The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutUrban and Community Forestry Development Plan - 2009 (ORD 5797)Aw %FENNO 0 O%om ONE %.1 'm %p 0 %W N.7 0 o Ohl e� �� 4, W. .111, 1 A, A 1V 'ErY- PREPARED WORTHY AND ASS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PARK AND ENVIRONMENTAL, DESIGN_ 1 of RENTON. AHEAD OF THE CUp,14E• e o CITY OF RENTON Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan August 2009 Prepared by: WORTHY AND ASSOCIATES, LLC Landscape Architecture, Park, and Environmental Design 1932 First Avenue, Suite 606 Seattle, WA 98101 With assistance from: MAKERS Architecture and Urban Design Sound Tree Solutions, Inc. City of ' o Mayor Denis Law Councilmembers Randy Corman, Council President Don Persson, Council President Pro-Tem Terri Briere Marcie Palmer King Parker Greg Taylor Rich Zwicker Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington Parks Commission Al Dieckman (Chair) Cynthia Burns Mike O'Donin Ron Regis Larry Reymann Tim Searing Troy Wigestrand Administrative and Judicial Services Marty Wine, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer Preeti Shridhar, Communication Director Bonnie Walton, City Clerk City Attorney Larry Warren Community & Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Suzanne Dale Esrey, Economic Development Director Neil Watts, Development Services Director Chip Vincent, Planning Director Community Services Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Leslie Betlach, Parks Director Finance & Information Services Iwen Wang, Administrator Fire & Emergency Services I. David Daniels, Chief Human Resources and Risk Management Nancy Carlson, Administrator Police Kevin Milosevich, Chief Public Works Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Peter Hahn, Deputy PW Administrator Lys Hornsby, Utility Systems Director Mike Stenhouse, Maintenance Services Director City of 0� S.-Pr. CITY OF RENTON Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan Contents 1. Definition of Urban Forestry....................................3 2. Task Force and Consultants .................................... 5 3. Executive Summary .............................................. 7 4. Vision and Mission Statements................................9 S. Introduction........................................................ 11 6. Benefits.............................................................. 13 a. Benefits to Our Environment....................................14 b. Benefits to Our Economy ........................................ 15 c. Benefits to Our Safety, Health, Quality of Life, and Identity.. 16 d. Quantifying Benefits & Costs...................................17 7. Historical Background ........................................... 18 8. Current State of the Forest.....................................22 9. Current Urban Forest Management Issues ..................25 10. Renton's Business and Comprehensive Plans...............30 11. Urban Forestry Goals and Objectives ....................... 32 12. Key Strategies.....................................................34 13. Administration and Management .............................37 14. Evaluation...........................................................38 15. Implementation Schedule ...................................... 39 16. Summary and Conclusion.......................................39 17. Resources Cited...................................................40 18. Appendix............................................................41 a. 2009-2020 Implementation Schedule b. Program Timeline c. Goals, Objectives and Strategies Definition Chart d. Executive Summary: 2007 and 2009 Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Reports e. Committee of the Whole - Committee Report f. 2009 City of Renton Limits and Surrounding Area Aerial Photograph from 2007 g. 2008 Urban Forestry Programs Comparisons Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 1 I Urban Forestry The art, science and technology of managing trees, forests and natural systems in and around cities, suburbs and towns for the health and well-being of all people. National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Council Sugar maples in Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan - 3 CITY OF RENTON Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan Urban and Community Forestry Task Force Community Services Department, Parks Division Terry Flatley, Urban Forestry & Natural Resources Manager Todd Black, Capital Projects Coordinator Community and Economic Development Department Chip Vincent, Planning Director Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Fire and Emergency Services Department Camille Walls, Lead Fire Inspector Cory Cappalletti, Fire Inspector Police Department Kent Curry, Commander Public Works Department Richard Marshall, Maintenance Services Manager Jim Seitz, Design and Planning Program Supervisor Ronald Straka, Utility Engineering Supervisor Patrick Zellner, Street Maintenance Services Supervisor Human Resources and Risk Management Department Pauletta Sulky, Risk Management Analyst Consultant Team Worthy and Associates, LLC, Landscape Architecture Steve Worthy, ASLA, Manager Laura Davis, ASLA Carolyn Alcorn, ASLA Madora Lawson, Manager MAKERS Architecture and Urban Design John Owen, Planner Sound Tree Solutions, Inc. Elizabeth Walker, Community Forester City of V �- N Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan Executive Summary The Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan is a new document that summarizes the historic and current conditions of the City's forest, and outlines steps to safely and efficiently manage and develop City forest resources. The plan builds upon the City's existing urban forestry programs in a formalized way. The Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan is a collaborative effort between the Com- munity Services, Community and Economic Development, Police, Public Works, Human Resources and Risk Management, and Fire and Emergency Services Departments. Urban Forestry Task Force (the Task Force) members, representing varied backgrounds came together to prepare this forward think- ing plan which provides mission and vision statements, goals and objectives, and builds upon foundations in the current Renton Comprehensive Plan and Business Plan, ensuring protection of the safety and eco- nomic future of Renton's citizens. Urban Forestry Task Force at London plane tree site The Urban and Community Forestry Devel- opment Plan proposes steps to protect trees, forestry assets and the health of Renton's citizens. Criteria for prioritizing resources to achieve best value have been used in the development of the listed improvements with short term, mid term and long term time frames. Renton's "Ahead of the Curve" theme leads us to proactively engage in planning for rebuilding and maintaining a healthy forest and other vegetation. The City of Renton Urban Forestry Task Force invites you to read further to gain insights into why we are excited to present the Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan. Renton's Urban and Community For- estry Development Plan. In the following chapters you will find the process that the Task Force followed in developing the Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan (the Plan). The Task Force developed four major goals for the Plan that are linked to the City's Business Goals, and Comprehensive Plan. These goals are elaborated in the Plan and focus on: . Achieving high performance standards; . Managing a healthy urban forest and other vegetation; . Increasing public safety; and . Adopting supportive legislation. Linked to a 10-year program timeline with supportive objectives, strategies, and actions, these goals can be closely monitored. We invite you to explore beyond the first few pages and introduction of this Plan to learn more in the following chapters and appendi- ces: Urban Forest Benefits. This section includes a fascinating look at nearly two dozen ways that Renton receives environmen- tal, economic, safety, health, quality of life, and identity benefits from our City forests. Historical Background. There has been a remarkable transformation of the forest from the time of the native Duwamish people continuing to the present day. Background information includes how Renton has been slowly expanding street tree care for over 30 years. Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development PIM Current State of the Forest. An urban forest inventory was completed for Renton in 2007 and covered 130,000 public trees: over 4,000 street trees, 20,000 park trees, and 105,000 trees in natural areas. With City annexations since 2007, the count of the trees has grown and additional surveys are proposed to keep the inventory and health records of our forest resources up to date. Current Urban ForestManagement Issues. Our forest can not take care of itself. Developed by the Task Force, this section summarizes the results of a year of meetings that reviewed topics, issues, concerns and vision for the City's public urban forest and vegetation. Categories reviewed include envi- ronment, development, sustainability, public safety, risk, and responsibility. Goals. Derived from Task Force work- shops, field trips, and informed discussions, a list of goals, objectives, and strategies are described in this section with further detail in the appendices. A ten-year program outline has been drafted (see appendix) to map out sequential steps to success for Renton's future Urban Forestry Program. Administration and Management. Since the urban forest needs human help to sur- vive and prosper, this section describes how the Urban Forestry and Natural Resource; Manager will manage trained professional support staff, and volunteers. ThtTas°k Fc reached consensus on the need for close cc dination between City departments. Suc< will be achieved through partnerships, coi munication, and acknowledgements to th, many departments, staff, and citizen volur teers who will contribute time and energy the Urban Forestry Program. Evaluation. This chapter describes the v in which we will measure and evaluate oui success and make adjustments to optimize results and benefits of the Plan in coming years. While some of Renton's neighbor- ing cities have long-standing urban forestr programs that the Task Force studied, our situation and needs are in many ways unique and will evolve over time to fit Renton's for- est, other vegetation and citizen needs. Implementation Schedule, Summary and Appendices. This 10-year plan is rep- resented by the Implementation Schedule with associated costs. Additional detail and access to reports and websites is provided to broaden the reader's understanding of the future opportunities of the Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan and Program. Arbor Day volunteers 18 — Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan Arbor Day volunteers onUrban and Community Forestry Development Plan Vision Renton's urban and community forest is healthy, diverse, and sustainable, contributing to Renton's identity in the region. Mission Renton will create a sustainable and exemplary urban forest, enhancing the livability of the community through education, coordination, stewardship, and conservation. _ Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 9 Introduction Ahealthy urban forest supports the City of Renton's goals of balancing economic vitality with environmental quality and social well being by enhancing the environment, increasing attractiveness and livability, and fostering civic pride. Studies consistently show that trees and other vegetation filter pollutants and increase property values, attract visitors, and promote community dur- ing events such as Arbor Day. The Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan is the collaborative effort of Task Force members from City depart- ments to create a pro -active work plan that guides the City's urban forestry and vegeta- tion management programs. This plan builds upon existing programs and establishes the focus and direction over the next 10 years. With the assistance of the consultant team, led by Worthy and Associates with support from Sound Tree Solutions and MAKERS, the Task Force reviewed the state of Renton's urban forest, from the downtown core to new and existing commercial and residential districts. Early interaction between different City departments in the development process was key to developing appropriate strategies Mayor Denis Law receives Renton's Tree City USA Award from Chuck Turley, State Forester Arbor Day volunteers to ensure the program's vision and mission statements. The group discussed various issues and opportunities, from public safety to current tree regulations that reflected many of the public's concerns with vegetation. The intention of this Plan is to lay the foun- dation for urban forestry programming, utilizing a collaborative process involving an Interdepartmental Team as various strategies progress through the years. Through imple- mentation of the Plan, the City of Renton will realize the maximum benefits afforded by the urban forest, making the community a great place to live, work and play. The Plan does not provide specific informa- tion on the components of each program or strategy. These details will be developed as each program is initiated, some with direct public involvement. For example, the Task Force recognized the need for a forestry ordinance. This plan proposes a sequence of actions to accomplish the ordinance, but it does not suggest policies to be included in the ordinance. Ordinance development is left to an ordinance development team whose composition is yet to be determined. Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 11 Urban Forest Benefits Though the urban forest provides a broad range of ecosystem services —direct and indirect benefits provided to the City, its citi- zens, the region, and the planet —we tend to take the benefits for granted because they are not assigned a dollar value. Local cities, state, and national sources have found great value in urban forests. (Please refer to the resources and websites on page 40.) As a result, these green assets are often over- looked in the land development process and destroyed for a fraction of their larger economic and ecosystem values. Long-term management of natural assets brings a higher return than their short-term elimination. The benefits and value of Renton's urban and community forest are summarized in Figure # 1 and further described on the following pages. Figure #1: Urban Forest Benefits (Figure by Worthy and Associates, 2009) Boost property values Great benefit to cost ratio- 4:1 Community image enhancement Reduce , cooling costs Reduce heat islands Make life more pleasant Reduce stormwater utility costs and decrease flooding Carbon sequestering L VI-1 VMS 1 .l Improve air quality, reduce greenhouse gases to combat climate change n__..: �1_ ...:I J I:t_ groundwater Protect biodiversity Improve water .._1:�_ Provide shade Improve mental and physical health Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 13 Benefits to Our Environment As humans we need clean air and water to survive. Our urban forests and other vegetation help provide and protect these key environmental resources. Protect water quality and quantity, and decrease erosion and flooding. . Vegetated landscapes intercept and absorb rainwater, reducing erosion and recharging aquifers. . Trees stabilize slopes by absorbing water and binding soil with their roots. . Trees and soils absorb and filter sediment and pollutants, reducing the amount reach- ing aquatic habitats. Enhance wildlife habitat and protect biodiversity. . Diverse and interconnected urban forests create habitat for birds, mammals, insects, improve air quality and reduce green- housegases. . Through photosynthesis, urban forests take in the most prevalent "greenhouse gas;' carbon dioxide, while releasing the oxygen we need to breathe. Mature trees absorb and filter large amounts of nitrogen oxides, ammonia, sul- fur dioxide, ozone and particulates, which cleans the air to improve human health and meet clean -air standards. Moderate extremes in local climate. . Trees provide shade and release cooling water vapor through their leaves to reduce areas of higher temperature ("heat islands") caused by heat -absorbing pavement and building materials. . Stands of trees provide buffering from strong winds. reptiles, fish and amphibians. . Due to cooling, trees reduce fuel tank . Along shorelines, the urban forest plays an emissions of parked cars. important role in salmon recovery by cool- ing water, stabilizing the bank, providing food and habitat. Urban forests aid salmon recovery 14 — Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan Benefits to Our Economy Studies of the ecosystem services provided by trees in Northwest cities have shown a benefit of three to four times the initial investment (Re -Leaf for Stormwater Man- agement, 2008). Some benefits are directly measurable when compared to the short and long-term costs of engineered solutions. Urban forests increase property values Increase property values. Increase economic stability. Urban forests increase economic stability by attracting new businesses, customers, tourists, and residents to cities and encour- aging shoppers to spend more for goods in business districts (Wolf 2007). Views of green landscapes increase work productivity and job satisfaction for office workers. Reduce the demand on engineered infra- structure. . The urban forest is a recommended best - management practice for managing storm - water. The interception, absorption, and filtration of water by trees and soils greatly reduces the costs of constructing and main- taining stormwater detention and water - treatment systems. Tree shade extends the life of asphalt surfaces by up to 20 years, reducing costs of repair and replacement. Figure #2: Studies show that yard trees increase Increased Property Values property values by as much as 25%. The property -value benefits alone can cover investment debt and maintenance expenses of trees. In new developments, the increase in property values can offset the extra costs of retaining trees (Wolf 2007). e Trees reduce the amount of time houses take to sell (Wolf 2007). Reduce energy costs. Deciduous trees can protect small build- ings from the heat of solar radiation in summer while allowing the sun's rays to pass through in winter, decreasing cooling and heating needs and potential carbon dioxide emissions. The street tree pictured above adds $7,593 to the price of the house it fronts and $7,098 to the seven houses within 100 feet, giving a total value of $14,691. The dotted line represents the tree's 100-ft radius sphere of influence. (Donovan & Butry, 2008) Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 15 ■ Benefits to Our Safety, Health, Quality of Life, and Identity Aproperly managed, healthy urban forest is an indicator of a healthy community life; and an aggressive urban forestry program would place Renton "Ahead of the Curve" compared to other leading high -quality com- munities in the Puget Sound Region. Improve safety. • Studies show that street trees lead to re- duced and more appropriate urban traffic speeds, with reduced road rage. • Street trees create safer walking environ- ments. Urban areas with trees and a green grow- ing environment have dramatically lower rates of crime including domestic violence. People come together under the shade of trees, which increases community connec- tion and reduces opportunities for crime (Kuo et al, 1998). Improve personal health and enjoyment. • Trees provide rain, sun, heat and skin protection. • Urban forests reduce health issues associ- ated with poor air quality and tailpipe emissions. Urban forests increase aesthetic value Contact with green spaces reduces stress • Trees create opportunities for outdoor recreation and daily contact with nature and are fundamental to physical health and well being, reducing stress -related illnesses. • Contact with green spaces reduces blood pressure and improves overall emotional and psychological health. • Trees buffer the impacts of transportation and commercial activities. Enhance community and neighborhood. • By improving the sense of place and com- munity pride, urban forestry programs strengthen ties among neighbors. • Participants in tree planting demonstrate an interest in the future, care, and commit- ment to the places they live and stimulate further investment for the betterment of their communities. In turn, this helps re- duce crime, graffiti, and litter (MacPherson et al, 2002). Increase aesthetic value. • Planting street trees is a cost effective ap- proach for a community to upgrade the visual quality of its downtown (McPherson et al, 2002). • Trees can block or soften undesirable views, such as large parking lots or industrial areas. 616 — Renton Urban and Community Forestry Developli t P City of Renton Quantifying Benefits & Costs Studies by municipalities in the Pacific Northwest and scientific research show that urban forestry is a good investment. The Urban Ecosystem Analysis for the City of Bel- levue by American Forests states that, for the year 2007: . Bellevue's assessed tree canopy provided 62 million cubic feet of stormwater deten- tion services, conservatively valued at $123 million; . Removed 687,000 lbs of pollutants from the air, valued at $1.55 million; and Stored 331,702 tons of carbon and seques- tered 2,582 tons of carbon. The 21 % loss of Bellevue's trees from 1986 to 2006 resulted in over a $7 million reduction in stormwater benefits. Quantifying these benefits varies depending on the local climate, species, amount of leaf area on the tree, tree age, and structure of the stand of vegetation. Larger -stature trees maximize urban benefits, many times that of smaller trees (Center for Urban Forest Research). The benefits are realized more directly where the forest originates but the benefits have an effect across City limits and across the nation for the common good. This resource must be cared for and managed properly to ensure that current and future residents will enjoy its benefits. Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 17 Historical Background First was the Forest. The Duwamish were the first people known to inhabit the pres- ent-day location of the City of Renton. At that time, dense stands of old -growth trees, including Douglas fir, western red cedar, and western hemlock, blanketed the hills above fertile river valleys. The land was abundant with natural resources. Trees were harvested in limited quantities to build longhouses and large dugout canoes. Lumber and Coal Harvesting. Renton's first white settler, Henry Tobin, came to this area in 1853 with business interests in lum- ber. After his neighbor discovered coal the following year, Tobin, Dr. R.H. Bigelow, and two other early settlers formed the Duwa- mish Coal Company and built a sawmill at the junction of the Cedar and Black Rivers. Timber from the mill was used to shore up coal -mine tunnels. The mill burned during the Indian War of 1855, temporarily halting mining operations. More white settlers arrived in the 1860s and began clearing trees, often by burning, to open land for farming and dairy. New coal seams were discovered in outlying areas and Renton's rivers provided important shipping connections from Lake Washington to Seattle Captain William Renton (R.H.S. #41.063) Renton loggers, 1908-1909 (Renton Historical Society #2749) and beyond. The small settlement near the lake became an important stopover for lodg- ing, food, and supplies. Significant coal discoveries in Renton in the 1870s changed the farming community into a rugged mining town. Active logging opera- tions resumed with the opening of the Parker sawmill. The timber was again used to sup- port mine shafts, but also to construct homes and businesses. The City of Renton is Born. Erasmus Smithers filed the first square -mile plat of the town of Renton in 1875. The town was named in honor of Captain William Renton, the most successful lumber merchant of the time who heavily financed Renton's early coal industry. The City of Renton incorporated in 1901 with a population of approximately 1,300. Additional transportation improvements and industrial establishments spurred growth throughout the 20th century. The most dra- matic growth period occurred with the influx of wartime industry workers at Boeing and PACCAR between 1940 and 1950, when the population rose from 4,500 to over 16,000. Forest clearing continued to make way for the airport, industrial areas, commercial centers, and housing. 18 — Renton Urban and Community Forestry Develop Urban Forestry's Early Beginnings in Renton. Early urban forestry in Renton included tree planting funded by various federal grants and maintained by the Public Works Department. No formal maintenance program was in place during the years prior to 1980. Trees were managed and maintained on a reactive, emergency basis. During the early 1980s a Street Tree Com- mittee was formed to address many urban tree issues. They offered recommendations to City Council and developed regulations for planting and maintaining trees. Mature trees in the downtown business district growing in small sidewalk cut-outs resulted in damage to the sidewalks. A street tree ordinance was drafted but never adopted. In 1982, Renton's Parks Department took over responsibility for trees in the down- town area from Public Works. The Parks Department spearheaded and established a routine vegetation management program that included improved standards for evaluations, street tree pruning, removals, and replace- ments. In the 1980s and 1990s, tree maintenance reverted to the improper practice of round- ing -over trees (a form of topping) to keep large -maturing sizes in scale with buildings and overhangs. Tree removal and sidewalk replacement was an expensive result of trees that became too large in limited planting spaces. Unregulated tree planting in neighborhoods was customary. Residential streets, planted mainly with ornamental cherry and purple - leaf plum trees, were eventually topped by residents. Public Works struggled with the resulting "bushy" trees. Street sweeping proved difficult and both vehicles and trees were needlessly damaged. Public safety was also being compromised by trees blocking street lights. The conflict between nature and civilization was apparent. Nearly every City department and many residents were affected by a lack of proper tree planning and design during this period, and struggled to find an effective solu- tion to public safety issues. In the 1990s, the City's aggressive program of acquiring additional natural areas provided important watershed and wildlife habitat. However, development pressures resulted in encroachments, unauthorized use, and trash disposal by both private residents and devel- opers within natural areas. Besides topping in such areas, whole tree removal was occurring without City authorization. Natural area City of Renton before 1905 (Renton Historical Society #414) enton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 19 lands were being partially occupied by a few residents, mostly because they were not aware of property line locations. Discarded yard waste and house plants contributed to the establishment of invasive plants such as ivy. Urban Forestry Awakening During the 1990s. In 1992, a tree ordinance was again proposed but was never brought to City Council for adoption and never resurrected again. The problems that had been occurring with trees in the built environment, the lack of good design standards and unregulated maintenance continued unabated. Protecting the public has been a paramount concern of City departments despite some of the controversy that has ensued. It often takes an incident to occur before a hazard is recognized. In 1997, 65 mature bigleaf maples along Maple Valley Highway were removed by the City after several tree limbs fell, temporarily closing the highway and the Maplewood Golf Course main entrance. After careful assessment of their condition, it was determined that the maples posed a significant risk to public safety. While there was public outcry at their removal, many local residents praised the City for being proactive. In 1998, a Beautification Program was adopted by City Council. City leaders recog- nized that trees were an important and inte- gral part of the community consistent with City goals. The plan included urban forestry components such as a tree ordinance (not completed), public education and awareness, a tree inventory, a tree management policy, an adopt -a -park program, marketing plan, and a method for measuring performance. The 21 st Century. By 2000, the City of Renton's population grew to 50,052 and to over 80,000 in 2009. Through a series of annexations, Renton's boundaries have expanded to 22.3 square -miles (Figure #3). Rapid development has replaced the old - growth forests of the past. Subsequently, an awareness of the pace of development, loss of City trees, salmon recovery, and better water quality both locally and regionally have driven an interest in urban forest conser- vation, enhancement and programming. Tree maintenance continued to be shared by Public Works and the Community Ser- vices Departments. Public Works regularly maintained trees in neigh- borhoods where branches interfered with sweeper trucks during the winter. Otherwise, most of the street trees Figure #3: Annexations Since Renton's Inception in 1901 Worthy and Associates, 2009 were maintained by Public Works crews on a reactive basis follow- ing calls or complaints. Community Services crews provided more frequent maintenance of trees in the downtown core, collaborating with Public Works on tree and sidewalk con- flicts and tree plantings in sidewalk openings. Storm damage to trees was coordinated city- wide by the Public Works Department with Renton aerial view, 1970 (Renton Historical Society #2630A) 120 — Renton Urban and Ca.nunity Forestry Develop Community Services providing support. Tree maintenance service contracts issued by the Community Services Department required tree work performed by International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborists to assure proper maintenance to City trees. The Beautification Program continued to move forward and in 2002 Renton's first City Forester was hired under the title, Parks Maintenance Manager, and worked in the Community Services Department. Since 2002 progress has continued to the present: • Staff training in arboriculture and intro- duction to proper tree and vegetation management to Community Services and Public Works staff. Elimination of all rounding -over (topping) of public trees. • Cooperative partnerships with Puget Sound Energy (PSE) to reduce tree and electric wire conflicts. On Park Avenue, ash trees were removed by PSE and PSE donated "wire -friendly" trees. . Eliminated planting large maturing trees in small sidewalk cut-out sections. Utilizing larger 4 x 8 foot cut-out sections and plant- ing smaller -maturing trees. • Completed a city-wide tree inventory and assessment for street trees, park trees and trees in natural areas. Street trees and park trees were located using global positioning satellite (GPS) coordinates and integrated into the City's graphic information system (GIS). • Budgeting in the Capital Improvement Program for Forestry Program Develop- ment and Tree Maintenance. • Adopted Tree Retention [Protection] Regulations for new development. • Renton's first certified arborist trained in 2006 under the ISA certification program. • Added tree -related policies to the City's Comprehensive Plan that regulated street trees along new or reconstructed streets and the landscape of new property devel- opments. City staff from multiple departments met to form the Urban and Community Forest Task Force, hired consultants and initiated the process for preparation of the Renton Urban and Community Forestry Develop- ment Plan. • Presentations to elected officials and orga- nizations of the Renton Urban and Com- munity Forestry Development Plan. Recognition. In 2008, for the first time, the City of Renton achieved Tree ® City USA status for efforts TREE CITY USA in urban forestry program- ming. This award is given annually by the National Arbor Day Founda- tion in cooperation with the National Associ- ation of State Foresters and the USDA Forest Service. Renton can now place Tree City USA signs at community entrances to show visitors that Renton cares about its environment and is dedicated to preserving a quality lifestyle. The annual Tree City USA award presenta- tion and Arbor Day celebration offer excel- lent publicity opportunities —reaching large numbers of people with information about tree care and conservation. Becoming a Tree City USA, Renton now qualifies to receive awards of state and federal agency grants. (www arborday.org) In 2009, the Maplewood Golf Course became Washington's second municipal golf course to be designated a "Certified Audubon Coop- erative Sanctuary" by Audubon International. Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan - 21 Figure #4: American Forests Regional Ecosystem Analysis Puget Sound Metropolitan Area,1998 Landsat MSS 1972 Current State of the Forest Landsat TM 1986 Is the green going away? These historic images are provided by American Forests, a non-profit organization that has been study- ing the loss of trees and canopy cover around Puget Sound and the United States. Tree cover shows as green for areas more than half vegetated. Impervious surfaces show as black. During a 24 year period from 1972 to 1996 over one third of our "green" has vanished. Fortunately, with improved planning and management of our urban forests, together we can start reversing this loss. What is the loss of forest costing us? On the regional scale around the Puget Sound region: . $2.4 billion in lost stormwater flow ben- efits; and • $95 million in reduced air pollution con- trols (American Forests 1997). Urban Forest Inventory. To assess tree health, inform maintenance and identify Landsat TM 1996 planting opportunities, a Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Report was completed for Renton in March 2007 (see appendix for Executive Summary). The report studied public trees located in parks, natural areas, and public right-of-ways, excluding assessment of trees on private and recently annexed lands. Public trees were catalogued for location, species, stem diam- eter, health and appraised value. The report identified nearly 130,000 public trees: 4,200 street trees, 20,000 park trees and 105,000 in natural areas. The data gathered helps deter- mine the value of the current resource, species diversity, age distribution, health and safety issues, maintenance needs, and opportunities for planting. The report provides a key first step in improved management of public trees in Renton. One of the more striking results of the inventory was the assessment of the real estate value contributed by Renton's current street tree population and the potential for routine maintenance to increase that value. 22 — Renton Urban and Community Forestry DevelopIF N ment Plan Liberty Park in spring The inventory report assessed the present value (2007) to be over $6.6 million for the 4,200 street tree population. Improving the condition and increasing the size of healthy, properly pruned and maintained street trees can more than double that value. Proper maintenance for improved health also reduces potential risks a tree might have, improving public safety. The inventory report specifically catalogued many tree -related needs and issues such as: . The need for greater species diversity. Most of Renton's trees are maple spe- cies (about 35%), yet forestry guidelines suggest having no more than 10% of any species due to the higher risk of disease or insect outbreaks when utilizing one species (e.g. Dutch elm disease). The need for properly pruning younger trees early and often for structural integrity. Renton's street and park trees are young, with 75% of them planted in the last 30 years. In an urban setting, younger trees require extra maintenance to minimize structural growth problems and protect public safety as these trees become larger. Avoiding tree topping practices. Topping is not an acceptable practice in any situa- tion, and makes trees less safe. The City needs to set the example for homeowners Renton natural area by never tree topping. The need for better specifications and standards of construction to allow planting the largest maturing sized trees possible. Research indicates the larger the tree the greater the benefits to the community. Large -maturing trees may require special engineering techniques to allow for their growth with a minimum of damage to sur- rounding infrastructure such as sidewalks. Optimizing the number of trees instead of maximizing the number of trees. Trees spaced closer than their optimal spread have the potential to increase maintenance costs (more pruning), reduce visibility (commercial signs blocked), increase com- petition (trees die sooner) and the negative affect intense shading has on groundcovers and shrubs. In addition, planting too many trees increases installation costs unneces- sarily (trees, grates, frames and concrete costs). Improved tree planting standards for street trees. In the past, trees have been planted near or under street lights and too close to traffic signs, signals, utilities, and fire hy- drants, reducing public safety and making access difficult during emergencies. Tree stakes left for more than a year have damaged trees. Renton Urban and Communitykorestry Development Plan — 23 . Increasing canopy cover through tree plant- ing in neighborhoods where nearly 2,000 trees could be planted at optimal spacing. . Improving forest composition in natural areas. Planting with desirable species, par- ticularly conifers, at a higher density will increase the habitat quality of natural area woodlands. Removal of invasives such as blackberry and ivy is needed. Figure #5 below from the Green Seattle Partnership 20 Year Plan shows what happens if Seattle's (and Renton's) natural areas are not maintained and invasive non-native plants are allowed to take over. Community for- ests urgently need English ivy removal or in 50-100 years these natural area forests could be destroyed. Figure #6 illustrates how the removal of English ivy, together with plant- ing a balanced mix of native trees, shrubs, and groundcovers, will lead to healthy and sus- tainable forests. Figure #5: If Urban Forests are not Restored (Cascade Land Conservancy) NOW 20 Years 50 Years 100 Years Ivy introduced from Ivy covers and Trees fall and few Forest is destroyed private property spreads kills trees native shrubs exist leaving an ivy desert into urban forests Figure #6: Healthy Urban Forest Restoration (Cascade Land Conservancy) NOW 20 Years 50 Years 100 Years Ivy is targeted for Ivy is removed, Mixed forest is Healthy restored removal new native plantings established forest 24 — Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan Current Urban Forest Management Issues Maintenance and Management of Public Trees. Today, the Community Services Department maintains 1,000 street trees within the downtown core and all park trees, with the goal of pruning trees on a five-year cycle. Staff and private contractors provide maintenance. Contractors are mostly utilized for larger trees and more technical tree work. Street and park trees are planted by City staff, contractors or volunteers. The Arbor Day/ Earth Day Celebration is the City's largest organized volunteer planting event, usually held on the last Saturday in April. The Public Works Street Division is respon- sible for 3,200 trees within the City right-of- way, with maintenance occurring on a reactive basis, such as when a branch obscures a traffic sign. Contractors are utilized for tree remov- als and stump grindings. To provide the best service possible to residents and businesses, Public Works and Community Services provide complementary support on many tree -related projects, such as sidewalk repair and replacement projects involving trees. Both departments share lift trucks and chippers with an inventory of other equipment to properly maintain Renton natural area trees. As trees become older and larger, more advanced equipment will be needed with additional training for City crews. Existing Legislation. Trees can be found mentioned in several City codes, regulations and plans. The task force recognized the need to consolidate regulations involving trees in order to make the codes more user friendly. Regulations to guide tree planting and maintenance are few and do not sufficiently address the concerns of many City staff and the public. For example, there are no regula- tions about planting trees near street lights. Removing trees during construction of sub- divisions became a problem after 2000 when the City experienced a period of rapid devel- opment. An emergency rule was invoked in late 2006 followed by adoption of the tree retention regulation in 2007 to deal with loss of canopy cover in new development. Legislation affecting the City of Renton is not only local in nature. Other state and federal legislation impacts trees in the city directly or indirectly. One of these is the Evergreen Communities Act which passed the State Legislature in 2008. This act specifically ben- efits urban forestry across the state for local jurisdictions. Sidewalk excavation due to tree root damage Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 25 Existing Legislation -Tree Retention. The Task Force identified the need to update the existing tree retention regulations and the cre- ation of a forestry ordinance as high priority actions. The lack of a forestry ordinance has created various issues between trees and the built environment. As part of this concern, the task force identified the development of a forestry ordinance as the # 1 priority. Other issues have arisen with the pace of development into wooded tracts and the effect this has had on canopy cover. The obvi- ous conflict between development density and urban forest preservation is manageable with better guidance early in the development process. This will require a coordinated effort between the City's urban forestry manager, city planners and private developers. Since tree retention regulations were put in place (2007), the Community and Economic Development Department has experienced several issues at odds with long-term urban forest preservation goals: . Regulations lack a method of preserva- tion beyond the initial development of a property; homeowners can remove trees at a rate of three per year from a standard city lot and up to 6 trees per year on larger lots. • 30% of existing trees shall be retained in a residential or institution development zoned RC, R-1, R-4, and R-8 Zones. 10% of existing trees shall be retained in R-10, R-14, RM-F, RM-T, Rm-U and RMH Zones, and 5% of existing trees shall be retained in all other commercial and indus- trial zones. . When the required number of protected trees cannot be retained, new trees, with a 2" caliper, shall be planted at the replace- ment rate of 12 caliper inches of new trees to replace each protected tree. (See RMC 4-4-130 for a full performance standard for land development/building permits.) . Right-of-way tree regulations and land- scaping requirements are not integrated. Tree retention requirements do not include trees within right-of-ways and private ac- cess easements. . Tree protection during construction opera- tions is currently limited to site fencing; grading restrictions and performance bonds would increase tree survival. . Tree protection and retention is not always practical for some developments and more flexibility is needed and can be accommo- dated through offsite tree planting options, tree banks, or fees. Since 2007, the tree retention regulation for residential areas has been instrumental in Street trees at Renton High School preserving stands of trees, especially where development tracts are large. The current reg- ulations requiring 30% retention of existing trees and the requirement for 6 trees planted for each retained tree removed, has resulted in less loss of canopy cover than prior years. The existing regulations provide a great founda- tion and "real -world" testing for increasing canopy cover in future revisions of the tree retention regulations. 26 — Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan ExistingLegislation-Evergreen Com- munities Act. In June 2008, the State Legislature voted to approve House Bill 2844, dubbed the Evergreen Communities Act. This act directly promotes urban forestry by allowing communities to voluntarily submit for qualification under the Evergreen Com- munities Recognition Program. If accepted, a community would be able to receive fund- ing and recognition for its urban forestry program. The two major portions of the bill direct the Departments of Community and Economic Trade and Natural Resources to develop standards for management programs and tree inventories. Such programs as for- estry ordinance development, management plans and tree inventory and assessments could be partially funded from grants pro- vided by the State of Washington. As of this writing, the Evergreen Communi- ties Act has been postponed until economic conditions improve. As it stands now, information will become available to com- munities in 2009 for assisting with program development and the minimum standards for tree inventory database collection, posted to the two State departments' websites. The Evergreen Communities Act will be fully implemented whenever the State Legislature recognizes funding can be restored as eco- nomic recovery continues. Issues and Opportunities Identified by the Task Force. The Task Force identified issues and opportunities beginning with a field trip, visiting several sites throughout Renton, in preparation for the nine meetings held during 2008 and early 2009. Task Force members were eager to point to situations that concerned their respective departments' tree -related issues and expressed by the public. The following tables (Figure #7-8) summarize these issues and concerns as well as recog- nized opportunities for improvement. Through consensus, the Task Force also devel- oped succinct vision and mission statements: Vision Renton's urban and community forest is healthy, diverse, and sustainable, contributing to Renton's identity in the region. Mission Renton will create a sustainable and exemplary urban forest, enhancing the livability of the community through education, coordination, stewardship, and conservation. 4V Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan - 27 Figure #7: Issues and Concerns Identified by the Task Force Issue or Concern • Sidewalk/curb damage • Visibility for traffic cameras • Tree retention regulations • Insufficient design standards • Distance to trees, lights, signals, etc • Consistent management/ maintenance • Need list of recommended trees • Forestry ordinance • Access to fire hydrants • Leaf litter and traffic safety • Pruning/clearance/structural • Maintenance responsibility -agency or property owner? • Tree topping • Lack of enforceable legislation • Tree/construction specifications • Canopy cover- ecosystem services • Invasives in natural areas • City Certified Arborist staff needed • Coordination with utilities • Public knowledge about trees Recognized by Department PW, RM PD CED CED, PW, CS CS, PW CS, PW CED CS FES PD PW, CS, FES PW All CS, PW CS, PW CED, CS PW, CS All All CS, PW Department Key CED= Community and Economic Development CS= Community Services FES= Fire and Emergency Services PD= Police Department PW= Public Works RM= Human Resources/Risk Management 28 — Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan Figure #8: Opportunities Identified by the Task Force Opportunity • Recognition programs • Forest management plans • Storm damage response plan • Tree planting program • Annual urban forestry report to Council • Urban forestry in the Comprehensive Plan • Tree bank or fee -in -lieu program • Public education and outreach • Citizen tree board • Urban forestry stewardship programs • Significant tree programs • On -going tree inventory and assessment • Coordinated management for street trees and other vegetation • Planting strip on all streets standard Recognized by Department CS, PW CS PW, CS, RM CS CS CED, CS CED All CS PW CED CED, CS CS CED Task Force meeting Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 29 Renton's Business and Comprehensive Plans he Task Force reviewed existing mission and vision statements, as well as relevant goals and objectives from Renton and other cities. Consensus was quickly reached by the Task Force that the Plan's mission and vision statements should closely reflect and support the City Business Plan's mission and vision. It was further decided that the Plan's vision statement would clearly and simply describe what the Task Force envisioned as Renton's urban forest characteristics. Likewise, the mission should be a succinct statement of what the City will do to create an exemplary urban forest that enhances the livability of the community. Goals elaborate the vision and mission state- ments and objectives describe more specific outcomes in terms that can be measured or evaluated. The following paragraphs reflect on the foundations provided by the City Business Plan and Comprehensive Plan. City of Renton Business Plan. Prior to preparing the forestry plan's vision, mission, or goal statements, the City Business Plan was reviewed. Key elements from the Business Plan include: Vision: Renton —The center of opportunity in the Puget Sound Region where families and businesses thrive Mission: The City of Renton, in partnership and communication with residents, busi- nesses, and schools, is dedicated to: . Providing a healthy, welcoming atmosphere where citizens choose to live, raise families, and take pride in their community . Promoting planned growth and economic vitality . Creating a positive work environment . Meeting service demands through innova- tion and commitment to excellence Key City goals influencing the Urban For- estry Plan: Promote citywide economic development. . Promote Renton as the progressive, oppor- tunity -rich city in the Puget Sound region Promote neighborhood revitalization. . Support the vitality and positive appear- ance of neighborhoods through commu- nity involvement . Ensure the safety, health, and security of citizens through effective service delivery . Promote pedestrian and bicycle linkages between neighborhoods and community focal points Manage growth through sound urban plan- ning. . Uphold a high standard of design and property maintenance throughout the city Meet service demands that contribute to the livability of the community. . Prioritize services at levels that can be sus- tained by revenue . Plan, develop, and maintain quality ser- vices, infrastructure, and amenities . Balance development with environmental protection 30 — Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan r�A.ra� 1►i 1:7 r City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. Further forestry planning and program sup- port came from sections of Renton's Compre- hensive Plan: Community Design Element Goals: 1. To raise the aesthetic quality of the City, 2. To strengthen the economy through high quality development, and 3. To ensure that a high quality of life is maintained as Renton evolves. Landscaping Section Policy CD-84. Trees should be planted along residential streets, in parking lots requiring landscaping, and in other pervi- ous areas as the opportunity arises. Trees should be retained whenever possible and maintained using Best Management Prac- tices as appropriate for each type. Policy CD-88. Street trees and landscap- ing should be required for new develop- ment within the Valley to provide an attractive streetscape in areas subjected to a transition of land uses. Policy CD-92. Residential subdivisions and multi -family residential projects should include planting of street trees ac- cording to an adopted citywide landscape plan. Streets, Sidewalks, and Streetscape Section . Objective CD-O. Promote development of attractive, walkable neighborhoods and shopping areas by ensuring that streets are safe, convenient, and pleasant for pedestri- ans. Policy CD-95. The design of pedestrian - oriented environments should address safety as a first priority. Safety measures should include generous separation of cars and pedestrians, reducing the number of curb cuts and driveways, having numerous, well -marked street crossings, and providing street and sidewalk lighting. Policy CD-103. Landscaped parking strips should be considered for use as a safety buffer between pedestrians and moving ve- hicles along arterials and collector streets. Objective CD-P. Develop a system of residential streets, sidewalks, and alleys that serve both vehicles and pedestrians. Policy CD-110. Street trees should be used to reinforce visual corridors along major boulevards and streets. Economic Development Element • Summary: The policies encourage the qual- ity development necessary to sustain a high standard of living in Renton. • Objective ED-B: Expand the retail and of- fice base within the City. • Policy ED-9. Adopt land use and zoning that is supportive of responsible economic development. Housing Element Goal #4. Maintain, protect, and enhance the quality of life of Renton's residents. Quality of Neighborhoods Section • Objective H-K: Develop and maintain livable neighborhoods with a desirable quality of life. Goals and Objectives of the Urban For- estry Plan. Through nine workshops, the Task Force developed four specific goals with each having several objectives to accomplish each goal. The objectives were further divided into strategies. The Implementation Schedule in the Appendix breaks down the strategies into actions and tasks which are proposed to occur over a ten-year period. Through this process, the urban forestry plan proposal can be followed each year to culminate into what the Task Force envisioned as an exemplary plan, community enhancement, and a valu- able working resource. Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 31 Goals, Objectives and Strategies GOAL I: Create a functioningand exemplary urban forestIFIA1 Objectives: _ .- 1.1 Receive national and regional recognition by meeting high standards. Strategies: A. Tree City USA Designation B. Society of Municipal Arborists Accreditation C. State Evergreen Communities Recognition 1.2 Increase the health and benefits of the urban forest on a larger geographical scale through participation and coordination. Strategies: A. Green Cities Partnership B. Puget Sound Partnership C. Washington Community Forestry Council GOAL 2: Manage the urban forest at optimum levels for canopy, health and diversity Objectives: 2.1 Coordinate City urban forestry operations. Strategies: A. Host Department and Renton Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team B. Coordinated staffing and funding sources 2.2 Inventory the existing urban forest to establish canopy cover goals and management needs. Strategies: A. Canopy Cover Analysis, in combiniation with other City analysis B. Tree Inventory and Assessment 2.3 Develop a Forest Management Plan for public trees. Strategies: A. Sustainable management standards and practices for public trees B. Tree Planting Program 2.4 Balance and manage city growth and development with the urban forest. Strategies: A. Urban Forestry in the Comprehensive Plan B. Tree Retention Regulations C. Site Development Landscape Standards D. Tree Bank or "Fee in Lieu" Program 32 — Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan 37Increase public awareness of the value and benefits of the urban forest and the urban forestry program 3.1 Create an urban forestry public outreach program to educate residents and developers about the benefits of developing and sustaining a healthy urban forest. Strategies: A. Consumer Literature B. Citizen Tree Board C. Existing Volunteer Networks D. Urban forestry presence at schools, clubs, community gatherings 3.2 Update City Council and the public on urban forestry accomplishments. Strategy: A. State of the Urban Forest Report 3.3 Encourage the public to preserve and honor significant trees in the community. Strategies: A. Significant Tree Programs GOAL 4: Draft and adopt legislation that supports the urban forestry program Objectives: 4.1 Develop and adopt regulations that optimize tree canopy and maximize public benefits. Strategies: Forestry Ordinance also 2.4: Site Development Landscape Ordinance Tree Retention Ordinance Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan - 33 Key Strategies he Task Force came to consensus on over 30 strategies following development of the program goals and objectives. This rich number of strategies will position Renton as a leader in urban forestry across the state and perhaps the nation. There were several sig- nificant strategies the task force highlighted as being of higher priority than others. These were predicated upon resolving public safety issues as well as improving the climate in the Puget Sound area and other benefits an urban forestry program will provide to its citizens. Task Force Key Strategies • Forestry Ordinance • CS as Lead for Urban Forestry & Vegetation Management • Public Outreach & Education • Certified Arborist Crew • Canopy Cover Analysis • Interdepartmental U.F. Implemen- tation Team I Urban Forestry Ordinance. The Task Force agreed that the most important strat- egy the community needs is a comprehensive forestry ordinance to regulate how trees are planted and maintained. The bulk of the ordinance will address the issues and con- cerns the Task Force identified with the built environment. The Task Force recognized the important role trees have to the built environ- ment, from the single street tree to the mature stand of Douglas firs in proposed housing developments. The goal of the ordinance should be to create a sense of appreciation for trees while minimizing their impacts to the built environment — more trees, fewer prob- lems. The figure on page 28 accurately portrays many of the issues and concerns City staff have for the challenging conditions trees grow in while maintaining a healthy and robust economy. Development and trees are com- patible with proper planning guided by regu- lations and standards. The forestry ordinance will accomplish these objectives. The ordinance would regulate planting, pruning, removal, protection and other maintenance activities near trees within the public right-of-way. Additionally, on publicly owned land and new development sites, the forestry ordinance will provide great improve- ments to the public's safety, health and wel- fare. The ordinance will clarify maintenance activities and landscape improvements that occur in the right-of-way and public versus private responsibility. In addition, an ordi- nance will regulate other tree -related projects, programs, procedures, and standards. The ordinance would be a supporting docu- ment closely coordinated with other City ordinances, codes, and regulations. This would include among others the City Busi- ness Plan, water conservation programs, landscape requirements in new developments, the comprehensive plan and tree protection regulations. The interdepartmental team, the City Attorney's Office, City Council, the Mayor and the general public will be con- sulted during the development of the forestry ordinance. Street right-of-way planting 34 — Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan Volunteers removing ivy Community Services Department as lead for urban forestry and vegetation man- agement. The Task Force concurred with the recommendation to place all urban for- estry maintenance and management within the Community Services Department. It was clear to the Task Force that one department should be responsible for trees along streets and on public property instead of splitting responsibility currently between Community Services and Public Works. This strategy will make tree and vegetation management opera- tions streamlined, more effective, provide consistency in maintenance practices and add value to the resource. Importance of urban forestry as a catalyst for community involvement. The City's most important resource, its people, was identified in the early stages of Task Force meetings as critical to the success of Renton's urban forestry program and implementation of this Plan. Engaging the community and informing residents about urban forestry were two components of this strategy. Volunteers are increasingly becoming more important to the successful accomplish- ment of many projects that would not occur without their involvement. Coordination of volunteers is occurring throughout most City departments and gains momentum each year. In 2008, volunteers contributed $1.3 million in services helping with Arbor Day/Earth Day plantings and other projects. The power of volunteers will become an important catalyst for urban forestry program development and acceptance of the program by the community as a whole. Engaging the community in urban forestry projects is criti- cal, not only for accomplishing City projects but educating volunteer residents about the importance of the urban forest and proper tree care and promoting the program to the general public. The information volunteer's gain from working on City projects can be utilized in their yards and will result in improving the private urban forest. Educating its citizens about urban forestry, from the need for regulating trees along streets to maintaining trees on their own property, was viewed as important by the Task Force for engaging and uniting people and to foster a better sense of community. One of the key components in this strategy is having public information about trees accessible to all. For example, an important message the Task Force discussed includes the negative effects tree topping has on the urban forest. The Community Services Department currently provides a pamphlet on tree top - Arbor Day volunteers Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 35 1 ping and other information that can be found on the City's Urban Forestry web page. (See resources in Appendix.) Public outreach and education programs and the people they reach create a win -win situ- ation for Renton's urban forests and enable efforts beyond the resources and time avail- ability of City staff. City CertfiedArborist Crew. A certi- fied arborist is a tree worker who has studied arboriculture, passed certification exams and receives annual continuing education train- ing. Arboriculture is the cultivation and management of trees within the landscape. This includes the study of how trees grow and respond to cultural practices and the environment, as well as application of cultural techniques such as selection, planting, care, surgery and removal. Renton's street trees have a current value of over $6.6 million. This value has accrued with slight attention to proper management and maintenance. This valuable resource has the potential to significantly increase in value with proper maintenance, additional tree planting and as the trees become larger. As with other infrastructure along busy streets and residential areas, public safety and reduc- ing the risk associated with the urban forest in the built environment is critical. Safety and value alone are good reasons to want the best care possible for the community's trees. Utilizing certified arborists is the best and most effective way to increase Renton's tree resource values and increase safety as trees become larger. The Task Force agreed on the importance of a dedicated full time city arborist crew. They recognized the advantages of this crew in relation to emergency storm damage response and accomplishing tree work for other emergency situations when contract crews are unavailable. The Task Force agreed that the arborist crew would be responsible for all trees in the right-of-way, all trees in parks and natural areas and all trees on other public grounds. Other City crews could supplement the arborist crews for special projects such as pruning trees along sweeper routes in the winter using Public Works staff. The arborist crew would provide support for other non - tree related activities whenever their equip- ment might be needed such as assisting Public Works with installing banners or backing -up City departments when needed. The Task Force agreed that the arborist crew would be best located within the Community Services Department. Finally, the Task Force agreed to convene an Interdepartmental Team to discuss the arborist crew funding and staff- ing options as part of Plan implementation. Continued interdepartmental coopera- tion & involvement in the urban forestry program. The Task Force recognized the urgent need to provide the highest value and control service costs utilizing existing City crews and resources. The Task Force agreed to work as an Interdepartmental Team to discuss departments' staffing options fur- ther. The Task Force agreed that the certified arborist crew would be best located within the Community Services Department, with interdepartmental support from City depart - Figure #9: Program Coordination PUBLIC MAYOR & / COMMUNITY \ AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Economic Development Development Services Planning COUNCIL \ COMMUNITY SERVICES Environment URBAN FORESTRY PROGRAM HUMAN RESOURCES AND RISK MANAGEMENT COMMISSIONS for Forestry Parks Planning PUBLIC WORKS Transportation Utilities Maintenance i POLICE \ FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES 36 - Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan ments, Mayor and City Council, Commis- sions, and the public (Figure #9). Canopy cover analysis. A city-wide framework is needed to determine whether Renton's urban forest objectives are being met. For over a decade, developing cities across the country have set up tree -canopy goals to ensure urban forest survival above minimum levels (www.americanforests.org). A necessary supplement to Renton's exist- ing public -tree inventory, the canopy cover analysis will help set -the -stage and clarify the case for ongoing and city-wide, tree conserva- tion efforts. Canopy assessments help urban forestry programs create realistic goals with proven tools for evaluation and measurement of success. A canopy cover assessment and analysis measures the extent and function of the forest resource over the entire city (both private and public lands), creating a base reference. The analysis defines the benefits of the existing canopy (stormwater, air, water, wildlife, etc.), places a dollar value per tree on those ben- efits, locates opportunities for increasing the canopy cover, calculates the current canopy cover percentage by land use type, suggests canopy cover goals, and offers recommenda- tions for the future. Value assessments take into account maintenance and other costs to determine annualized net returns on the public -tree investments. The canopy measurement is an easily mea- sured and updated indicator of progress toward meeting local objectives. The study Figure #10: American Forests Tree Canopy Recommendations Metropolitan Areas in the Pacific Northwest Average tree cover - all zones 40% Suburban residential 50% Urban residential 25% Central business districts 15% would be repeated periodically to evalu- ate the progress and success of key program objectives. Management for all features that sustain the healthy forest would be adjusted based on changing conditions. American Forest's Regional Ecosystem Analy- sis of Bellevue's canopy found a 36% overall coverage of tree canopy in 2007, higher than some cities, but lower than the 40% overall canopy coverage recommended by American Forests. Bellevue's urban residential areas were found to have 30% tree canopy cover versus American Forest's recommendation for 35% cover and street right-of-ways had 20% cover versus American Forest's recommenda- tion for 25%. Renton is planning to conduct an overall canopy cover analysis in the near future. Administration and Management The Task Force nominated the Com- munity Services Department to be the host department and to lead efforts within the urban forestry program, including vegeta- tion management. The Community Services Department currently employs an Urban Forestry and Natural Resources Manager. This leadership and coordination will clarify responsibility and action in the context of well -established regional efforts to increase and improve urban forest resources. Shared City Resources, Funding and Staffing Options. While certain strategies have been identified to accomplish the vision, goals and specific objectives of Renton's urban forestry program, tying in with realistic current and projected funding and staffing resources is critical. The Task Force has begun the work of this interdepartmental effort. A suite of funding and staffing options will be examined. With public oversight and coor- dinated management, public resources will be evaluated for best long term economic benefit to sustain and grow Renton's urban forest. Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 37 Evaluation How do we know we are successful? The Renton Urban and Community Forestry Program is being created in the context of collaboration with all City departments and federal, county and civic efforts to ensure a healthy environment, balance growth and conservation, and create healthy communi- ties. Opportunities for partnership and program expansion lie in existing regulations, city policies, and established regional partner- ships. Utilizing proven methods and existing resources will help support a high quality program and stretch Renton's financial invest- ments. Award programs structure bench- marks for measurable program progress, as well as showing citizens and businesses what they can be proud of and the results that their tax dollars are yielding. Plans Change — Adapting to Change. Adapting to change is key to successful program development. Just as implementing this Plan will create changes in how we do business, the plan must also adapt to changing conditions. During development of the plan, the Task Force struggled with accomplishing the many strategies each department represen- tative saw as a priority. Task Force members understood that the entire plan as shown in the Implementation Schedule in the Appen- dix was impossible to accomplish in one or two years. During the 2008 Task Force meet- ings, economic conditions in Renton and across the country began to change. Those conditions continue in 2009 and the Imple- mentation Schedule as envisioned by the Task Force has been modified due to the local economy. Updating the plan should occur on a regu- lar basis to adapt as needed to the current economic situation. While none of the Task Force members desired this, the Implementa- tion Schedule reflects 2009's current eco- nomic conditions. Out of several planned programs for 2010, the most important is the Forestry Ordinance development. Most of the Plan programs or strategies can remain unchanged, only the timeframe will change in the short term. It is the hope of the Task Force that the original schedule can be reestablished once the economic conditions improve. The Action Timeline shown in the Appendix reflects the Task Force's approach in imple- menting the Plan. Because of the current economy, the Implementation Schedule now reflects those conditions and focuses upon strategies that can be accomplished by City staff. Strategies requiring expenditures have been moved to post -recovery years in the Implementation Schedule. Young volunteers planting native shrubs 38 — Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan I Implementation Schedule he Appendix contains the Implementa- tion Schedule which is the yearly pro- gram for the next ten years. It takes the strate- gies, shown under the goals and objectives, and subdivides each strategy into actions and tasks. In addition, the Implementation Schedule shows a budget estimate with a total by year. The Schedule is the main piece of the Plan that can be easily adapted to changing conditions, providing more or less activity in any given year. The Implementation Schedule will be used by City staff to guide activities occurring in the current year and to plan for succeeding bud- get years. It provides the reader with informa- tion on how each program strategy is to be accomplished. The budget estimates used in the Schedule are in 2009 dollars. Summary and Conclusion D enton has a rich forestry history that trongly influenced the City's early development. Today, with all of the origi- nal vegetation gone, the urban forest plays an important role in making life richer for Renton citizens and visitors, and attracting new businesses. Several attempts were made in the past to bring urban forestry forward to this point in time. To resolve many of the issues with the built and the natural environ- ments experienced today, this Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan is timely. With dedication, Renton's urban forest will once again provide the value of the historic landscape. Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 39 Resources Cited f KEY PLAN RESOURCES"y Research that demonstrates ways that trees add value to communities, converting results into financial terms to stimulate investment in trees. McPherson, E.G., S.E. Maco, J.R. Simpson, P.J. Peper, Q Xiao, A.M. VanDerZanden and N. Bell. 2002. Western Washington and Oregon Community Tree Guide: Benefits, Costs, and Strate- gic Planting. Silverton, OR: International Society of Arboriculture, Pacific Northwest. Vermont Urban & Community Forestry Program. Guidelines for Developing Urban & Commu- nity Forestry Plans; Strategic Plans & Management Plans for Street and Park Tree Management. OTHER RESOURCES CITED American Forests. October 2008. Urban Ecosystem Analysis: City of Bellevue, Washington. 12pp. wwwamericanforests.org/downloads/rea/AmforReport_Bellevue_lowres.pdf American Forests. July 1998. Regional Ecosystem Analysis Puget Sound Metropolits 8pp. www.americanforests.org/downloads/rea/AF—PugetSound.pdf American Forests Global Releaf Campaign. 2008. www.amfor.org/global—releaf Benedict, Mark A. and Edward T. McMahon. "Green Infrastructure: Smart Conser` the 21st Century." Renewable Resources Journal20.3 (Autumn 2002). Sprawl Watch house. 22 September 2004. wwwsprawlwatch.org/greeninfrastructure.pdf>. City of Renton Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Report. March 2007 http://rentonwa.gov/Living/Default.aspx?id=16702 Donovan, G.H. and Burry, D.T. "Market Based Approaches to Tree Valuation.' Arbo August 2008 Dwyer, J.F., D.J. Nowak, M.H. Noble, and S.M. Sisinni. 2000. Assessing our Nation's %-jj. uai, Forests: Connecting People with Ecosystems in the 21st Century. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-460.540p. Evergreen Communities Act: Technical Advisory Committee Web Page -Tree Inventories and Assessments wwwdnrwa.gov/ResearchScience/Topics/UrbanForestry/Pages/rp—urban_eca tac.aspx Partnership Task Force Web Page -Urban Forestry Programming www.commerce.wa.gov/site/1 131/Default.aspx Green Seattle Partnership 20 Year Strategic Plan. Cascade Land Conservancy. wwwgreense- attle.org Kuo, F.E., Sullivan, W.C., Coley, R.L., and Brunson, L. 1998. Fertile ground for community: Inner-city neighborhood common spaces. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26(6), 823-851. wwwlhhl.uiuc.edu/download.php?article=l—article_Fertile%20ground%20for%20 communitypdf.) Lewis, Charles. Green Nature/Human Nature: The Meaning of Plants in Our Lives. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1996. Wolf, Kathleen L. "City Trees and Property Values.' ArboristNews 16.4 (2007): 34-36. 40 ^- Remrban and Caunity Forestry Develop Appendix Contents 1. 2009-2020 Implementation Schedule. The urban forestry proposal listing strategies, actions and tasks by year with estimated budgets. 2. Program Timeline. The original timeline as chosen by the Urban Forestry Task Force. The 2009-2020 Implementation Schedule superseded this timeline to reflect the current economic conditions in 2009. 3. Goals, Objectives and Strategies Definition Chart. Defines and provides reasons for each of the strategies. 4. Executive Summary to the 2007 and 2009 Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Reports. Provides an overview of these documents. S. Committee of the Whole - Committee Report. Documents the review of the Plan and its approval by Renton's Parks Commission on July 14, 2009, and City Council on July 20, 2009. 6. 2009 City of Renton Limits and Surrounding Area Aerial Photograph from 2007 7. 2008 Urban Forestry Programs Comparisons Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 41 Appendix 2009-2020 Implementation Schedule 1. 2009-2020 Implementation Schedule - 5 pages • The urban forestry proposal listing strategies, actions and tasks by year with estimated budgets. • Dark Green = No Direct Budget Associated with Strategy Bright Green = Proposed Funds from Operating Budget Light Green = Proposed Funds from Capital Improvement Program (CIP) . Page 5 Totals - Subtotals shown for Operating Budget and CIP Budget separately followed by Grand totals for both. • Timeline Costs adjusted for 2009 economic conditions. Most strategies and actions that have no direct costs are planned for the period between 2009 and 2011. Work to occur mainly by City staff during this period. Compare with the Program Timeline which reflects the Urban Forestry Task Force original schedule of activities. NOTE: The Implementation Schedule is subject to change from time to time. The most current version can be found on the Urban Forestry web page edition at http://rentonwa.gov/Living/ Default.aspx?id=16702. Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 43 Strategies & Actions 1.1A Tree City USA Designation & Growth Award Action 1.1A.1 Submit Annual Application Arbor Day Celebration and Proclamation Update and Install Arbor Day Signs, Flags and Plaques Action 1.1A.2 Join the Arbor Day Foundation & Pay Annual Dues Action 1.1A.3 Submit Application for Tree City USA Growth Award 1.1 B Society for Municipal Arborists Accreditation Action 1.16.1 City Forester Obtain Arborist Certification through ISA Program Obtain 30 CEUs each 3 years & Recerfication Fee Action 1.1 B.2 City Forester Obtain Municipal Specialist Certification & Recertifications Obtain 12 CEUs each 3 years Action 1.1B.3 Research, Purchase & Incorporate ANSI Standards into Ordinances, OF Plans, Procedures & Contracts Incorporate Preference for Tree Care Industry Arborists into RFPs Incorporate SMA Code of Ethics & Sign Code of Ethics Pledge Letter into Procedures or Plans Action 1.1 BA Complete the Forest Management Plan (See Strategy 2.3 A) Action 1.16.5 Maintain Annual Tree City USA Designation See 1.1A Action 1.1B.6 Tree City USA Growth Award Designation (See 1.1A.3) Action 1.1 B.7 Submit Application to SMA Receive accreditation, incorporate into NRPA accreditation Action 1.1B.8 SMA Reaccreditation 1.1C State Evergreen Community Designation Action 1.1 CA Continue to track and monitor progress on implementaiton of the Act Periodically contact WADNR-UF Coordinator on status Action 1.1 C.2 Promote funding of the ECA Program through state lobbyist Contact state legislators to make them aware of the ECA Action 1.1 C.3 Volunteer to sit on future SEC Act committees Action 1.1CA Review WDNR website and provide feedback on ECA Information 1.2A Green Cities Partnership Action 1.2A.1 Meet with Cascade Land Conservancey (CLC) - focus meeting Action 1.2A.2 CLC presentation to City Council Action 1.2A.3 Identify grant funding opportunities and apply Action 1.2A.3 Prepare scope of work with CLC see Forest Management Plan, Strategy 2.3A Identify natural area restoration projects Idendify possible groups within Renton and from outside Action 1.2A.4 Process contract with CLC Action 1.2A.5 Determine funding strategies for specific projects and budgets Identify grant funding opportunities Action 1.2A.6 Implement projects annual) Volunteer training sessions Forest Stewards training sessions Urban Forestry Program 2009 - 2020 Implementation Schedule YR2009 YR2010 YR2011 YR2012 YR2013 YR2014 YR2015 YR2016 YR2017 YR2018 YR2019 YR2020 lmi 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 300 350 300 300 350 300 55 45 50 50 50 120 Completed as other Strategies are Implemented, for example the forestry ordinance 300 Awaiting full program development and implemention by the State of WA i 1.26 Puget Sound Partnership 1.2B.1 Research methods to influence partenership members on urban forestry issues 1.2C Washington Community Forestry Council Action1.2C.1 City Forester serves a second term as the Forest Manager Rep Attend Quarterly Meetings Serve on Evergreen Community Act Inventory Advisory Committee 2.1A Host Department and Renton Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team Action 2.1A.1 Designate CS as the host department for all ROW landscape maintenance Research process for implementation Council Presentation and Adoption Action 2.1A.2 Determine areas for ROW landscape mainenance Determine annual budget for maintenance - Investigate staffing/contracting options Hire staff or contract 250000 250000 Action 2.1A.3 Officially designate the Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team Identify Team Members Annual Team Meeting 10000 5000 5000 10000 5000 5000 10 10 10 300 350 300 45 50 50 50 15000 15000 15000 5000 5000 5000 5000 5000 5000 Occurs in 2021 20000 5000 5000 250000 260000 260000 260000 270000 270000 270000 280000 Rev. 8.011.tf 1 Strategies & Actions 2.1B Coordinated staffing and funding sources Action 2.1 B.1 Meet with Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team Discuss and develop a team recommendation Action 2.1 B.2 Determine budget implications and prepare plan for Administrators Submit recommendation to Dept. Administrators for consideration & approval Action 2.1 B.3 Prepare information for Parks Commission recommendation Presentation to Parks Commission Action 2.1 B.4 Presentation to CS Committee for recommendation Action 2.1 B.5 Prepare information for Council presentation (Committee of the Whole) Action 2.1 B.6 City Council Considers Adoption Action 2.1 B.7 Submit plan information for budgeting and hiring or transfer of FTE Action 2.1 B.8 Implement the staffing and funding sources plan Hire or direct 3 FTE staff Purchase vehicles & equipment Annual Operating Costs (supplies, clothing, equipment, rental etc.) Fund annual training and arborist certifications Certified Arborists join ISA Oversee daily assianments 2.2A Canopy Cover Analysis Action 2.2A.1 Research best methods for obtaining information Action 2.2A.2 Prepare scope of work and RFP Select eligible firm Prepare and execute contract Review, edit and publish report Action 2.2A.3 Distribute and present report to stakeholders Presentation to Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team Presentation to Parks Commission Presentation to City Council Publish to website Schedule report on City cable access channel 2.2B Tree Inventory and Assessment Action 2.213.1 Research best methods for obtaining information. Identify grant funding opportunities Action 2.26.2 Prepare scope of work and RFP Select eligible firm Prepare and execute contract Review, edit and publish report Action 2.26.3 Distribute and present report to stakeholders Presentation to Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team Presentation to Parks Commission Presentation to City Council (receive & file) Publish report on website Schedule summary report on City cable access channel Action 2.26.4 Research tree maintenance software programs Purchase software (may not be necessary if EAM is active) Tree inventory integration Purchase hand held devices for arborists to update inventory daily 2.3A Develop a Forest Management Plan for Public Trees Action 2.3A.1 Prepare Forest Management Plan Urban Forestry Program 2009 - 2020 Implementation Schedule YR2009 YR2010YR2011 YR2012 YR2013 YR2014 YR2015 YR2016 YR2017 YR2018 YR2019 YR2020 175000 �W 1750 35000 35000 40000 40000 40000 45000 1000 1000 1000 1500 1500 600 600 600 600 700 60000 60000 100000 125000 Research other cities' examples Determine Evergreen Communities Act Standards Identify grant funding opportunities and apply Identify plan components Prepare draft of plan Subsequent drafts for review Action 2.3A.1 a Prepare Sustainable Management Standards and Practices for Public Trees Research other cities' examples Develop and draft specifications Review of specifications by Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team Revise specifications Review by stakeholders (e.g. Transportation) and revision Prepare draft of plan Parks Commission reviews plan Rev. 8.011.ff 2 Strategies & Actions 2.3A Develop a Forest Management Plan for Public Trees Action 2.3A.1 a Prepare Sustainable Management Standards and Practices for Public Trees Committee of the Whole reviews plan/receive and file Action 2.3A.1 b Street Tree Selection List Research other examples Prepare draft of recommended trees booklet Review of booklet by Community Forestry InterDepartmental Team Revise & Dublish Urban Forestry Program 2009 - 2020 Implementation Schedule YR2009 YR2010YR2011 — YR2012— YR20137 2014 YR2015 YR2016 YR2017 YR2018 YR2019 YR2020 ::� Action 2.3A.1c Franchise Utility Cooperative Program Focus meeting with affected utilities Draft letter of understanding with each utility Review with Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team Present to utilities for signature Incorporate into Forestry Ordinance (see 4.1A) Annual Review with each utility as necessary Action 2.3A.1d Storm Damage Emergency Response Plan Focus meeting with Emergency Management Director Focus meeting with other City Departments Prepare draft of plan Review with Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team Revise draft Review with City Administration and revise as needed Presentation to Parks Commission and recommendation to approve Presentation to Committee of the Whole - receive and file Revise and publilsh Action 2.3A.1e Wood Waste Recycling Program Research other examples Prepare program plan Presentation to Parks Commission Presentation to Committee of the Whole - receive and file Incorporate into operations and implement Action 2.3A1f Develop operating policies and information (see 2.3A Forest Management Plan) Public notification forms for planting, pruning, removals & others Action 2.3A.2 Update the OF Development Program Plan 25,000 25000 2.3113 Tree Planting Program Action 2.36.1 Develop Tree Program Plan Scope New Tree Planting Program Scope Replacement Tree Planting Program Scope Tree Planting Donation Program Draft plan and review by CS staff Action 2.313.2 Present New Tree Planting Program Plan to Parks Commission Action 2.313.3 Present New Tree Planting Program Plan to CS Committee Action 2.31B.4 Present New Tree Planting Program Plan to City Council (Committee of the Whole) Action 2.36.5 Submit New Tree Planting Program budget Action 2.31B.6 Implement New Tree Planting Program Purchase one-time equipment Hire 3 Part-time staff Purchase trees and supplies annually Annual sidewalk repair program related to trees Prepare and distribute new tree planting care guidelines to residents Action 2.31B.7 Identify grant funding opportunities Action 2.36.7 Designate sites for City nursery tree production Purchase and plant liners Annual maintenance of nursery trees Identify annual citywide tree planting sites Order Supplies and Transplant trees 2.4A Urban Forestry in the City Comprehensive Plan Action 2.4A.1 CS & CED Draft OF elements Action 2.4A.2 CS & CED present OF elements to Comm Action 2.4A.3 City Council Adoption 80000 40000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 100000 100000 100000 100000 100000 100000 100000 0 1 4000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 4000 Rev. 8.011.tf 3 Urban Forestry Program 2009 - 2020 Implementation Schedule Strategies & Actions YR2009 YR2010 YR2011 YR2012 YR2013 YR2014 YR2015 YR2016 YR2017 YR2018 YR2019 YR2020 2.4B Tree Retention Regulations Update Action 2.4B.1 CS assists CED in update CS Research other tree retention regulations CS Review draft regualtions and comment Review and Recommendation of Planning Commission Review and Adoption by City Council 2.4C Update Site Development Landscape Standards & Regulations (Led by CED) Action 2.4C.1 Hire consultant to prepare draft standards Action 2.4C.2 Review standards and revise by Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team Action 2.4C.3 Presentation of standards & regulations to developers & revisions Action 2.4C.4 Presentation of draft to Parks Commission, revision & recommendation Action 2.4C.5 Presentation of draft to Planning Commission, revision & recommendation Action 2.4C.6 Presentation of draft to CS Committee & revision Action 2.4C.7 Presentation to City Council Committee of the Whole Action 2.4C.8 Prepare and publish final draft Action 2.4C.9 City Council adoption Action 2.4C.10 Implementation Action 2.4C.11 Periodic Update 2.41D Tree Bank or "Fee in Lieu" Program Action 2.41D.1 Research tree banks and fee in lieu of programs Action 2.4D.2 Review options with Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team Action 2.41D.3 Identify regulations that tree bank might affect and revise accordingly Action 2.4D.4 Adopt tree bank VA Consumer Literature Action 3.1A.1 Provide OF consumer literature at Special Events Action 3.1A.2 Make literature available through advertising on OF web page & mailings Action 3.1A.3 Develop OF web page to offer online sources of extended educational information 3.1 B Citizen Tree Board Action 3.1 B.1 Research responsibilities of tree boards and prepare white paper Action 3.1 B.2 Present findings to Parks Commission for discussion Action 3.1 B.3 Prepare Tree Board Plan & present to Parks Commission for recommendation Action 3.1 BA Determine next steps Action 3.1B.5 Present Tree Board Plan to Community Services Committee Action 3.1 B.6 Present for adoption the Tree Board Plan to City Council 3.1C Existing Volunteer Networks Action 3.1C.1 Assist with Volunteer Program incorporating OF projects See 1.2A Green Cities Partnership 3.1 D Urban Forestry at schools, clubs, community events Action 3.1 D.1 Identify school programs, club events and community events for intial contact Action 3.1 D.2 Participate in Schools Sponsored Arbor Day events 3.2A State of the Urban Forest Report Present annually to Parks Commission Present annually to City Council 3.3A Significant Tree Programs Action 3.3A.1 Research other programs and prepare a concept plan Action 3.3A.2 Identify grant funding opportunities Action 3.3A.3 Review plan with Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team Action 3.3A.4 Prepare Program Plan & Guidelines Action 3.3A.5 Present Program Plan to Parks Commission & recommendation Action 3.3A.6 Present Program Plan to CS Committee Action 3.3A.7 Implement Plan Advertise Program 4.1A Forestry Ordinance (for streets, parks, public 500 500 500 Research other ordinances Identify key elements Rev. 8.011.tf 4 Urban Forestry Program 2009 - 2020 Implementation Schedule Strategies & Actions YR2009 YR2010 YR2011 YR2012 YR2013 YR2014 YR2015 YR2016 YR2017 YR2018 YR2019 YR2020 4.1A Forestry Ordinance for streets, parks, public open spaces Action 4.1A.1 Prepare documents Prepare draft ordinance Action 4.1A.2 Review draft with Community Forestry Interdepartmental Team Revisions and drafts Action 4.1A.3 Review by City Attorney Revisions and drafts Action 4.1A.4 Presentation to Parks Commission & recommendation Revisions and drafts Action 4.1A.5 Presentation to CS Committee Revisions and drafts Action 4.1A.6 Presentation to City Council (Committee of the Whole) Revisions and drafts Action 4.1A.7 City Council Adoption Action 4.1A.8 Implementation Action 4.1A.9 Periodic Update Subto Subtotals - Capital Improvement Program Budget Grand Totals 10 7-ff,-260 287,030 423,960 342,465 518,460 349,410 359,605 359,060 405,110 444,605 50,000 110,000 45,000 100,000 60,000 194,000 205,000 226,000 310,000 186,000 185,000 190,990 50,010 110,010 776,260 387,030 483,960 536,465 723,460 575,410 669,605 545,060 590,110 635,595 TF 7.22.09 Rev. 8.011.tf Appendix Program Timeline 2. Program Timeline The original timeline as chosen by the Urban Forestry Task Force. The 2009-2020 Imple- mentation Schedule superseded this timeline to reflect the current economic conditions in 2009. Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 45 E 2 k\ $ \ 4 \ E 2 / 2 a E E 2 C\j \ 0 CL / C) ^ § E 2 oCD 5 \ a co co co co co coa _ § § § \ 60 a) a)\ \ \ e » » _ - - - a * * \ k k k E / a)} E % \ o / \ � \ I ( % < E 2 § f = a)\ 6 co} \ = 0 cu E E 2 k _ = k cu > m \ § g \ a/ _ I E a 2 E k c 3 E = { / § $ % \ E 2 E ƒ « o o Q E y 2\ Co o_= @ ° @ e u e ° 2 k\ b°= « E z 2 c E I E s/ E 3 m c /{ 7 a / a @ 2 P=_ ° 3 I = I o=\ e I e/ E o § » 7 0 ± 2§ _ ® % < m@ o _ ® E o O > m = co u = @ o 3 I m» E y . a @ = E �� a = : _ I = = g m m = = . t — _ a = = o m _ = — ± ± 7 @ ® c — E � z = = = 7 _ ® � r < E _ @ _ = _ e E @ = 5 � = -j _ _ z / u o y / _ . ®= = o G = c E e=__ 0 ® I o Z = _ = / o ° u — ° @ ± _ o c _— = 2= / t s E g e c = e c = ® o 2 2 / . I?® = 2=»# n t= /§±%_ = = e I o=� E e< + » m E__ y = o I o ± = o E E a o I= a ±� z= 2 c 7\ n g = t = > o = = _ m = n = m a o S = = — 7 « = } p = 2 w = o o e ± o O £ = — = e c ® @ ® E _ = @ o = a 2 = f » @ 0 > ± c _ a » O > i 0 @ a = m s > / / n e 7 c 3 ± _ $ n E + o ± o ® c » \ \ % \ = [ I § I I=_= o & 2 3 F 7° 0 c k ƒ 2 _ f@ _ \ c @ @ N \ a 2 O e e e o m m o 14 o I co) n O e=__@°@ e m co m± 7 e= e e e o 0 0 Q@_> 2 2$ I± o 2< @@ 9 n n t n— a §\\ w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w a 4 O Appendix Goals, Objectives and Strategies Definition Chart 3. Goals, Objectives and Strategies Definition Chart e Defines and provides reasons for each of the strategies and describes if a short, mid, or long term item. Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 47 H W w O LL Q m J a 2 w w 0 Z Q Z Z O U Z LL W Q W w U r J Q c@ O = c0 N 0 C E 0O) U E U E Uo m m Y � 7 O C a s m o a a N ° y ` OL N N a) = C_ O LL m U m O O y T t C E v c N y m E in a C a O aC EO N O y N c 0 o a T N N o CL Q. OO a) m .0 � Q m C` a c 7 a) Q m m (n o- F m d E o E Q c m N O U p C C O Vl N Q 'L J J 3 T N y o- E w m a) r o •E a=.. E C Q v°. C a) o E E m U m c0 m E EO O w 0. 2 N = , N U -° y a) N y 7 $ N U O ° C 7 m t @ O c aai a y o 7 3 a m° O N C y C 7 N C O O O o y Y m O) r y N vi am. a) V 7 y O a) U ma) E a) E oym - -6 -° U)) U UM ate+ C a > p '� 'v O a= E N a U) m vc c N a Z s @ c c !E .2 o M W 9 c a) 07 o Q c o o O TKO y C U O O) c N y N a w �E'� u ¢m C 7 mU7 T 0 O ° C O a m = m +_ m C r N O C 9 F C o U U) �w O 0) f6 ca i 'R Da ' y a —0?� y ma 0) 0 a) N E y N d L F_ = a, 3 C O •� C a o •'- c 7 a E� C OO U)L C aa)) ° O" m m o m H O. C M 0 o u m p E a O C m o> lC `� c Q m 0 ro 01 m a U i in a c L y m y y 7 O V Um0 r O w a 3 0 w =@ L ci m -O _ o m a) m .= o a .� a) N « 0 d y c a> i 672 m o d a MO a m L a o) y 0.Nm 3 a> N E°' a) c O Q :° ° N y 3 -a 3 �° N p° o a fn m p r2 y c E U m U) C wa)m p� =d wErn aam,) V o m _ � Loc a E m 0." o� U) Mn a Es °O E w I�F_a F_.M U c -O a) N Y y m O nQ O �° a = U n m y U a) 6 N m O H O c > 0 O T U c o o a U Q a`i N = ° a) n R a) c 0 = c Q "a x a m i 0 U 'E O r`m• W aD 3 -° Q m d U E o E E .p. E .p. m a .p m 0 N 3 E r c = o M > ` LL ° y O U) a. U)o U m _ N CL ` Y O m O U O c o L m d a) o o otM @ Eo = d w L 3 a' L 0 U o � 0 y m r � CD _ _ a o y a a) C 0 t Q a) N U)m 7 w a y C cc a) N m i a= a7a aai o� c C 2 m o)7 n� Ny O j y .U-. o G1 y y .r.. > N V) .t-. C y a O > L S a m m 3 a U o m > E 7 >Lm >. o o m U a y N f0 p)m p-a O.p O S a) v, E o c0 ° C c U)0 y y y CDC O ++ v aa a) E.2 o a cm m c o_° 02my- m co U) N a na aa) y C 0 s m o m E C 10 o 3 a)) o c w T o C m m r Q) y m i y a) N y 0- O — j O Z C N 0 <6 y N y U C a fn 7 m y a+ N� 0 m o r o m o r C U a° d U n y a) w o �@ m C a •C.) E c m a Z m m 0 Mn F J L U N J 7 7 y '0 a) E O a s O a) ° c a a) c a p 0 Y yN y y 2° U o° n9 a) N wy, N m .- c� U 0 m O o L o m m p t y F N N N W N 0 N N 0) p E d C y O- � O L a y a p. C a) m 0 LL E U r s n 0 ,Y •s o c M �0 E d N m=2J) L m 7 0, p y c m = Z a) a0i ='�Et tn'coma 0)"i- Ein w L E a;LL L 0CL m ° om U c yaEapY > c m r 0 U)c r 9 7 m y 3 o E o' E u c o o m C m y goat 7£ E c ° U O N> a) t9 -m° °° as N m vm m ly0 m m N Q m V CD `O LL ca H LL In y a O CD m c 4 VNI 6L W Z Q H J TW i a z Q V O LL U) J W W CJ G C� LC r a O Q V+ W O LL Z MQ W W 2 F— LU Q Z L m a E w CO N a C m a L O a a N m N C O E a) N U U p N 6 N LLL N a E o Y a to 7 m C Q L O O 3 U T w m a C C C m o_ a) m 7 E a E m C a m m E 4 m O -o E OC Q m o U � E y c E E E O LL OT Q O T t "' Ua Mm t . (A o N U E a)a y N C N m N m a C o E o N ti O a N L L C m m mcza N U y 3 0 a a3 m o p m m d N0._ E x N o m r a U C n N m Q a o 0 U U O C Y m O o m m 0 U o a > m N C 'o mC a i N m N O m E C - U T o w C X C m m o N C O m � p oU a O O> y i+ (Q ; a1 d Q O LL O r �+ C N i O E W O U U O N +_ (n -0 O O U m LLi w N C E d m ECL % rn O 0 r O a7 N U d E �z m = C. m C V 0 in- y .O 00 O Q 5 U N a m 0 O L T C N C C- :E j a N N O m y6 C N 0) m N C N C m (D w m N m m 3 E L T a D C- p m m E a (D cpiU._� C T N E m 0-0 'X m ) c O O � U .N+ a Oi C- o Y > N N � N C U C LL m O Q C7 a) m C a a c m c .� a p c > O U 'Z` E Q a) a N U a C N a E m m X ro m E a C Q N p a ro m p X Oi a) ._ O a a a>i N o o o U 5 U m 0)N E E d E E O C r O T L L '6 a) a) O a � C C m � N � u O N m N N Cm p � m w Q m L E C N Oa N d m L tv m x d m o 0 C l3 a I a E O N :L- a 'U onO C m m C Q E m E L) a w O � y a> 0) a1 c c `o a O O a M O. C m aL o N C N (D InO C .- O ` lC V a a. L O a H m t y .N d p c m m a O L 7 N a+ E O O 0 m m p 0 m a C U U 0 a U7 O O a)O �( N > 01 O m C N 'N Q� C U N T m 01 N E U COL L (/� N O ate+ N Q in U p N a U o ?, �W w a a C C m 0 a =cm _ w T U > . > o 3 y O m� E N mm m m o O U m w H e -- `m a m N 9 U r m -o C C (Lp y C O U m (` N O y d 0 N_ O N U r C N O> LL E C N o,E.>_ 0 a) m C a m C m N G E WE C M m N o 0. 0> E> .� N OEt a) a) w E F 0_ = Co y o rn N O N m E a w CD a m r a� E> m C p- n F C O 'V 00 OC) O U C/J 7 "O N T O �. U .N m 0 E m 01 O p` N N _T E m C m 2 O m ` w C w _ a L N C O p N C m a� CD a C� = N C@ Ca C N c,V N r N T p m C U 0 U 'O m p_ a a) N C' y E N -S; N D W co 0 a p E C o o p m E N E (p w4 a.@>3 N a yE 00 ° 2 a s 9 c s° y o c 3 a �' ¢ N N L O L N a 0 C C a m f6 o O L N C 06 N 0) N C O O 7 O Y L d N t O C n c 0 >` N L 'N N ai m m N N m a C rmL+ r O N m y O O. C V 0 O .m p N V N C m C a 3 m L N 0 a� °wmC of C •� O .`O- O E a-> V a)U NL m_O N 01 C N m 0 O U C d m N U m a 'O m C m N C C T m d N w U O O. C O> a vi 7 m p m L) m — N y E ai N co i m N C 0 r, r ci C m m U Ci 7 Q V i w Q 3 O. C m w a d c U - d E m d Q � C m C m (6 N '6 N m i N O N LL 5 m d CL O y O1 R y c O > d m E a N rn C N > a � C m y N a N 4 (n r H M ¢ m N N a? N � O a N C LL N C C C C O 0 N U 9 O m 9 C N f/1 C N N E O N .• y O y C m m a)C 'O N O U O C U w C U C C y N N' N m N U a E a N N � (0 N 0)c C c m E o -p 'C > N a .O ca c m a> E (D w m y L E° a y n o) E m _ F �>> C C :EIDE O N 7 C N .m-. a) > N L C C V m O_ 'O C d C E N mOL 01 __ N N a p p E0. p m ca Oco a. 72 L E 3 1) m m co '� p rn c o a c O "O U `O > N E "O 'O > p— n y D a)+' w? y a C N m p O C U p C EE Ea.E N E� E o EL) E m .d. N _0d. cmi m .d. O m m s N O L s C co E 0 0 c 0 O 0 0 s fA m 7 M N 2. N J fA O ZO C � 9 N O C O- C O p T N C E m m m.0 :E y .N U C C j U U N N U m nm+ LE m s C 2 m V O m N 0 CL a N N m N 0- y E 2 c o y c o) E C -mo c a N .N T1 N O V £ 0 C m N `1 m d > N C 0) 0)O U N m 'C m U r O C N m a U 2 E y CD p m.2 °c a ac > V O V> N> •C. In L N .3 C N w 9 -O -O -O O C f0 "O C C m p ` C N m O" N D L N y d 0 'L N Q N C N > O a)E a)O L C 3m r �Ca"rn O@ 7 c n -0 E C N N i C C O .0 3 a a)m m o o L) 2N o > >U'y-a IL -a NLL am C CN C Q O N N m OiS s 3 O � m a m N _T H E N m � d L fn G m CL N CL 0 CO 7 OiS U N N (' V r 01 J - c m c ami m N 2 (D E O. LL N C O O ci p LL m N a)c > Y m m � Q m .0a)d N o H N H ll� ¢ m U 0 N U O LL cNo H LL 7 a� N a O n N N E m C 4 MZ W D W F- a Z Q F- LU w O LL Q m W L2 r LL O U) F— M W Z W m Z Q W `J W Lm r LL O W Z W 2� Q U J m a W W tU z J Q 'O V C v w a C0 NW LL O LL c R - N O C p C iC 0 N 0 O U) N O 0 O > N C tR > O U °c o fC L CL U i U O> O ° ILO °CU X N N c c �= 0) t/1 Cl Q a) E w C •� C 0- C N O .. R O L R O '� R R £ O .T. fyN F R.. a o LO O N R C1 N C T R E E y R 0 C Q Q° Y R i U R �_� U 00' `p_ C N N N L C .N O U N O 0 ` N O m .2 'c- O 00 0> 0 0) d C EC C E , O, Q W 0 N a0+ -0 a0+ ++ 0 o 0-6 c 0 C -6 2 a t: y o E fA L) c a C d � i C � N O N ° R iG a C E (6 N w C N R Y o ` ° U R Q O cu U Q L _0 C R O 0 E 0)0 V N N L Ol C N cm O O °- a m O N O t O R U C R E OL 0 p CZ d C N a)Q D N y N O R a LD ° O > L E L l.L C CD m c - 3 N N N 0 .� ° a)° E o R 0 .3 0- CD I > a L O o o) E o E '0 N C (i O U C 2U :N L d Q 5 fl_ d L 61 O C. L V f6 L T O 7 c� E E V Y1 7 N V L � w N O O � y Y t L 3 0 R C 3 m u Z N U i0�� '� F tm L O N U1 L O w U U W 7 0 M Q 00 U G C N 0 0 CL m i° C C N R E H C 0 O w V O Q 0 0 d E 0 o CL s ° y L C O N w N � i 0 N 0 a)N U N O _0 r C O R CL N R C 7 � R y Q r R _ O 0 N N L 0) R Cco m N a c E Y O t `O Ul 3 m .a � C E C R O c m U E R R y > C ._ ° �- c N N U 30 O W C m 3 C O V Q N Z � R m c c 3 L O Uy w N U 0 O N LL m Q O d r 'V N 0 � r O fA cv Q M N 0 C N U O C O" � - Y T ° U O m � 0 O N 2 C O U O N R m N o c O 0 R 0 U Q o W CD 00 0 O M 0 N Q C U_ R t: E = R O O_ E _ N 6 d y0 p R � o -0- 0 c U J -O C C R 7 E O a U E w C � N 0 N � N � rT R R i N N 0 C� O CLL C A a) 0 C Y O a o E V R O U C R E U N L -0 m C N i O a V C V O i N N N .y N 0 C O L C m d d Ul L Q O C1 3 � y t d E L � 3 O V CL d c W H d > R u V 0 w C 01 O N M Q M 9 � � O O w a � m W w O LL Z « � � D w 2 F- m F- w O a. a. � m « � F- 2 O F- � m_ O w � w IL O � « � 2 « LL � � §/ � - )! -2 /} \ \) »� a))f* =F` ))\ \ (*E ©_ 2 !\2_ !« (DE�}&a : $m \\\${/s §}StE fE7\ \ )E)a) k$ \jr )00w 23J 272E/\ /� \ () ) 22 -CL - \ mr- 2 ul 4 {)I §E \ $ Eo - \} 2 {/§ ({\ JEz2` OJ2 � \ k § § _ kCL � - m / J CL 4 ) 0 - e C R - C E - R » - \ © ) d � G / ■ Appendix Executive Summary to the 2007 and 2009 Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Reports 4. Executive Summary to the 2007 and 2009 Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Reports - 10 pages . Provides an overview of the above document. • Describes the inventory process for Street Trees, Park Trees and Natural Area Trees. . Summary of the number of trees in the above areas, the percentages of major species, their relative condition (health) and real estate values. Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 49 Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Report March 2007 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Renton has a diverse urban forest that includes trees growing along street rights -of - way, in parks and natural areas, in private yards, on commercial and industrial properties, and on public and private woodlands and wetlands. As a whole, these trees contribute to the quality of life in Renton and create a favorable climate for residents to live, work and play. "The tree inventory is a proactive management tool. It is the cornerstone of a long-term urban forestry maintenance and management program. Tree inventories are fundamental to the development of comprehensive, sustainable, and appropriate arboricultural and management practices."1 To get an idea of the quantity and diversity of trees in the urban forest, and to begin planning for their care, the City commissioned a public property inventory of street, park and natural area trees in 2003. This report provides a summary of the inventory with detailed information found in the appendix. A tree inventory is important for many reasons including: • Determining the quantity and composition of trees; • Understanding the quality, the health and condition of trees; 1 The Tree Inventory as a Proactive Management Tool, M. Duntemann & S. Gasperini, City Trees, March/April 2007, Volume 43, No. 2, page 6. Tree Inventory and Assessment Summary Report Page I • Assessing the real estate value of trees; • Calculating the environmental benefits of trees; • Finding the location of trees; • Learning about the maintenance needs of trees; • Establishing risk management goals for trees; • Informing residents of their tree resources; • Developing a management plan to maintain trees; • Discovering new tree planting opportunities and; • Beginning point for a comprehensive urban forestry program. A tree inventory is a dynamic process because all trees grow, becoming larger with time. In addition, the inventory changes as new trees are planted, others are pruned and some removed. Annexations can affect an inventory when new areas are added, increasing trees in the community. Since 2003, this inventory was updated to reflect the additions of the Panther Creek Wetlands and Tonkin Park — areas not included in the original inventory. Only trees found on street rights -of -way and City -owned properties were considered in the inventory. Trees found on private lands were not inventoried. The general categories of trees represented are street trees, park trees and natural area trees. Information about street and park trees was gathered using global positioning satellite (GPS) equipment. This equipment pinpoints a tree on land using coordinates triangulated and transmitted by satellites and is accurate within a few millimeters. The "tree points" were plotted onto aerial photographs called orthophotographs used as a scalable base map. Each tree on the inventory base map is represented by a green tree symbol. The LandInfo Parcel Map's program within the City's intranet system, known as RentonNet, provides a visual location of the tree and inventory information that can be viewed on a computer. Natural area trees were inventoried differently than street and park trees without using GPS equipment. Instead one -tenth acre sample plots were established, tree information gathered and the data extrapolated to provide a total tree estimate for the wooded portion of each area. Tree species and number of trees were tallied for the natural area inventory. Street and park tree information collected during the inventory included tree species, diameter, condition, maintenance needs, tree problems and more. Appraisal data was gathered to apply a monetary value to trees. Street tree data was collected by six management units presented in the document, "Parks, Recreation and Open Space Implementation Plan." This report is divided into four sections: • The Introduction (Page 6) Tree Inventory and Assessment Summary Report Page 2 • Street Tree Inventory (Page 10) • Park Tree Inventory (Page 23) • Natural Area Tree Inventory (Page 28) and; • The Appendix (Page 34). The Street Tree Inventory section defines street trees as those within the public right-of-way. These are trees growing either in sidewalk cutouts, in planting strips between sidewalk and curb, in boulevards or in other landscaped islands. Renton has 4,220 street trees within 205 miles of street rights -of -way. The Community Services Department - Parks Division maintains approximately 1,000 of these street trees and the Planning/Building/Public Works Department has responsibility for the remainder. A reason for collecting inventory information is to determine the diversity of species being planted, with greater diversity being the goal. Reliance on too many of one species or genus has proven to be costly in the past when an insect or disease epidemic affects an entire city's tree population consisting of one species or genus of tree. In Renton, 35% of the street tree population are maple trees. Researchers recommend that only 10% of the total street tree population be comprised of a particular genus or species to avoid problems such as those experienced with American elms caused by Dutch Elm Disease in the later half of the 20th Century and the recent outbreak of emerald ash borer on ash trees in the Lake States.2 The inventory indicates Renton has a relatively young street tree population with 82% of the trees less than 25 years old. Sixty percent (60%) are in fair to excellent condition. Renton's street tree population has a value of approximately $6.6 million. Improving the existing street tree population through active maintenance such as planting, pruning, removing tree -staking wire, mulching and other practices can increase condition, health and value of trees. Identifying unsafe trees in the inventory and removing them before they cause problems is important - 215 trees were identified for potential removal. Planting opportunities abound — the inventory discovered 1,740 vacant sites along streets within planting strips between sidewalks and curbs. The Park Tree Inventory section identifies 2,918 trees that were planted and another 17,082 trees that are remnant forest trees found in small groves within parks. In developed areas of established parks, maples (38%) are more prevalent than other species followed by pines (12%). Park trees tended to be older, larger, in better condition and with fewer problems than street trees. Because of their larger average size and better condition, park trees present a greater value per tree than street trees. Total value of the planted landscape trees found in parks is $9.7 million. 2 R.W. Miller. 1997. Urban Forestry: Planning and Managing Urban Greenspaces. Prentice Hall Tree Inventory and Assessment Summary Report Page 3 105,367 trees are included in The Natural Area Tree Inventory section. Natural areas comprise 769 acres; the areas inventoried comprised 401 acres of fully wooded portions or 52% of total natural area acres. The remaining acreage had few if any trees - comprised of wetlands, fields and other open space lacking groupings of trees. Natural areas are comprised of. • Bigleaf maple - 31 % • Cottonwood - 20% • Alder - 18% • Hemlock 9% • Douglas fir 9% • Western redcedar - 7% • Others — 6% The number of natural area trees per acre is considerably lower than is typical for many Washington forests, a result of having been logged in the past but not replanted. Inferior species such as cottonwood and invasive plants like Himalayan blackberry have dominated and have prevented more desirable species from becoming established such as, Oregon ash, Garry Oak, Douglas fir, Western red cedar and Western hemlock. However, the land remains valuable for recreation, wildlife habitat, and watershed. The current timber value of trees in natural areas is approximately $1.2 million. In summary, 4,220 street trees, ` 20,000 park trees and 105,367 ' natural area trees exist. These 129,587 trees present man challenges to those managing this valuable resource. The tree J inventory provides information r: that should prove useful to managers for increasing the value of the City's urban forest resource VAI- and managing it more wisely into "41966.091.1121 the future. The inventory is the "springboard" for an urban forest management plan which would address the maintenance recommendations found in the inventory. Tree Inventory and Assessment Summary Report Page 4 City of Renton Benson Hill Neighborhood 2009 Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Report Executive Summary In March, 2008 the Benson Hill Neighborhood was annexed into the City of Renton. Approximately 17,000 new residents added to the City's existing population to make Renton the 1 Vb largest Washington city at 83,650 people. Annexation increased the total street miles by 44 miles (249 total citywide). With those streets came street trees within public right-of-ways. Other public property annexed and part of this inventory includes two fire stations, the Edlund Farm property and Cascade Park.' This report provides the summary of the 2009 Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Report conducted and prepared by the Davey Resource Group. It considers only trees within the public right-of-way as well as three of the four properties mentioned above. A separate tree inventory was prepared by TreeResource, Incorporated for Cascade Park, whose summary is included below. 1K Field data was collected using Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) equipment to locate trees and integrated to work with the City's Geographic Information System (GIS). Tree location can be viewed using the City's ParcelViewer program via the internet. Information about each tree is detailed when a tree is selected from the GIS aerial map of the city - the parcel number and address can also be viewed. The field data collected was analyzed and a summary report prepared. Some of the information derived includes: • There are a total of 2,544 trees in the Benson Hill Neighborhood located on street right-of-ways and at the four other locations. The distribution is as follows: o Street Trees — 1,677 o Vacant Tree Planting Sites Along Streets — 195 o Cascade Park Trees — 370 o Edlund Farm — 349 o Fire Station 13 — 64 o Fire Station 17 — 83 1 This is the unofficial Executive Summary of the 2009 Benson Hill Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Report. For the official version, and the full report, please refer to the on-line version at http://www.rentonwa.gov/living/default.aspx?id=l 6702. City of Renton Benson Hill Neighborhood 2009 Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Report Executive Summary Street Trees • Street Trees. There are at least 48 genera represented by 98 identified species primarily composed of- * 35% White or Red cedar (Thuja) 0 18% Plum & cherry (Prunus) 0 9% Douglas fir (Pseudostuga) 0 8% Maple (Acer) 0 3% Ornamental pear (Pyres) 0 27% Miscellaneous (represented by 3% or less of other species) The 24 most common species include: Thu'a occidentalis (587) Malus fusca (37) Cornus florida (15) Prunus cerasifera 157 Acer macro h llum 27 Acer circinatum 13 Pseudostu a menziesii(147) Tilia cordata (24) Betula papyifera, (12) Prunus serrulata 80 Picea pungens 22 Betula pendula 10 Thu'a plicata (63) Acer palmaturn (20) Ilex a uifolium 10 P rus calle ana 57 Acer platamoides 16 Po ulus nigra italica 10 Acer rubrum 54 Fraxinus Americana 16) Pinus ni ra (9 Liquidamber styraciflua(53) Alnus rubra (15) Tsuga heterophylla (8) The 1,400 trees in the table represent 84% of the total street tree population. Tree Condition Tree condition is determined by evaluating a tree's structural integrity and health. This assessment includes visual observations of the trunk, branches, foliage and roots. A tree with a condition rating of 100% is in better health than one rated at 50%. The inventory indicates that street tree condition is nearly evenly spread between the general classifications of poor, fair and good. 25% of the trees were rated at 50% condition or less (poor); 32% at 60% and 70% condition (fair) and 43% rated 80% or higher (good). Age Distribution The age distribution of trees was not a direct measurement taken as part of the inventory. However, using an age -diameter comparison provides insight into tree age assuming a small diameter tree is younger than a large diameter tree of the same species. Using this assumption, the table below presents the approximate age distribution using diameter classes. City of Renton Benson Hill Neighborhood 2009 Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Report Executive Summary 1-3" % of 4-12" % of 13-24" % of 25-36" % of 37"+ % of 1-6 yrs Total 7-24 yrs Total 25r50 Total 51-75 yrs Total 76 yrs+ Total 227 13% 898 54% 429 26% 91 5% 32 2% From the table, 67% of the street trees are 25 years old or less. Trees in size classes twelve inches and below were mostly represented by Thuja occidentalis (arborvitae). The arborvitae tended to be of small diameter and planted in hedgerows. 33% of all trees are older than 25 years. Indications of age can determine the level of maintenance required such as tree pruning. Generally, the younger the stand the more pruning is required to create positive branch structure. Branch structure is important to prevent costly maintenance when trees become larger. Generally, pruning should be early and often in younger trees and infrequent in older trees, therefore, the time to prune is now! Pruning can significantly improve tree condition or health. Condition has a direct relationship on tree value; the higher the condition rating, the more valuable the tree. Performed properly, pruning lowers safety risk, increases life span, contributes to higher real estate values and enhances ecosystem services benefits. As an example of how tree pruning can increase the real estate value of trees, the following example is presented: Tree ID #: 126 Species: Bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) Diameter: 45 inches Existing Condition: 70% Current Appraised Value: $32,700.00 Problem Code indicates structural issues and there are some dead branches in the tree. Pruning the tree will increase the condition rating by a minimum of 10% in this example, raising it from 70% to 80%. Increase in value by pruning: $4,700.00 Post -pruning Condition Rating: 80% Post -pruning Value: $37,400 A structural pruning of this bigleaf maple increases its safety rating, the tree will not likely break apart as easily thus live longer, dead branches have been removed to reduce City of Renton Benson Hill Neighborhood 2009 Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Report Executive Summary chances of insect or disease problems or from falling from the tree and pruning adds nearly $5,000.00 more to the real estate value of the property it abuts. Treatments Treatments No. of Trees Treatments No. of Trees Clearance 220 Prune 97 Remove 25 Unstake 9 Monitor 119 Stump Removal 7 Mulch 3 Repave 42 Plant 194 None 1,162 Treatments are related to tree problem codes (not shown here). For example, a treatment of "Clearance" (actually clearance pruning) means there are low hanging branches over the street and/or sidewalk that hinder access. The treatment of "Pruning" includes removing any broken, dead or diseased branches or other branches to improve tree structure. The data collection format allowed for two problem codes so some trees may show both such as a need for "Clearance" pruning and the other kinds of pruning under "Pruning." "Removal" means whole tree removal and is associated with poor tree condition. This group of trees needs to be located from the database and work initiated at removing these unhealthy trees. Stump removal is a part of that operation. It is listed in the table because pre-existing stumps were found but were never removed. Monitoring some of the trees is indicated in the table. "Monitor" is required for such trees as those showing signs of decline, decay or other conditions that do not require removal or pruning at this time but could over time if conditions deteriorate. Mulch is a material applied around the base of trees to cover the roots, preventing competition from other plants such as weeds or turf and to conserve moisture. Mulching trees is very beneficial during the first several years of establishment and beyond. Because the inventory assessed available tree planting sites, a treatment of "Plant" was used and shows 194 sites that could potentially be planted. Many times, as part of tree planting, stakes are used to prevent trees from falling over during the first year. Left attached, the materials that tie a tree to a stake can girdle the stem. Also, research shows staking weakens stems when they prevent natural swaying. Removing stakes and ties after one growing season is recommended. City of Renton Benson Hill Neighborhood 2009 Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Report Executive Summary Where tree roots have heaved sidewalks, the treatment of "Repave" indicates the sidewalk may need to be repaired or replaced. And, the treatment of "None" shows the majority of the street trees do not require any maintenance work at this time. Summary of Street Trees Between the 2007 Inventory and Assessment Report and the 2009 Report, through Annexation, Renton now has a total of 5,896 street trees more or less. In addition, there are a total of 1,937 potential tree planting locations. Since 2007, Renton's street tree population has increased by 28%. The real estate value of this resource today has a conservatively estimated appraised value of $11,160,000.00. While the majority of street trees are the responsibility of the property owners to maintain, tree value is so great that a higher level of maintenance is justified and achieved using professional arborist staff. Edlund Farm, Cascade Park, Fire Stations 13 and 17 Property - Total Trees Major Species % No. of Trees Total No. of Species Edlund Farm - 349 Alnus rubra 42% 147 35 Acer macrophyllum 5% 20 Betula pendula 5% 20 Cascade Park - 370 Po ulus trichoca a 53% 195 14 Alnus & Salix 27% 100 Pseudostu a menziessii 11% 41 FS 13 - 64 Thu'a plicata 24% 15 11 Tsu a hetero h lla 22% 14 Calocedrus decurrans 19% 12 FS 17 - 83 Thu'a plicata 37% 31 7 Acer macrophyllum 23% 19 Pseudotsu a menziesii 16% 13 The four properties listed in the table represent 34% of the trees found in the Benson Hill Neighborhood inventory of public property. Each location is significantly different than the others in composition. Descriptions of each follow: Edlund Farm. Located at the intersection of Petrovitsky Road and Carr Road, this nearly 18-acre area is maintained in its former farm -like state. There are a few native stands of Douglas fir, Western redcedar and bigleaf maple with many of the other trees planted by the former owners. Contrasted with Cascade Park, there is a rich diversity of species City of Renton Benson Hill Neighborhood 2009 Public Property Tree Inventory and Assessment Report Executive Summary however, red alder dominates on the formerly exposed farmland edge. Typical of park- like areas, the trees are in better condition, with fewer problems and less maintenance needs than street trees; their sizes tend to be larger and trees are somewhat older. Unusual species identified in the inventory include English walnut, butternut, white oak and common fig. Cascade Park. Located in the southeastern area of Renton, this nearly 9 acre park contains a majority of black cottonwood nearing maturity. High risk trees identified in the inventory have been removed; relatively little maintenance is required of remaining trees. Probably the greatest maintenance needs are gradual removal of Himalayan blackberry followed by tree planting with desirable species. Some of the unexpected species found in the park include London planetree, Pacific madrone and European mountainash. Fire Stations 13 and 17. Station 13 is located on 108 Avenue SE and has new landscaping. Most of the trees are small having been planted two years ago. A few larger trees exist that were protected during development. Very few problems exist and pruning will become important in the next year and beyond. Noteworthy species include eastern red cedar, downy serviceberry and Pacific dogwood. Fire station 17 is an older facility located on Petrovitsky Road in the Fairwood Neighborhood. It contains larger mature trees typical of the Pacific Northwest. These remnant forest trees require very little maintenance other than periodic removal of dead or storm damaged branches. The site is home to a bigleaf maple measured at 58 inches in diameter. Appendix Committee of the Whole - Committee Report S. Committee of the Whole - Committee Report • Documents the review of the Plan and its approval by Renton's Parks Commission on July 14, 2009, and City Council on July 20, 2009. • Document signed by City Coucil Chairman Randy Corman. Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan - 51 Appendix 2009 City of Renton Limits and Surrounding Area Aerial Photograph 6. 2009 City of Renton Limits and Surrounding Area Aerial Photograph . Aerial shows the City of Renton in 2007 with City limits in red. . Shows surrounding areas not within City limits but part of the proposed annexation areas and other parts of King County. . Lake Washington is in the upper left corner (north) with the southern portion of Mercer Island. Lake Youngs in in the lower middle right corner (south). Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan - 53 City of Renton PUBLIC WORKSDEPARTMEW This Om,enliaagmphioropresentadon,notgearanteod city D( Gregg Zimmemlan,ACmin —., D ty TechnicalS—ms to aurroy aaumq,aM is basetl on lne xat information r 0 1.200 2.400' e B. MacOng, D.I..*i lebk as of ft date shown. 1Tis map is intentle0 for L IRenton City Limifs PnnW on JuN 27,2009 ciay Elaplay vamaaeaonly. vv ems"" ■ Appendix 2008 Urban Forestry Programs Comparisons 7. 2008 Urban Forestry Programs Comparisons . Table comparing urban forest programs of 4 representative cities and Renton. . Illustrates the Urban Forestry Task Force desires for programming in Renton. Renton Urban and Community Forestry Development Plan — 55 co 0 0 N C r Q d N co tm i d d 2 W U w O cn I� H cn w O, UL H Z O U 0 Z a Z m Z O Z w LL N Mn— L (6 .0 f0 C O �' a) cn C L co C ,C c N w a) co I a) > N O a p 'a j X 7 m O Q co c (}pC N cu C -a C a C U N C co X NO -L>> O 0 N a) a a - m C --OL - OO p Q� a) co >* yO �LL a) m O U coC" O Z ; + Q W = N >, C C .0 'L O C N cn O .F a) E .0 3 p a� LEL L 7aE 7 7 00 O a) ��07 7 7 a) 77 7} II cc)c p a) C 04 "> U —0 > U o c d m Q ?� E co C) �_ * a) 0 cn a) a)~ N N Ecn s? N a N O E N CU cC In C N Z (n } O N m (6 a) C > N i i N i z i N i- 0_ f 11 lJ N E 7 O L L N CO N cu O U (n O L ��— u O p Q 1 U O >, otj fo >+ IL N 7 0 C c O a) cn U _ O N U U + p p p N O N Q> O N O d O O C v) cn > rn Y E �� O E N �o-a > z rn o 0> 0 z z z a) �U� a) >_ M a) j N m aim C� Z L IL �CA Q Cod caa)i - Y cnm 0 a) a) Eco � .. a i M L In X_ U a) p O a) C) (6 (o C� O N a) .0 a) N N O V) a) 0 p <n a) cn a) 00 Co N C U •O d' N L +-. cl U }�I L O LO U > �� a) L O a) a La m U) o LL _0 C 0 — C: 0 p cu a) a CD ��/O/� V) a) i6 L O co cm a) N L N o � (7 > �a� O O z a) o' co a) mrn a) � = O O O ��>- 0 0 Q >- � v m C > o a) a o o V o i i a) 6 C -O m a) N m LL (6 L C � 0_ ca a c ° C U) O iao Q u _E u) E 0 U o io6 � N co C nL3 >, C a) a) o C m E aOj cu C O (o m O a_ U C O co m Z � a) .0 N C N a a) O W C V N 6 L co O 0 0 a) � N " a) O a) U O N> a) oo O O O CL a 0- a) H a) �' a) C U a) O >, m > a. mO O 0 °) a) +' >� a) L 0)> C m N 2 Z 7- _� .� O p co L L a) �_ N� a) • m a) a c) a= +�+ cn 7 LL F s o o IL IL H (0 p IL a cn > E cD = z � U