City of Paramount Tree Canopy Prioritization

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Loyola Marymount University Center for Urban Resilience, TreePeople, and the Gateway Cities Council of Governments partnered to conduct tree canopy prioritization in the City of Paramount. This process utilized high resolution, high accuracy tree canopy data as a foundation to engage the public in identifying their priorities for tree planting in the city. Analysis of tree canopy data showed that the City of Paramount has 15% existing tree canopy cover. The analyses also found that Paramount has great opportunity to increase its tree canopy, with 45% of the land area of the city shown to be Possible Tree Canopy. However, 32% of the possible area is in places with impervious surfaces, such as concrete or asphalt, that would require modification to be a good place for trees. The project partners held a series of planning meetings with the City of Paramount and conducted multiple forms of outreach to engage community participation in a virtual “tree summit,” which took place on June 10, 2021. Participants were presented with the numerous ways that their city could benefit from increased tree canopy, engaged in a discussion and several interactive activities about their personal experiences and values around trees, and were invited to take a survey to choose their top ten priorities for tree planting. There were 37 surveys collected, with the majority (73%) of respondents indicating that they were residents of Paramount and a smaller number (39%) indicating that they work or study in Paramount. Respondents had the opportunity to vote to prioritize 20 specific tree benefits across eight categories. Participants identified “Improve Air Quality and Reduce Noise,” “Beautify Neighborhoods,” and “Increase Equity for Residents” as their top priority categories for tree planting. Among the specific benefits, the highest priorities were Air Quality, Low Tree Canopy, Park Improvement, Heat, and Toxic Release Sites. Each of the benefits voted on by participants was associated with a spatial variable (e.g., “Heat” was associated with high-resolution surface temperature data available through NASA). Using the results from the survey, priority weightings were calculated for each spatial variable at the parcel level. These rankings were mapped to provide a visual of where participants’ combined priorities are located. The results revealed that the highest tree planting priority areas for Paramount were in the the central eastern, southeastern, and northwestern parts of the city. Many of these areas border the I-710 or I-105 freeways, reflecting priorities to improve air quality and reduce noise. The lowest priority areas were mostly located in the central southern part of the city. In addition to the maps, tables were produced to provide rankings for each individual parcel in the Possible Tree Canopy boundaries. This dataset includes a comprehensive listing of over 7,000 parcels in the City of Paramount, along with their priority score and percent of possible area for increasing tree canopy. The survey also asked participants about their demographics and their perceptions of tree planting and care in Paramount. Responses to the demographics questions showed that some groups were not represented or under-represented in the survey results. For the perceptions questions, there were 90% who agreed that planting more trees is a priority, though 60% believed there are barriers to planting and 92% recognized that there are barriers to taking care of the trees in Paramount; in particular, Land Ownership, Land Availability and Water-related barriers. This project can help guide the City of Paramount in future urban forestry strategies. The City may look to focus their tree planting efforts in high priority locations that also rank high on the Possible Tree Canopy - Vegetated scale. The City may also consider educational campaigns and incentives to reach out to specific communities and to increase tree canopy on private lands. Finally, the City may wish to pursue funding programs to help replace some of the impervious surfaces with tree canopy.https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cures_reports/1006/thumbnail.jp

City of Lynwood Tree Canopy Prioritization

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Loyola Marymount University Center for Urban Resilience (CURes), TreePeople, and the Gateway Cities Council of Governments partnered to conduct a tree canopy prioritization in the City of Lynwood. This process utilized high resolution, high accuracy tree canopy data as a foundation to engage the public in identifying their priorities for tree planting in the city. Analysis of tree canopy data acquired through a previous project between CURes and TreePeople showed that the City of Lynwood has 16% existing tree canopy cover. The analyses also found that Lynwood has great opportunity to increase its tree canopy, with 41% of the land area of the city shown to be Possible Tree Canopy. The project partners held a series of planning meetings with the City of Lynwood and conducted multiple forms of outreach to engage community participation in two virtual “tree summits,” which took place in December, 2020. Participants were introduced to the numerous ways that their city could benefit from increased tree canopy, engaged in a discussion and several interactive activities about their personal experiences and values around trees, and were invited to take a survey to choose their top ten priorities for tree planting. Overall, 120 surveys were collected, with the large majority (86%) of respondents indicating that they were residents of Lynwood and a smaller number (24%) indicating that they worked in Lynwood. Respondents had the opportunity to vote to prioritize 22 specific tree benefits across eight categories. Participants identified “Improve Air Quality and Reduce Noise,” “Beautify Neighborhoods,” and “Increase Equity for Residents” as their top priority categories for tree planting. Among the specific benefits, the highest priorities were Air Quality, Replacement Trees, Reduce Heat, Low Tree Canopy, and Schools. Each of the benefits voted on by participants was associated with a spatial variable (e.g. “Heat” was associated with high-resolution surface temperature data available through NASA). Using the results from the survey, priority weightings were calculated for each spatial variable, and these priorities were mapped using the Possible Tree Canopy data as a guide. Thus, the resulting maps showed the priority locations for tree planting in the City of Lynwood that were already identified by the tree canopy assessment as Possible Tree Canopy. The results revealed that the highest tree planting priority areas for Lynwood are on the eastern and western edges of the city, corresponding with major transportation corridors. In addition to the maps, tables were produced to provide rankings for each individual parcel in the Possible Tree Canopy boundaries. These datasets include a comprehensive listing of nearly 10,000 Residential Parcels, over 6,000 Road Segments, and 12 Parks in the City of Lynwood. Together, the products of this tree canopy prioritization project can guide the City of Lynwood in its urban forestry planning. In the near term, TreePeople will use these data to inform the planting of 1,000 trees. In the longer term, the City can use these data to guide future urban forestry strategies. The community-engaged prioritization process served to raise interest and enthusiasm around tree planting in Lynwood, as well as provide the opportunity for community members to provide meaningful input about urban forestry decision-making in their city.https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cures_reports/1008/thumbnail.jp

LA RIVER STEW-MAP: The Los Angeles River Stewardship Mapping & Assessment Project

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Stewardship Mapping and Assessment Project (STEW-MAP) was applied in the Los Angeles River Watershed to answer the questions: Who are the active environmental stewardship groups in my area and where, why, and how are they caring for the land? STEW-MAP defines a “stewardship group” as a civic organization or group that works to conserve, manage, monitor, transform, educate on and/or advocate for the environment. Leveraging national expertise and previous regional investment in Los Angeles County STEW-MAP, the Los Angeles (LA) River STEW-MAP provides detailed information on the geographical footprint and collaborative relationships of organizations working in the Los Angeles River watershed. LA River STEW-MAP researchers developed an inventory of 535 environmental stewardship organizations working in the LA River Watershed; and collected survey data from 107 of those organizations. Some highlights of the resulting data analysis included: The majority of groups (57%) were 501(c)3 nonprofits, with less than ten percent representing other legal designations. The next largest group was city/local government, chosen by just nine percent of respondents. The government was identified as providing funding to over two-thirds of responding stewardship organizations; and the network results showed that government agencies were often identified by respondents as groups that they go to for collaboration, knowledge, and funding related to environmental projects. This may reflect the historical development, land ownership, and current political climate of the LA River—all of which are largely led by agencies at all levels of government. Responding groups tended to be younger and smaller, and heavily reliant on volunteer labor. Most groups had been founded since the 1990s, with nearly a quarter of groups founded in just the past ten years. The median number of staff reported by the responding organizations was 9 full-time and 3 part-time. Notably, the average hours respondents reported from occasional volunteers was 152 hours/month, the equivalent of almost a month of full-time work. Education is a focus of stewardship organizations. Education-related responses were prominent throughout the results. LA River stewardship groups are playing a key role in educating their communities about the watershed and broader environmental issues. Stewardship groups support local environments AND communities. “Community” was prevalent in mission statement analysis, “community improvement and capacity building” was among the most chosen focus areas, and “community organizing” was identified by nearly half of respondents as a service they provide. LA River STEW-MAP results reflected the watershed approach of the study, with “stream/river/canal,” “stormwater management,” and “watershed/sewershed” representing three of the top five most chosen stewardship site types, and water quality/water conservation among the top three most chosen focus areas. However, when asked to consider the influence of eight water-related plans and programs on their work, LA River Watershed plans were not influential to the average responding organization. This dilution of influence of any one plan or program may be attributed to the large number of ongoing planning efforts within the watershed. It also may highlight a need for even greater engagement with stewardship groups in watershed plan implementation. The highest geographic concentration of stewardship was found in downtown Los Angeles around the LA River. Other areas of high stewardship concentration were the northeastern area of the watershed, within the Angeles National Forest. Groups identified over 1200 collaborative, knowledge, or funding relationships related to environmental stewardship. Since respondents were able to write in their responses, this provided the opportunity to add new groups not included in the initial inventory of stewardship organizations. The “hubs” of activity in the stewardship network were mostly 501(c)3 nonprofit groups, and government agencies from the local to the federal level. These results are reported in detail in this report. The project also produced two publicly available online mapping tools where users can further explore the geographic and social network data. The summary statistics, initial maps and network analyses provided here offer an extensive look at stewardship across the LA River Watershed. There is great potential across the data types for more intensive examination. Future analyses may include spatial, social network, or other explorations of this rich dataset to better understand environmental stewardship in the Watershed. The results and mapping tools have numerous possibilities for application in practice. Examples from previous STEW-MAPs include using the spatial data to help guide prioritization of urban forestry efforts to meet sustainability goals; and searching the STEW-MAP database in a particular area to help mobilize a community network in response to a specific issue. These are two of many examples compiled by the national STEW-MAP Community of Practice, which the LA River Watershed organizations may participate in and use as a resource. It is important to note that the LA River STEW-MAP survey only reached about 20% of the initial list of organizations. Thus, follow-up work could include on the ground outreach to increase the response rate. LA River STEW-MAP has the potential to be a dynamic, regularly updated database and map that provides a current view of stewardship across the watershed rather than a snapshot in time. The LA River Urban Waters Federal Partnership may be a good place to discuss possibilities for further development and ongoing maintenance of the database and mapping tool.https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cures_reports/1007/thumbnail.jp

Polycentric networks and resilience in urban systems: A comparison of Baltimore and Seattle

Numerous studies have demonstrated that successful resource management requires collaboration among many groups. While most research has been conducted on rural resource management, collaborative management is now recognized as an important strategy in densely settled urban areas. Cities generally consist of many fragmented land parcels under different types of use and ownership, which produces a large and diverse group of stakeholders with an interest in resource management decisions. Past research has shown that 1) natural resource stewardship organizations play an important role in both managing natural resources and building social capital; 2) successful outcomes often rely on effective collaborations through organizational networks; 3) there are different types of network structures; and 4) the effectiveness of a network can depend on its structure. However, missing from the field is empirical research analyzing how natural resource stewardship networks impact social and ecological outcomes, both spatially and temporally.

Building on pioneering work on urban environmental groups in New York City and developing efforts in Chicago, this research will assess the stewardship networks in Seattle and Baltimore. More specifically, it will examine whether the network structure affects social and ecological outcomes; and conversely, whether variation in social and ecological conditions affects the resulting social network. Through a mixed methodological approach employing interviews, organizational surveys, spatial mapping, and social network analysis, this research examines:

•	What network relationships exist between environmental stewardship groups in Baltimore? In Seattle?
•	What is the spatial structure of these stewardship networks?
•	Does network structure affect social and ecological outcomes?
•	Does variation in social and ecological conditions predict the resulting network?
•	How do the stewardship networks in Baltimore and Seattle compare?

Results from this study will contribute to the growing body of research on polycentric governance networks. The need for longitudinal and comparative studies in this area is evident, as many cities are looking to adaptive management strategies to respond to the needs of an rapidly changing population and landscape. In Baltimore, this data can be compared to organizational network data collected 10 years ago. In Seattle, the study will establish baseline network data, which provides a foundation for future studies. Similarities and differences between cities may provide implications for whether environmental stewardship programs and other sustainability initiatives can be applied from one city to another

Examining and Developing Environmental Stewardship Funding Networks in Los Angeles

Following general patterns in non-profit funding, environmental grants have a continuing history of being inaccessible to the groups that could benefit from them the most. While many environmental stewardship organizations (ESOs) are in need of funding for projects, Los Angeles lacks a clear network of environmental funders that is accessible to all potential actors. In this study, we will be researching existing funder coalitions as well as philanthropic trends in Los Angeles. The findings from this review will be used to compile a database of environmental grant sources in Los Angeles detailing funders as well as specific grant programs, and will finally lead to the creation of a preliminary funding network. This funding network will be accessible to the general public and will allow for thorough, yet efficient grant- seeking in hopes that stewardship organizations of all scales and focuses will feel more confident pursuing funding for environmental projects.https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cures_posters/1047/thumbnail.jp

Public Opinion of Coyotes in Long Beach: Surveys and Interviews

It is important to understand public opinion on urban wildlife in order to effectively manage it. Coyotes have adapted to survive in urban environments and do not have a favorable presence in Long Beach, California due to their predatory nature. This research project seeks to provide a clearer understanding of how the residents of Long Beach feel about the coyote population and how they interact with it. The data obtained from this project will fill knowledge gaps about the types of encounters residents have with coyotes and help create management plans to effectively deal with local safety concerns. Residents were randomly mailed a survey (n=341) where they were asked about their opinions towards coyotes in the City and their satisfaction with the City\u27s coyote management. Interviews were conducted with six different urban wildlife experts. Prevalent themes among the interviews include (1) a need for public education and awareness of coyotes and (2) higher concern among residents with pets and small children. Survey data shows that 60% of residents have encountered coyotes in their neighborhood and that the most common encounter type is ”sighting only.” 31% of free responses indicated concern regarding pet safety. 19% of free responses favored management practices that involve human behavior (primarily through education) and 10% of responses favored those that would involve action on coyotes. Increasing public awareness is necessary in order to promote the coexistence of wildlife with human life in an urban environment.https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cures_posters/1048/thumbnail.jp

Examining and Developing Environmental Stewardship Funding Networks in Los Angeles: A Research Proposal

Similar to other types of non-profit funding, environmental grants have a continuing history of being inaccessible to the groups that could benefit from them the most. While many environmental stewardship organizations are in need of funding for community projects, Los Angeles lacks a clear network of environmental funders that is accessible to all potential actors. This project is a proposal to study existing environmental funder coalitions as well as philanthropic trends in Los Angeles. The findings from this research will ultimately be used to compile a database of environmental grant sources in Los Angeles detailing both funders and their grant programs, and will finally lead to the creation of a preliminary funding network model. The funding network and database will be accessible to the general public and will provide thorough, intentional grant information in hopes that stewardship organizations will be able to experience a more efficient, transparent process when pursuing funding

A Geographical Analysis of Gentrification and the Changing Foodscape in Seattle 2010-2017

Anguelovski defines food privilege as “the exclusive access to desirable ‘natural’ and fresh food thanks to one’s economic, cultural, and political power” (Anguelovski 2015a). Previous studies have demonstrated that access to fresh, healthy, affordable food is correlated with socioeconomic status (LA Food Policy Council 2017; Walker et al. 2010; Alkon & Agyeman 2011; Raja et al. 2008). However, as is being increasingly noted, the introduction of environmental amenities, such as farmers markets and community gardens, can have unintended consequences and trigger environmental gentrification (Kern 2015; Pearsall 2010; Eckerd 2011; Curran & Hamilton 2012; Wolch et al. 2014; Alkon & Cadji 2018). The introduction of upscale grocery stores into areas of low socioeconomic status may signify an influx of affluence and spark business interest in what has become known as the Whole Foods Effect (Anguelovski 2015a). In the last decade, Seattle’s population has undergone significant demographic shifts, as many parts of the city have become gentrified. This study will use ArcGIS to analyze the relationship between these demographic shifts and the changing foodscape, and consequently, which socioeconomic groups have gained and lost access to fresh, healthy, affordable food in Seattle between 2010 and 2017

Agricultural Water Management in a Changing Mid-Atlantic: Stakeholder Experiences and Attitudes Towards Alternative Water Sources, Weather Variability, and Related Factors

Water and agriculture are inextricably connected, and so are the impacts of climate change upon water supplies which will impact agriculture with greater intensity as the earth continues to warm. In the mid-Atlantic, climate change will intensify extremes such as flood and drought, resulting in greater water quantity variability (NIACS). Other consequences of climate change will include significant sea level rise and saltwater intrusion, as well as increased temperatures and decreased water quality (NIACS). In a region already experiencing significant but commonly overlooked impacts on water quality and quantity due to population and development increases, land use modifications, and agricultural runoff, understanding stakeholder perspectives on agricultural water management in the region is imperative. This study interviewed 17 mid-Atlantic stakeholders, largely based in Maryland, which included farmers, extension agents, engineers, academics, and state agency personnel. These semi-structured interviews examined stakeholders’ perceptions and experiences with 1) water use and management in agriculture, including both freshwater and reusable resources; 2) past, existing and future weather variability; and 3) related factors impacting water use and management. Semi-structured interviews were completed to examine stakeholder perceptions towards nontraditional water sources and water conservation practices, with the intent of informing a future survey that would assess farmers’ willingness to use treated recycled wastewater in agriculture in order to mitigate increasing water supply variability due to climate change.https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cures_posters/1042/thumbnail.jp

Silver Lake Neighborhood Council Reservoir Complex Survey

Executive Summary In recognition of the critical moment facing the Silver Lake community as it undergoes the development of a new Reservoir Master Plan, the Loyola Marymount University Center for Urban Resilience (LMU CURes) was invited by the Silver Lake Neighborhood Council (SLNC) to conduct a study to provide sound information to support these efforts. A comprehensive study would likely span multiple years, and would include wildlife, green infrastructure, and social research to analyze the options available to Silver Lake to plan and implement an open space policy. This report focuses on Phase 1, a pilot survey of individuals intended to collect foundational data about the knowledge, attitudes and behaviors of those stakeholders who currently utilize the area. Conducted in late 2018 and developed in consultation with the SLNC, the pilot survey gathered 249 in-person public intercept surveys and 1014 responses to a publicly available online survey. Two public meetings informed modifications of the originally proposed study, including the addition of in-person survey locations and the additional online survey option. The in-person surveys were conducted by nine LMU CURes researchers over a period of approximately six weeks at locations immediately surrounding the reservoir complex or other nearby locations that were chosen at SLNC meetings. The online survey link was available on the LMU CURes website, but efforts to publicize the online survey were managed by the SLNC. Given the varying methodologies, the results from the in-person and online surveys were analyzed separately and viewed as different data sources. The results showed that both in-person and online respondents were predominantly residents of Silver Lake, though there was also representation from others who are considered part of the SLNC’s broader stakeholder community. Those responding to the survey tended to use the reservoir areas often. Based upon the survey results, respondents from the Silver Lake community had many areas of agreement on the benefits and concerns regarding the reservoir complex, but common themes emerged as points of conflict. These included: the presence of dogs and their related facilities, green space and wildlife, accessibility, traffic, and changed usage concerns. While the average reservoir user self-reports to be fairly informed about environmental topics and processes, education and outreach may be needed moving forward. Demographically, the survey was fairly representative of the resident population of Silver Lake, with some exceptions. The intent of the survey was not to have an identical representation of the demographics of Silver Lake, but to be inclusive of other stakeholder opinions. However, if increased representation across categories is desired, an expanded study with a larger sample size could capture greater participation in certain demographic areas. The report details and discusses the results from each survey question, and ends with conclusions and next steps. Possible future directions include recommendations for an expanded survey protocol beyond this Phase 1 pilot, and other areas for analysis and future research based on the findings. These initial findings and recommendations may provide some foundation for the SLNC and the Silver Lake community as they proceed into the planning process for the reservoir complex.https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cures_reports/1002/thumbnail.jp