically important urban forestry is for urban planning and design particularly in context of enhancing liveability and adapting to predicted climate change. An urban forest provides a multitude of benefits for ecosystems, the economy and community health and wellbeing. It is essential that we acknowledge and build upon those benefits now to ensure the best future for our city – an urban forest loved and enjoyed by our children and their children.

6 Making a great city greener 2012-2040 Page 12 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012 2 Executive Summary

The City of Melbourne’s Urban Forest is The following strategies and targets provide an overview of the undergoing unprecedented change. Modelling key actions required to achieve this strategy’s vision: shows that 23 per cent of the current tree Strategy 1: Increase canopy cover population will reach the end of its useful life Target: Increase public realm canopy cover from 22 per cent within in 10 years and 39 per cent within 20 years. to 40 per cent by 2040.

We now have the unique opportunity to create a healthy, Strategy 2: Increase urban forest diversity resilient forest for the future that maximises the economic, social Target: The urban forest will be composed of no more than and ecological benefits that can be provided by the urban forest. 5 per cent of any tree species, no more than 10 per cent of any genus and no more than 20 per cent of any one family. As we anticipate increases in urban temperatures and density, we can expect that Melbourne’s Urban Heat Island (UHI) Strategy 3: Improve vegetation health effect will intensify. An increased canopy cover throughout the Target: 90 per cent of the City of Melbourne’s tree municipality will minimise the impact of the UHI effect. population will be healthy by 2040.

Responding to change requires a new approach in how the Strategy 4: Improve soil moisture and water quality municipal urban forest is managed, so that future vulnerability Target: Soil moisture levels will be maintained at levels to can be minimised and benefits maximised. Both climate change provide healthy growth of vegetation. science and international urban forestry research indicate that the range of threats facing the urban forest will increase in Strategy 5: Improve urban ecology the future, particularly vulnerability to pests and disease and Target: Protect and enhance a level of biodiversity which extremes of weather. contributes to the delivery of healthy ecosystem services.

This strategy provides the framework to build a resilient, healthy Strategy 6: Inform and consult the community urban forest that can thrive in the future. The key principles are Target: The community will have a broader understanding to: of the importance of our urban forest, increase their • mitigate and adapt to climate change connection to it and engage with its process of evolution. • reduce the urban heat island effect • become a ‘water sensitive’ city The delivery of these strategies and targets will provide multiple • design for health and wellbeing benefits for Melbourne’s urban forest. Most importantly they • design for liveability and cultural integrity will ensure that we prepare and adapt adequately for predicted climate change, manage the health of the urban forest and • create healthier ecosystems provide the community with world class open spaces, parks and • position Melbourne as a leader in urban forestry streetscapes that provide multiple benefits for public health and wellbeing and for the environment. Our vision of a healthy and resilient urban forest that contributes to the health and wellbeing of our communities and to a liveable This strategy provides the City of Melbourne and its city, will be achieved by creating better urban environments communities a unique opportunity to work collaboratively to for everyone. The guiding principles defined above highlight develop the future urban forest. The City of Melbourne has a the importance of a well-designed city and of maintaining leading role to play in urban forest advocacy. The principles and Melbourne’s cultural integrity whilst creating the forest of the actions developed through this strategy have the capacity to be future. used and adapted across Melbourne, thereby reinforcing Greater Melbourne’s urban forest.

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest 7 Page 13 of 253

View of Southbank from the Yarra River northern embankment

Renowned avenue of Lemon Scented Gums along Fraser Avenue, Kings Park, Perth

8 Making a great city greener 2012-2040 Page 14 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012 3 Background & Context

3.1 What is an Urban forest? Agriculture’s Forestry Department, the practice of urban forestry gradually pervaded US urban policy, and its outreach met UK City of Melbourne’s urban forest comprises all of the trees and shores in the early 1980s – sparking the Forest of London project vegetation – including the soil and water that supports it – within aimed at social, ecological and economic regeneration of UK the municipality. It incorporates trees and vegetation in streets, cities, and flowed into the Netherlands in the mid 1980s. From parks, gardens, plazas, campuses, river and creek embankments, there, Scandinavian, European and Asian cities have embraced wetlands, railway corridors, community gardens, green walls, the concept, broadening the depth of knowledge and research balconies and roofs. globally.

Urban forests provide critical ecosystem services such as air and Urban forestry has yet to be well researched, implemented water filtration, shade, habitat, oxygen, carbon sequestration and and evaluated in an Australian context. There is a reliance on nutrient cycling. The urban forest also provides the ‘connection research from the United States, Europe, Scandinavia and Asia to nature’ that is often perceived to be missing in urban areas. to supplement thinking and programs domestically. Whilst Australia is some way behind in providing robust urban forest Urban forestry, as opposed to arboriculture and horticulture, research and literature, Australian cities are by no means allows us to consider the cumulative benefits of an entire areas behind in current management and planning of urban trees tree population, such as a town or city. Looking holistically at and vegetation. We have been practicing the art and science the urban forest and its associated ecosystem services, allows of urban forestry for years through tree and parks planning, for consideration of the broader issues of climate change, urban arboriculture, horticulture and urban design. heat island effects and population growth that can be influenced by the presence of an urban forest, but also how they will impact on our future urban forest.

Urban forestry can be described as the science and art of managing trees, forests and natural ecosystems in and around urban communities to maximise the physiological, sociological, economic and aesthetic benefits that trees provide society. Often this responsibility for management, including ‘green governance’, is considered a local government responsibility; however its sphere of influence frequently extends well beyond that. Local communities, schools, community groups, developers, business, industry and State and Federal Government all have a key role to play in ensuring we manage and care for Australia’s urban forests.

The discipline of ‘urban forestry’ originally stemmed from A green wall forming the front facade of Triptych, Southbank research conducted by Erik Jorgensen at the University of Toronto, Canada in 1965. This was the first recognition that Defining what urban forestry means for Melbourne and Australia urban trees provide environmental benefits in addition to is important in determining visions for our future cities and how providing recreational and amenity value.1 With support from the we will go about realising them. Essentially, urban forestry is International Society of Arboriculture and the US Department of the meeting of arboricultural and forestry practices with other disciplines such as urban planning, landscape architecture, sustainability, architecture, engineering and economics. Ensuring these groups work collaboratively will be integral to creating a genuinely Australian concept of urban forestry.

Green roofs and green walls are an important element in the fabric of our urban forest. They offer a real mechanism by which all cities can adapt and increase resilience to climate change. They also contribute to sustainable and regenerative urban landscapes that reduce the impacts of urban development on our communities. However, despite the persuasive business case for green roofs and the expansion of the industry overseas, green roofs and walls have not yet been widely implemented in Melbourne or indeed Australia. By contrast, cities across North America, Europe and Asia have widely embraced green roof technology. There is a compelling need for urban forestry to ‘Local scale’ urban greening - waterfront promenade demonstrate and promote the benefits of green roofs and walls at Victoria Harbour, Docklands for consistent inclusion in the development of our urban fabric.

1 Randrup et al, 2005

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest 9 Page 15 of 253

3.2 Benefits of the Urban forest Urban forests have been around for as long as people have lived in cities but only recently have they become valued for providing more than aesthetic and recreational values.

Cities around the world now regard trees and other vegetation as critical urban infrastructure – as important to how a city functions as roads or public transport and particularly vital to the health and wellbeing of communities.

The benefits of urban forests spanenvironmental, economic, cultural and political domains. These benefits are interrelated, with each cumulatively feeding into the creation of resilient and sustainable urban landscapes. Foresting the suburbs provides cumulative benefits Given the pressure on governments to plan for greater for ensuring a healthy city - in particular they offer the populations, increased urban density and climate change opportunity to be the ‘green lungs’ of the city. adaptation, there is a clear opportunity to communicate the importance and benefits of urban forests in creating resilient, sustainable cities that provide healthy and enjoyable places for people to live and work. Some of the major benefits of urban forests in supporting and providing essential services are explored in this section.

Summary of the broad array of benefits offered by urban trees (adapted from the Woodland Trust, UK)

10 Making a great city greener 2012-2040 Page 16 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012

3.2.1 Environmental benefits • Reduce stormwater flows and nutrient loads Tree canopies and root systems reduce stormwater flows The urban forest is essentially the ‘engine room’ for urban and nutrient loads that end up in our waterways. Broad tree ecosystems. The urban forest takes in water, nutrients and canopies intercept and mitigate the impact of heavy rainfalls carbon dioxide and processes them through photosynthesis and and healthy tree roots help reduce the nitrogen, phosphorus transpiration, transforming them into the valuable environmental and heavy metal content in stormwater. Green roofs not only outputs of clean air, oxygen, shade and habitat. Broad retain rainwater, but also act as natural filters for any of the calculations suggest that larger mature trees provide 75 per cent water that happens to run off. They also delay the time at more environmental benefits than smaller trees. which runoff occurs, resulting in decreased stress on sewer systems at peak flow periods. Wetlands and raingardens are A summary of environmental benefits of the urban forest is as also important means for trapping stormwater, improving follows: water quality and reducing nutrient loads.

• Provide shade and cool our cities • Reduce air pollution and air-borne particulates The addition of trees and vegetation in the built The role of urban vegetation is equally vital in ameliorating environment provides the greatest benefit in terms of air pollution and greenhouse gases. Through the process of mitigating the Urban Heat Island effect. Through the natural photosynthesis trees take up carbon dioxide, nitrous oxides, process of transpiration trees help reduce day and night- sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide and ozone from the time temperatures in cities, especially during summer. Trees atmosphere. Studies show a typical mature tree can store as provide shade for streets and footpaths and their leaves much as 10 tonnes of carbon. reflect and absorb sunlight, minimising the heat absorbed by the built environment during the day. Green roofs and • Provide habitat and enhance levels of biodiversity walls in the urban landscape also contribute to cooling the Although few Australian cities have preserved large areas urban microclimate by providing evapotranspirative cooling of natural habitat, a healthy urban forest contributes to whilst reducing heat storage in buildings. biodiversity and provides habitat for a variety of wildlife. Urban forests around the world have been shown to support a wide range of species, even endangered animals and other biological species of high conservation value. By planting and managing different age strata, biodiversity and a wider range of animal habitats can be enhanced. Green roofs and walls can also provide an additional layer of habitat for wildlife.

A well-placed tree with suitable below ground growing conditions (in this case above a disused WC in Russell Street) maximises the benefits of trees in a city street

A study in New York found that its urban forest removed 1,821 The biodiverse habitat of the wetlands at Trin Warren metric tonnes of air pollution at an estimated value to society Tamboore in Royal Park provides a valuable public open of $9.3 million annually2. space.

2 Nowak, D 2000. The Effects of urban trees on air quality. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station 5 Moon Library, SUNY-CESF, Syracuse, NY 13210. http://nrs.fs.fed.us/units/urban/local-resources/ downloads/Tree_Air_Qual.pdf

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest 11 Page 17 of 253

3.2.2 Community benefits • Reducing heat related illnesses From a public health perspective, the shade provided by Urban forests have a large range of positive impacts for the canopies during hot summer days helps reduce localised community by forming shared points of reference within the day time temperatures by up to 2 degrees Celsius. In urban environment and allowing daily interaction with nature. Melbourne, on days over 30 degrees Celsius the risk of heat- Specific benefits include the following: related morbidity and mortality for people over 64 years of age increases significantly. Evidence suggests that buildings • Providing a sense of place and creation of local identity with little or no surrounding vegetation are at higher risk of A city’s landscape helps define its character in much the heat related morbidity.5 same way as architecture or urban design because trees and vegetation physically define a place. Landscapes are the • Improving mental wellbeing setting for many everyday recreational opportunities such The availability of, access to and even the ability to view as organised sport, walking the dog or having a picnic and green spaces and trees has positive effects on people’s therefore help forge a sense of connection to place. wellbeing. Many studies have explored the relationships between the amount of green in the landscape and • Improving community cohesion associated levels of depression and wellbeing. In the Urban forests and green open space provide the place for Netherlands, disease rates, including mental disease were major events, festivals and celebrations throughout the shown to be of a lower prevalence in areas with higher city. Events and spaces can bring diverse groups of people percentage of green spaces within a 1km radius than those together through the provision of a public realm which is with lower percentages.6 available for everyone to enjoy. Green spaces especially play an important role in the integration of minority groups and can assist in the adaptation process of immigrants into their host country.

• Encouraging outdoor activity Well-vegetated parks, gardens and streets encourage the use of open spaces, which have multiple flow on health benefits such as reduction in obesity and improvement in general physical and mental wellbeing. In an era where lifestyle-related illnesses are prevalent and 61 per cent of Australian adults are overweight or obese, (obesity costs Australia’s health care industry $58 billion in 2008) prevention methods are usually more effective than cures.

• Reconnecting children with nature With technological innovations enticing children into ‘make Melbourne’s tan track is one of its premier green spaces for believe worlds’ of computer games, electronic technology is active recreation for all ages and abilities prevalent in contributing to childhood obesity and inactivity. Studies have shown that green spaces provide therapy to children, allow creativity of mind, encourage exploration and adventure, promote physical activity, build resilience and enhance experiential learnings.3

• Reducing sun exposure Sun exposure illnesses such as skin cancer have long Determined that the importance of protection from sunlight’s UV rays is paramount. Shade alone can reduce overall exposure to UV radiation by up to 75 per cent4. The urban forest provides the best form of natural shade, with broad canopied street and park trees being the most effective.

5 Bi, P, Williams S, Loughnan M, Lloyd G, Hansen A, Kjellstrom T, Dear K, Saniotis A. 2011. The Effects of Extreme Heat on Human Mortality 3 Louv R., 2005. Last Child in the Woods: saving our children from and Morbidity in Australia: Implications for Public Health. Asia-Pacific nature-deficit disorder. Algonquin books of Chapel Hill: a division of Journal of Public Health. 23(2):27S-36S Workman Publishing, New York. 6 Maas J., Verheij R.A, Groenewegen P.P, De Vries S., Spreeuwenberg P., 4 Parsons P.G, Neale R,. Wolski P., Green A, 1998. Shady side of solar 2006. Green space, urbanity, and health: how strong is the relation? protection medical journal of Australia 168(7), 327-330. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 60, 587-592.

12 Making a great city greener 2012-2040 Page 18 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012

3.2.3 Economic benefits • Decreasing health costs Knowing the extensive health benefits of urban forests The breadth of urban forest benefits that can be quantified in and green spaces, it is likely that the provision of these in dollar terms span a range of industries and disciplines. Most urban areas reduces health costs associated with sedentary infrastructure and design decisions are based on economic behaviour, obesity and mental illness. While it is difficult cost benefit analysis and understanding the financial impacts to create a direct link and quantify exact dollar savings, of urban forests is critical in helping understand their research suggests that a healthy green city helps alleviate functionalities. Some of the economic benefits of an urban forest the burden on national health systems. Access to a view of include the following: green space, including trees can also encourage hospital patient recoveries, reducing the amount of time spent in • Reducing energy costs hospital. A major economic benefit of the urban forest is the ability of healthy trees to shade buildings in summer, reducing • Marketing the City the need for air conditioning, in turn cutting energy costs. Many cities now aim to have their green spaces recognised Increasing tree cover by 10 per cent – or planting about internationally. Tourism and city marketing can be boosted three trees per building lot – saves annual heating and by green infrastructure. Urban forests and parks can be cooling costs by an estimated $50 to $90 per dwelling unit marketed as city attractions, provide attractive settings for because of increased shade.7 various events and activities which boost the local economy.

• Increasing property values • Storing and sequestering carbon Tree planting in streets directly enhances and improves the During photosynthesis, trees convert carbon dioxide (CO2) neighbourhood aesthetics and consequently is proven to and water into sugar and oxygen and store carbon within increase property values. It is estimated that properties in their biomass as they grow older. Urban trees therefore tree-lined streets are valued around 30 per cent higher than make an impact in absorbing carbon from the atmosphere. those in streets without trees.8 The diversity of benefits which can be quantified in economic • Avoiding costs of infrastructure damage terms span health, engineering, planning, sustainability, geology Urban forests that provide significant canopy coverage over and real estate industries. Bringing these together to form a a city improve the lifespan of certain assets, such as asphalt solid economic business case for urban forests is a very powerful by shading them from harmful UV rays. Tree canopies tool for decision makers. and root systems also play a key role in mitigating flood levels during extreme events and have the ability to lower stormwater flows into our existing drainage infrastructure. Urban forests can increase the lifespan of asphalt by 30 per cent.12

The Chicago Trees Initiative, economic calculations indicated that a 17.2% canopy cover:

• Stores $14.8M carbon • Sequesters carbon at a value of $521,000 per year • Filters air pollution at $6M per year • Has a structural value of $2.3 billion

Chicago’s urban forest annually sequesters 318,800 tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere, equivalent to the annual greenhouse gas emissions from over 50,000 passenger vehicles.

7 McPherson E.G, Rowntree R., 1993. Energy Conservation Potential of Urban Tree planting. Journal of Arboriculture 19(6), 321-331. 8 Sander H., Polasky S., Haight R.G., 2010. The value of urban tree cover: a hedonic property price model in Ramsay and Dakota, Minnesota, USA. Ecological Economics 69(8), 1646-4656.

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest 13 Page 19 of 253

3.3 Evolution of Melbourne’s It is possible then, that today inner Melbourne’s urban forest is as dense as it has ever been. However, it is an entirely urban forest different place than pre-colonisation. Today’s trees are part of a conglomeration of processes, things and pressures, that are unique to an urban world. The trees in Melbourne’s 3.3.1 Historical development parks, gardens and streets have originated from forests in all It is hard to imagine exactly what Batman would have seen when corners of the world, or as is the case with the most common he stepped off his boat in 1835. However, records suggest it contemporary tree, the London Plane, the world’s gardens. Other was unlikely that he stepped into a dense forest. Instead, it was than some remnant river red gums12 the trees standing in central grasslands that caught his imagination, a landscape resulting Melbourne today were planted with purpose by a person and from the management of the Wurundjeri people. According to the story of Melbourne’s urban forest is thus a tale of people and Batman there was not more “than six [trees] to the acre”, mostly ideas. Today’s landscape is the living result of a particular mix sheoaks and wattle9, in the region. Grasslands framed by lightly of human and plant migration with changing trends in science, wooded hills10 stretched to the north of the river, and to the morality, circumstance and aesthetics. south and west swamps and lagoons dominated the landscape. The most forested land was significantly east of the place where Melbourne was first laid out, far enough away that Fawkner struggled to locate enough timber to build the permanent settlement11.

Early map of Melbourne Source: State Library of Victoria, picture collection.

9 James Boyce. 2011. 1835: The Founding of Melbourne. Black Inc., 12 Melbourne today has only 1.7% of its pre-settlement vegetation and Collingwood. Page 92 most of this smaller plant life growing along creeks. See Dave Kendall. 10 Gary Presland. 2008. The Place for a Village: How Nature has Shaped 2011. ‘Potential effects of climate change on Melbourne’s street the City of Melbourne. Museum Victoria Publishing, Melbourne. trees and some implications for human and non-human animals’. 11 James Boyce (2011). 1835: The Founding of Melbourne. Black Inc., In Proceedings of the 2011 State of Australian Cities Conference. Collingwood. Page 96 Melbourne.

14 Making a great city greener 2012-2040 Page 20 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012

The nineteenth century foundation of Melbourne’s The Carlton gardens were reserved in 1852, named by the contemporary urban forest Colonial Secretary as a ‘recreation reserve’16.

In 1854 the important Aboriginal camp, now Royal Park, was In 1839, people were already concerned about the destruction reserved, and also by 1856 Fitzroy Gardens based on a plan by of trees around the growing city. Surveyor Townsend wrote that La Trobe Bateman who planted the border of Fitzroy square people destroying Melbourne’s trees must be hindered “as the with eucalypts and wattles17. Also popular during this first beauty of Melbourne will be destroyed if the land to the north of decade of park creation, were pines and other conifers. This it is allowed to be cleared” and the trees growing on the city’s was a legacy both of connections with Tasmania, where early boundaries were protected in one of Lonsdale’s first pieces of settlement coincided with new species of conifers, particularly 13 legislation . Retaining unbuilt on land close to the city centre from the New World being celebrated Britain18, and with a was part of a belief that these spaces were essential for people’s need to create a secure supply of timber. Baron Ferdinand von health. “It is of vital importance to the health of the inhabitants Mueller, a key figure in the tree species involved in Melbourne’s that there should be parks within a distance of the town” urban forest, established a pinetum in his first year as director 14 declared the Melbourne Town Council in the year they formed” . of the Botanic Gardens, with a goal of “having these useful and noble pines planted copiously throughout the country”19. Often, popularity and availability of tree species in early Melbourne was connected to experiments for establishing larger rural industries, such as pines for timber. It also included a brief focus on mulberry trees for a proposed silk industry and various nut tree species20.

The trees grown in each of Melbourne’s large parks tended to be part of landscapes designed by a series of men, including Baron von Mueller, now famous in Melbourne’s history. In 1860, Clement Hodgkinson began managing the city’s reserves, including the Fitzroy Gardens. He designed the first major planting of this important part of Melbourne’s urban forest and used elms and other deciduous species to line the various paths with shade trees. This brought relief from the hot summer and was also part of a desire to control the movement of people through these St Kilda Road early 1900’s places, creating clear pathways to stroll through. Interestingly, Hodgkinson also believed that it was important to preserve as much remnant indigenous vegetation as possible in the city’s Melbourne came to life at a time when cities were places to be reserves21. It is thought, however, that by the time Hodgkinson feared because they were thought to breed both disease and stated this pre-settlement vegetation in and around the Hoddle 15 immorality . Preventing Melbourne from becoming densely Grid was already scarce22. populated and an unhealthy place for humans to live drove the desire to reserve land around the city’s central edges from development. The parks and gardens in which Melbourne’s 16 Lovel Chenn. ‘History and Development of the Royal Exhibition and urban forest grows from today are the result of this nineteenth Carlton Gardens’ in document published by the Victorian Department century fear and foresight. of Planning and Community Development. Available online. http:// www.dpcd.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/64403/Att-A-REB- In 1846, the Botanic Gardens was reserved and laid out carefully CMP-Vol-1-2.0_Part1.pdf Accessed April 2012 17 The ‘Landscape History’ of the Fitzroy Gardens states that the Argus adjacent to the river where year-round water could be secured. newspaper reported in May of 1858 that the wattles and gums had been planted. Available in http://www.fitzroygardens.com/History. htm, accessed April 2012. Another letter to the Argus a year later, in April 1859, complains of the way that the entire Fitzroy Gardens appears to be a “plantation of gums” – Thomas Wilson. 1859. “Carlton Gardens. Letter to the editor of the Argus”. Argus. Thursday 21 April, page 5 13 Letter from Surveyor Townsend to Police Magistrate Lonsdale in 1839. 18 Gwenda Sheridan. 2011. “Insights into Tasmania’s cultural landscape: Published in a history written by R. M. McGowan. 1951. ‘Spare those the conifer connection”. Australian Garden History. 22(4): 6 - 12 Trees!’. The Argus. Friday 5 January, 1951, page 27. 19 Georgina Whitehead. 2007. From acclimatization towards ecology: 14 Melbourne Town Council in Georgina Whitehead. 1997. Civilising The influence of environmental thought in Melbourne’s Public the City: A History of Melbourne’s Public Gardens. Melbourne: State Parkland, ca 1850 – 1920. Masters Thesis. RMIT University. Page 22 Library of Victoria & the City of Melbourne. Page 1 20 Early Melbourne experimentation with mulberry trees is evident 15 See James Beattie’s work who argues that “the environment assumed in reports and letters in the Argus newspaper, especially prevalent a power that we can today only imagine” in the way it was assumed between the years 1859 and 1868. to affect the quality of life and prevalence of disease of those living 21 Georgina Whitehead. 1997. Civilising the City: A History of in it. He describes how “divining ‘healthy’ from ‘unhealthy’ became Melbourne’s Public Gardens. Melbourne: State Library of Victoria & one of the most important areas of thought for Europeans settling the City of Melbourne. Page 15 and 16. new lands. James Beattie. 2008. ‘Colonial Geographies of Settlement: 22 Georgina Whitehead. 1997. Civilizing the City: A History of Vegetation, Towns, Disease and Well-Being in Aotearoa/New Zealand, Melbourne’s Public Gardens. Melbourne: State Library of Victoria & 1830s – 1930s’. Environment and History. 14: pp 588 the City of Melbourne. Page 5

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest 15 Page 21 of 253

Melbourne’s urban forest composition was not only driven by Baron von Mueller is important not only for his promotion of key designers and local leaders but also by citizens. Nineteenth eucalyptus trees worldwide but also because his involvement in century ideas of health drove individuals to request trees for the colonial seed trade was often the entry point through which their streets and in less formal spaces of the city. During the new trees reached Melbourne. This trade marked the beginning 1870s, almost one in three of the adult population in the city of a world in which city gardeners or landscape designers of Melbourne died of tuberculosis23, and more from other fever could easily open a catalogue and gain access to hundreds of based disease. Prevailing medical science understood the source choices of trees to plant. The seeds gathered by Mueller from of such illness to arise from the landscape, from bad smells, or his contacts at Kew Gardens in London and elsewhere were miasmas, that wafted from swamps, stagnant water and sewage sometimes provided directly to the city’s gardeners for planting. and particular trees were thought to absorb these odours and Because of his great knowledge of trees of the world, through excess moisture. Leaving land poorly drained was considered books and letters and conversation he also regularly advised irresponsible and dangerous, “the existence of such a swamp on which tree to plant in the city. Included in one piece of advice the margins of a populous city” wrote ‘The Father of a Family’ in 1861 were the British Elm and both the American and Oriental to the Argus newspaper, “is a scandal and disgrace” and must Plane tree, the beginnings of the trend towards varieties of these be remedied by creating a health-giving and life-sustaining genera now so prominent in the city’s urban forest28. garden...”24.

Eucalyptus trees, promoted worldwide for their health-giving properties and quick timber growth by Baron von Mueller, were thought to be able to save the city from ill-health. Von Mueller led a cry of many voices recommending that Eucalyptus trees be planted on the streets25. Nurserymen, also powerful players in determining the composition of the urban forest agreed. William Adamson, one of the city’s most prominent nurserymen, described the blue gum in his 1883/84 catalogue as being placed “transcendentally above many other plants, if not ALL other plants in hygienic importance”26. In the early 1880s, the Melbourne City Council received letters from residents requesting the planting of Blue Gums along Flinders Street. One author argued that as the tree was ‘well ascertained to provide in staying and absorbing bad gasses as that evil to manure depot, the polluting influences of the Yarra and the Swamps of west Melbourne may in great measure be stayed by such rows of Trees”27. Thus, contrary to popular belief, many nineteenth century Melbournians wanted to plant eucalyptus trees in their urban forest.

On the Queen’s Birthday in 1875 the Mayor of Melbourne planted the first elm in Collins Street Source: State Library of Victoria, picture collection. Wood Engraving. Created June 14th 1875.

In the founding decades of Melbourne’s urban forest debates of whether to plant native or exotic trees were not important. Instead, discussion centred around which trees would best 23 Warwick Anderson. 2002. The Cultivation of Whiteness: Science, Health and Racial Destiny in Australia. Melbourne: Melbourne make the city healthy, or whether deciduous or evergreen were University Press. Pp 58 preferable. “It becomes of primary importance” wrote von 24 Father of a Family. 1866. Mueller in 1861, “whether evergreen or deciduous trees should 25 Colonel Warren in Von Mueller, 1895 TITLE, PUBLISHER: 189? – receive preference for this purpose [street trees]”29. Von Mueller also described the health properties of eucalyptus throughout his regularly updated editions of the Descriptive Atlas of the Eucalyptus of Australia and the Adjoining Islands. In his seventh edition (1880) he described the trees’ general utility as an agent of sanitation and of the Blue Gum wrote; “our blue gum tree has, on the whole, exercised on regions of the warm temperate zone a greater influence, scenic, industrial and hygienic than any other single species 28 Baron Ferdinand von Mueller. 1861. ‘Trees for Street Planting’, The of arborious vegetation reared anywhere, even pines, or oaks..”. Cited Victorian Agricultural and Horticultural Gazette. May 2. 1861. Vol V. No. in a Review of New Books in The Argus, Monday 3rd January, 1881: 3 5. Pages 65 -66 26 William Adamson, 1883-4 Seed Catalogue: page 101. 29 Baron Ferdinand von Mueller. 1861. ‘Trees for Street Planting’, The 27 Letter to J. Smith. Curator of Parks and Gardens, in the Town Clerk’s Victorian Agricultural and Horticultural Gazette. May 2. 1861. Vol V. No. Records. VPRO 38181/P0000: 840.1034. 30 June 1882 5. Pages 65 -66

16 Making a great city greener 2012-2040 Page 22 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012

Many people believed that deciduous trees were dull and One writer wanted them along St Kilda road, to ‘relieve the lifeless when bare branched trees in Melbourne’s winter and monotony’ and address the ‘want of colour’34. In the early 1930s, Mueller recommended avoiding this by interspersing plantings the curator of the city’s Parks and Gardens tried to acquire 21 of his beloved blue gums with elms or oaks, both for shade acres of land in the Government Domain for the purpose of and aesthetic purposes30. Pines were loved because they were planting Australian Flowering Gums. He believed that planting green all year and were often also recommended alongside these trees would create “a sanctuary for native birds and the eucalypt to mix with deciduous trees31. As the century fauna” as well as creating a “park of Flowering Gums which progressed, deciduous trees; their colours, the way their in due course will provide a very beautiful feature and be of changes marked seasons, and their architectural form, became considerable attraction to visitors and others”35. more popular32. The popularity of the flowering gums, demonstrates two key Seeds and seedlings for the city did not always come through priorities and debates with implications for the city’s urban the botanic gardens. Nurserymen were vital, yet are often forest during the 1910s, 20s and 30s. They had colourful unmentioned in Melbourne’s tree histories. There is evidence flowers, a key characteristic of popular trees at this time, and that nurserymen sometimes accessed their seeds from the they were native. As part of the furore surrounding Federation, botanical networks, but they also had their own connections. In Melbourne was keen to be seen by the world as both a the 1870s, Thomas Lang, imported seeds from his own contacts modern and Australian city. The city thus required both the in California, which he then passed onto the Botanic Gardens33. commonly planted deciduous trees that easily formed avenues Each year the nurserymen produced detailed catalogues and architectural shapes and colours popular in global urban describing the trees they had available and each year they grew landscaping trends as well as areas that show-cased the ‘best’ seedlings, often in land in nearby hills, such as Mt Macedon, of Australian flora. William Guilfoyle, the man who replaced nursing into life before making them ready for planting in Baron von Mueller as director of the Botanic Gardens in 1873, the city’s streets. The choices made about what to plant in was renowned for bringing a more design based element to the Melbourne’s urban forest have always been limited by access to organisation of city’s Botanic Gardens. He was also important for seed and healthy seedlings. Melbourne’s urban forests due to his love for Australian plants and his eye for design resulted in great changes to the city’s Twentieth century changes to the forest landscape. His publication in 1912, ‘Australian Plants suitable foundation for Gardens, Parks, Timber Reserves, Etc,’ was highly influential and celebrated the “splendour of the blossoms, the variety The turn of the twentieth century brought with it changes to the of forms and greenness of foliage, and their hardy nature” of way trees in Melbourne’s urban forest were valued. The science the new country’s own flora. He argued in the introduction of bacteriology slowly changed ideas of public health and trees of his book that “our Eucalypts, Acacias, Eugenias, Banksias, were thought less valuable for ensuring human health. By the Hakeas, Grevilleas, Flindersias, Sterculias, Callistemoms, end of the nineteenth century issues of health were no longer Melaleucas, Cupanias, Angophoras, and hundreds of other present in public debates about urban trees and during the brilliant evergreen and gorgeous flowered trees and shrubs... 1920s trees were removed from the Health Committee’s portfolio are too often neglected, in the decoration of parks and gardens, and became instead the responsibility of the Parks and Gardens in favour of exotic vegetation, which, in the majority of cases, Committee. is less hard and not nearly so picturesque”36. This period of celebrating Australian trees, especially those with colourful and Trees, however, were not less valued. They were just wanted attractive flowers, was also the time when the golden wattle for different purposes. Eucalyptus trees remained desired, flower became the national floral emblem and this tree was also but different species were planted. By the 1920s and 30s the popular in the city’s plantings. red flowering gum from Western Australia had replaced the Tasmanian blue gum as one of the most highly requested urban trees. The Town Clerk received numerous letters requesting that the colourful Australian tree be planted.

30 Baron Ferdinand von Mueller. 1861. ‘Trees for Street Planting’, The Victorian Agricultural and Horticultural Gazette. May 2. 1861. Vol V. No. 5. Pages 65 -66 31 Horticultural Improvement Association. 1861. ‘Report of Monthly 34 Letter from Hon Agar. Wynne of the Town Clerk, Mr Clayton, July Meeting: June, 1861’. Victorian Agricultural and Horticultural Gazette. 22nd 1908. ‘St Kilda Road Improvements’. Town Clerk’s Records. Vol V. No. 5. Pages 65 -66 VPRO. Streets. (1909). 38181/P0000 – 888: 3190 32 Stephen Frank, Glenn Waters, Russell Beer, and Peter May. 2006. ‘An 35 Letter from J. Smith, Curator of Parks and Gardens to the Town Clerk. Analysis of the Street Tree Population of Melbourne at the Beginning 24th February 1932. Town Clerk’s Records. VPRO. 3183/P0003/229: of the 21st Century’. Arboriculture and Urban Forestry 32(4): 155 - 163 639/32 33 Thomas Lang. 1874. Letter to the editor. Argus. Tuesday 16th June 36 William R. Guilfoyle. 1912. Australian Plants suitable for Gardens, Parks, 1874. Page 7 Timber Reserves, Etc. Melbourne: Whicombe and Tombs limited. P. 13.

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest 17 Page 23 of 253

In addition to a love of Australian flowering trees, this was the The question of what constitutes a healthy urban landscape has time in which an organised town planning movement became changed throughout Melbourne’s history and how trees have important in Australia. The 1914 formation of the Victorian Town fitted into this has been dependant on the science and politics Planning and Parks Association brought with it goals to “give of the day. Since the 1890s, when Melbourne’s first horticultural the town a bit of the country and the country a bit of the town”; school was founded in Burnley, the city’s trees have been heavily “to protect existing parks” and “to safeguard native animals influenced by the science and people emerging from this school. and plants”37. The first of these goals was the key to the famous This focus from such an early time in Melbourne’s history on Garden City movement and encouraged the creation of avenues, the science of horticulture, and then also more specifically resulting, for example, in Royal Parade being planted with elms arboriculture, has given the city a high level of professionalism in and a renewed sense of the need for urban citizens to access its approach to the trees. The former principal of the school, Dr greenery. The City Beautiful movement was also influential and Greg Moore, has been a champion for Melbourne’s trees during ‘beautification’ efforts saw the reconsideration of trees involved the twenty-first century and is at the forefront of ensuring that in planting with an emphasis on shape and form as well as trees are a key part of the city’s future. He has been a key voice colour. Melbournians often reacted strongly to the heavy pruning in promoting mechanisms to value trees economically, ensuring of street trees, seeing it as vandalism rather than care38. For that they are treated as key pieces of Melbourne’s infrastructure. the urban forest the new formalised town planning movement was an important force part of organising protection against Despite all the debates over time regarding which trees to tendency’s to ‘clip off little pieces” of the urban forest for plant, and the changing trends valuing different characteristics development or sporting clubs. of trees; health properties, perfume, colour, deciduous or evergreen, flower, size and shape, a certain very small number of The post-war period, from 1945 to the early 1960s, was a time in species dominate inner Melbourne’s contemporary urban forest. which Melbourne’s inner city urban forest was regularly part of This is for two reasons. Firstly, it is because by far the majority of disputes. There was less discussion about which trees to plant the city’s contemporary mature trees were planted at three main during this period than there were fights over potential tree points in the Melbourne’s history; the latter half of the nineteenth or park loss for building development. The shortage of quality century, the first decades of the twentieth century, and in the housing for the post-war population boom placed great pressure late 1960s and 1970s. Certain species were more available or on the ring of greenery surrounding the CBD. But Melbournians fashionable than others at those moments leading to them wanted their parks and trees and regularly campaigned to keep dominating planting at these times, such as the elms and planes the land as reserves. planted along streets in the late 19th and early twentieth century. Once planted and a park, garden or streetscape has a set of The wave of energy in the early 1970s associated with the rise mature trees it is rare to change or remove them unless they of both indigenous and environmental political movements become ill, dangerous or offensive to new science or fashion in a brought with it new life for Melbourne’s trees and parks. Rupert strong way. The removal of mature trees from a landscape is not Hamer, the Victorian premier, revived the term “Garden State” only expensive but is almost always met with fierce opposition for Victoria and alongside this branding created new parks and from people who have grown attached to the trees and the public spaces throughout the state. In the centre of Melbourne presence they bring to their place. trees also regained attention. The new political movements created a council in which green politics were at the centre, Secondly, to survive in the city, it seems tree species need two and key individuals such as Frank Keenan, horticulturalist and main things. The first, is to hold a variety of the characteristics Director of the city’s parks and gardens, fought for the council to and properties that make humans like them through the ages think about the urban environment as an ecosystem. Trees were and the second, although more obvious often less talked a key part of a vision the council held at this time, of restoring a about, is a hardiness and adaptability to city life. In the streets balance between land and people, and Keenan was responsible especially, only certain species are able to tolerate the compact for leading the planting of many trees during the 1970s and early soils, the uniformity of standing alone in separated rows, rather 80s. than in diverse clumps and different air composition. There is evidence that many of the early plantings of eucalypts did Importantly also to this time, was the rise of a different slant in not survive in the streets due to insect damage and that oaks debates of native versus exotic trees. The ‘native’ in discussions and elms planted died without constant watering in the black was more complicated than simply being any plant from the cracking soils in the west of Melbourne. The London plane huge continent and nation of Australia, but for many was instead tree, currently dominating street plantings in the city, was a plant that grew locally prior to colonisation. In conjunction never a wild tree. It is a cross between two trees from different with this the rise in the popularity of the science of ecology corners of the world, the American and Oriental plane trees, meant that more nuanced elements of a healthy landscape or occurring first in a garden in the UK. It exists only because of environment were explored. human involvement moving trees around the world and then of selectively gardening. One could thus say, that this tree is ‘native’ to a city. The history of Melbourne’s urban forest is the story of 37 Robert Freestone. 2010. Urban Nation: Australia’s Planning Heritage. such an interdependence between people and trees. It is a story CSIRO: Collingwood. Page 15-16 38 Review article of Melbourne’s trees describes the importance of tree of people planting, transplanting and caring for trees in a very form and structure, uniformity, and good care required for creating different landscape than pre-settlement, an environment where, beautiful streetscapes as well as describing the angst when pruning is without people, most of them would fail to grow. done badly or in his opinion, too heavily. Viator 1914. ‘Street Trees and their Care’. The Argus. Saturday 21st March 1914, page 9

18 Making a great city greener 2012-2040 Page 24 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012

3.3.2 The urban forest today Our urban forest is home to a rich diversity of animal species including the Powerful Owl, Tawny Frogmouths, Kookaburras, The City of Melbourne’s urban forest comprises around 70,000 Kingfishers, Possums, White’s Skink, Grey-headed Flying Foxes, trees in streets and parks as well as approximately 20,000 trees Striped Legless Lizard and Blue-tongued Lizard, the Eltham located in the private realm in addition to a growing number of Copper butterfly, and a variety of frogs and micro bats. Various green roofs and walls across the municipality. waterways across the municipality are used by birds for nesting and habitat. The urban forest is highly vulnerable from a range of The trees managed by the City of Melbourne in the public realm perspectives. The dominance of a smaller group of species and contribute significantly to the individual character and identity genera, and the ageing of many of our elms, combine to render of Melbourne. Carlton Gardens, Royal Park, Fitzroy Gardens, it vulnerable to significant loss due to potential pest and disease Royal Parade, St Kilda Road and the Yarra River banks are attack, heat-waves and ageing. landscapes that are highly valued by our residents, workers, visitors and tourists. Key urban forest indicators There are over 388 different species of trees in our municipality We can examine our public urban forest in a number of different ranging from the iconic Elms and Planes to River Red Gums, ways. In order to best manage existing vegetation and to guide Melaleucas, Lemon Scented Gums, Spotted Gums and significant the development of the forest of the future, we have undertaken stands of conifers in our gardens. The tree population is extensive mapping of tree health, species composition, dominated by three species: Elms, Planes and River Red Gums, canopy cover and expected useful life in the landscape of trees however this dominance is part of what creates the respected currently managed by the City of Melbourne. This mapping and unique character of Melbourne’s urban forest. Plane trees provides key indicators with which to benchmark the forest, set alone make up 75 per cent of the trees within our central city. future targets and measure change over time.

The majestic, but ageing, elms which form magnificent avenues The private realm requires a more collaborative approach with along many of our grand boulevards and through our historic the community to gain a better understanding of its health, parks are the last remaining examples of mature elm avenues in diversity and distribution. The mapping of the private realm and the world. Dutch Elm Disease (DED) has killed 40 million elms in landscapes managed by other agencies will be integral for the the Northern Hemisphere and more recently, in New Zealand and ongoing assessment and evaluation of the urban forest. Japan. Worldwide, elm trees are an endangered species which places an even greater importance on Melbourne’s elms.

1800s 1900s 2000s Melbourne founded Carlton Gardens Alexandra Avenue Elm Trees Plane Trees Periods of drought Water restrictions Climate change awareness

Reminder of European origins Develop neighbourhoods Urban intensification Aesthetic quality Revegetation Urban Heat Island mitigation Provide shade Natives as patriotic Biodiversity Reclaim land Concept of trees as an ‘asset’ emerges Water sensitive urban design Cultivate or tame landscape Sustainability Reminder of nature and growth Recognition of public realm Improve land value Health and wellbeing benefits

Temporal evolution of Melbourne’s urban forest

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest 19 Page 25 of 253

Tree canopy cover Table 3: Canopy coverage calculated on a Canopy cover is a measure of the physical coverage of the precinct basis for major parks and gardens tree canopy over the land. It represents a way of expressing, Major Parks and Gardens Percentage as a percentage, the spatial extent or density of tree crown Carlton Gardens North 62.32% coverage in an area. Canopy cover provides an important way of measuring the character of any urban forest. It is a repeatable Carlton Gardens South 58.00% benchmark that can be measured regularly and will guide future Kensington Reserves 56.10% tree planting programs. The measure of canopy cover for our Fitzroy Gardens 53.10% urban forest is more valuable than focussing on the total number of trees in the municipality. Kings Domain 50.32% Treasury Gardens 50.08% In the City of Melbourne we are seeking to increase summertime Alexandra Gardens 48.04% shade and biomass in the municipality to combat urban heat island effects, adapt to climate change and enhance our Flagstaff Gardens 44.97% streetscapes for the comfort of people Shrine Reserve 42.49% Fawkner Park 38.38% . Table 1: Canopy coverage in the City of Melbourne Birrarung Marr 25.51% Location Percentage Princes Park 21.87% Whole of Municipality 22.23% Royal Park 21.64% Road Network 10.23% JJ Holland Park 20.19% All Parks and Gardens 28.02% Docklands Park 5.95%

Currently tree canopy cumulatively covers 22 per cent of City Environmental values of Melbourne’s public streets and park areas. This means 78 The City of Melbourne has prepared a scientifically-based per cent of the municipality is without natural shade. amenity formula for calculating the amenity value of our trees. The formula is based on factors such as tree condition, species type and its growth rates, aesthetics value and locality values. A Table 2: Canopy coverage calculated on a rough estimate of the City of Melbourne’s urban forest amenity precinct basis value is around $700 million. City Precinct Percentage We also have the ability to value the environmental benefits of South Yarra 33.44% our urban forest through a US based tool called i-Tree Eco. Air Carlton 29.11% pollution amelioration, carbon storage and sequestration, energy savings benefits of trees and structural values of the urban forest CBD 21.20% can be calculated using i-Tree. East Melbourne & Jolimont 20.66% North & West Melbourne 19.87% Our first initial results using i-Tree on trees in Royal Parade, Collins Street, Swanston Street, Lonsdale Street and Victoria Kensington 19.68% Parade show that the 982 trees within the municipality: Parkville 19.42% • remove 0.5 metric tonnes of air pollution per year at a dollar Southbank 14.20% benefit of $3,820 • store 838 metric tonnes of carbon at a dollar value of Fishermans Bend 6.40% $19,100 Docklands 4.72% • sequester 24 metric tonnes of carbon each year at a value of $548 per year • save $6,370 in energy costs each year through shading buildings in summer and providing solar access in winter • avoid carbon emissions by reducing energy use by$114 per year • are structurally worth $10.4 million.

If we broadly extrapolate these figures across the entire population of 70,000 trees, there is a clear indication that our urban forest is a very valuable environmental asset.

20 Making a great city greener 2012-2040 Page 26 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012

Tree diversity and vulnerability Table 4: Most prominent species within the City of Melbourne Diversity plays an important role in the long-term stability of tree population an ecosystem and is a representation of vulnerability within the SPECIES Common name Total % forest. Low tree species and age diversity will create an unstable ecosystem that is vulnerable to pest and disease attack or loss Eucalyptus River Red Gum 8248 11.7% from extreme events such as heat or drought. A skewed age camaldulensis profile amongst the urban forest also exacerbates vulnerability Platanus x acerifolia London Plane 5647 8.0% as trees will decline and senesce at the same time. We should Ulmus sp. Elms 3296 4.7% therefore aim for greater species and age diversity. Corymbia maculata Spotted Gum 3141 4.5% In addition to species and age diversity, a lack of spatial diversity Eucalyptus melliodora Yellow Box 2631 3.7% also contributes to vulnerability within the urban forest. The Allocasuarina Drooping 2356 3.4% City of Melbourne is widely recognised for the magnificent verticillata She-Oak avenues and boulevards that are formed of single species such as Elms. While it is the sum of the single species of even age Acacia sp. Wattles 2038 2.9% that contributes to the value of the landscape element it is also Acacia mearnsii Black wattle 1855 2.6% inherently what contributes to the vulnerability. Elms also have Ulmus procera English Elm 1840 2.6% the attribute of root grafting between trees, this can spread pathogens such a Dutch Elm Disease rapidly along an avenue of Corymbia citriodora Lemon Scented 1639 2.3% trees. Gum Eucalyptus leucoxylon Yellow Gum 1602 2.3% While London Planes account for eight per cent of the overall Casuarina glauca Swamp She-Oak 1511 2.1% municipal tree population, this species dominates the central city, accounting for 75 per cent of all trees within the Hoddle Melaleuca ericifolia Paperbark 1496 2.1% Grid. This is concerning when the urban heat island (UHI) effect Eucalyptus sp. Ecualypt 1338 1.9% is considered. Large scale loss of Plane trees within the gird due Angophora costata Smooth-barked 1174 1.7% to attack from pest or pathogen, or excessive would not only Apple Gum significantly remove visual amenity and environmental benefits, but it would also exacerbate the UHI effect enormously. Table 5: Most prominent genera within the City of Melbourne There is a high percentage of the genus Eucalyptus within our tree population tree population. This is partly due to the fact that many different GENUS Common name Total % Eucalyptus species make up this genus, that these trees are native to Australia and that they are resilient as urban trees. Eucalyptus Ecualypt 17516 24.9% It should be noted that Royal Park, a large native landscape, Acacia Wattle 7909 11.3% houses many of these Eucalypts, including the majority Platanus Plane 6485 9.2% population of River Red Gums (Eucalyptus camaldulensis). Ulmus Elm 6473 9.2% Almost 43 per cent of our tree base is from one family, the Corymbia Corymbia 4968 7.1% Myrtaceae family. In fact, many Australian native trees that Melaleuca Paperbark 2837 4.0% function well as urban trees in Melbourne belong to this family, which includes Eucalyptus, Corymbia, Callistemon, Angophora Allocasuarina She-Oak 2690 3.8% and Melaleuca. It should be noted that of the 26,377 trees in Casuarina She-Oak 2060 2.9% Royal Park, 15,008 are from the Myrtaceae family. This creates a Quercus Oak 1823 2.6% high level of vulnerability in terms of pest and diseases such as Myrtle Rust. Ficus Fig 1436 2.0% Angophora Apple Gum 1194 1.7% Callistemon Bottle Brush 1059 1.5% Lophostemon Brush Box 928 1.3% Melia White Cedar 915 1.3% Fraxinus Ash 743 1.1%

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest 21 Page 27 of 253

Most prominent botanical families within Useful Life Expectancy (ULE) the City of Melbourne tree population of City of Melbourne’s trees Useful life expectancy (ULE) is an estimated measure of how Table 6: Useful life expectancy of Elm trees long a tree is likely to remain in the landscape based on health, in City of Melbourne amenity, environmental services contribution and risk to the community. It is not a measure of the biological life of the tree FAMILY Common name Total % and it is not used as a timetable for scheduling tree removals. Myrtaceae Myrtle 29742 42.3% Mimosaceae Acacia 7920 11.3% The primary benefit of a ULE assessment is that it facilitates strategic planning for the longevity of the urban forest. It allows Ulmaceae Elm 7245 10.3% for tree population decline to be identified and for a long term Platanaceae Plane 6485 9.2% response to be developed for that decline. Casuarinaceae She-Oak 4750 6.8% A ULE assessment for the City of Melbourne’s urban forest was Fagaceae Beech 1829 2.6% undertaken between March 2011 and April 2012. 35,000 trees Moraceae Fig 1440 2.0% were assessed with results indicating that 23 per cent of the tree population will be at the end of its useful life in the landscape Rosaceae Rose 1164 1.7% within ten years and 39 per cent within twenty years. Meliaceae Melia 916 1.3% For heritage landscapes, excepting the Shrine of Remembrance, Pinaceae Pines 832 1.2% the findings are more dramatic with the ULE assessments Oleaceae Olives 829 1.2% indicating a likely 35 per cent loss in 10 years and 58 per cent loss in 20 years. The City of Melbourne’s heritage landscapes Araucariaceae Araucaria 774 1.1% include Kings Domain, Flagstaff Gardens, Speakers Corner, The Aceraceae Maples 696 1.0% Shrine of Remembrance, Royal Parade, Fitzroy Gardens, Carlton Proteaceae Grevillia 668 1.0% Gardens and Treasury Gardens. The reason the ULE assessments in Shrine of Remembrance a significantly high is due to the Anacardiaceae N/A 609 0.9% development and implementation a 5 year master plan which has involved the staged removal of dead and declining trees and a vigorous program of replanting. The approach was to plant en masse to allow for a natural reduction over time to ensure that landscape continues to be robust. The species selected for this area were highly diverse combination of native and exotic specifically drought tolerant.

Useful Life Expectancy (ULE) of City of Melbourne’s Elms ULE assessment of City of Melbourne’s Elm trees indicated that 55 per cent of Melbourne’s Elms are in a state of severe decline and will likely need to be removed from the landscape within the next ten years.

Table 7: Useful life expectancy of Elm trees in City of Melbourne

Elm Trees -ULE (years) Percentage <1 year to 10 years 55% 11-20 years 21% 21-30 years 11% 31-60 years 9% 61+ years 4%

22 Making a great city greener 2012-2040 Page 28 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012

Mapping ULE for the city’s tree population is one of the most effective tools for strategic planning of its replacement

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest 23 Page 29 of 253

24 Making a great city greener 2012-2040 Page 30 of 253 REVISED DRAFT – JULY 2012

3.3.3 Policy context The following diagram illustrates the City of Melbourne’s policy documents that underpin and inform this Strategy:

Future Melbourne Community Plan http://www.futuremelbourne.com.au/wiki/view/FMPlan City of Melbourne and the community’s vision to 2020, being: a city for people, creative, prosperous, connected, a knowledge city and an eco-city Influencing strategies • City of Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C162 – Municipal Strategic Council Plan 2009-2013 Statement, 2010 • Total Watermark: City as a Catchment Four year plan with objectives and strategies Strategy, 2009 aligned with the • Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, Future Melbourne vision 2009 • WSUD Guidelines, 2009 • Zero Net Emissions by 2020 Strategy Urban Forest Open Space • Greenhouse Action Plan 2006-2010 Strategy Strategy • Public Melbourne – Draft Urban Design Making a great city Planning for future Strategy, 2006 greener growth • Inner Melbourne Action Plan, 2005 City of Melbourne’s City of Melbourne’s • Growing Green Environmental strategic response to strategic response Sustainability Plan, 2003 managing the urban to future open space forest requirements

Associated policy & deliverables • Urban Forest Diversity Guidelines • Urban Forest Community Engagement Plan • Urban Forest Precinct Plans • Boulevard Master Plans • Growing Green Guide for Melbourne • Exceptional Tree Register • Urban Ecology and Biodiversity Strategy

melbourne.vic.gov.au/urbanforest 25 Page 31 of 253

Carlton Gardens, Carlton

Treasury Gardens, Melbourne

26 Making a great city greener 2012-2040