Agenda - Planning Commission - 07/10/2008

Home

Better Foliage Through Zoning By James Schwab, AICp' and Carrie Fesperman Trees are an overwhelmingly popular amenity in urban areas these days, yet they don't always get the respect they deserve in local development regulations. Citizens enjoy trees, butthere is room for more education of both the public and decision mak- ers about the conditions that allow successful urban forestry programs to happen. Planners, foresters, and arborists are leaming how to con- vert good intentions into actual long-term improvements in greening our cities. The need for effective planning and implementation of urban forestry is becoming more apparent in a nation that is increasingly focusing its attention on serious environmen- tal challenges like climate change. Fortu- nately, a growing body of research and experi- ence has given urban policy makers much to consider. In recent years, urban forestry research has documented and quantified a variety of benefits from trees. These include: . storm water runoff filteri ng; . soil. stabilization; . filtering of some kinds of air pollution; . urban heat island mitigation; . reduced building energy consumption (through tree shading and wind breaks); and . improved mental health and social interac- tion for residents, particularly in densely developed areas. Trees are, quite simply, central to a healthy ecosystem. This list is only the begin- ning of a substantial web of interrelated bene- fits that ultimately encompass increased bio- diversity, water quality, aesthetics, and quality of life-a panoply of positive impacts that in turn foster a wide variety of civic motives for protecting the urban forest. Because this issue is so vital to the health of American cities, the American Planning Association joined forces more than two years ago with the u.s. Forest Service, American Forests, and the International Society of Arboriculture to prepare a Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Report examining best 74 practices in planning .for urban forestry. The emphasis of the project has been on ways to integrate urban forestry concems into the planning process. This issue of Zoning Practice distills a few of the most important points from the forthcoming PAS Report, Planning the Urban Forest: Ecology, Economy, and Community Development, as they r,elate to zoning and other development codes. URBAN FORESTRY IN PLANS AND CODES Considering the combination of benefits associ- ated with the urban forest, two questions arise in drafting local regulations to protect and encourage trees: What goals has the community established,and how does it hope to achieve them? The PAS Report, which includes 13 case . studies of communities across the U.s., identi- fies both holistic and single-purpose approaches among local govemments, as well as two regional efforts. Within those broad cate- gories, community needs often vary widely. For instance, among the more focused approaches, Ragstaff, Arizona, must address concems about fires in the wildland-urban interface. None of the other communities studied treat that as a major challenge. In communities with more holistic approaches, there are varying mixtures of both external stimuli for program development and intemal civic motivations ranging from beautifi- cation to economic revival and environmental protection. It is worth looking at each of these factors separately before discussing regulatory techniques. PlannerS who understand the rela- tive importance of these factors in their commu- nities are in a better position to advance the underlying goals sensibly and efficiently. External Drivers These are mandates, grant programs, and incentives from higher levels of government, usually state or federal, but sometimes regional. Environmental protection laws, such as stormwater regulations or air quality man- dates, as well as state planning laws, are among the externaldrivers that may induce action at the local level to solve a problem or comply with regulatory standards. Studies showing that trees can help reduce nonpoint- source pollution, for example, at lower cost than highly engineered alternatives, help make the case for incorporating them as a means of reaching the desired goal. These drivers often provide a politically and eco- nomically viable rationale for adopting tree preservation requirements that might other- wise face more intense opposition. Reaction to the Impact of New Development Sometimes, however, citizenswant better tree protection because they feel the community has lost something valuable when trees are cut down to make way for new deveiopment, or when trees die be.cause of the adverse impacts of such development. Columbus, Georgia, for instance, adopted a strict tree protection ordinance as the result of intense citizen lobbying in the face of developer resistance. Many cities, like Savannah, Georgia, have local tree trusts and other organizations that advocate for better tree protections and often provide potent political support for local officials who enact such measures. Green Community Pride At some-point in many communities, civic pride in the community's green image man- ages to transform the civic agenda. These communities then begin to craft a more holis- tic approach to creating and supporting green infrastructure, defined by authors Mark A. ZONINGPRACTICE 6.08 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION I pa!}e 2