Village of New Hartford, NY
Street Tree Inventory Report
Prepared for the Village of New Hartford by the Cornell University
Student Weekend Arborist Team (SWAT)
December 2007
Executive Summary
This document reports the findings of the street tree inventory conducted in the Village of New Hartford, New York on September 22, 2007 by the Student Weekend Arborist Team (SWAT) of Cornell University. These results include:
- 704 total trees were inventoried in the village’s right-of-way and in its parks.
- 639 trees and 204 planting sites were inventoried in the village’s rightofway.
- 65 trees were inventoried in New Hartford parks.
- The current street tree population in the village’s right-of-way is 75.8% of full stocking.
- 39 different species comprise the village’s total publically managed tree population with Norway Maple (36.3%) and Sugar Maple (16.1%) occurring most often.
- 46.4% of the village’s publicly managed trees have diameters between 1 – 11” while 53.6% have diameters greater than or equal to 12”.
- The total estimated annual benefits for the village’s publicly managed trees are $95,727, or $135.98 per tree.
- The replacement value of all publicly managed trees is $3,854,388.
Introduction
The urban forest is an integral part of communities. Whether found along streets, in parks, or in less structured open spaces, urban trees contribute greatly to the quality of community life. Recent research has shown that urban trees offer many benefits including improved air quality, reduced storm water runoff, reduced psychological stress, and increased residential property values. The urban forest is therefore an important natural resource that communities have an interest in protecting and preserving.
Much like any natural resource, the urban forest needs to be conserved and managed. A street tree inventory is an important tool in managing and planning urban tree populations. By providing complete and up-to-date information about the diversity, condition, and age of its trees, a street tree inventory enables a community to care for the contemporary urban forest as well as to plan intelligently for the urban forest of the future.
Undertaking a street tree inventory, therefore, signifies a community’s investment in and commitment to the current and future well-being not just of its trees, but that of the community itself.
Inventory Methodology
The entire village was inventoried on September 22, 2007
including all trees and planting sites in the village right-of-way and in
village parks. The area surveyed in the inventory is indicated in the map below:
The inventory was conducted by the Student Weekend Arborist Team (SWAT) of Cornell University. This team has conducted inventories in numerous upstate New York communities since 2001, and the data collected on tree characteristics, maintenance need, and planting sites have been used to create urban forest master plans for these communities.
Data was collected in a walking survey utilizing Pharos PDAs equipped with the USDA Forest Service’s i-Tree MCTI/STRATUM PDA utility. Data collected includes the following:
(1)
Tree Location: Locations for right-of-way trees and right-of-way planting sites were established primarily by property address. If an address was unavailable, a location was assigned based upon the next sequential address. Site numbers were assigned for trees and planting spaces at each address. For addresses with multiple trees and/or planting spaces, site numbers were assigned from left to right facing the property. Trees and planting spaces located at street corners were assigned the property address, but if located on a side street different than the property street address, a notation for “side” was made. Locations for park trees were established primarily by GPS coordinates (see below).(2)
GPS: Latitude (Y) and Longitude (X) for right-of-way trees, right-of-way planting sites, and park trees were collected with Magellan Gold Meridian series receivers, accurate between 3 and 7 meters, in the Lat/Lon coordinate system with a WGS 84 Datum. Coordinates for right-of-way trees and planting sites were corrected after the inventory to more closely approximate property addresses according to a parcel shapefile supplied by the Chenango County GIS Department. Coordinates for park trees were not generally corrected.(3)
Location Site: Placement of trees and planting sites were assessed by one of five ratings: 1= unknown; 2 = sidewalk tree pit; 3 = treelawn planting strip less than four feet wide; 4 = treelawn planting strip greater than four feet wide; 5 = lawn area.(4)
Species: Trees were identified and assigned their respective botanical names. Common names were added subsequent to the inventory.(5)
DBH: Trunk diameter at breast height (approximately 4.5 feet above the ground) was measured to the nearest inch. DBH is the most commonly used measure of tree size and age. It is not an absolute measure, however, as relationships between DBH and canopy spread or DBH and tree age vary by species.(6)
Condition Wood: The health of a tree’s wood (its structural health) was assessed by one of four ratings: 1= Dead or Dying – extreme problems; 2 = Poor – major problems; 3 = Fair – minor problems; 4 = Good – no apparent problems.(7)
Condition Leaves: The health of a tree’s leaves (its functional health) was assessed by one of four ratings: 1= Dead or Dying – extreme problems; 2 = Poor – major problems; 3 = Fair – minor problems; 4 = Good – no apparent problems.(8)
Percent Deadwood: “Deadwood” refers to branches over two inches in diameter that are dead, dying, or diseased. The percentage of deadwood in the tree canopy was assessed by one of five ratings: 1= less than 10%; 2 = 10 – 25%; 3 = 25 – 50%; 4 = 50 – 75%; 5 = greater than 75%.(9)
Weak Fork: The presence or absence of a “weak” fork, a V-shaped branch union created when two branches come together at a narrow angle, was noted. This union, which may contain included bark, is structurally weak and can fail if not addressed.(10)
Maintenance Recommendation: Tree maintenance needs were assessed by one of four ratings: 1= None – no maintenance necessary; 2 = Train – routine maintenance for a young tree; 3 = Routine Prune – routine maintenance of a mature tree; 4 = High Priority Prune – a tree requiring immediate maintenance.(11)
Consult: Based on the condition of the tree, an assessment was made as to whether a certified arborist should be brought in to examine the tree.(12)
Sidewalk Damage: The presence or absence of damage associated with tree roots where the sidewalk was heaved at least ¾ inch was noted.(13)
Wire Conflict: The presence or absence of single or triple phase overhead utility wires was noted.Street Tree Inventory Summary
Stocking Levels
Two methodologies are commonly used to determine street tree stocking levels. The first compares the number of street trees per mile of street to an ideal 100% stocking level (180 trees per mile of street). The second compares the number of existing street trees to the total number of potential street trees (number of trees plus the number of available planting spaces). This report utilizes the second methodology.
The New Hartford Street Tree Inventory accounted for 639 street trees and 205 planting spaces in the village’s right-of-way. The proportion of trees to potential street trees translates into a 75.8% street tree stocking level (see graph below). A 60% stocking level is the national average and most municipalities have stocking levels between 50 and 75%.
Genera and Species Distribution
The New Hartford Street Tree Inventory accounted for 704 publicly managed trees. 639 trees were inventoried in the village’s right-of-way and 65 trees were inventoried in village parks.
A significant percentage of all trees inventoried (67.0%) were Maples (Acer genus) and this percentage was still larger for trees in the village’s right-of-way (see graph below).
No other genus besides
Acer accounted for more than 7.5% of all publicly managed street trees (see table below).Genus Number of Trees Percentage
Acer
(Maple) 471 67.0%Malus
(Crabapple) 53 7.5%Gleditsia
(Honeylocust) 50 7.1%Fraxinus
(Ash) 20 2.8%Pyrus
(Pear) 18 2.6%Prunus
(Cherry) 17 2.4%Quercus
(Oak) 14 2.0%Syringa
(Lilac) 14 2.0%Tilia
(Linden) 12 1.7%Others 35 4.8%
Within the
Acer genus, two species of Maples, Norway Maple (Acerplatanoides) and Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum), accounted for 79.2% of all Maples and 79.2% of all Maples in the village’s right-of-way.Regarding the overall street tree population, Norway Maples accounted for 36.3% of all publicly managed trees and 38.7% of the right-of-way trees; Sugar Maples accounted for 16.1% of publicly managed trees and 17.2% of right-of-way trees (see graphs below).
As a general rule, no one tree species should comprise more than 5% of the street tree population nor should any genera exceed 20%. That way, if a species becomes susceptible to an insect or disease, a majority of the other trees will likely not be affected. The high percentages of Norway and Sugar Maples, and to a lesser extent Red Maples, in the village exceed this general rule and indicate that these species are overrepresented in the population. In addition, the high percentage of trees in the Acer genus is of concern.
Diameter Distribution
Tree diameter is not only a measure of tree age and size, but it is also a valuable indicator of the benefits provided by street trees. In general, the older and larger the tree, the more the benefits provided. At the same time, there must be a sufficient number of younger, smaller trees in the street tree population
to account for the loss of trees over time and thereby maintain a sustainable urban forest. Accordingly, Richards (1983)1 postulated an ideal distribution of street trees whereby 40% of trees would have a dbh less than 8 inches, 30% 8 to 16 inches, 20% 16 to 24 inches, and 10% greater than 24 inches.The graph below plots the DBH distribution for all inventoried New Hartford trees and inventoried ROW trees against Richards’ ideal DBH distribution. It is evident from the graph that (1) New Hartford is slightly deficient in the number of younger, smaller trees to account for the loss of trees over time, and (2) there is a somewhat disproportionate share of older, larger trees.
New Hartford DBH Distribution
Taking a closer look at the dbh distribution for New Hartford’s right-of-way street trees, the graph below plots the dbh distribution for ROW Norway and Sugar Maples, the most heavily represented tree species in the village inventory, against the dbh distribution for all ROW trees. It appears based on this graph that (1) the Sugar Maple population is disproportionately old compared to both Norway Maples and all ROW trees and (2) a significantly large proportion of middle-aged trees are Norway Maples. This analysis is supported by the graphs below which depict the dbh distribution of ROW trees by species for trees with a dbh less than 12 inches and trees with a dbh of 12 inches and greater. Not surprisingly, since they are the two most prevalent species among New Hartford ROW trees, Norway and Sugar Maples predominate in both dbh distributions, especially for trees with dbh of 12 inches and greater. However, for trees with dbh less than 12 inches, species distribution appears much more varied, perhaps reflecting efforts made by the village in the last decade to increase the diversity of its street tree population.
Tree Condition and Maintenance
Most New Hartford trees are in good condition and a great majority is in at least fair condition (see graphs below).
In addition, a majority of inventoried New Hartford trees is in need of routine pruning at most; 9.0% of inventoried trees require a high priority prune and 11.2% should be inspected by a licensed arborist (see table below).
It is also clear, however, that the village’s aging Sugar Maple population accounts for the largest percentage of maintenance needs and concerns. For example, Sugar Maples comprise 17.2% of New Hartford’s ROW trees, but they also comprise 39.3% of ROW high priority prunes and 27.3% of ROW consults needed.
STRATUM Analysis
STRATUM (Street Tree Resource Analysis Tool for Urban Forest Managers) is a computer-based street tree management and analysis tool developed by the USDA Forest Service for urban forest management. It uses street tree inventory data to (1) quantify the dollar value of annual urban forest benefits such as energy conservation, air quality improvement, CO
2 reduction, storm water control, and property value increase, and (2) evaluate the benefits, costs, and management needs of community trees. Based on the data collected in the September 22, 2007 inventory, a STRATUM analysis was performed for the Village of New Hartford. This analysis revealed the following:The total estimated annual benefits for all publicly managed trees amount to $95,727, or $135.98 per tree. Of this total, energy conservation is $39,962, CO2 reduction is $1,096, air quality improvement is $7,206, storm water control is $9,849 and property value increase is $37,614. Not surprisingly, Norway and Sugar Maples, the two most heavily represented species in the inventory, contributed most of these benefits. Norway Maples accounted for $38,806 in annual benefits, or 40.5% of the total, and Sugar Maples accounted for $20,582 in annual benefits, or 21.5% of the total.
The replacement value of all publicly managed trees is $3,854,388. The replacement value of the village’s Norway Maples is $1,637,057, or 42.47% of the total, and the replacement value of its Sugar Maples is $712,224, or 18.48% of the total.
STRATUM tables are included as an appendix to this report.
Management Recommendations
New Hartford tree inventory data revealed the following:
Stocking level is relatively high with trees occupying 75.8% of available tree planting spaces.
Trees are generally in good condition; only 9.0% of trees were rated as high priority prunes and 11.2% were rated as consult needed. A notable exception to this assessment is the aging population of Sugar Maples that comprise 39.3% of ROW high priority prunes and 27.3% of ROW consults needed.
The population is insufficiently diverse with a disproportionate representation of Norway and Sugar Maples, and maple trees generally.
The overall dbh distribution suggests that the overall population is aging and more trees need to be planted in order to sustain current stocking levels. Aging is especially evident in the dbh distributions of Norway and Sugar Maples.
Based on this data, this report makes the following recommendations:
New plantings should primarily include species and genera other than Maples, and particularly Norway and Sugar Maples. As a general rule, no one tree species should comprise more than 5% of the street tree population nor should any genera exceed 20%. That way, if a species becomes susceptible to an insect or disease, a majority of the other trees will likely not be affected.
The village’s current 75.8% stocking level, with 205 planting spaces available in its right-of-way, provides ample opportunity for additional plantings. Typically after an inventory, more resources are spent on the deferred maintenance of older trees than on planting new trees. New plantings, however, are required to maintain current stocking levels, and even a modest yearly planting program will begin the rejuvenation of community trees necessary if removed trees are to be replaced and more trees added.
Decisions on where to plant new trees are based on a community’s perceived greatest need. Many communities find that a cluster planting provides the greatest visibility and impact. A map of the 205 planting spaces identified in the inventory (see next page) indicates where in the village plantings might occur. It should be noted, however, that 109 of the village’s 205 planting spaces (53.2%) are located beneath triple and single phase utility wires. For example, while 16 planting spaces were identified on Genesee Street, 100% of these spaces were subject to potential wire conflicts, and of the 36 planting spaces identified on Oxford Road, 27 (75%) were subject to potential wire conflicts. Stocking levels on Genesee and Oxford are relatively high anyway (75.4% and 74.3% respectively) whereas, in the subdivision east of Oxford Road, stocking levels are significantly lower and 24 of 51 planting spaces (47%) do not have wire conflicts. A table indicating stocking levels and planting spaces without wires for individual streets is included as an appendix.
New Hartford Planting Spaces
Ideally, new trees would be planted in all available planting sites. Budget limitations, however, coupled with the opposition of some property owners to a tree planted in the right-of-way make that goal difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. If maximizing street tree benefits is a priority, then larger growing tree species should be emphasized where possible versus smaller growing species. The table below details the relative benefits of a mature crabapple and a mature sugar maple, both in good condition.
Where small trees are advisable, due primarily to the presence of overhead single or triple phase utility wires, trees selected for planting sites should mature at less than 30’. Appropriate species to consider would be
various disease resistant Crabapples, Winter King Hawthorn, Amelanchier (Serviceberry), cold hardy strains of Redbud, Korean Sun, Mountain Frost or Prairie Gem Flowering Pear, Globe or Bessoniana Black Locust, Japanese Lilac, Wireless Zelkova, Imperial Honeylocust, and Sugar Cone Sugar Maple among others. A list of both smaller and larger maturing trees appropriate for urban street tree plantings can be found in the “Recommended Urban Trees” booklet available from Cornell University’s Urban Horticulture Institute (http://www.hort.cornell.edu/uhi/outreach/recurbtree/index.html).The Emerald Ash Borer is an invasive beetle devastating Ash (
Fraxinus) populations in the Midwest. While the EAB has not yet impacted New York State, it has been found in Pennsylvania and continues to spread.Accordingly, as a precautionary measure new plantings of Ash trees should be avoided at present. New Hartford’s street tree inventory located 20 Ash trees or 2.8% of the population.
63 of New Hartford street trees (9%) were given a rating of “High Priority Prune” and 79 were rated as “Consult Needed” (11.2%). It must be stressed that neither one of these ratings constitutes a “hazard” designation.
This inventory did not make hazard tree evaluations. These ratings do signify, however, that, in the case of the High Priority Prune, maintenance of the tree is highly recommended, and, in the case of the Consult Needed, the tree should be inspected by a competent arborist. Both tasks should be performed in a timely manner.
Finally, a street tree inventory is a snapshot in time, a useful tool in maintaining a healthy urban forest and planning for a future sustainable one. Its usefulness depends greatly, however, on keeping the information current. Having made the commitment to conduct an inventory, the village should now strongly consider making the additional commitment to update inventory data as trees are pruned, removed, or planted.
