MSUS Culminating Experience Final Report
Paige Anglin and Rett Evans
March 25, 2021
Peoria Community Forestry Program
City of Peoria, Arizona
Abstract
The City of Peoria, AZ approached Project Cities and the 2021 MSUS cohort for
research on the feasibility, and challenges, of adopting a Community Forestry Program
(CFP). The team was asked to evaluate Peoria’s potential for canopy growth and plan
adoption by researching forestry or shade programs in cities with similar climates, as well
as by reaching out to Peoria citizens to determine the community desire for a CFP. This
process includes identifying the specific barriers and opportunities regarding
implementation. Research was conducted through peer reviewed articles and interviews
with shade or forestry program officials; citizen outreach was conducted through surveys
and focus groups. These results have been compiled and presented to the City of Peoria to
provide recommendations moving forward.
These recommendations will be invaluable for the city when it comes time to
evaluate whether or not a CFP can be successfully implemented. Peoria will likely benefit
from a comprehensive CFP, and this program will help reduce inequalities within the city,
enhance urban form, promote walkability, and increase biodiversity within the urban area.
This will also highlight that Peoria is dedicated to becoming a forerunner in the arena of
urban planning, the intersection of social and environmental sustainability, and human
health. Through their efforts in this sphere, Peoria can emerge as an example, and provide
motivation, for other cities that are interested in pursuing a similar program. If
implemented, the CFP will influence the development of Peoria for years to come.

Table of Contents
A.
B.
C.

Introduction and Background
Literature Review
Project Approach and Intervention Methods
Page 1

3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

D.
E.
F.
G.
H.

Outcomes/Findings
Recommendations
Conclusions
Appendices and Acknowledgements
References

Introduction and Background
The partner for this project was the City of Peoria, and the main contact is the Trails
Superintendent, Brandon Putman. Peoria brought this project forward to the School of
Sustainability with the scope already established. The city has a tree inventory and a
sustainability plan, yet is interested in developing a Community Forestry Program (CFP) to
provide equal opportunities for shade, increasing transportation options and creating a
safer walking environment in the summer. In addition, increased shade improves air quality
along walkways and alleviates the urban heat island effect. Implementing the CFP could
stimulate Peoria’s economy by providing a comfortable, shaded environment for shoppers
and by providing a pull force for new business development.
If Peoria does decide to create and adopt a CFP, the urban environment would likely
change for the better. Cooler temperatures allow for greater outdoor leisure and exercise,
and the urban landscape would be more vibrant and appealing to spend time in.
Connectivity between walkable areas would be improved as pedestrians could travel
comfortably for longer distances on pathways that are shaded, beautiful, and protected
from traffic by the natural infrastructure that trees provide.
This project confronts the sustainability issues of excessive urban heat, low
walkability, and social inequalities due to urban economic and social disparities. These
problems are common across many cities around the world, and this project can help
provide a pathway forward for them. Through helping the city determine if a CFP is a
worthwhile investment, we can also demonstrate to adjacent cities the numerous benefits
trees bring to urban areas. By investing in CFPs, cities can become more resilient to climate
change, become better places to live in terms of equalities and happiness, and benefit from
the financial value that urban tree canopies produce.
Urban sprawl is perpetuated in Peoria by the availability of cheap land and
automobile-centric infrastructure. Sprawl is nearly synonymous with waste: wasted time,
wasted energy, wasted land, wasted resources, and wasted money. If Peoria continues
forward with status quo development, it will have significantly negative implications for the
three pillars of sustainability. The local environment will suffer from rapid urbanization and
destruction of the native desert landscape, and society will suffer from the lost time spent
commuting and being disconnected from other residents and family members. The
economic implications are more debatable, yet increased population density can spur local
economic activity. The CFP is unlikely to solve all of these problems; however, they will
contribute to a desirable future state where residents can be less dependent on cars,
increasing disposable income.
Peoria’s CFP will make the city more beautiful and safe, making Peoria a more
desirable place to live and raising property values. This, in turn, can increase the local
government’s tax revenue, allowing for further development of urban improvement
Page 2
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

projects. To make these changes more robust, the city should focus on zoning for increased
density and access to commercial areas.
The pathways to determine if a CFP was best for Peoria were already fairly solidified
in our projects’ scope, but we used Weik’s solution framework to ensure our solution is
truly sustainable. We are also working directly with stakeholders- the citizens of Peoria- to
learn about what aspects of a CFP are most and least desirable, as well as where the most
impact can be made, through a survey the team created.

Literature Review
Peoria, Arizona experiences summers characterized by extreme heat, which is
projected to worsen with the regional effects of a changing climate (Grossman-Clarke et al,
2014). Researchers utilized ten unique climate models to predict a feasible range of future
temperatures, and determined that extreme heat events could increase by 6 to 20 times in
the period from 2041-2070 (Grossman-Clarke et al, 2014). Meanwhile, the Phoenix
Metropolitan area is rapidly growing, leading to increased conversion of land use to urban
forms and exacerbating the urban heat island effect (Grossman-Clarke, 2010). With the
growth of the population due to urbanization and sprawl, there is an increased risk of heat
vulnerability amongst residents, especially with the absence of adequate urban cooling
(Harlan et al, 2013). On the bright side, researchers have determined that green
infrastructure, such as parks and trees, has a notable cooling effect (Declet-Barreto et al,
2012). This is due to the direct provision of shade and the evaporative cooling effect of
transpiration (Declet-Barreto et al, 2012). A handful of cities in the Phoenix metro area
have already taken action to increase shade coverage through tree planting programs.
Human health is often linked to urban heat in terms of comfort levels, heat-related
illnesses, and death; the extent to which heat kills is hard to quantify, but in a study of 7
Canadian cities, found that an increase of Urban Heat Island (UHI) intensity of 2–3 °C
translates into a 4–7% increase in mortality rate (Wang et al, 2016). Lives can be saved by
planting trees, and as temperatures continue to rise as climate change worsens, tree shade
will be critical to ensuring safety in outdoor urban environments. However, it is paramount
that the trees are locally adapted and able to survive in extreme heat.
The study by Declet-Barreto et al. (2012) provides evidence that an increase in
urban canopy through the implementation of Peoria’s proposed urban forestry program is
an effective means to mitigate urban heat, while also providing co-benefits such as beauty
and clean air. Local vegetation density is a major indicator of heat vulnerability among
neighborhoods, which is also closely tied to relative poverty (Harlan et al, 2013). The aim of
this project is to determine if a CFP can be established in Peoria; if the city decides to go
forward with CFP creation, the plan should seek to equitably increase tree cover, providing
ecosystem services and related co-benefits for all city residents.
Public outreach techniques determined the concerns and preferences of residents to
inform Peoria officials on how to incorporate the residents’ vision into the program. One
outreach approach that was shown to be successful is a community wide conference to
discuss approaches to heat mitigation and to promote dialogue and partnerships among
Page 3
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

community leaders (Guyer et al, 2019). While novel outreach techniques must be applied
due to the coronavirus pandemic, it is possible that traditional barriers to public
participation can be alleviated by the accessibility of an online format.
Researchers in Europe have identified several important considerations for public
engagement in sustainability initiatives, including robust information sharing through
media platforms, dedicated forums to facilitate engagement, and direct public access to the
decision making process connecting local government and civil groups (Richard, 2018).
Some barriers to constructive public participation that have been identified include an
unwillingness to negotiate for collective solutions beyond special interests, and the lack of
time afforded to trust building exercises (Richard, 2018). Despite these challenges, public
participation is seen as a critical process in the development of long-term solutions and
necessary for exercising democratic government mandates (Richard, 2018). To alleviate
these issues, the team will ask participants to indicate potential conflicts of interest in focus
groups. If there appears to be inequitable representation among population groups, the
team will focus communications on involving additional stakeholders. In the case of severe
gridlock, the team will ask participants to select representatives for a series of moderated
discussions to build trust and buy-in among residents, while facilitating compromise.
Tempe, Phoenix, and Peoria share similar climates due to proximity. Tempe and
Phoenix have demonstrated their commitment to urban sustainability through the
development of comprehensive shade plans and urban forestry. Tempe’s forestry plan
identifies a need for collaboration between public and private landowners so that trees are
planted where they are needed to provide shade- not just where it is convenient (City of
Tempe, 2017). Tempe identified the following barriers to the forestry plan’s
implementation: tree maintenance, water availability, viewshed reduction, property
disputes, and stakeholder engagement (City of Tempe, 2017). The City of Phoenix provides
statistics that are helpful for convincing citizens of the benefits of tree planting; for
example, healthy trees can increase nearby home values of up to 10% and can reduce urban
temperatures by 9 degrees Fahrenheit while simultaneously improving air quality (City of
Phoenix, 2015). Other benefits of urban forestry include improved physical and mental
health, increased energy savings, and amplified business to shaded commercial areas. For
example, an existing canopy such as the one in Phoenix has been shown to provide over 40
million dollars annually in general benefits (City of Phoenix, 2015). These two documents
will be crucial for swaying Peoria public opinion of trees to be more positive, as team
members can bring up the financial, physical and mental health benefits of adding trees to
existing urban environments, particularly human-scale walkways.
Taslim et al. (2015) compiles a number of general guidelines for mitigating urban
heat in arid regions such as Peoria. Some of these planning guidelines include artificial
shade provision, orienting new developments to shade walkways during the hottest parts
of the day, and using region-appropriate vegetation to offset urban heat (Taslim et al, 2015).
This compilation shows that urban green spaces provide more benefits than just shade;
they clean the air and can provide a critical barrier between pedestrians and traffic, thus
improving urban safety and well-being (Taslim et al, 2015). One guideline that stood out is
Page 4
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

the importance of planting trees with small canopies along sidewalks adjacent to streets, as
they will not trap heat and pollutants in the human realm like a wide-canopied tree would.
By analyzing literature in the realms of urban planning, urban heat, and urban
canopy, teammates will be able to better understand the drivers of Peoria’s UHI,
communicate more effectively with Peoria residents and partners, and present compelling
statistics for forestry program creation.

Project Approach and Intervention Methods
The current project approach is to extend public participation opportunities to
Peoria residents so that they can inform the development of the CFP. By gathering citizen’s
preferences through a survey, we hope to increase public buy-in and to ensure that the
project is aligned with a unified vision for the future of the city (Richard et al., 2018). If the
CFP is implemented, a multitude of environmental benefits including urban heat mitigation
and air quality improvements are expected (Declet-Barreto et al., 2012). The CFP is
expected to improve social conditions by increasing walkability in the warmer months and
by making the distribution of urban green space more equitable (Taslim et al., 2015).
Additionally, the CFP is expected to spur business development and to attract commerce in
improved areas. By gathering and responding to the citizens’ perspectives, the
implementation will be more aligned with their values and will face fewer barriers.
Therefore, the benefits of the CFP to the future of Peoria can materialize more
expeditiously. By helping the city consult its residents and take their suggestions seriously,
the team expects greater community buy-in and improved project efficacy.
By learning directly from Peoria residents about CFP desirability, as well as through
conducting research and creating matrices on Peoria’s ability to create an adequate CFP, the
team recommended what Peoria’s CFP should entail if adopted. If Peoria approves the CFP,
next years’ MSUS cohort could work with the city to run pilot projects that may iron out
inefficiencies and add more data catered to the approved CFP. Transition management
approaches, as well as Wiek’s sustainability problem solving, solution strategy and problem
identification frameworks, have all been incorporated into this project. Performance will be
evaluated by comparing our final results with the expectations laid out in the project
proposal.
The matrices produced for Peoria include information about code and tree shade
plans from cities within the Phoenix metro area (such as Chandler, Phoenix, and Tempe)
and outside the metro area (such as Tucson, Albuquerque, and San Antonio). By analyzing
this information and comparing it to results gathered from the public survey, the team
identified forestry plan success tactics and intervention points that were incorporated into
Peoria’s CFP recommendations.

Outcomes/Findings
The outcomes or findings will not be truly known until all survey results are
received; however, using survey information from the City of Peoria Sustainability 3.0 Plan
Resident Survey, some initial data on citizen perceptions regarding the urban canopy and
trees is available (Nelson et al., 2021). One of the open-ended questions was: “What actions
Page 5
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

or goals do you feel are important for successful community engagement and education
related to sustainability and conservation in Peoria?”. Several of the responses referenced
the need for investment in tree plantings and shade; for example, “We need to invest in
ways to wisely use water, cool down the city, plant more native trees and shrubs”,
“encourage people to buy a tree and have a plaque installed--have some labels and info
about trees around town”, and “Holding classes to teach about options to be more
sustainable at home (in person or online web based class) with an opportunity for a free
plant, seeds, or tree to grow”. In response to a question asking what sustainable
transportation goals are important for Peoria’s future, one person said “Who wants to wait
for a bus in the heat? Plant more trees”.
Question 10 in the sustainability survey was: “Which statement best describes your
understanding of the phrase "community forestry" as it relates to the Peoria sustainability
plan?”(Nelson et al., 2021). The majority of respondents (71.6%) selected that “the
community forest consists of trees and vegetation located throughout Peoria that have a
special relationship to people contributing to Peoria's ecosystems, sustainability, and
community well-being”; the following question, which asked how important financial and
temporal commitments to a tree recovery project are to the community, saw an impressive
response of “extremely important” (54.68% of respondents).
In addition, question 14- “What do you feel are important actions for the ongoing
health and growth of natural ecosystems and community forestry in Peoria?”- has
numerous free responses from Peoria citizens that highlight the necessity of trees for shade
and that there is a general understanding of the tradeoff between water conservation and
tree planting, as well as the importance of proper maintenance for forestry success and
aesthetic satisfaction.
This survey suggests that the majority of Peoria residents are not only knowledgeable
about the importance of an urban forest, but they are also ready to support one.
As of 4/25/2021 (one week before the survey will close), 750 community responses
have been recorded. The respondents represent a diverse group from low to high income,
18 to 70+, and all ethnicities. Gender distribution was nearly 50-50. The following figures
show survey respondents’ demographic information (Figures 1, 2, & 3).

Figure 1 - Race/Origin
Page 6
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

Figure 2 - Household income

Figure 3 - Education Level
The majority of respondents indicated that they were at least moderately familiar
with the terms “community forest” and “ecosystem services” at the time of the survey.
Respondents were asked to evaluate which ecosystem services were the most important to
them. The top 5 choices were clean water, improved well being, outdoor recreation space,
less noise, and wildlife habitat. These choices were only slightly favored over the rest, with
all categories being heavily ranked as ‘important’ (Figure 4). These results indicate that
respondents would likely support a CFP that provides for more park space and green
infrastructure. The addition of more trees can help Peoria increase the provision of these
highly valued ecosystem services.

Page 7
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

Figure 4 - Ecosystem Services Importance
The following question asked respondents to assess how well Peoria’s community
forest currently provides these same services (Figure 5). These responses demonstrate that
residents see room for improvement for the community forest. A good sign is that very few
people consider these services to not be well provided.

Figure 5 - Rating Current Provision of Ecosystem Services
Page 8
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

Residents were then asked to identify how severe certain problems were in their
experience with the current community forest. The two most common problems were
‘places for litter to accumulate’ and ‘plants that cause allergies’. Close behind were ‘leaf
litter/ fruit drop’ and ‘personal tree care expenses’. Reference figure 6 for the full results.

Figure 6 - Severity of Community Forestry Problems
Surprisingly, one of the problems recognized as severe was lack of public funding on
tree care. While it cannot be truly determined from the wording of the question, this lack of
funding may have been noticed in lack of proper maintenance or lack of trees altogether.
Most respondents felt that common tree-related issues like sidewalks broken by tree roots
and wildlife accumulation were not issues at all.
Next, residents were asked to identify what they consider to be the most severe
threats to the community forest. The threats marked “most severe” by respondents
included changes in climate, increasing city population, and habitat loss. It is likely that
these were identified because residents consider the growth of the city to reduce
community forest coverage. A successful CFP will remedy some of these concerns by
incorporating trees into the fabric of urban design. It will be crucial for Peoria to take into
consideration changes in temperature and precipitation when selecting trees to plant, as
well as how sprawl may impact existing tree coverage and how a budget can be carefully
maintained to preserve the integrity of the canopy. These results are viewable in figure 7.

Page 9
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

Figure 7 - Severity of Threats to Community Forest
When asked about their preferred goals for community forestry management,
citizens considered sustainability, an improved sense of community, climate change
mitigation, and heat reduction all important for defining a future CFP (Figure 8). This is
promising and could mean that there is great potential for Peoria’s CFP if they were to link
it with the existing sustainability plan and frame it as a project for bettering multiple
aspects of society.

Figure 8 - Important Management Goals

Page 10
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

Respondents were asked to indicate how well the following examples demonstrate
successful community forestry management by the city (Figure 9). Tree maintenance, more
park visitors, more trees, and more green space were shown to be strong metrics that are
identifiable by residents. A general feeling of safety in public parks was also chosen as a
measure of success.

Figure 9 - Indicators of Successful Community Forestry Management
The final question asked if the respondents would support Peoria moving forward
with the Community Forestry Program. There was a resounding level of support indicated,
with 681 out of 703 people that answered the question saying yes. This is very promising
and shows that there is support within the community for expanded community forestry.
The survey proved to be a valuable method of collecting information from the
residents of Peoria. While we would have liked to see more responses to paint a more
accurate picture of Peoria citizens’ perspectives, we are thrilled that there is a general
feeling of support and a decent understanding of how community forestry would benefit
the city. These responses show that our project accomplished its main goal. The survey will
continue to collect responses for the remainder of April, thereby allowing increased data
collection for the City.

Page 11
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

Recommendations
Because of the positive response from the sustainability plan survey and our survey,
we suggest that Peoria begin development of a forestry program that is equitable, is
responsible in regards to water usage and management, and outlines appropriate
maintenance techniques for trees on municipal, commercial, and private properties. In
order to increase citizen support for this undertaking, we advise Peoria to educate citizens
on the environmental, social, and economic advantages of increasing urban shade through a
CFP. It is crucial to make it clear to citizens that existing trees will be maintained carefully;
this maintenance would need to include climate-appropriate watering techniques, a level of
trimming that will ensure canopies provide shade but do not interfere with citizen
activities, and responsible and timely removal and replacement of trees that have been
downed by storms.
By researching other cities’ forestry or shade plans, we found that many of the
documents were not heavily code-based; rather, they focused more on education,
budgeting, and implementation timelines. Forestry-based code is needed to ensure that no
harm stemming from citizen malpractice or vandalism befalls the urban canopy, but is not a
strong factor in development of CFPs. Most plans suggested that code changes will be
crucial to make in the future, but education should be the initial priority.
We recommend that the Peoria 311 app be made available on App stores (Apple,
Android and Google) and have options available for citizens to report beyond downed trees.
One possible feature could be the ability for app users to place a pin on a satellite map of
the city where they would like additional shade; concentrations of pins could help guide
maintenance crews on the areas where tree plantings are a priority.
Peoria does not have a citizen tree planting or forestry board; creating a board to
advise tree maintenance personnel and policy decision makers on forestry topics would be
a fantastic way of ensuring community involvement and input in CFP development. If
creation of an entire board is not feasible, then a subcommittee or designated “forestry
board members” could be added to the existing Parks and Rec board to advise on urban
trails and the intersection of shade and walkability.
Adding public fruit-bearing trees to the urban landscape would provide benefits
beyond shade provision to Peoria. Advertising a citrus-lined walkway or corridor as a “food
forest” could promote tourism and inspire discussions about sustainable and local food
production. Additionally, whatever produce from the trees that is not picked and consumed
by passerby could be donated to local low income housing centers or shelters.
As hinted towards in the Sustainability 3.0 survey, there is a lack of public
understanding of what tree maintenance staff do. Actions such as removing trees can be
confusing to local homeowners or pedestrians if there is no explanation given as to why
that tree was removed (for instance, if it was diseased or otherwise compromised). If Peoria
tree maintenance staff were to do social media takeovers, run a blog, or have another
method of creating transparency, the community would have a resource with which to
become familiar with common city forestry practices.
Virtual or in-person classes for a variety of age groups discussing the benefits of
trees would be another tool that Peoria could utilize to broaden resident understanding of
Page 12
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

urban forestry, biodiversity, water conservation and sustainability. Holding these events for
a low cost or free at community centers, or recording them as an educational video
mini-series, would increase access to the information.
Although it may not be feasible at this time, Peoria could hire an urban forester to
work for or consult for the city, similar to Richard Atkin’s role in Tempe. While Peoria does
have arborists that are working on the forestry plan, a dedicated individual whose primary
focus is the development of the urban canopy would likely shorten creation and
implementation time of a CFP as well as serve as a spokesperson for tree related
educational campaigns.
The responses in our survey showcase that there is a need for community education
on the subject of community forestry, and a demand for an expanded tree canopy due to the
ecological services it would provide. In summary, adding additional tree guidelines or
restrictions in Peoria’s code may not be the best way to spearhead change in a CFP
(although code may have to be altered in the future based on the rate of greenfield
development). Rather, education, maintenance visibility, and consistent citizen input are
key to plan development, implementation, and success. Because many forestry plans in
local cities are relatively new, it is nearly impossible to guarantee success with one specific
approach without the implementation of tests, such as pilot projects.
In general, the CFP should aim to increase tree canopy and publicly accessible green
spaces around the city. Guidelines should be created so that a certain number of parks are
accessible per unit of distance. All bus stops should have natural or artificial shade
provision, and should be accessible by bike lanes. The city should use the survey results as
a guide to determine the priorities of the CFP. Community support for this plan is
promising, and it has the potential to change Peoria’s urban form for the better, thereby
increasing the well-being of residents and the city’s overall attractiveness.

Conclusions
Based on the survey results, the City of Peoria has the public mandate to move
forward with the development and implementation of the Community Forestry Plan. The
next step should be to create a draft of the plan and conduct a focus group or community
charette with the survey respondents who indicated they would want to participate in such
an event. The city can derive more detailed information about community preferences and
concerns.
This project certainly can be expanded upon by future students and MSUS groups;
the next course of action should be to conduct a pilot project in a key Peoria corridor where
pedestrians are often present to provide more information to the city. Additionally, groups
could collaborate with the Peoria planning department to further guide the creation of a
CFP document.
The survey was successful with close to 750 responses at time of writing. Peoria
now has a relatively accurate and detailed account of what its citizens would like to see in a
future CFP. Using the transition management governance framework to write the survey
appears to have been beneficial for response collection
Page 13
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

Not all aspects of the scope provided by Peoria came to fruition in this project as a
result of COVID-19 related complications (such as the inability to speak face-to-face with
Peoria citizens), IRB delays, and only having a few short months to create content-rich
deliverables for the city. We were unable to work with the city to analyze budget constraints
and reduce inefficiencies in current tree maintenance, as well as identify a forestry focus
group or local business/nonprofit/municipality partnerships. Despite setbacks, the
deliverables that we were able to provide for Peoria will undoubtedly assist them in
creating an efficient and sustainable CFP.

Appendices and Acknowledgements
We would like to personally thank Paul Prosser, as well as Scott Cloutier and Charles
Redman from the MSUS Committee, for their academic support throughout the project. We
appreciate the guidance, attentiveness, and patience from our partners in the City of Peoria,
Brandon Putman and Ryan McCartney. We are also grateful for the knowledge and care
from our subject matter experts; Richard Atkins, Jason Kelley, Paul Coseo, David Sailor, and
Michael Schoon. We appreciate the work that Project Cities has put in to make our project a
success.
● Appendix 1: link to AZ forestry plan matrices
○ https://drive.google.com/file/d/15wsE610-_oNaYaGzrpBDd4UTv62z8VT2/v
iew?usp=sharing
Cities

Peoria

Chandler

Tempe*

Designated forestry/shade Tree education
plan?
strategies
According to
management plan
proposal, education
is desired but public
education is not
No, but draft available
available
Environmental
Education Center
and occasional
events, nothing
No
formal

Yes, finalized

(From Urban
Forestry Master
Plan):∙ Conduct
community
workshops for all
ages
∙ Provide training in
urban forestry
∙ Tree information
library and other
online resources

Known next
steps

Tree City
USA?

Looking to
assess
feasibility of a
CFP

Yes (12 yrs)

None publicly
available
Yes (8 yrs)
Plenty and very
well laid outinclude
highlighting
pilot projects,
increasing
shade at bus
stops, make
neighborhood
shade more
uniform, train
staff, replace
trees w drought
tolerant
Yes (24 yrs)

Other relevant info

Tree planting ceremonies for
Arbor Day

Special; has position of Urban
Forester (Richard Atkins)

Page 14
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry
species, etc
No, but discusses retaining
of trees in master plan and
providing ample shade in
public spaces for activities
and has a native plant
Scottsdale ordinance

Phoenix

Flagstaff

Glendale

Yes (released 2010)

No, but Coconino forest
has guidelines (can't cut
down live trees)
No, but public document
available that analyzes
2002 tree status:
https://www.fs.fed.us/psw
/topics/urban_forestry/pro
ducts/cufr579_GlendaleBC
AFinal.pdf

No, but RFQ went out in
August 2020 for a "Shade
and Streetscape Master
Gilbert
Plan"
No, but has a street tree
Avondale master plan

Mesa

No

Green building
program exists, but
talks more about
design than
specifically tree and
shade plans
According to shade
plan, educational
programs were
actually eliminated.
Does education
through partnerships
with ASU, Arbor Day
Foundation, AZ
Community Tree
Council, etc

Coconino forest has
education, but city
does not

Website has links to
info about
appropriate trees to
plant and good
watering guidelines
None- from
experience,
sustainability dept is
very small and
focuses on recycling

None publicly
available
Yes (38 yrs)
Has a structure
created to
facilitate future
changeeducate,
preserve/prote
ct/increase,
and sustainable
maintainable
infrastructure Yes (34 yrs)
NAU has a
campus tree
advisory
committee, and
a tree campus
plan, but no
citywide efforts
are publicly
available.
Yes (12 yrs)

Urban tree plan is not as
needed for walkability due to
lower temperatures in city

Yes (24 yrs)
Because of
RFQ, master
plan will likely
be created
soon
None publicly
available

None
Lots of educational
info available on site
(https://www.mesaa
z.gov/residents/sust
ainability/arbor-day? None publicly
locale=en)
available

No
Yes (9 yrs)

Yes (10 yrs)

Page 15
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

Yuma

The Yuma chapter of
the Arizona Native
Plant Society
"promotes
cultivating and
planting native
plants for wildlife
habitat and has
educated the public
about the many
values native plants
bring to the
landscape". Parks
and rec sometimes
offers tree classes,
and in 2019 local
arborist Frank
Saldana taught "right
tree, right place".
Pecan Grove garden
Yes
club also is planning
(https://www.yumaaz.gov/ to conduct tree
Home/ShowDocument?id= classes at local Yuma
644)
schools.

Goodyear No

None

Doubling
canopy to 7%
and doing an
update in 10 yrs Yes (12 yrs)

Updating city
landscaping
standards,
pursue grants,
strategic tree
plantings

No, but
wants to be

https://www.yourvalley.net/sto
ries/finding-the-right-shade-goo
dyear-plans-to-add-trees-to-sha
de-walkable-areas,123655 The
Maricopa Association of
Governments recommends 50%
shade coverage as a minimum
standard, or “safe” designation,
for pedestrian routes and
gathering spaces, 60% shade
coverage for a “comfortable”
standard and 75% for a
“destination” standard for
major gathering spaces or
spaces with a lot of elderly
pedestrians. The study,
completed over the summer, of
shade on a sample of corridors
and paths throughout
Goodyear, found developed
areas within the study had only
16% shade coverage. Staff
suggested the “comfortable”
designation as a reasonable
goal for the city. The United
States Forest Service

Page 16
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry
recommends 30% shade
coverage for arid regions within
the U.S., such as Goodyear. The
current coverage within the
areas sampled is 10%

● Appendix 2: link to external-AZ forestry plan matrix
○ https://drive.google.com/file/d/15wsE610-_oNaYaGzrpBDd4UTv62z8VT2/v
iew?usp=sharing

Cities

Designated forestry/shade Tree education
plan?
strategies

Peoria

See last tab

Tucson

Yes- Tucson Million Trees

San
Antonio

Yes,
https://www.sanantonio.go
v/Portals/0/Files/Parks/Ad
min/Appendix%20A%20Urb
anForestryAssessment.pdf?
ver=2018-12-17-132018-51
0

Austin*

Yes (est 2014)https://austintexas.gov/site
s/default/files/files/Parks/F
orestry/AUFP_Final_DRAFT
_01-07-14_No_Appendices.
pdf

Known next
steps

Tucson Clean and
Beautiful's Trees for
Tucson- a nonprofit
that works closely
with local
government and
businesses
(https://tucsoncleana Carrying out
ndbeautiful.org/trees Million Tree
-for-tucson/)
Plan
Not many, but
Some tree education are combating
info/people to
Oak Wilt and
contact are listed on provide
website
trainings to get
https://www.sananto a Tree
nio.gov/DSD/Constru Maintenance
cting/Tree
License
"The Austin
Many- most
Community Tree
revolve around
(ACT) program
updating tree
delivers free trees to plan to factor
low tree canopy
in public
neighborhoods in
opinion
Austin. The addition changes, do
of trees can cool
benchmarking,
daytime
and work
temperatures and
towards urban
reduce the "Urban
forest vision
Heat Island effect".
"Austin’s urban
TreeFolks is an NGO forest is a
that does tree
healthy and
education
sustainable
workshops. Austin's mix of trees,
tree information
vegetation,

Tree City
USA?

Other relevant info

Yes (28
yrs)

Has a manager for TMT
(https://tucson.com/news/local/tu
cson-hires-manager-to-lead-its-tuc
son-million-trees-initiative/article_
7c9e74a3-a879-5312-ba7b-fab314
95c6d6.html). Tucson is third
fastest warming city in US

Has a tree rebate program for
Green Shade plan.
https://www.sanantonio.gov/susta
inability/Community-Sustainability
/Conservation/GreenShadeProgra
Yes (5 yrs) m

Yes (28
yrs)

2034 Urban Forest Vision; also
have urban heat island reports and
mitigation programs. Designated
urban forester (Emily King)

Page 17
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry
center:
https://austintexas.g
ov/department/tree-i
nformation-center

and other
components
that comprise
a contiguous
and thriving
ecosystem
valued,
protected, and
cared for by
the City and all
of its citizens
as an essential
environmental,
economic, and
community
asset."

Yes (adopted 2017)https://www.sandiego.gov/
sites/default/files/final_ado
2035- want
San
pted_urban_forestry_progr https://www.treesan 35% canopy
Diego*
am_five_year_plan.pdf
diego.org/
cover in city.
https://www.portlan
doregon.gov/parks/6
0388 and
https://www.portlan
doregon.gov/trees/5
Not formally, but has
9505 and
comprehensive tree
https://www.portlan
maintenance guides
d.gov/trees/tree-plan
https://www.portland.gov/ ting/tree-species-and
Portland trees/about-urban-forestry -planting-lists
None
in 2019 the mayor
announced intent to renew
the urban forest;
https://www.cabq.gov/park
sandrecreation/news/mayo
r-keller-announces-plans-to https://treenm.org/p
Albuquer -restore-albuquerque2019s artners-and-resource Possibly a
que
-urban-forest
s/
forestry plan?

Yes (10
yrs)

Have conducted great citizen
outreach surveys.

Yes (48
yrs)

yes (21
yrs)

Mainly runs under state forester;
very little city-specific tree
information

Page 18
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

References
City of Phoenix. (2015). Urban Tree Planting. Retrieved from
https://www.phoenix.gov/parkssite/Documents/PKS_Forestry/PKS_Forestry_Infographic
_Urban_Forestry_Benefits_Costs.pdf
City of Tempe. (2017). City of Tempe Urban Forestry Master Plan. Retrieved from
https://www.tempe.gov/home/showdocument?id=48543
Declet-Barreto, J., Brazel, A., Martin, C., Chow, W., & Harlan, S. (2012). Creating the park cool
island in an inner-city neighborhood: heat mitigation strategy for Phoenix, AZ. Urban
Ecosystems, 16(3), 617–635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0278-8
Grossman-Clarke, S., Schubert, S,, Clarke, T. R., & Harlan, S. L. (2014). Extreme summer heat
in Phoenix, Arizona (USA) under global climate change (2041-2070). ERDE, 145(1),
49-61.
Grossman-Clarke, S., Zehnder, J., Loridan, T., & Grimmond, C. (2010). Contribution of Land
Use Changes to Near-Surface Air Temperatures during Recent Summer Extreme Heat
Events in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area. Journal of Applied Meteorology and
Climatology, 49(8), 1649–1664. https://doi.org/10.1175/2010jamc2362.1
Guyer, H., Putnam, H., Roach, M., Iñiguez, P., & Hondula, D. (2019). Cross-Sector Management
of Extreme Heat Risks in Arizona. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society,
100(3), ES101–ES104. https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-18-0183.1
Harlan, S., Declet-Barreto, J., Stefanov, W., & Petitti, D. (2013). Neighborhood effects on heat
deaths: social and environmental predictors of vulnerability in Maricopa County,
Arizona. Environmental Health Perspectives, 121(2), 197–204.
https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1104625
Nelson, L. and Project Cities. (2021). Sustainability 3.0 Survey. Document accessed via author
permission.
Richard, D. (2018). The future of citizen engagement in cities—The council of citizen
engagement in sustainable urban strategies (ConCensus). Futures : the Journal of Policy,
Planning and Futures Studies, 101, 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2018.06.012
Taslim, S., Parapari, D. M., & Shafaghat, A. (2015). Urban design guidelines to mitigate urban
heat island (UHI) effects in hot-dry cities. Jurnal Teknologi, 74(4).
Wang, Y. and Akbari, H. (2016). The effects of street tree planting on Urban Heat Island
Page 19
3-25-2021

Peoria Community Forestry

mitigation in Montreal. Sustainable Cities and Society, Volume 27, Pages 122-128.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.04.013.
Wiek, A. (2015). Solving Sustainability Problems – Tools for a New Generation of Sustainability Professionals. School of Sustainability, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.

Page 20
3-25-2021