Socio-Economic Benefits of Austin’s Tree Canopy A proposal for analysis presented by: Kyle Fuchshuber (Project Manager) Jerad Laxson (Asst. Project Manager) Megan Thomas (Editor & Researcher) Eric Tijerina (Graphic Designer & Researcher) Zachary Dye (GIS Specialist & Researcher)

Introduction Urban Tree Canopy and Socio-Economic Benefits: ◦ Carbon sequestration ◦ Reduce Storm Water Runoff ◦ Energy Reduction ◦ Higher Quality of Life ◦ Less $$ Benefits of our study ◦ COA legislative decisions ◦ Green future that is economically feasible for Austin, TX

Primary Areas of Study Pavement Conditions ◦ Less maintenance = less cost Crime rates ◦ Lower crime = less costs and happy citizens Property values ◦ Higher property value = higher property taxes and affluent citizens

Scope Characteristics within the City of Austin that will be focused on: 1. Heavy tree cover 2. Broad tree cover 3. Average tree cover 4. Limited tree cover 5. No tree cover

Pavement Costs Research Pavement Costs for the City of Austin 2010: $42,571, : $50,163, : $37,186,628 (Wilson 2012) Modesto, CA ◦ Over a 30-year period, up to 60% savings in pavement maintenance and rehabilitation cost (McPherson & Muchnick, 2005)

Property Values Research Twin Cities ◦ Increasing tree cover w/in 250 meters = 60% gain in home sale prices Comparison Model ◦ How do external factors relate? (Sander 2010)

Crime Rates research Baltimore ◦ Strong negative relationship Portland ◦ Moderately negative in old growth forests (Donovan, Prestemon, 2010)

Data City of Austin GIS data sets ◦ ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/GIS-Data/Regional/coa_gis.html COA Urban Forestry Program

Methodology Objective 1 – Pavement Costs ◦ External factors:  Age, traffic, environment, material, strength of pavement ◦ Comparative analysis  Model based on natural effect of external factors  How does this relate to tree cover? ◦ Expect positive correlation

Methodology Objective 2 – Crime rates ◦ External factors:  Median income, age of neighborhood, prevalence of alarm systems, sidewalk traffic, and single family homes ◦ Crime to be measured:  Home invasion, burglary, auto theft, vandalism ◦ Comparative analysis  Model based on natural effect of external factors  How does this relate to tree cover? ◦ Expect negative correlation

Methodology Objective 3 – Property Value ◦ External factors:  Environmental, Structural, Community ◦ Comparative analysis  Model based on natural effect of external factors  How does this relate to tree cover? ◦ Expect positive correlation (Sander 2010)

Methodology Field assessment ◦ On site analysis ◦ Pictures to match areas studied

Project Manager Hours: 100 Work hours over 20 days Hourly Rate: $40 Sub-Total: $4000 Assistant Project Manager Hours: 100 Work hours over 20 days Hourly Rate: $36 Sub-Total: $3600 Graphic Designer & Researcher Hours: 100 Work hours over 20 days Hourly Rate: $26 Sub-Total: $2600 GIS Specialist & Researcher Hours: 100 Work hours over 20 days Hourly Rate: $29 Sub-Total: $2900 Editor & Researcher Hours: 100 Work hours over 20 days Hourly Rate: $30 Sub-Total: $3000 Esri ArcGIS Hours Used: 100 Work hours over 20 days Hourly Rate for Subscription: $5.71 Sub-Total: $571 (5) Workstations 2.5 Months Rent per Station: $150 Sub-Total: $750 (5) Depreciation of Computers 2.5 Months Rent per Computer: $138 Sub-Total: $690 Transportation 60 Mile Trip 2 Trips 55 cents per Mile: $33 Sub-Total: $66 Supplies & Software Sub-Total: $2,077 Services Supplies & Software Total Cost: $18,177 Services Sub-Total: $16,100 Budget

Final Deliverables (2) CDs that cover all aspects of project including: ◦ Proposal report and presentation ◦ Progress report and presentation ◦ Final Report ◦ GIS data including metadata ◦ Maps for each objective covering all aspects of analysis Physical Final Report Poster ◦ Generalizes methodology of project and findings

Conclusion An analysis of insight for the future Information to guide legislative decisions Create a greener, more sustainable future for Austin

Sources Sander, H., Polasky, S. & Haight, R. G. (2010). The value of urban tree cover: A hedonic property price model in Ramsey and Dakota Counties, Minnesota, USA. Ecological Economics 69(2010), pubs/jrnl/2010/nrs_2010_sander_001.pdf Wilson, P. Texas Department of Transportation, (2012).Transportation program expenditures fiscal year Retrieved from website: info/library/reports/expenditures/fy2012.pdf McPherson, E. G., & Muchnick, J. (2005). Effects of street tree shade on asphalt concrete pavement performance. International Society of Aboriculture, 31(6), Retrieved from _mcpherson001_joa_1105.pdf

Questions or concerns?