16/12/19
Growing a Climate-Resilient City – A Melbourne Perspective on Urban Forestry
David Callow Director Parks and City Greening City of Melbourne
1
• Greater Melbourne 9900km2 (3800sq mi) • 4.9 million people today • 8 million by 2055
• City of Melbourne (36km2, 14 sq mi) • 143,000 residents today • 900,000 visitors daily • Will double by 2037
2
The high-performing urban forest
• Responds to local context and conditions Strategically managed • Is consistent with community expectations • Is underpinned by evidence-based decisions • Is a climate-ready mix of species Diverse • Has demonstrated succession • Supports biodiversity • Connects people to nature Life-sustaining • Enhances city liveability through environmental services • Inspires, provides a sense of wonder and joy • Spatially dispersed Extensive • Enables ecological connectivity • Is represented in both public and private jurisdictions • Is actively managed Healthy • Has fit-for-purpose above and below ground growing environments • Is protected from development
3
1 16/12/19
Melbourne’s urban forest – History and challenges
4
The urban forest – City of Melbourne The urban forest comprises all of the trees and other vegetation – and the soil and water that supports it
5
Key statistics
• 80,366 public trees managed in City of Melbourne. • Approximately 20,000 trees on private property • 520 tree species on public land • Tree canopy cover 23.7% public land • Tree canopy cover 11.5% for all of municipality • 5100 Dutch and English Elms.
6
2 16/12/19
7
Carlton Gardens South 1883
8
Carlton Gardens Grande Allee - current
9
3 16/12/19
City of Melbourne: 1988
Population: 39,512
Green cover: 24.6%
10
City of Melbourne: 2009
Population: 94,341
Green cover: 13.6%
11
https://developmentactivity.melbourne.vic.gov.au/ 12
4 16/12/19
13
14
15
5 16/12/19
16
Urban Heat Island
17
18
6 16/12/19
Impact of the drought and water restrictions
Alexandra Park – Feb 2004 Alexandra Park – Feb 2010
19
Useful life expectancy (2011)
Overall
23% loss in 10 years 39% loss in 20 years
Heritage Landscapes
35% loss in 10 years 58% loss in 20 years
20
Response
21
7 16/12/19
22
Urban Forest Strategy
Strategy 1: Increase canopy cover Target: Increase public realm canopy cover from 22 per cent to 40 per cent by 2040.
Strategy 2: Increase urban forest diversity Target: The urban forest will be composed of no more than 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.
Strategy 3: Improve vegetation health Target: 90 per cent of the City of Melbourne’s tree population will be healthy by 2040 Design for health and wellbeing
Strategy 4: Improve soil moisture and water quality Target: Soil moisture levels will be maintained at levels to provide healthy growth of vegetation Become a water sensitive city
Strategy 5: Improve urban ecology Target: Melbourne’s green spaces will protect and enhance a level of biodiversity which contributes to the delivery of ecosystem services.
Strategy 6: Engage the community Target: The community will have a broader understanding of the importance of our urban forest, increase their connection to it and engage with its process of evolution
23
Total city canopy public realm
24
8 16/12/19
What does 40% look like?
25
26
26
Translating a canopy cover target to an annual planting program
27
9 16/12/19
The high-performing urban forest
• Responds to local context and conditions Strategically managed • Is consistent with community expectations • Is underpinned by evidence-based decisions • Is a climate-ready mix of species Diverse • Has demonstrated succession • Supports biodiversity • Connects people to nature Life-sustaining • Enhances city liveability through environmental services • Inspires, provides a sense of wonder and joy • Spatially dispersed Extensive • Enables ecological connectivity • Is represented in both public and private jurisdictions • Is actively managed Healthy • Has fit-for-purpose above and below ground growing environments • Is protected from development
28
How do you estimate the number of trees required to meet a tree canopy target?
First, nominate a timeframe and target
Calculate existing canopy (Baseline m2)
- Predicted losses (ULE or other method)
+ growth of existing (during timeframe) + growth of replacements
+ growth of *new* to achieve gap to target
29
Precinct 2012 2020 2030 2040
Total City 23% 27% 30% 40% Carlton 25% 28% 30% 40% CBD 20% 26% 22% 27% Docklands 6% 21% 28% 40% East Melbourne & Jolimont 33% 33% 31% 40% Fishermans Bend 8% 24% 32% 40% Kensington & Flemington= 2400 trees a year plus 18% 36% 39% 47% North & West Melbournereplacements 18% 24% 28% 40% Parkville 22% 24% 28% 40% South Yarra & Eastern Parklands 36% 31% 31% 40% Southbank & South Wharf 16% 27% 31% 40%
30
10 16/12/19
Measuring canopy cover
Some options
• iTree Canopy • Multi-spectral camera • LiDAR • Orthorectified aerial imagery
31
31
Modelling growth for Metro Rail tree replacement
• Precinct plan growth is based on long-term modelling. • But does not provide an accurate prediction for a specific age (15 years).
15 years of growth
32
1. Double tree canopy cover by 2040
2. Plant 2 trees for every tree removed
3. Plant at least 2 trees for every tree removed
33
11 16/12/19
• DBH ~30k trees • Canopy Area (only individual canopies) • Planting date (only accurate to 1998) • Tree species with <5 records excluded from data set • RESULT: 11.5k useable records
34
All Trees - DBH 400 350 y = 0.0021x2 + 1.7729x + 1.1884 R² = 0.90259 300 250 200 150 100 Average Canopy Area m2 50 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 DBH
Trees 17cm DBH at 15 years of age = 32m2 canopy
35
Trees in parks
Ficus macrophylla – Fawkner Park Average canopy at 15 years – 41m2
Ulmus procera – Fawkner Park Average canopy at 15 years – 10m2
Corymbia citriodora – Domain Parklands Average canopy at 15 years – 60m2 Cedrus deodara – Treasury Gardens Average canopy at 15 years – 22m2
Average canopy at 15 years of all park sites – 33m2
36
12 16/12/19
Trees in WSUD Platanus orientalis ‘Digitata’ Southbank Boulevard Average canopy at 15 years – 77m2 Platanus x acerifolia – Collins Street Average canopy at 15 years – 68m2
Syzygium floribundum – Lt Bourke Street Average canopy at 15 years – 32.5m2 Corymbia citriodora – Eades Place Average canopy at 15 years – 25.7m2
Average canopy at 15 years of all Water Sensitive Urban Design sites – 57m2
37
All sites at 15 years of age = 32m2 canopy Open space sites at 15 years of age = 33m2 canopy WSUD sites at 15 years of age 57m2 canopy
If you are removing 346* trees, doubling of canopy (55k m2) would require 964-1718 trees.
or a ratio of: 2.8 (57m2) : 1 or 4.9 (32m2) : 1
38
Evidence based tree planting prioritisation
39
13 16/12/19
Urban Forest Precinct Plans – Co-designed with the community
40
Partnership with the community
41
Community preferences – South Yarra
“Large canopies, colour, shape and habitat for native birds”
42
14 16/12/19
Digital outreach
43
44
UFPP – Prioritisation
45
15 16/12/19
10 year planting plan
46
47
48
16 16/12/19
49
50
Planting trees for the climate future
51
17 16/12/19
The high-performing urban forest
• Responds to local context and conditions Strategically managed • Is consistent with community expectations • Is underpinned by evidence-based decisions • Is a climate-ready mix of species Diverse • Has demonstrated succession • Supports biodiversity • Connects people to nature Life-sustaining • Enhances city liveability through environmental services • Inspires, provides a sense of wonder and joy • Spatially dispersed Extensive • Enables ecological connectivity • Is represented in both public and private jurisdictions • Is actively managed Healthy • Has fit-for-purpose above and below ground growing environments • Is protected from development
52
53
The Gap
54
18 16/12/19
55
56
57
19 16/12/19
Trees for Melbourne’s climate future research project (Dave Kendal – Melbourne University) The aims of this project:
1. Identify key limiting factors to the global distribution of tree species cultivated in cities e.g. maximum temperatures, potential evapotranspiration, length of dry spell, shade, minimum rainfall 2. Identify the City of Melbourne’s likely future climate envelope parameters 3. Identify a palette of plants that are likely to be well adapted to these climate envelopes.
58
Global Biodiversity Information Facility database records
59
Urban tree inventories
60
20 16/12/19
61
Atlas of Living Australia
Eucalyptus leucoxylon (Yellow Gum) – Blue
Eucalyptus camaldulensis (River Red Gum) - Orange
62
Temperature vulnerability
63
21 16/12/19
https://www.nespurban.edu.au/publications -resources/research- reports/CAULRR02_CoMFutureUrbanFore st_Nov2016.pdf
Google: ‘Future Urban Forest Melbourne’
64
65
66
22 16/12/19
375 Current tree Current Moderate CC Extreme CC species Green 81% 65% 38%
Amber/aqua 8% 24% 28%
Red/Blue 11% 11% 35%
67
375 Current tree Current Moderate CC Extreme CC species Green 81% 65% 38%
Amber/aqua 8% 24% 28%
Red/Blue 11% 11% 35%
976 Global species Moderate CC Extreme CC
Green 273 241
Amber/aqua 229 217
Red/Blue 474 518
68
375 Current tree Current Moderate CC Extreme CC species Green 81% 65% 38%
Amber/aqua 8% 24% 28%
Red/Blue 11% 11% 35%
976 Global species Moderate CC Extreme CC
Green 273 241
Amber/aqua 229 217
Red/Blue 474 518
753 Australian Moderate CC Extreme CC natives Green 401 148
Amber/aqua 209 280
Red/Blue 176 358
69
23 16/12/19
375 Current tree Current Moderate CC Extreme CC species Green 81% 65% 38% Extreme =143 Amber/aqua 8% 24% 28% species Red/Blue 11% 11% 35%
976 Global species Moderate CC Extreme CC
Green 273 241
Amber/aqua 229 217
Red/Blue 474 518 Extreme =389 753 Australian Moderate CC Extreme CC species natives Green 401 148
Amber/aqua 209 280
Red/Blue 176 358
70
Particularly vulnerable groups
• Species from colder climate, such as northern Europe and north-eastern United States • Species with narrow climate envelopes, such as many locally indigenous trees.
Eucalyptus cephalocarpa (Mealy Stringybark) 71
72
24 16/12/19
73
74
Ulmus pumila (Siberian Elm) see also Ulmus 'Sapporo Autumn Gold‘ (Siberian and Japanese Elm Hybrid) 75
25 16/12/19
Ulmus alata (Winged Elm) Ulmus serotina (September Elm)
76
Further work
- Component 1 – Trees for Melbourne’s climate future
- Component 2 – Maximising desirable ecosystem services - Component 3 – Taking advantage of microclimates
77
78
26 16/12/19
From: Risks to Australia’s urban forest from climate change and urban heat
CAUL Research Hub (2017)
79
Diversity and new tree species
80
Strategy 2: Increase urban forest diversity
Target: The urban forest will be composed of no more than 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.
• Establishing a diversity target is a contemporary management practice for urban forests. The targets will depend on the drivers. • Santamour (1990) 10/20/30 rule • City of Sydney 10/30/40
• Kendal et al. (2014) average from 108 global cities was 20/26/32.
81
27 16/12/19
Urban forest diversity Drivers • Resilience to pest and disease impacts (not only loss, but also underperformance) • Climate change adaptation • Diverse provision of ecosystem services
Risks • Maladaptation • Loss of local species biodiversity • Change in landscape character
82
Current diversity
Family Number of Number of Number of count over- Genus count over- Species count over- (20% represented (10% target) represented (5% target) represented target) families genus species
2 (Eucalyptus camaldulensis 1 (Myrtaceae 1 (Eucalyptus 59 166 520 9.9%, Platanus 34.9%) 21%) x acerifolia 6.5%)
83
Current diversity
Family Number of Number of Number of count over- Genus count over- Species count over- (20% represented (10% target) represented (5% target) represented target) families genus species
2 (Eucalyptus camaldulensis 1 (Myrtaceae 1 (Eucalyptus 59 166 520 9.9%, Platanus 34.9%) 21%) x acerifolia 6.5%)
84
28 16/12/19
Comparison of 2006 Street tree species diversity and 2015 Planted tree species diversity Frank et al. (2006) 2015 Planting Lophostemon confertus 7% Callistemon viminalis 7% Melaleuca linariifolia 5% Tristaniopsis laurina 5% Prunus cerasifera 'Nigra' 4% Ulmus parvifolia 4% Melaleuca styphelioides 3% Casuarina glauca 4% Callistemon salignus 3% Casuarina obesa 3% Platanus x acerifolia 3% Lophostemon confertus 3% Eucalyptus leucoxylon 2% Banksia marginata 3% Agonis flexuosa 2% Corymbia ficifolia 3% Fraxinus angustifolia subsp. angustifolia 2% Pyrus calleryana 3% Eucalyptus spp. 2% Syzygium floribundum 2%
85
Comparison of 2006 Street tree species diversity and 2015 Planted tree species diversity Frank et al. (2006) 2015 Planting Lophostemon confertus 7% Callistemon viminalis 7% Melaleuca linariifolia 5% Tristaniopsis laurina 5% Prunus cerasifera 'Nigra' 4% Ulmus parvifolia 4% Melaleuca styphelioides 3% Casuarina glauca 4% Callistemon salignus 3% Casuarina obesa 3% Platanus x acerifolia 3% Lophostemon confertus 3% Eucalyptus leucoxylon 2% Banksia marginata 3% Agonis flexuosa 2% Corymbia ficifolia 3% Fraxinus angustifolia subsp. angustifolia 2% Pyrus calleryana 3% Eucalyptus spp. 2% Syzygium floribundum 2%
86
Comparison of 2006 Street tree genus diversity and 2015 Planted tree genus diversity Frank et al. (2006) 2015 Planting Eucalyptus spp. 13% Eucalyptus spp. 13% Acacia spp. 4% Callistemon spp. 7% Melaleuca spp. 3% Casuarina spp. 7% Grevillea spp. 3% Corymbia spp. 5% Prunus spp. 2% Banksia spp. 5% Callistemon spp. 2% Tristaniopsis spp. 5% Acer spp. 2% Ulmus spp. 4% Quercus spp. 2% Pyrus spp. 4% Hakea spp. 2% Lophostemon spp. 3% Fraxinus spp. 1% Acacia spp. 3%
87
29 16/12/19
Comparison of 2006 Street tree genus diversity and 2015 Planted tree genus diversity Frank et al. (2006) 2015 Planting Eucalyptus spp. 13% Eucalyptus spp. 13% Acacia spp. 4% Callistemon spp. 7% Melaleuca spp. 3% Casuarina spp. 7% Grevillea spp. 3% Corymbia spp. 5% Prunus spp. 2% Banksia spp. 5% Callistemon spp. 2% Tristaniopsis spp. 5% Acer spp. 2% Ulmus spp. 4% Quercus spp. 2% Pyrus spp. 4% Hakea spp. 2% Lophostemon spp. 3% Fraxinus spp. 1% Acacia spp. 3%
88
Comparison of 2006 Street tree family diversity and 2015 Planted tree family diversity Frank et al. (2006) 2015 Planting Myrtaceae 52% Myrtaceae 46% Rosaceae 12% Casuarinaceae 9% Oleaceae 5% Proteaceae 7% Platanaceae 5% Fabaceae 5% Mimosaceae (Fabaceae) 3% Rosaceae 5% Proteaceae 3% Ulmaceae 5% Fagaceae 3% Sapindaceae 4% Ulmaceae 2% Fagaceae 3% Pittosporaceae 2% Oleaceae 2% Malvaceae 2% Lythraceae 2%
89
Comparison of 2006 Street tree family diversity and 2015 Planted tree family diversity Frank et al. (2006) 2015 Planting Myrtaceae 52% Myrtaceae 46% Rosaceae 12% Casuarinaceae 9% Oleaceae 5% Proteaceae 7% Platanaceae 5% Fabaceae 5% Mimosaceae (Fabaceae) 3% Rosaceae 5% Proteaceae 3% Ulmaceae 5% Fagaceae 3% Sapindaceae 4% Ulmaceae 2% Fagaceae 3% Pittosporaceae 2% Oleaceae 2% Malvaceae 2% Lythraceae 2%
90
30 16/12/19
Achieving greater diversity
• Set a target.
• Understand your existing tree population and develop your planting program based on balancing the current inequities.
• Regularly assess performance. Develop feedback systems.
• Consider age and spatial diversity.
• Initiate and support tree species innovation within the nursery industry.
91
The high-performing urban forest
• Responds to local context and conditions Strategically managed • Is consistent with community expectations • Is underpinned by evidence-based decisions • Is a climate-ready mix of species Diverse • Has demonstrated succession • Supports biodiversity • Connects people to nature Life-sustaining • Enhances city liveability through environmental services • Inspires, provides a sense of wonder and joy • Spatially dispersed Extensive • Enables ecological connectivity • Is represented in both public and private jurisdictions • Is actively managed Healthy • Has fit-for-purpose above and below ground growing environments • Is protected from development
92
Contract growing
Species name Common Name Family Origin
Phytolacca dioica Ombu Phytolaccaceae Argentina Cardwellia sublimis Northern Silky oak Proteaceae Qld Quercus macrocarpa Bur Oak Fagaceae USA Firmiana simplex Chinese Parasol tree Malvaceae China Taxodium mucronatum Montezuma Cypress Cupressaceae Mexico Abies pinsapo Spanish fir Pinaceae Spain Carya illinoinensis Pecan Juglandaceae USA Gleditsia sinensis Chinese Gleditsia Fabaceae China Pterocarya fraxinifolia Caucasian wingnut Juglandaceae Eurasia Schinus terebinthifolius Brazilian peppercorn Anacardiaceae S America Alloxylon flammeum Queensland tree waratah Proteaceae Qld Flindersia brayleyana Queensland maple Rutaceae Qld Quercus pubescens Downey Oak Fagaceae Med Elaeodendron croceum African Holly Celastraceae S Africa Argyrodendron trifoliolatum White Booyong Malvaceae NSW
Argyrodendron actinophyllum Black Booyong Malvaceae Qld Gymnocladus dioicus Kentucky Coffee Tree Caesalpinioideae USA Ostrya carpinifolia Hop Hornbeam Betulaceae Euro
Carpinus betulus (Non Cultivar) Horn beam Betulaceae Euro Umbellularia californica Californian Laurel Lauraceae USA Beilschmiedia miersii Northern belloto Lauraceae Chile Eriobotrya deflexa Bronze Loquat Rosaceae Asia Auranticarpa rhombifolia Diamond Leaf Pittosporum Pittosporaceae Qld Davidia involucrata Handkerchief tree Cornaceae China
Magnolia delavayi Chinese evergreen Magnolia Magnoliaceae China Carya ovata var. australis Shagbark hickory Juglandaceae USA
93
31 16/12/19
Evaluating new tree species
94
94
Urban Forest Visual
95
96
32 16/12/19
Urban Forest Dashboard
97
Hi Tree Carer,
Hopefully someone has already reported that this tree has a large broken limb which is hanging into the car park below and could be quite a safety / hazard if it moves further.
Kind Regards,
Liz
98
The high-performing urban forest
• Responds to local context and conditions Strategically managed • Is consistent with community expectations • Is underpinned by evidence-based decisions • Is a climate-ready mix of species Diverse • Has demonstrated succession • Supports biodiversity • Connects people to nature Life-sustaining • Enhances city liveability through environmental services • Inspires, provides a sense of wonder and joy • Spatially dispersed Extensive • Enables ecological connectivity • Is represented in both public and private jurisdictions • Is actively managed Healthy • Has fit-for-purpose above and below ground growing environments • Is protected from development
99
33 16/12/19
Appreciation…
Dear London, I am saddened to see that your life expectancy is only around five years.
I am also saddened to see that you have been labelled as a 'Plane Tree' - I do not think you are plane at all, in fact I think the way you wear your bark is quite alluring.
100
Humour… Good afternoon,
Quick message to apologise for making too much noise last night. I had few friends over and things got out of hand. Hope we can still be friends.
Take care, Charlie
101
Poetry and art…
Hey Tree 1066821, what stunning view you have across the Yarra from your home at The Arbory Eatery.
The view was so good, I had to sketch it.
Enjoy your portrait.
Happy Easter.
102
34 16/12/19
The urban forest on private property
103
The high-performing urban forest
• Responds to local context and conditions Strategically managed • Is consistent with community expectations • Is underpinned by evidence-based decisions • Is a climate-ready mix of species Diverse • Has demonstrated succession • Supports biodiversity • Connects people to nature Life-sustaining • Enhances city liveability through environmental services • Inspires, provides a sense of wonder and joy • Spatially dispersed Extensive • Enables ecological connectivity • Is represented in both public and private jurisdictions • Is actively managed Healthy • Has fit-for-purpose above and below ground growing environments • Is protected from development
104
105
35 16/12/19
What are we doing? • Urban Forest Strategy • Open Space Strategy • Green Your Laneway • Nature in the City Strategy
106
How can we increase and maintain greening in on private property?
107
1. Urban Forest Fund
2. Exceptional Tree Register
3. GOCAP
108
36 16/12/19
1. Urban Forest Fund
2. Exceptional Tree Register
3. GOCAP
109
1. Urban Forest Fund
2. Exceptional Tree Register
3. GOCAP
110
1. Urban Forest Fund
2. Exceptional Tree Register
3. GOCAP
111
37 16/12/19
1. Urban Forest Fund
2. Exceptional Tree Register
3. GOCAP
112
113
Property 1 Property 3
ESO ESO
TPZ
SRZ
ESO Property 2
114
38 16/12/19
Exceptional Tree Register
Challenges Opportunities/Wins Limited only to Exceptional tree specimens Round 2 currently underway
Does not protect 99% of trees in the private realm 170 trees protected through the planning scheme
Requests for further protection (Local law, Opportunity to celebrate significant trees, broaden planning overlay) community engagement
Requires State Government support Tree Protection Zone is the planning trigger
Low administration load
115
How does the Urban Forest Fund work?
$ contributions (from Council, government, organisations or NGOs)
Urban Forest Fund
Owner contribution
116
Key statistics (so far) • Two rounds of funding awarded (2017 and 2018): • 33 applications • 7 projects funded • 5773 m2 of greening • $1.2M investment for $4.9M total value
117
39 16/12/19
118
Urban Forest Fund
Challenges Opportunities/Wins Planning permits for projects Retrofitting green Flexibility in the program to respond to dynamic Strong governance and community voice market needs Administrative load Complement GOC(S)AP Planning scheme amendment Bespoke legal and funding agreements Targeted grant programs (Round 3)
Pathway for replacement greening for trees removed for development
119
The Rooftop Project Maps GOCAP – Potential for greening
• 236 ha for intensive green roofs. • 328 ha for extensive green roofs. • 150 ha of useable vertical space for greening
http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/building-and-development/sustainable-building/Pages/rooftop-project.aspx
120
40 16/12/19
The four focus areas and eleven actions
Focus area 2: Develop Focus area 1: Lead by and Maintain Focus area 3: Targeted Focus area 4: Effective Example Partnerships Advocacy Regulation • Build a demonstration • Co-fund through the • Work with • Develop a planning green roof/s Urban Forest Fund Fisherman’s Bend scheme amendment • Evaluate the Green • Advocate for industry taskforce to influence • Enhance Your Laneway project standards and rating a major growth area sustainability • Improve information mechanisms • Continue and improve objectives in the accessibility Canopy green roof Municipal Strategic forum Statement • Join and attend • Provide an ESD/GI CASBE service
121
The four focus areas and eleven actions
Focus area 2: Develop Focus area 1: Lead by and Maintain Focus area 3: Targeted Focus area 4: Effective Example Partnerships Advocacy Regulation • Build a demonstration • Co-fund through the • Work with • Develop a planning green roof/s Urban Forest Fund Fisherman’s Bend scheme amendment • Evaluate the Green • Advocate for industry taskforce to influence • Enhance Your Laneway project standards and rating a major growth area sustainability • Improve information mechanisms • Continue and improve objectives in the accessibility Canopy green roof Municipal Strategic forum Statement • Join and attend • Provide an ESD/GI CASBE service
122
Scope of business case for Planning Scheme Amendment All land that is covered by Sustainability elements the Melbourne Planning considered as targets/standards Scheme
All building types
123
41 16/12/19
GOCAP Business case for planning scheme amendment
Challenges Opportunities/Wins Tier 2 developers in the reference group Tier 1 developer participation
Finding the right expertise in the business case Learning by doing – Diverse consultancy pool consortium No current mandatory GI requirements in Australia to benchmark Requires State Government support
124
Revised Tree Valuation Method
125
The high-performing urban forest
• Responds to local context and conditions Strategically managed • Is consistent with community expectations • Is underpinned by evidence-based decisions • Is a climate-ready mix of species Diverse • Has demonstrated succession • Supports biodiversity • Connects people to nature Life-sustaining • Enhances city liveability through environmental services • Inspires, provides a sense of wonder and joy • Spatially dispersed Extensive • Enables ecological connectivity • Is represented in both public and private jurisdictions • Is actively managed Healthy • Has fit-for-purpose above and below ground growing environments • Is protected from development
126
42 16/12/19
City of Melbourne Tree Valuation Formula
Removal costs Removal, replacement and two years maintenance + Amenity Value Where Value = Basic Value x Species x Aesthetics x Locality x Condition + Value of a tree = Ecosystem services value Calculated using i-Tree + Reinstatement greening costs
127
127
Tree Valuation as a $ Disincentive
128
Tree Valuation as a $ Disincentive
129
43 16/12/19
Why do we need to update the method?
1990 → Valuation Method derived from CTLA 2012 → Ecosystem service quantifications added to valuation method
Since then…. •New scientific research •Technical advancements •Evolved policy focus
Objectives of update: •Accuracy •Alignment to strategic objectives •Incorporating recent research •Consistency with global best practice
130
130
Tree Valuation Formula
Removal costs Removal, replacement and two years maintenance + Amenity Value Value of a tree = Where Value = Basic Value x Species x Aesthetics x Locality x Condition + Ecosystem services value Calculated using i-Tree + Reinstatement greening costs Reinstating the growing environment following development
Google: City of Melbourne tree valuation 131
131
Amenity Value = Base Value x Species x Aesthetics x Locality x Condition
Base Value updates
• Base values table to be updated annually and shared on CoM website
• Updates will be based on ‘rise and fall’ value from tree maintenance contract
• Table extended to include base values for trees between 2cm and 6cm DBH 132
132
44 16/12/19
Amenity Value = Base Value x Species x Aesthetics x Locality x Condition
New modifier: climate suitability
Species that are likely to grow well in hotter temperatures will be valued more highly.
Climate suitability modifiers Score
Non-climate ready species, or species without 0.0 climate suitability rating. Species suitable for current climate +0.1
Species moderately climate suitable +0.2
Species very climate suitable +0.3
133
133
Amenity Value = Base Value x Species x Aesthetics x Locality x Condition
New modifier: habitat value
Trees that have habitat features will be valued more highly.
Habitat modifiers Score
Tree species indigenous to the +0.2 local region or ecosystem Australian native tree species +0.1
Tree host to native mistletoe +0.1
Tree bearing visible hollow/s +0.2 wider than 5cm
134
134
Amenity Value = Base Value x Species x Aesthetics x Locality x Condition
Locality factors Score Locality multiplier updates In undeveloped bushland or open forest 0.5 In country areas and country roads 1.0 • New modifier: priority planting street In outer suburb areas and residential streets 1.5 In inner city suburbs 1.75 In City Park or Reserve; significant street near 2.0 City Centre In City Garden, City Square, Mall or City Centre 2.25 secondary street City Centre Main Street, Principal Boulevard 2.5 Modifiers Tree in identified priority planting +1.0 street
Tree occurs in a known ecological +1.0 habitat corridor
135
135
45 16/12/19
Amenity Value = Base Value x Species x Aesthetics x Locality x Condition
Locality factors Score Locality multiplier updates In undeveloped bushland or open forest 0.5 In country areas and country roads 1.0 • New modifier: habitat corridors In outer suburb areas and residential streets 1.5 In inner city suburbs 1.75 In City Park or Reserve; significant street near 2.0 City Centre In City Garden, City Square, Mall or City Centre 2.25 secondary street City Centre Main Street, Principal Boulevard 2.5 Modifiers Tree in identified priority planting +1.0 street
Tree occurs in a known ecological +1.0 habitat corridor
136
136
Amenity Value = Base Value x Species x Aesthetics x Locality x Condition x Canopy
Percentage New factor: Canopy form crown missing Score 0 – 10% 1 Canopy form is now a standalone factor 11 – 20% 0.9 which provides a finer scale for valuing Canopy form 21 – 30% 0.8 Canopy form 31 – 40% 0.7 the loss of a portion of canopy. relates to the 41 – 50% 0.6 shape and form of the tree canopy 51 – 60% 0.5 61 – 70% 0.4 71 – 80% 0.3 81 – 90% 0.2 91 – 100% 0.1
137
137
Tree Valuation Formula
Removal costs Removal, replacement and two years maintenance + Amenity Value Value of a tree = Where Value = Basic Value x Species x Aesthetics x Locality x Condition + Ecosystem services value Calculated using i-Tree + Reinstatement greening costs Reinstating the growing environment following development
138
138
46 16/12/19
i-Tree Eco Pollutant Price per Price per metric tonne, Updates metric converted to AUD (March tonne 2018, USD=AUD1.30) (USD) • Shift from market value to social cost
NOx $432 $566.71 of carbon (eg $23/t to $150/t)
SOx $148 $192.37 • Air pollution values shifted from cost O3 $2849 $3722.63 of removal to cost of health impacts.
PM2.5 $116,591 $152,214.38 • No change to avoided runoff values
• Amenity (Structural) value not included
139
139
Incentivising integrated growing conditions
Options for reinstatement greening Developer agrees to deliver an improved greening outcome following project completion, to the satisfaction of the Council Arborist. Option 1 No fee. Improved greening will be inspected upon completion and if it does not meet the agreed standard, the full Option 3 fee will be charged retrospectively. Developer does not agree to undertake any reinstatement greening but the tree plot can be reinstated by CoM after the project is finished (either in the same location or relocated within the same street segment). $5,025.28 per Option 2 tree Where plot cannot be replanted due to underground service conflicts, the full Option 3 fee will be charged retrospectively. Developer does not agree to undertake any reinstatement greening and the tree plot cannot be replanted. $10,050.56 per Option 3 Tree planting costs are based on the average cost of tree planting projects tree undertaken by the City of Melbourne. 140
140
Testing Overall value Total value increased from $1,314,379 to $1,376,486 = +5%
Amenity portion Total amenity value increased from $1,048,486 to $1,371,785 = +31%
i-Tree Eco portion Total ecosystem service increased from $841 to $4,700 = 460%
141
141
47 16/12/19
Example: London Plane
142
142
Example: River Red Gum
143
143
Example: Lemon-scented Gum
144
144
48 16/12/19
Example: Jacaranda
145
145
Example: English Elm
146
146
Example: Ecological value
147
147
49 16/12/19
Example: Ecological value
148
148
The high-performing urban forest
• Responds to local context and conditions Strategically managed • Is consistent with community expectations • Is underpinned by evidence-based decisions • Is a climate-ready mix of species Diverse • Has demonstrated succession • Supports biodiversity • Connects people to nature Life-sustaining • Enhances city liveability through environmental services • Inspires, provides a sense of wonder and joy • Spatially dispersed Extensive • Enables ecological connectivity • Is represented in both public and private jurisdictions • Is actively managed Healthy • Has fit-for-purpose above and below ground growing environments • Is protected from development
149
Thank you
LinkedIn – David Callow
150
50