A reader sends in these pics from the Allen Wilson Terrace demolition site and snarks “Man, if this is the protocol for a TREE SAVE AREA, I’d hate to see what they do in a TREE KILL AREA.”
« Collards Challenge at East Lake Farmer’s Market
Good-Bye Georgia Council For the Arts? »
Kind of obscene.
Maybe the trees are being saved for firewood? -:)
Does anyone know how to get this on Failblog?
The worst part is I have asked the City to remove these signs for on 3 different occasions. They are very misleading and should be removed! Thank you for posting. Unfortunately, the new buildings have different and substantial foot prints and few if any of the existing trees planted 40 years ago are likely to be preserved. Because the new plan does not have enough space for trees they will be contributing to the Tree Bank. I understand that to finance the project, the Housing Authority needed to sell off a large portion of the land to a private developer which decrease the amount of space for trees, especially given the parking requirements for so many units. Still, it is very say that there is not enough room for trees, for they give a sense of place, a place you want to live in, opposed to being adjacent to a very large parking lot. Destruction of the trees and lack of planting area for future trees a major destruction of assets and potential assets that could have been avoided with more forethought and consideration, namely community input. I am hoping that at least the street trees that are planted will be in spaces that will encourage 100 year trees instead of the typical 5-10 year tree.
It is incredible to me that they hope to sell some of the new units to middle-income people but are destroying the ‘sense of place” and what could be a marketing plus. In the past, I have supported the management of our Housing Authority. Now I am feeling pretty low on their vision thing.
Contact Paul P. at housing authority, not city about signs.
treesrock… please explain your comment about how community input would have prevented the destruction of assets. It seems to me when the community is invited to meetings/hearings etc… that it is merely show to make people feel that they have a voice but the reality is that the powers that be, whether economic or political, do what they want anyway. Please someone help me see how community input is valuable. I am willing to shake off my cynicism but I need something to go on. (citing an example would really help and I’m sure I’m not the only one)
I guess I was being optimistic in the sense that maybe the reason they did not account for the trees was an oversight and community input would bring it to their attention and create some accountability. That is probably naive since the City Arborist had to have talked to them and the choice was still to tree bank instead of preserving existing trees.
I love trees, and hate to lose any, but did any of y’all look at some of the trees they felled? They were D-E-A-D on the inside, and clearly needed to come down.
I did look at them, there were a few in decline, but also a few in excellent condition.
One other point, the reason to preserve existing trees in addition to preserving that tree to to create a space for a future tree.
Maybe they plan to plant collards instead.
That would be great but I have not heard plans for a community garden, I really think space is at a premium.
If you look back at some of the posts about this you’ll see what you’re going to get instead of trees.
Some VERY UGLY built to the lot line fake stucco crap that will need to torn down in fifteen years.
Come on Decatur we can do better than this, we really can.
But hey, it made some bank and developer happy so what could be better for the community than that?
I know nothing about the situation but have to wonder if it’s just cheaper to donate to the Tree Bank than make the effort to save viable trees. Can’t imagine anyone wanting to live in a new development without any Mother Nature around.