4 ms·

from one LA resident to another, amen to that. we were just walking down our street this morning and discussing, for the umpteenth time, whether our neighbors w

from one LA resident to another, amen to that. we were just walking down our street this morning and discussing, for the umpteenth time, whether our neighbors would actually be willing to take care of trees if we went out and bought them and planted them. the problem, as other commenters have pointed out, is that they do require upkeep, but since they're living/breathing things the more hardy ones can really be abused and still survive. The question is how do you incentivize the people who benefit from the trees--the residents, businesses, other local stakeholders--to actually maintain them? on our street there are countless trees that were likely planted decades ago, but a lack of care by the residents makes them mere shadows of their potential. and for anyone interested, LA's a great example of how trees provide a return on investment (actual dollar return outside the tremendous ecological benefits). go onto google maps and look at the satellite view. people who have never been here can point out the expensive neighborhoods because they are the greener ones.

clairity 5y ago
LA has an woefully underpublicized street (and lawn) tree program, where you can get free trees if you agree to take care of them (which is mostly just periodic watering), so you wouldn't even have to buy them yourself. for street trees on the parkway (the patch of ground between the sidewalk and street), you don't technically even need the permission of the owner, although the owner might not be amenable to watering them then. apartment dwellers (like me) can get trees planted on the parkway just by agreeing to take care of them on behalf of the owner.
- harmmonica 5y ago
  it's true, that's exactly how we got our street tree, but a) it took an extremely long time to get the tree in the first place and b) the tree itself was rather lackluster, though now we're on year 3 of it and it's... ok. if I knew then what I know now I would've just gotten my own tree (one of the ones on the approved list) to get a nicer tree up front. as for planting the trees without the permission of the resident responsible for that parkway, like I said in that previous comment, it doesn't do much good if the folks don't take care of them. we've also learned the hard way that doing things that seem additive to the hood are not always taken that way by neighbors and can cause conflict. been on the end of that a couple of times already. that said, maybe I'll stop talking about doing this and actually try it and see what folks say.
stackbutterflow 5y ago
I've never been to LA so let me try. Rolling hills, Park estates, coastal san Pedro? That's all I got after 5 minutes on Google maps.
- harmmonica 5y ago
  ha! i’m glad you tried it! only one of those (san pedro) is in the city of LA, which i should’ve been more clear about. but those places do indeed appear to have more trees than the vast urban expanse. sadly san pedro does not rate as an above average area (rolling hills would). that said if you want to waste another 5 minutes of your life on this go to google maps again, look at the area between “downtown los angeles” and “santa monica” and find the green areas. really love that you actually tried to do it once already though!
robocat 5y ago
> people who have never been here can point out the expensive neighborhoods because they are the greener ones This is normal in many cities. Trees can mean high status because (a) you need excess land to have trees. (b) old wealthy suburbs often have old trees (a massive old oak tree implies something). (c) single dwelling houses that are near the city often have very old trees due to the age of the location, and can have high value because the location has now become central (due to city outskirt growth). (d) maintaining trees costs time and money, as mentioned, so that also implies wealth (and status). Aside: lawns are another status symbol - that is why so many people care about them so much! Think of a huge old English estate with manicured lawns, and why that is a strong symbol of wealth. Edit: and I should say I love trees and I think they are really worthwhile, independent of any associated status!
- Tempest1981 5y ago
  > Trees can mean high status Yep, check out a satellite view of Atherton, CA vs Redwood City next door. A huge contrast.
karmelapple 5y ago
Here’s a very relevant 99% Invisible podcast episode about trees, shade, and plenty about Los Angeles: https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/shade/ https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/shade/

clairity 5y ago

LA has an woefully underpublicized street (and lawn) tree program, where you can get free trees if you agree to take care of them (which is mostly just periodic watering), so you wouldn't even have to buy them yourself. for street trees on the parkway (the patch of ground between the sidewalk and street), you don't technically even need the permission of the owner, although the owner might not be amenable to watering them then. apartment dwellers (like me) can get trees planted on the parkway just by agreeing to take care of them on behalf of the owner.

harmmonica 5y ago
it's true, that's exactly how we got our street tree, but a) it took an extremely long time to get the tree in the first place and b) the tree itself was rather lackluster, though now we're on year 3 of it and it's... ok. if I knew then what I know now I would've just gotten my own tree (one of the ones on the approved list) to get a nicer tree up front. as for planting the trees without the permission of the resident responsible for that parkway, like I said in that previous comment, it doesn't do much good if the folks don't take care of them. we've also learned the hard way that doing things that seem additive to the hood are not always taken that way by neighbors and can cause conflict. been on the end of that a couple of times already. that said, maybe I'll stop talking about doing this and actually try it and see what folks say.

stackbutterflow 5y ago

I've never been to LA so let me try. Rolling hills, Park estates, coastal san Pedro? That's all I got after 5 minutes on Google maps.

harmmonica 5y ago
ha! i’m glad you tried it! only one of those (san pedro) is in the city of LA, which i should’ve been more clear about. but those places do indeed appear to have more trees than the vast urban expanse. sadly san pedro does not rate as an above average area (rolling hills would). that said if you want to waste another 5 minutes of your life on this go to google maps again, look at the area between “downtown los angeles” and “santa monica” and find the green areas. really love that you actually tried to do it once already though!

robocat 5y ago

> people who have never been here can point out the expensive neighborhoods because they are the greener ones This is normal in many cities. Trees can mean high status because (a) you need excess land to have trees. (b) old wealthy suburbs often have old trees (a massive old oak tree implies something). (c) single dwelling houses that are near the city often have very old trees due to the age of the location, and can have high value because the location has now become central (due to city outskirt growth). (d) maintaining trees costs time and money, as mentioned, so that also implies wealth (and status). Aside: lawns are another status symbol - that is why so many people care about them so much! Think of a huge old English estate with manicured lawns, and why that is a strong symbol of wealth. Edit: and I should say I love trees and I think they are really worthwhile, independent of any associated status!

Tempest1981 5y ago
> Trees can mean high status Yep, check out a satellite view of Atherton, CA vs Redwood City next door. A huge contrast.

karmelapple 5y ago

Here’s a very relevant 99% Invisible podcast episode about trees, shade, and plenty about Los Angeles: https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/shade/ https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/shade/