19 ms·

Cities need more trees

293 points by HermanMartinus 2y ago

tetris11 2y ago
I understand that tall trees a threat to capital and maybe also to human life when one falls over near a house, but do we really need to chop them down? Can we not add metal struts between a house and a tall tree, to reinforce its strength, rather than preemptively cut it every time?
- short_sells_poo 2y ago
  Unfortunately the decision is often made based on costs, and chopping them down is cheaper than employing an arborist (?) to make sure the tree is reinforced properly. Please don't get me wrong, I agree with you. In many historic cities, there are trees that are hundreds of years old. There are trees that have been around since before the invention of the telegraph, lived through 2 world wars and are still going strong! There are efforts to keep these alive, but I feel newly planted trees won't get the chance to live that long :(
  - lukan 2y ago
    "There are trees that have been around since before the invention of the telegraph" There are trees, that are allmost 5000 years old, so around the time humans started building cities. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_trees https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_trees The oldest tree in a city might be this one, 2300 years old, living history. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaya_Sri_Maha_Bodhi https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaya_Sri_Maha_Bodhi Around here, they also plan to chop down a lot of trees that are around 200 years old, because the road repairs are cheaper with them gone. I hope it does not get to it as resistance is forming, but I might consider climbing and sitting there to block it.
- silon42 2y ago
  Simpler/better to plant a new tree.
  - pvaldes 2y ago
    Plant a new tree and then pay air conditioner for 20 years until the tree grows again. Simpler yes; better not so much, if you take in mind all the hidden costs. Of course sometimes the tree is rotten or will fall over your home, and it must go before that happens.
- Hikikomori 2y ago
  Too much KSP?
- stuaxo 2y ago
  The tree just needs to be managed, the whole thing doesn't need to be cut down. I'm in London on a tree lined street, every year they come and cut branches. If trees are rotten then they are cut (we have a lot of non-native trees). In this bit of London there's a target to plant much more trees, so any cut down are replaced with a native tree. Property developers are a different matter, I'm pretty sure the huge tree behind the flat I used to live in was illegally cut down; if the council had been aware it would probably have had a tree protection order put on it.
- Joel_Mckay 2y ago
  It is a $10k fine to cut down any tree over 6" in diameter without a permit in our city. We have many cherry trees that form a pink-petal snow every year, that were planted after hostilities ceased with Japan in WWII: Accolade, Afterglow, Akebono, Ama-no-gawa, Atsumori, Autumnalis Rosea, Avium Plena, Beni-shidare, Birch Bark Cherry, Choshu-hizakura, Fudan-zakura, Gyoiko, Hosokawa-nioi, Ichihara-tora-no-o, Ichiyo, Ito-kukuri, Ito-zakura, Jo-nioi, Jugatsu-zakura, Kanzan, Kiku-shidare-zakura, Kiku-zakura, Korean Hill Cherry, Mikuruma-gaeshi, O-yama-zakura, Ojochin, Okame, Oshima-zakura, Pandora, Pink Perfection, Rancho, Sargent Hybrid Cherry, Schmitt Cherry, Sendai-shidare, Shiro-fugen, Shirotae, Shogetsu, Shosar, Shujaku, Snofozam, Snow Goose, Somei-yoshino, Spire, Star Cherry, Tai-haku, Takasago, Taki-nioi, Ukon, Umineko, Washi-no-o, Whitcomb, Yae-beni-shidare, Yama-zakura, Yokihi Fruit trees consume a lot of water, thus many cities should consider drought resistant options to reduce sun baked roads. Some don't like the trees due to superstitions, but most enjoy the reminder Spring has arrived. =3
mglz 2y ago
Lots of chopping trees seems to come from a laziness of thinking, where certain people in the city adminsitration are just used to the idea "trees cause costs". They never think any further about benefits beyond finances.
- stuaxo 2y ago
  Or, as in Sheffield in the UK misaligned incentives: the company that was paid to manage the trees realised it was cheaper for them to cut them down, so started labelling trees as diseased that weren't.
  - lucioperca 2y ago
    Privatisation gone wrong!
    - wongarsu 2y ago
      Something the UK has a lot of experience with
  - pferde 2y ago
    Doesn't that count as plain old fraud?
    - pvaldes 2y ago
      And steal of wood. One cubic meter of Cedrus is like 1000 euro in the market. Most owners don't realize that trees had value, and are often tricked to get rid of their "diseased" old cedars with a convenient "free removal" by part of the company that will chop it. If the owner can't be persuaded, a common trick deployed is some "allergic" woman calling authorities and requiring to chop that tree because it makes her uncomfortable. Then some good Samaritans ring the bell offering their services. Extra bonus if you can made the owner to pay for the operation.
sriram_malhar 2y ago
I think the department in charge of maintaining roads should also be put in charge of maintaining trees. Any time a road needs to be widened, make provisions for planting (or better) transplanting trees, including watering infrastructure.
wodenokoto 2y ago
I recently visited Tbilisi in Georgia which is also almost a city within a forest. It is very nice and something I would wish upon any city. However, it does take it toll on buildings and infrastructure. I wonder what Johannesburg spends per tree in not just cutting and leaf collection but also in addition road and pavement repairs and I’m sure there is more than one foundation that has been damaged by roots.
yen223 2y ago
> You can still see a stark difference between rich and poor neighbourhoods to this day based purely on tree cover. You can see that here in Sydney. The poorer Western Sydney suburbs have a noticeable lack of tree coverage when compared with the richer inner west, northern, and eastern suburbs. I don't know which direction cause and effect goes. It is plausible that affluent suburbs can afford to plant trees, but it is also plausible, especially here in Australia, that trees lead to nicer climates that are more appealing to folks who can afford it.
- lmpdev 2y ago
  West Sydney was rural fields until it was developed during the later half of the 20th century I’m fairly sure the issue stems from insanely dense urban packing with a refusal to develop almost anything other than single family homes They try to maximise house size on small blocks leading to an almost impossible block to plant a tree on ——— Also pointing out Greater Western Sydney is one of the worst urban places in the world for tree cover given the climate I could never afford to live in Sydney, but my late father’s upbringing in the then “poor” North Sydney is starkly different to the quality of life available to the youth in “poor” areas of 21st century Sydney
  - djrobstep 2y ago
    But it’s not just the block sizes, it’s also the streets. Often Western Sydney streets have no trees at all (and even no footpaths)
- Jarmsy 2y ago
  I'd guess both. Rich places have the money and influence to improve their area, leading to increased property value, in a cycle.
- cjs_ac 2y ago
  This is such a long-standing difference that Sydney newspapers will use the word 'leafy' to describe a suburb as having significant social capital. The local governments in the 'leafy' areas are extremely protective of their trees, for example, have a look at Hornsby Shire Council's regulations on trees[0]. They will fine you significant amounts of money if you kill or significantly prune a tree on your own property without permission. [0] https://www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/environment/flora-and-fauna/trees https://www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/environment/flora-and-fauna/t...
classified 2y ago
Trees are nothing but obstacles to traffic. If you take a good look at cities, you will see that they were built for cars, and cars alone. Anything that's not a car has no place in a city.
- lopis 2y ago
  Even if that was true, sounds like a net gain if trees make cities more inhospitable for cars.
  - classified 2y ago
    But then, where would all those poor cars live?
- f6v 2y ago
  Not in Europe though.
  - morsch 2y ago
    Mostly better, still awful.
  - ffgjgf1 2y ago
    Depends, people keep saying stuff about “Europe” as if it’s some single monolithic place. In any case very few people live in old town houses built prior to the late 19th century (in those places have their own issues) and there was plenty of car centric development during the 1950s and subsequent decades.
- self_awareness 2y ago
  > Anything that's not a car has no place in a city. Erm, I thought cities are for people, not for cars
  - nottorp 2y ago
    Erm, I think HN could use a "+1, well done sarcasm" upvote.
angelagershen 2y ago
[dead]
short_sells_poo 2y ago
The photo in the article looks amazing! You basically don't see a city, you see a vast woodland! An occasional rooftop peeking through here and there are the only signs of civilization. I'd love to live in a place like that. London is a very green city by many standards, but it is nowhere close to appearing like the unbroken forest in the article. In fact, the thing I miss the most after having moved to the UK are the forests. Most of it is private and fenced off, and it's just tiny patches of woods anyway. It's interesting how different it is compared to Switzerland for example, where one can roam freely (at risk of being chased by an occasional herd of curious cows) and there are plenty of forests where one can escape civilization.
- obscurette 2y ago
  I also happen to live in such area. It's nice, but there are also downsides – solar roofs for example don't make sense here.
  - short_sells_poo 2y ago
    That's fair criticism, but perhaps it'd be much more effective to have a few but large solar farms outside the city, no?
    - palata 2y ago
      Or a nuclear plant.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  Huh? I've read multiple times that in the UK, private land can't be "fenced off" and the general public has the right to roam on it, as long as they aren't causing a nuisance or getting too close to peoples' homes. Is that only for pastures or something?
  - helsinkiandrew 2y ago
    > and the general public has the right to roam on it There's no right to freely roam in the UK unlike Finland and other countries [1], although there are public footpaths/rights of way that cross private land [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam [2] https://www.gov.uk/right-of-way-open-access-land/use-public-rights-of-way https://www.gov.uk/right-of-way-open-access-land/use-public-...
arthurofbabylon 2y ago
Does anyone have a "greenery index" of world cities?
- grvbck 2y ago
  Not really a universal index, but interesting nevertheless: MIT Treepedia has indexed some cities based on tree canopies from Google street view. Some (to me) surprising finds, like Paris (8.8%) vs NY (13.5%). https://senseable.mit.edu/treepedia https://senseable.mit.edu/treepedia
f6v 2y ago
What I found incredibly uncomfortable when moving from Eastern to Western Europe is a lack of shade in residential areas. Yes, there’re parks, but the buildings often don’t have enough shade (anecdotal evidence). With the rising temperatures, many homes are exposed to sun whole day. I live in a city that’s been growing really fast and none of the newer residential houses have any trees around them. Mind you it takes many many years to grow a proper tree.
- mantas 2y ago
  Don't worry, newer developments in eastern europe suck at tree coverage too.
  - earthnail 2y ago
    Newer Western European developments tend to focus a lot on trees again in my experience. So there’s hope.
    - nope1000 2y ago
      Yes, I live in a new apartment in Munich and when I look out of the window, I feel like I'm in nature. Really nice.
have_faith 2y ago
Where I live, Sheffield in the UK, the council was nearly toppled because they chopped down some street trees. They still haven't fully recovered from it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield_tree_felling_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield_tree_felling_protest...
- rob74 2y ago
  I'm also against chopping down trees - but sometimes tree protection turns into a pretext for NIMBYism, especially if it's against projects that are also good for the environment, such as public transport (felling 189 trees for a bus lane sounds like a lot, but if the trees shown in this photo https://proarbmagazine.com/controversial-sheffield-bus-lane-plan-see-188-trees-axed/ https://proarbmagazine.com/controversial-sheffield-bus-lane-... are representative, those look more like shrubs)
  - buro9 2y ago
    There are a lot of species that may be misinterpreted as a shrub, i.e. a Hazel tree https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/trees-woods-and-wildlife/british-trees/a-z-of-british-trees/hazel/ https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/trees-woods-and-wildlife/br... is dense, and forms many smaller straighter branches shooting up in parallel... could easily be mistaken as a shrub as this next pic shows https://cotswoldtrees.com/hazel-corylus-avellana/ https://cotswoldtrees.com/hazel-corylus-avellana/ . Still a tree though, and all trees are good trees.
    - pvaldes 2y ago
      Hazelnut on cities are mainly from two different species. Corylus avellana is clearly a shrub, even if can grow 6m high with time, and will recover fast from being chopped, but the other species is a tree.
  - benoliver999 2y ago
    It was a bigger scale. The plan was to cut down 17,500 of 35,500 street trees, all due to a total mis-reading of a report. Instead of backing down the council ploughed on, got people arrested and even tried to jail one of its own councillors for protesting. It was a huge fiasco.
huevosabio 2y ago
One of my biggest complains for American cities is the risk adversity with respect to trees. In SF, the city went in a rampage to prune and tear down trees (mostly ficus) because of the risk of the branches falling. There are lots of rules for where you can and can't plant trees based on road visibility, signage, electric cables etc. Result is that you have a lot of tree-less spaces in a city where basically anything grows. In contrast, Mexico City has an almost anarchist version of urban greenery. Trees overflow streets and side walks. Yes, there are issues from dealing with the urban greenery, but the city is incredibly pleasant to walk in. Also, despite being an incredibly noisy city, trees and buildings mute out a lot of the noise.
- AidenVennis 2y ago
  Streetview shows this very nicely for Mexico City. I wonder if having so many trees in the city would make chopping down of few trees for some new public development less frowned upon by residents?
  - rambambram 2y ago
    Thanks, now I just spent two hours streetview surfing through Mexico City.
- inferiorhuman 2y ago
  Kind of an odd flex given how walkable San Francisco is, but the "risk adversity" is because people actually die. Last year, five people died from fallen trees in a single storm (two in the city).
  - FactolSarin 2y ago
    Mexico City is one of the largest cities in the world. Five people out of 21 million is nothing. Sure, every death is tragic, but there are a lot more efficient ways to spend time and money preventing deaths than tree trimming.
    - 2y ago
jurmous 2y ago
Here in Utrecht the Netherlands they are trying to greenify the city to reduce heat stress during the hot months. They try to plant as much trees and plants as possible, they try not to mow grass often and let it grow, they encourage homes to remove tiled gardens and add green, they have programs to turn roofs into green roofs. I like it, the city feels nicer to life in. https://healthyurbanliving.utrecht.nl/fileadmin/_processed_/d/b/csm_Integrale-aanpak-van-de-openbare-ruimte-ENG_6265a924bb.png https://healthyurbanliving.utrecht.nl/fileadmin/_processed_/... https://healthyurbanliving.utrecht.nl/our-vision-for-utrecht-in-2040/ https://healthyurbanliving.utrecht.nl/our-vision-for-utrecht... https://aiph.org/floraculture/news/utrecht-is-crowned-the-netherlands-greenest-city/ https://aiph.org/floraculture/news/utrecht-is-crowned-the-ne...
- ctenb 2y ago
  I live there as well, and while I'm sure it could be worse, it's nothing compared to Johannesburg. I would like to see much more green throughout the city. Hopefully they will keep up the trend.
  - jurmous 2y ago
    Well they are still in transition. My street is next. They will plant quite a bit more trees and plant areas. Looking forward to them :)
- config_yml 2y ago
  Same in Zurich, where the city tries to establish a “Schwammstadt”. But the tree growth is actually negative, because on private properties people are chopping down their trees to build lucrative housing.
  - BSDobelix 2y ago
    If you look at bellevue i personally think it's disgusting, that loveless massive sechseleutenplatz, lot's of cars always using the horn, what a waste of that iconic place constricted between traemli and a always busy street, tbh even Delhi is less stressful, let alone Vienna. EDIT: Do you mean Schwanstadt right? That lovely smell of birdshit in the sommer plus the massive stink of piss and puke after (and up to 10 days) streetparade is the pure soul of Zurich ;)
randomcarbloke 2y ago
my city is the largest urban forest. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/07/london-forest-i-tree-study https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/07/london...
- andsoitis 2y ago
  Johannesburg is the largest man-made urban forest and Tijuca forest in Rio is the largest urban forest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_forest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_forest
  - randomcarbloke 2y ago
    Okay, by some people's argument it is and since this is not an exact science comparing Tijuca's 3,953 hectares to London's 14,000 even with percentage coverage it would suggest otherwise. That said lots of cities have a claim: Oslo, Joberg(as you indicate), some places in China. Is it most trees, densest coverage, or simply largest area that still satisfies the definition of Urban Forest? You can pick a different answer for whichever metric qualifies.
robbyiq999 2y ago
Would love to see them tear up highways and build forests and not the other way around
- littlelady 2y ago
  It's not quite what you mean, but a woman in Ireland has planted over 1000 trees on her 3-acre plot, which was previously overrun with rushes and thought to be barren. Here are her before and after pictures, maybe it will inspire you too. https://bealtainecottage.com/before-permaculture/ https://bealtainecottage.com/before-permaculture/
z3phyr 2y ago
When I lived in Delhi, my home was near the ridge area of North Campus. Its a lush forest with shrubs, ferns, and subtropical hard trees with a few lakes. The temperature difference, the coolness in air and the vibe difference from the rest of the city was like night and day.
- littlelady 2y ago
  I also know this feeling! I think if more people knew did, they would be more supportive of urban green spaces. It's always remarkable to ride my bike through a paved residential area and then cut through this green alleyway-- the temperature and air is so fresh and feels 5 degrees cooler than the street.
lopis 2y ago
> However, planting trees in cities is pretty much all upside with almost no downside (except that birds tend to shit on my car). > So the next time you're enjoying a walk down a lovely shady street, take a look up and appreciate the trees. Author seems to be contradicting themselves (:
- blackhawkC17 2y ago
  I’ll trade a rare chance of bird poop to live in a pleasant leafy area :) A bird actually once pooped directly on my shirt, and it’s one of the funniest things I can remember.
aaron695 2y ago
[dead]
highhedgehog 2y ago
Please tell this to mediaval towns in Italy.
lordgrenville 2y ago
I also grew up in Johannesburg, and really miss those trees. When you drive a little bit out of the city you see a completely different landscape. However I'm sceptical about the author's claim that there's no downside. I would assume that most of the trees are not native, and in any case definitely don't grow natively at that density. Feels like there's no free lunch in ecology: is mass tree-planting an exception?
- HermanMartinus 2y ago
  Author here :) You're correct that very few of them are native. That being said, when comparing to a city with no trees vs a city with non-native trees, I think the latter is still superior.
PaulRobinson 2y ago
Spent last week in South California, visiting family. Flying into LAX made me feel like I was flying into a hell scape. From the air, no green was visible for miles. Compared to my home (London, originally Manchester), I thought it not just odd but barely liveable. You could almost the heat off the concrete by looking at it from the air. Driving around as far south as Orange County for the next week I was happily surprised when I saw any indication of nature at all. Perhaps it’s just me and what I’m used to, but the only spot I visited that felt really relaxing was up around Griffith Observatory.
- CuriouslyC 2y ago
  Next time you visit family get them to rent a house in Santa Barbara. Technically it's "central" California but it's only 90 minutes from LA and it's probably the coolest and most livable place in the whole state.
  - sebstefan 2y ago
    "only" 90 minutes
  - surfingdino 2y ago
    Might as well rent a small plane.
  - sillyfluke 2y ago
    The change of landscape from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara always gives me prehistoric or jurassic vibes for some reason. Flying into LA from Europe and seeing slabs of reflecting concrete and buildings strech out for miles into the horizon from the desert really does give you the feeling that you are seeing the future of the climate apocalpyse in the present. As Gibson says, the future is already here it's just unevenly distributed. And then you drive north and you run into vegetation that wouldn't be out of place in a dinosaur movie. In that sense, Santa Barbara is nice but what exactly is "cool" sbout it? Americans awkward relationship with class is kind of in full view there frankly. There is almost no normal social interaction between the residents and the Latino blue collar community that prop up everyone's gardens and landscapes. Have you ever taken a bus around town in Santa Barbara? It's like, "Oh, so this is where the real people are." Don't get me wrong, there's lots of interesting and nice people that live in Santa Barbara but the lack of cross-over is a little depressing. In Europe, you can be living in an nice expensive place in the city and run into the guy that cuts your hair at the corner barbershop at a music festival and hang out together with their friends the rest of the day. Also with the exception of downtown Santa Barbara, like most of the US, it's incredibly anti-pedestrian. Make the mistake of google mapping a spot 20 min walk away and you'll find yourself on the highway walking for half an hour cause all the residents take short cuts through private property.
hahamrfunnyguy 2y ago
We have the same issue in my city with respect to areas lacking trees. The trees in the more affluent areas tend to be better maintained by property owners, and replacement trees are planted when trees are lost in ice and wind storms. The city's forestry department is working on a long-term solution to this problem but it takes time to grow trees.
langcss 2y ago
Canberra is heavenly in terms of number of trees. Acres of parkland, farmland or wild bush near every part of the city. As well as treelined streets.
nosrepa 2y ago
EAB is definitely making sure we cut down more than ever!
b3ing 2y ago
I just wish they wouldn’t plant acorn trees anywhere near a road, squirrels just end up in a kill zone
nurple 2y ago
One thing I'm very frustrated by is my city's(Salt Lake) push for water conservation to the point they're paying residential owners to xeriscape their property. We've spent over a century terraforming the desert into a beautiful green canopy, and every day they're building more concrete and asphalt jungles with nearly no greenery while existing properties are tearing out greenery and replacing it with rocks. We even had one politician try to say we needed to cut the trees in the canyon down to save the Salt Lake, because they're absorbing too much water. In the state, residential water usage is almost a single-digit percentage and unmetered secondary water systems have been a standard feature of neighborhoods built over farmland. They're now going around putting meters on the secondary water systems and no new developments even have them at all. I'm really worried as the city is beginning to resemble hellscapes like Las Vegas and LA. The developer-captured legislature is just pushing shit through without much thought for their livability or scalability. Couple legislative sessions ago they removed the requirement for them to review referenda brought by concerned residents, which is one of the only methods we still had to push back against overdevelopment.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
notjustanymike 2y ago
Living in Brooklyn, I always prefer to explore east/west instead of north/south. This is because the streets have trees, while the avenues are exposed. In the hot summer months you’ll have a delightful walk down Bergen, then absolutely bake on Franklin or Nostrand.
openrisk 2y ago
Dense urban-type settlements attracted billions (and continue to do so worldwide) as they offer hard-to-beat advantages. But as these gains are booked and largely taken for granted, people long for the paradise lost, the walkability, the green spaces etc. Anecdotaly the pandemic may have hastened this realisation, as people resorted to walking in larger numbers. Walking around tree-lined streets with lots of natural looking grass and flower beds certainly beats doing the same in a car infested concrete jungle.
floppiplopp 2y ago
Trees in cities, just taking up valuable space, handing out shade and oxygen equally and for free, like them there communisms. Their leaves might turn red in autumn, but they are red inside all year, these woody marxist menaces!
lippihom 2y ago
When I tell people I live in Berlin, they often make a face and disparage it for being an "ugly" city - and to a certain extent I agree with them... if they've only visited the tourist heavy central areas (Alexanderplatz, Friedrichstrasse, and much of Mitte), where there is a notable lack of greenery. What I try to remind them of, is that there are more parks, gardens, and forest here than any other capital city, and that those areas will go toe-to-toe beauty wise with anywhere. Additionally, as temperatures rise (and there's a lack of indoor refuges due to AC being uncommon), finding respite among the greenery is one of the only foolproof ways to cut the heat here.
11235813213455 2y ago
Simply remove cars, 40% more space
kkfx 2y ago
Cities have too much thermal mass exposed to the Sun, that's is. As a result they makes heat domes between buildings and you can't reduce much the thermal mass with trees because you still have all the buildings. A solution is new buildings "coated" with light air-gapped panels where air between them and the core structure of the building is free to slowly climb and going outside in the atmosphere. Of course you can't do so on glass facade walls. And it's hard to do on most existing buildings. Also you can't do much for the large asphalted area. Like it or not, cities and global heating are incompatible, as cities and many other aspects of the modernity.
Yawrehto 2y ago
I read somewhere that trees help seed clouds, thus causing rain (or maybe just moisture in the air? I forget), though it seems like it's also a vicious cycle - the areas not in drought continue to not be in drought, whereas areas that are lose trees that could've seeded clouds, and thus rain. That said, I agree with the points made in the article. "Trees are good" is a pretty uncontroversial stance. Should be, anyway. I do wonder, if the biophilia thing is real, and it seems reasonable that it is - are some trees better at creating this effect than others, even if the same size? If so, does it vary by region, cultural/ethnic background, etc., and what do those trees that are unusually biophilia-inducing have in common? I have no idea what the answers to those questions are, and there's a lot of speculation before you need to ask it, but it seems like some university or government or something should be researching those questions right now, what with all the plans to make cities greener.
t0bia_s 2y ago
I live in big historocal city in Czechia. Trees are rare here. Those few trees have trimmed crowns regularly, every spring they left only trunk with some shot cuted branches. It looks terrible and makes trees weaker. Arguments are that trees are dangerous and could fall on property or peopel walking under and that it not fits in historical concept of city. It is impossible to stay on main square during summer and overall aesthetic of treeless streets is sad. It's actually biggest downside of my city. Every time I visit Germany or Austria, I envy those green cities.

I understand that tall trees a threat to capital and maybe also to human life when one falls over near a house, but do we really need to chop them down? Can we not add metal struts between a house and a tall tree, to reinforce its strength, rather than preemptively cut it every time?

short_sells_poo 2y ago
Unfortunately the decision is often made based on costs, and chopping them down is cheaper than employing an arborist (?) to make sure the tree is reinforced properly. Please don't get me wrong, I agree with you. In many historic cities, there are trees that are hundreds of years old. There are trees that have been around since before the invention of the telegraph, lived through 2 world wars and are still going strong! There are efforts to keep these alive, but I feel newly planted trees won't get the chance to live that long :(
- lukan 2y ago
  "There are trees that have been around since before the invention of the telegraph" There are trees, that are allmost 5000 years old, so around the time humans started building cities. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_trees https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_trees The oldest tree in a city might be this one, 2300 years old, living history. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaya_Sri_Maha_Bodhi https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaya_Sri_Maha_Bodhi Around here, they also plan to chop down a lot of trees that are around 200 years old, because the road repairs are cheaper with them gone. I hope it does not get to it as resistance is forming, but I might consider climbing and sitting there to block it.
silon42 2y ago
Simpler/better to plant a new tree.
- pvaldes 2y ago
  Plant a new tree and then pay air conditioner for 20 years until the tree grows again. Simpler yes; better not so much, if you take in mind all the hidden costs. Of course sometimes the tree is rotten or will fall over your home, and it must go before that happens.
Hikikomori 2y ago
Too much KSP?
stuaxo 2y ago
The tree just needs to be managed, the whole thing doesn't need to be cut down. I'm in London on a tree lined street, every year they come and cut branches. If trees are rotten then they are cut (we have a lot of non-native trees). In this bit of London there's a target to plant much more trees, so any cut down are replaced with a native tree. Property developers are a different matter, I'm pretty sure the huge tree behind the flat I used to live in was illegally cut down; if the council had been aware it would probably have had a tree protection order put on it.
Joel_Mckay 2y ago
It is a $10k fine to cut down any tree over 6" in diameter without a permit in our city. We have many cherry trees that form a pink-petal snow every year, that were planted after hostilities ceased with Japan in WWII: Accolade, Afterglow, Akebono, Ama-no-gawa, Atsumori, Autumnalis Rosea, Avium Plena, Beni-shidare, Birch Bark Cherry, Choshu-hizakura, Fudan-zakura, Gyoiko, Hosokawa-nioi, Ichihara-tora-no-o, Ichiyo, Ito-kukuri, Ito-zakura, Jo-nioi, Jugatsu-zakura, Kanzan, Kiku-shidare-zakura, Kiku-zakura, Korean Hill Cherry, Mikuruma-gaeshi, O-yama-zakura, Ojochin, Okame, Oshima-zakura, Pandora, Pink Perfection, Rancho, Sargent Hybrid Cherry, Schmitt Cherry, Sendai-shidare, Shiro-fugen, Shirotae, Shogetsu, Shosar, Shujaku, Snofozam, Snow Goose, Somei-yoshino, Spire, Star Cherry, Tai-haku, Takasago, Taki-nioi, Ukon, Umineko, Washi-no-o, Whitcomb, Yae-beni-shidare, Yama-zakura, Yokihi Fruit trees consume a lot of water, thus many cities should consider drought resistant options to reduce sun baked roads. Some don't like the trees due to superstitions, but most enjoy the reminder Spring has arrived. =3

mglz 2y ago

Lots of chopping trees seems to come from a laziness of thinking, where certain people in the city adminsitration are just used to the idea "trees cause costs". They never think any further about benefits beyond finances.

stuaxo 2y ago
Or, as in Sheffield in the UK misaligned incentives: the company that was paid to manage the trees realised it was cheaper for them to cut them down, so started labelling trees as diseased that weren't.
- lucioperca 2y ago
  Privatisation gone wrong!
  - wongarsu 2y ago
    Something the UK has a lot of experience with
- pferde 2y ago
  Doesn't that count as plain old fraud?
  - pvaldes 2y ago
    And steal of wood. One cubic meter of Cedrus is like 1000 euro in the market. Most owners don't realize that trees had value, and are often tricked to get rid of their "diseased" old cedars with a convenient "free removal" by part of the company that will chop it. If the owner can't be persuaded, a common trick deployed is some "allergic" woman calling authorities and requiring to chop that tree because it makes her uncomfortable. Then some good Samaritans ring the bell offering their services. Extra bonus if you can made the owner to pay for the operation.

sriram_malhar 2y ago

I think the department in charge of maintaining roads should also be put in charge of maintaining trees. Any time a road needs to be widened, make provisions for planting (or better) transplanting trees, including watering infrastructure.

wodenokoto 2y ago

I recently visited Tbilisi in Georgia which is also almost a city within a forest. It is very nice and something I would wish upon any city. However, it does take it toll on buildings and infrastructure. I wonder what Johannesburg spends per tree in not just cutting and leaf collection but also in addition road and pavement repairs and I’m sure there is more than one foundation that has been damaged by roots.

yen223 2y ago

> You can still see a stark difference between rich and poor neighbourhoods to this day based purely on tree cover. You can see that here in Sydney. The poorer Western Sydney suburbs have a noticeable lack of tree coverage when compared with the richer inner west, northern, and eastern suburbs. I don't know which direction cause and effect goes. It is plausible that affluent suburbs can afford to plant trees, but it is also plausible, especially here in Australia, that trees lead to nicer climates that are more appealing to folks who can afford it.

lmpdev 2y ago
West Sydney was rural fields until it was developed during the later half of the 20th century I’m fairly sure the issue stems from insanely dense urban packing with a refusal to develop almost anything other than single family homes They try to maximise house size on small blocks leading to an almost impossible block to plant a tree on ——— Also pointing out Greater Western Sydney is one of the worst urban places in the world for tree cover given the climate I could never afford to live in Sydney, but my late father’s upbringing in the then “poor” North Sydney is starkly different to the quality of life available to the youth in “poor” areas of 21st century Sydney
- djrobstep 2y ago
  But it’s not just the block sizes, it’s also the streets. Often Western Sydney streets have no trees at all (and even no footpaths)
Jarmsy 2y ago
I'd guess both. Rich places have the money and influence to improve their area, leading to increased property value, in a cycle.
cjs_ac 2y ago
This is such a long-standing difference that Sydney newspapers will use the word 'leafy' to describe a suburb as having significant social capital. The local governments in the 'leafy' areas are extremely protective of their trees, for example, have a look at Hornsby Shire Council's regulations on trees[0]. They will fine you significant amounts of money if you kill or significantly prune a tree on your own property without permission. [0] https://www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/environment/flora-and-fauna/trees https://www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/environment/flora-and-fauna/t...

classified 2y ago

Trees are nothing but obstacles to traffic. If you take a good look at cities, you will see that they were built for cars, and cars alone. Anything that's not a car has no place in a city.

lopis 2y ago
Even if that was true, sounds like a net gain if trees make cities more inhospitable for cars.
- classified 2y ago
  But then, where would all those poor cars live?
f6v 2y ago
Not in Europe though.
- morsch 2y ago
  Mostly better, still awful.
- ffgjgf1 2y ago
  Depends, people keep saying stuff about “Europe” as if it’s some single monolithic place. In any case very few people live in old town houses built prior to the late 19th century (in those places have their own issues) and there was plenty of car centric development during the 1950s and subsequent decades.
self_awareness 2y ago
> Anything that's not a car has no place in a city. Erm, I thought cities are for people, not for cars
- nottorp 2y ago
  Erm, I think HN could use a "+1, well done sarcasm" upvote.

angelagershen 2y ago

[dead]

short_sells_poo 2y ago

The photo in the article looks amazing! You basically don't see a city, you see a vast woodland! An occasional rooftop peeking through here and there are the only signs of civilization. I'd love to live in a place like that. London is a very green city by many standards, but it is nowhere close to appearing like the unbroken forest in the article. In fact, the thing I miss the most after having moved to the UK are the forests. Most of it is private and fenced off, and it's just tiny patches of woods anyway. It's interesting how different it is compared to Switzerland for example, where one can roam freely (at risk of being chased by an occasional herd of curious cows) and there are plenty of forests where one can escape civilization.

obscurette 2y ago
I also happen to live in such area. It's nice, but there are also downsides – solar roofs for example don't make sense here.
- short_sells_poo 2y ago
  That's fair criticism, but perhaps it'd be much more effective to have a few but large solar farms outside the city, no?
  - palata 2y ago
    Or a nuclear plant.
shiroiushi 2y ago
Huh? I've read multiple times that in the UK, private land can't be "fenced off" and the general public has the right to roam on it, as long as they aren't causing a nuisance or getting too close to peoples' homes. Is that only for pastures or something?
- helsinkiandrew 2y ago
  > and the general public has the right to roam on it There's no right to freely roam in the UK unlike Finland and other countries [1], although there are public footpaths/rights of way that cross private land [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam [2] https://www.gov.uk/right-of-way-open-access-land/use-public-rights-of-way https://www.gov.uk/right-of-way-open-access-land/use-public-...

arthurofbabylon 2y ago

Does anyone have a "greenery index" of world cities?

grvbck 2y ago
Not really a universal index, but interesting nevertheless: MIT Treepedia has indexed some cities based on tree canopies from Google street view. Some (to me) surprising finds, like Paris (8.8%) vs NY (13.5%). https://senseable.mit.edu/treepedia https://senseable.mit.edu/treepedia

f6v 2y ago

What I found incredibly uncomfortable when moving from Eastern to Western Europe is a lack of shade in residential areas. Yes, there’re parks, but the buildings often don’t have enough shade (anecdotal evidence). With the rising temperatures, many homes are exposed to sun whole day. I live in a city that’s been growing really fast and none of the newer residential houses have any trees around them. Mind you it takes many many years to grow a proper tree.

mantas 2y ago
Don't worry, newer developments in eastern europe suck at tree coverage too.
- earthnail 2y ago
  Newer Western European developments tend to focus a lot on trees again in my experience. So there’s hope.
  - nope1000 2y ago
    Yes, I live in a new apartment in Munich and when I look out of the window, I feel like I'm in nature. Really nice.

have_faith 2y ago

Where I live, Sheffield in the UK, the council was nearly toppled because they chopped down some street trees. They still haven't fully recovered from it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield_tree_felling_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield_tree_felling_protest...

rob74 2y ago
I'm also against chopping down trees - but sometimes tree protection turns into a pretext for NIMBYism, especially if it's against projects that are also good for the environment, such as public transport (felling 189 trees for a bus lane sounds like a lot, but if the trees shown in this photo https://proarbmagazine.com/controversial-sheffield-bus-lane-plan-see-188-trees-axed/ https://proarbmagazine.com/controversial-sheffield-bus-lane-... are representative, those look more like shrubs)
- buro9 2y ago
  There are a lot of species that may be misinterpreted as a shrub, i.e. a Hazel tree https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/trees-woods-and-wildlife/british-trees/a-z-of-british-trees/hazel/ https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/trees-woods-and-wildlife/br... is dense, and forms many smaller straighter branches shooting up in parallel... could easily be mistaken as a shrub as this next pic shows https://cotswoldtrees.com/hazel-corylus-avellana/ https://cotswoldtrees.com/hazel-corylus-avellana/ . Still a tree though, and all trees are good trees.
  - pvaldes 2y ago
    Hazelnut on cities are mainly from two different species. Corylus avellana is clearly a shrub, even if can grow 6m high with time, and will recover fast from being chopped, but the other species is a tree.
- benoliver999 2y ago
  It was a bigger scale. The plan was to cut down 17,500 of 35,500 street trees, all due to a total mis-reading of a report. Instead of backing down the council ploughed on, got people arrested and even tried to jail one of its own councillors for protesting. It was a huge fiasco.

huevosabio 2y ago

One of my biggest complains for American cities is the risk adversity with respect to trees. In SF, the city went in a rampage to prune and tear down trees (mostly ficus) because of the risk of the branches falling. There are lots of rules for where you can and can't plant trees based on road visibility, signage, electric cables etc. Result is that you have a lot of tree-less spaces in a city where basically anything grows. In contrast, Mexico City has an almost anarchist version of urban greenery. Trees overflow streets and side walks. Yes, there are issues from dealing with the urban greenery, but the city is incredibly pleasant to walk in. Also, despite being an incredibly noisy city, trees and buildings mute out a lot of the noise.

AidenVennis 2y ago
Streetview shows this very nicely for Mexico City. I wonder if having so many trees in the city would make chopping down of few trees for some new public development less frowned upon by residents?
- rambambram 2y ago
  Thanks, now I just spent two hours streetview surfing through Mexico City.
inferiorhuman 2y ago
Kind of an odd flex given how walkable San Francisco is, but the "risk adversity" is because people actually die. Last year, five people died from fallen trees in a single storm (two in the city).
- FactolSarin 2y ago
  Mexico City is one of the largest cities in the world. Five people out of 21 million is nothing. Sure, every death is tragic, but there are a lot more efficient ways to spend time and money preventing deaths than tree trimming.
  - 2y ago

jurmous 2y ago

Here in Utrecht the Netherlands they are trying to greenify the city to reduce heat stress during the hot months. They try to plant as much trees and plants as possible, they try not to mow grass often and let it grow, they encourage homes to remove tiled gardens and add green, they have programs to turn roofs into green roofs. I like it, the city feels nicer to life in. https://healthyurbanliving.utrecht.nl/fileadmin/_processed_/d/b/csm_Integrale-aanpak-van-de-openbare-ruimte-ENG_6265a924bb.png https://healthyurbanliving.utrecht.nl/fileadmin/_processed_/... https://healthyurbanliving.utrecht.nl/our-vision-for-utrecht-in-2040/ https://healthyurbanliving.utrecht.nl/our-vision-for-utrecht... https://aiph.org/floraculture/news/utrecht-is-crowned-the-netherlands-greenest-city/ https://aiph.org/floraculture/news/utrecht-is-crowned-the-ne...

ctenb 2y ago
I live there as well, and while I'm sure it could be worse, it's nothing compared to Johannesburg. I would like to see much more green throughout the city. Hopefully they will keep up the trend.
- jurmous 2y ago
  Well they are still in transition. My street is next. They will plant quite a bit more trees and plant areas. Looking forward to them :)
config_yml 2y ago
Same in Zurich, where the city tries to establish a “Schwammstadt”. But the tree growth is actually negative, because on private properties people are chopping down their trees to build lucrative housing.
- BSDobelix 2y ago
  If you look at bellevue i personally think it's disgusting, that loveless massive sechseleutenplatz, lot's of cars always using the horn, what a waste of that iconic place constricted between traemli and a always busy street, tbh even Delhi is less stressful, let alone Vienna. EDIT: Do you mean Schwanstadt right? That lovely smell of birdshit in the sommer plus the massive stink of piss and puke after (and up to 10 days) streetparade is the pure soul of Zurich ;)

randomcarbloke 2y ago

my city is the largest urban forest. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/07/london-forest-i-tree-study https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/07/london...

andsoitis 2y ago
Johannesburg is the largest man-made urban forest and Tijuca forest in Rio is the largest urban forest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_forest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_forest
- randomcarbloke 2y ago
  Okay, by some people's argument it is and since this is not an exact science comparing Tijuca's 3,953 hectares to London's 14,000 even with percentage coverage it would suggest otherwise. That said lots of cities have a claim: Oslo, Joberg(as you indicate), some places in China. Is it most trees, densest coverage, or simply largest area that still satisfies the definition of Urban Forest? You can pick a different answer for whichever metric qualifies.

robbyiq999 2y ago

Would love to see them tear up highways and build forests and not the other way around

littlelady 2y ago
It's not quite what you mean, but a woman in Ireland has planted over 1000 trees on her 3-acre plot, which was previously overrun with rushes and thought to be barren. Here are her before and after pictures, maybe it will inspire you too. https://bealtainecottage.com/before-permaculture/ https://bealtainecottage.com/before-permaculture/

z3phyr 2y ago

When I lived in Delhi, my home was near the ridge area of North Campus. Its a lush forest with shrubs, ferns, and subtropical hard trees with a few lakes. The temperature difference, the coolness in air and the vibe difference from the rest of the city was like night and day.

littlelady 2y ago
I also know this feeling! I think if more people knew did, they would be more supportive of urban green spaces. It's always remarkable to ride my bike through a paved residential area and then cut through this green alleyway-- the temperature and air is so fresh and feels 5 degrees cooler than the street.

lopis 2y ago

> However, planting trees in cities is pretty much all upside with almost no downside (except that birds tend to shit on my car). > So the next time you're enjoying a walk down a lovely shady street, take a look up and appreciate the trees. Author seems to be contradicting themselves (:

blackhawkC17 2y ago
I’ll trade a rare chance of bird poop to live in a pleasant leafy area :) A bird actually once pooped directly on my shirt, and it’s one of the funniest things I can remember.

aaron695 2y ago

[dead]

highhedgehog 2y ago

Please tell this to mediaval towns in Italy.

lordgrenville 2y ago

I also grew up in Johannesburg, and really miss those trees. When you drive a little bit out of the city you see a completely different landscape. However I'm sceptical about the author's claim that there's no downside. I would assume that most of the trees are not native, and in any case definitely don't grow natively at that density. Feels like there's no free lunch in ecology: is mass tree-planting an exception?

HermanMartinus 2y ago
Author here :) You're correct that very few of them are native. That being said, when comparing to a city with no trees vs a city with non-native trees, I think the latter is still superior.

PaulRobinson 2y ago

Spent last week in South California, visiting family. Flying into LAX made me feel like I was flying into a hell scape. From the air, no green was visible for miles. Compared to my home (London, originally Manchester), I thought it not just odd but barely liveable. You could almost the heat off the concrete by looking at it from the air. Driving around as far south as Orange County for the next week I was happily surprised when I saw any indication of nature at all. Perhaps it’s just me and what I’m used to, but the only spot I visited that felt really relaxing was up around Griffith Observatory.

CuriouslyC 2y ago
Next time you visit family get them to rent a house in Santa Barbara. Technically it's "central" California but it's only 90 minutes from LA and it's probably the coolest and most livable place in the whole state.
- sebstefan 2y ago
  "only" 90 minutes
- surfingdino 2y ago
  Might as well rent a small plane.
- sillyfluke 2y ago
  The change of landscape from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara always gives me prehistoric or jurassic vibes for some reason. Flying into LA from Europe and seeing slabs of reflecting concrete and buildings strech out for miles into the horizon from the desert really does give you the feeling that you are seeing the future of the climate apocalpyse in the present. As Gibson says, the future is already here it's just unevenly distributed. And then you drive north and you run into vegetation that wouldn't be out of place in a dinosaur movie. In that sense, Santa Barbara is nice but what exactly is "cool" sbout it? Americans awkward relationship with class is kind of in full view there frankly. There is almost no normal social interaction between the residents and the Latino blue collar community that prop up everyone's gardens and landscapes. Have you ever taken a bus around town in Santa Barbara? It's like, "Oh, so this is where the real people are." Don't get me wrong, there's lots of interesting and nice people that live in Santa Barbara but the lack of cross-over is a little depressing. In Europe, you can be living in an nice expensive place in the city and run into the guy that cuts your hair at the corner barbershop at a music festival and hang out together with their friends the rest of the day. Also with the exception of downtown Santa Barbara, like most of the US, it's incredibly anti-pedestrian. Make the mistake of google mapping a spot 20 min walk away and you'll find yourself on the highway walking for half an hour cause all the residents take short cuts through private property.

hahamrfunnyguy 2y ago

We have the same issue in my city with respect to areas lacking trees. The trees in the more affluent areas tend to be better maintained by property owners, and replacement trees are planted when trees are lost in ice and wind storms. The city's forestry department is working on a long-term solution to this problem but it takes time to grow trees.

langcss 2y ago

Canberra is heavenly in terms of number of trees. Acres of parkland, farmland or wild bush near every part of the city. As well as treelined streets.

nosrepa 2y ago

EAB is definitely making sure we cut down more than ever!

b3ing 2y ago

I just wish they wouldn’t plant acorn trees anywhere near a road, squirrels just end up in a kill zone

nurple 2y ago

One thing I'm very frustrated by is my city's(Salt Lake) push for water conservation to the point they're paying residential owners to xeriscape their property. We've spent over a century terraforming the desert into a beautiful green canopy, and every day they're building more concrete and asphalt jungles with nearly no greenery while existing properties are tearing out greenery and replacing it with rocks. We even had one politician try to say we needed to cut the trees in the canyon down to save the Salt Lake, because they're absorbing too much water. In the state, residential water usage is almost a single-digit percentage and unmetered secondary water systems have been a standard feature of neighborhoods built over farmland. They're now going around putting meters on the secondary water systems and no new developments even have them at all. I'm really worried as the city is beginning to resemble hellscapes like Las Vegas and LA. The developer-captured legislature is just pushing shit through without much thought for their livability or scalability. Couple legislative sessions ago they removed the requirement for them to review referenda brought by concerned residents, which is one of the only methods we still had to push back against overdevelopment.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

notjustanymike 2y ago

Living in Brooklyn, I always prefer to explore east/west instead of north/south. This is because the streets have trees, while the avenues are exposed. In the hot summer months you’ll have a delightful walk down Bergen, then absolutely bake on Franklin or Nostrand.

openrisk 2y ago

Dense urban-type settlements attracted billions (and continue to do so worldwide) as they offer hard-to-beat advantages. But as these gains are booked and largely taken for granted, people long for the paradise lost, the walkability, the green spaces etc. Anecdotaly the pandemic may have hastened this realisation, as people resorted to walking in larger numbers. Walking around tree-lined streets with lots of natural looking grass and flower beds certainly beats doing the same in a car infested concrete jungle.

floppiplopp 2y ago

Trees in cities, just taking up valuable space, handing out shade and oxygen equally and for free, like them there communisms. Their leaves might turn red in autumn, but they are red inside all year, these woody marxist menaces!

lippihom 2y ago

When I tell people I live in Berlin, they often make a face and disparage it for being an "ugly" city - and to a certain extent I agree with them... if they've only visited the tourist heavy central areas (Alexanderplatz, Friedrichstrasse, and much of Mitte), where there is a notable lack of greenery. What I try to remind them of, is that there are more parks, gardens, and forest here than any other capital city, and that those areas will go toe-to-toe beauty wise with anywhere. Additionally, as temperatures rise (and there's a lack of indoor refuges due to AC being uncommon), finding respite among the greenery is one of the only foolproof ways to cut the heat here.

11235813213455 2y ago

Simply remove cars, 40% more space

kkfx 2y ago

Cities have too much thermal mass exposed to the Sun, that's is. As a result they makes heat domes between buildings and you can't reduce much the thermal mass with trees because you still have all the buildings. A solution is new buildings "coated" with light air-gapped panels where air between them and the core structure of the building is free to slowly climb and going outside in the atmosphere. Of course you can't do so on glass facade walls. And it's hard to do on most existing buildings. Also you can't do much for the large asphalted area. Like it or not, cities and global heating are incompatible, as cities and many other aspects of the modernity.

Yawrehto 2y ago

I read somewhere that trees help seed clouds, thus causing rain (or maybe just moisture in the air? I forget), though it seems like it's also a vicious cycle - the areas not in drought continue to not be in drought, whereas areas that are lose trees that could've seeded clouds, and thus rain. That said, I agree with the points made in the article. "Trees are good" is a pretty uncontroversial stance. Should be, anyway. I do wonder, if the biophilia thing is real, and it seems reasonable that it is - are some trees better at creating this effect than others, even if the same size? If so, does it vary by region, cultural/ethnic background, etc., and what do those trees that are unusually biophilia-inducing have in common? I have no idea what the answers to those questions are, and there's a lot of speculation before you need to ask it, but it seems like some university or government or something should be researching those questions right now, what with all the plans to make cities greener.

t0bia_s 2y ago

I live in big historocal city in Czechia. Trees are rare here. Those few trees have trimmed crowns regularly, every spring they left only trunk with some shot cuted branches. It looks terrible and makes trees weaker. Arguments are that trees are dangerous and could fall on property or peopel walking under and that it not fits in historical concept of city. It is impossible to stay on main square during summer and overall aesthetic of treeless streets is sad. It's actually biggest downside of my city. Every time I visit Germany or Austria, I envy those green cities.