Is It Possible To Have a Thriving, Vibrant, and Civil City With So Many Dead And Missing Trees?

Hooray, they're alive (for now)!

The Conservation Advisory Council seems to have followed through with its pledge to get a lot more sidewalk trees planted around town this year. Many new trees have sprouted, especially along Union Street.  It's a great thing, for sure, though I do worry about too many trees choking our sidewalks.  Can pedestrians, trees, concrete, and dog pee coexist in harmony?

For the past few years, it's been odd and funny to me that a group seemingly so devoted to beautifying our city and making it greener just ignores so many dead or dying and missing sidewalk trees.  I mean, if a tree has been dead or has obviously been on the way out for years, wouldn't it make sense to get rid of it, and then either a) replace the ugly, dead or dying thing if the property owner agrees to try again; or b) make sure that the city forces the property owner to return the planting area to accessible sidewalk (good luck with that!)?  Shouldn't replacing dead (or missing) trees be a priority to someone at City Hall or to the CAC, rather than only focusing on adding more trees to newly created spaces?  Where is the balance?

Talk about depressing! Why should anyone

have to walk around an ugly dead tree, let

alone look at it?  For years!

City property, dead city tree

Warren Street sidewalk "tree"

6 or 7 year old "trees" on Union

(above and below)

Galvan's sidewalk tree, adjacent
to Galvan's eyesore property at
7th & State.  So inspiring!  Has it
been dead for 8 years? Or just 4?

After all, what purpose does a dead tree or an empty sidewalk planter taking up sidewalk space serve us besides being in the way, an eyesore, and having a general negative impact on the city?  Aren't these just the things the CAC is working to change?  How long can a property owner leave a dead tree standing?  Does the CAC care? Does City Hall care?  You would think that they both would!  I applaud the CAC for their sidewalk tree efforts, but I gotta say that their follow up and big picture outlook could use some better consideration.

.

Here are just a few of the several spots along Warren, Union and Columbia Streets that have been without trees for years.   Will they remain like this forever?  It's all still there waiting for another tree to be easily planted-- concrete removed, the soil that once supported a tree, even the grates that once protected trees -- but ignored by City Hall and the CAC.  Some of them are tripping hazards and none of them are attractive.  How are any of them a positive thing for the city? 

Stumps are so lovely
and beneficial, aren't they?
(Galvan property on Columbia)

Not far away, our DPW recently removed equal amounts of sidewalks
and new trees were planted!

Remove a portion of sidewalk on 
Union Street to plant a tree,
but ignore this for years or decades on Warren Street.

"Yoo-hoo, people!  Hello! Why am I
still here and what is my purpose?  Will I forever
be nothing more
than a tripping hazard?  What
are you waiting for?" 

I think this situation is not too dissimilar to property owners who take care of their immediate property but allow a dangerous or ugly sidewalk to persist (with or without a dead tree).  Or leave a healthy sidewalk tree or two of theirs untrimmed with branches slapping the faces of pedestrians walking by.  You know, the "not my problem" approach that we need less of, not more.

I also think this issue has a lot to do with the lack of communication at City Hall I often harp on.  There's no one at 520 Warren - not Robert Perry, not Kamal Johnson, nor Craig Haigh -- working with the CAC to ensure that when trees are no longer useful (dead, overgrown, damaging sidewalks, even missing), even those planted by the CAC, that they must be removed and/or replaced.  So the CAC, even though they are an ADVISORY group, ACTIVELY takes on the task without any oversight from City Hall.  If the CAC's purpose is to do City Hall's work by planting trees, is it any surprise that our city sidewalks are littered with dead, dying and missing trees?  It is as if City Hall prefers our sidewalks to be  full of cracks and all the other tripping hazards we are so accustom to, as well as dead and dying trees and empty planters.  What other conclusion can one reach when they continue to do nothing to improve things?