315 West Ponce Dawn Redwoods Might Be in Jeopardy
Decatur Metro | July 30, 2008 | 8:41 am
Trees As Seen in Winter - From Google Street View
Cherie has forwarded along a note from a landscape architect in the neighborhood who has contacted three separate arborists in regards to the four unique (and massive) Dawn Redwoods on the 315 W. Ponce property. The verdict seems to be that the 12 1/2 foot distance between the Redwoods and Building “B”, which fronts Ponce, isn’t enough and would eventually kill the trees.
Here’s the resident’s note followed by an arborist’s letter in the continuation….
Dear Commissioners,
In reviewing the documents for the proposed project located at 315 West Ponce de Leon Avenue, it has come to my attention that the 5 Dawn Redwood trees, located along the front plain of the existing Wachovia building, are in jeopardy as a result of the proposed nearby construction. As a Landscape Architect, I am familiar with basic protection measures which are recommended to insure long term survivability of trees in construction zones.
It is my understanding that the City is of the strong opinion that these 5 specimen trees are not to be damaged or killed. As recently as the July DDA meeting, the developer stated that the trees were safe. This is in doubt.My first hope is that the trees will be saved. Short of that goal, I want for the fate of the trees to be known up front.The proposed front building, Building “B”, is designed to be sited 12 1/2′ from the centerline of the tree trunks. My concern about this placement led me to meet with three certified arborists, all independent from one another, to learn their opinions about the survivability of these trees. The following report expresses the professional opinion of one of the arborists, saying that the trees will be severely compromised by construction and will not survive. Please read the report and let me know if you have any questions.Not included at this time are the other arborists’ analyses; however, their conclusions coincide with those of Mr. Morris.
Sincerely, [ed: Name has been withheld]
You’ll find the arborist’s letter after the jump…
Hmm…this is troubling…and it seems that at least one member of the city commission agrees. Commissioner Baskett replied to the landscape architect’s original note expressing his concern.
Personally I’ve never quite bought on to the idea of Building “B” anyway. While the rear building only covers a parking lot, building “B” replaces probably the best example of the modernist landscape in the town…and that includes those Redwoods.
Also, I still can’t picture building “B” not looking sort of cramped in front of the massive office building.
Should be interesting to see how this new wrench works its way thru the gears of the political system.
Stay tuned!
This letter is in reference to the five dawn redwood trees located on West Ponce De Leon Avenue, beside the Wachovia building in downtown Decatur. Per your request I visited the property on Friday, June 25th to perform a visual inspection on the trees and review proposed building plans for the site. The trees measure 31.5, 28, 27.5 25 and 35 inches in diameter (measured at 4.5 feet above grade, DBH) and appear to be in good health with no significant structural defects. I understand from our conversation that you are concerned about the potential for damage to the trees during construction of the proposed building on West Ponce De Leon Ave.
The critical root zone is defined as the soil area surrounding a tree that contains the minimum number of tree roots necessary to maintain its health. This area is accurately defined as a circle with a radius of one foot for every inch of trunk diameter. For example, a 24-inch diameter tree has a critical root zone that extends 24 feet in all directions. Soil disturbance, grade changes and compaction inside the critical root zone are expected to have an impact on tree health, and disturbance in excess of 30 percent of the critical root zone may cause decline and death of the tree.
The nearest edge of the proposed structure for this site will be located approximately 12 feet from the dawn redwood trees (Lord Aeck and Sargent site plans dated 7.8.08). Additional soil disturbance is expected within 12 feet, and will be necessary for construction access. Soil disturbance and root damage within six to twelve feet of the dawn redwood trees is expected to cause decline and eventual death of the trees. In addition to root damage, the pruning necessary to provide clearance to a building 12 feet from the trees will exceed 25 percent of the tree canopies. Removal of more than 25% of a tree’s foliage is a violation of ANSI A300 standards for tree care, and will accelerate their decline.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Arthur Morris
ISA Board-Certified Master Arborist #SO2627-B
Bartlett Tree Experts
3524-A Lawrenceville Hwy.
That picture does not do those trees justice. These are amazing trees, and I’ve always admired them. They are a major asset to Decatur. I do like this project, but I like the trees a lot better. If they have to come out, they are welcome to transplant them them to my front yard. I would not want to see anything jeopardize these trees. Seeing as these trees would be such a benefit to the atmosphere of this project, I have to imagine the developer would have a major interest in protecting them as well.
Developer: Must bulldoze…trees. Trees bad get in way of bulldozer. Bulldozer mad now. Must bulldoze trees…mmmmm, save money bulldoze trees…mmmm.
OMG its the attack of the zombie developers!
I’m extremely happy to see people take an interest in the trees. I see Avondale Estates is grappling with a similar issue. I volunteered with Trees Atlanta for a number of years back in 2000-2002. Great organization and a great way to meet amazing people that really care about this city and the world at large. You know the Decatur license plate decal you see people driving around with? The one with the homes, schols, and churches? There is a small bit of green in the background of that picture which I always thought should be more accentuated. The city of homes, schools, churches, and trees!
I mean, cmon… If it wasn’t for trees in Atlanta and Decatur, these cities would be nothing. These cities do not sit on oceanfronts, riverfronts, visible hillsides, mountainsides, etc. Without its beautiful and amazing trees Atlanta is just a wasteland.
Can’t five trees be replaced? It’s not exactly Gramercy Park or Yellowstone.
B. Steal
Hmm…If they are indeed “Dawn Redwoods”, though not native Wikipedia has them listed as “Critically Endangered”…
The city of homes, schools, churches, and trees! – and parking lots, parking decks, and strip malls!
here’s another slogan for downtown – Decatur brought to you by the asphalt association of Georgia! š
They are nice trees though…but not really endangered in cultivation. I do like deciduous needle leaf trees too.
Yeah maybe Wikipedia is just talking about the native Chinese version…
Instead of cutting down the trees how about a little reverence for life and move the building a few feet? I know…its all about profit. Well, who says its all about profit? Has it gotten that way because most of us, including myself, have all become complacent?
It’s all about profit because the alternative is losses. Everyone here bemoaning the loss of a few trees has every opportunity to buy their own property, plant their own trees, and display their own reverence for life.
Let’s be realistic here. The Ponce corridor is going to be a built environment – it is our Main Street. It is not going to be a leafy avenue with 100 year old oaks and rare (and non-native) species of trees. That’s more in line with our historical/residential areas.
I can’t believe the nitpicking that these developers have to go through. This is an unwise battle to choose.
Because the alternative to nitpicking is a complacent public.
And for me, its less about the trees themselves and more about being straight-forward about the project. If the common consensus is that the trees will die, then the public should have the opportunity to have that debate and note their opinions in the appropriate forums.
Why can’t it be a main corridor with 100 year old oaks and rare species of trees? Its what adds to the charachter of the place. Turning the commerical strip into ‘Anywhere USA’ doesn’t do our city any justice at all. I find it inspiring that people actually still care about life in this age of no holds barred profit seeking and greed at any price. Some things you can’t put a price on. The Indians of pre-Christian days were right on…one way of putting it….that eventually we will all be sitting around in our own sewage (smog, deforestation, water pollution, etc). A few thousand years ago the split between spirit and matter was created. Well, rational science including quantum physics is showing us there is no split…it was all a lie to create controls over society. E, perhaps our worldviews are starting to diverge dramatically. I like to think that blogs like this are a way to cut through the lies and expose the truth of what is going on. Those trees are beautiful and majestic. Profit can still be made on that development if someone gets creative and appropriate adjustments are made. I for one still have reverence for life above profit.
Wonder if the wailing cry of treelovers will hold up the ENTIRE Avondale downtown development over that one WATER/PIN oak tree? I am all for smart development and protection of greenspace whenever possible, but so many of these “tree” issues..like the one in Candler Park as well….just become this huge devisive brouhaha. It all gets rather silly. We are not talking clearcutting here.
And root structures and their invasive nature wreak havoc on public sidewalks, sewer/water lines etc…..that is part of the reason why you will never see major cities…or even Decatur have a “tree lined” Main Street…or Ponce in this case.
Sure you have reverence for the trees over money…its not your money!…
(this probably has more to do with the other 315 post..oh well) From a sustainability standpoint, I would imagine those same Native Americans would hold New York City in high regard over Atlanta BECAUSE of its density. It is because of its density it is substantially more sustainable. ie, if New York (the 5 boroughs – 8 million people) was built out in the way Atlanta (500,000 people) has it would be not the 470 or so sq miles it is but would have to explode in land area to over 3,200 sq miles (thats larger than Deleware!).
Atlanta and especially the area ITP needs MORE density to make it MORE sustainable so that we can preserve MORE land and have LESS SPRAWL!!
Donāt get me wrong, I like the trees, and everything should be done to save them, but i do not think they should drive whether or not this project gets built. Otherwise, the people who would have lived in this development could end up moving to a green site out in Gwinnett where they clear cut 50 acres for them to live…instead of loosing two or three trees here. People have to live somewhere…Atlanta’s not shrinking!
last rant…that building and the parking lot it sits in is what MAKES IT ANYWHERE USA!!!!! This development would be unique due to the existing conditions of the site and the context of the city.
Hey, Jim. Can you clarify the bit about never having a tree-lined Main Street? Hasn’t the city and developers planted street trees all the way from the post office to Decatur First Methodist? Granted, some of the more recent plantings have a long way to go, but the ones planted in the 80s when they built the office building across from Rue de Leon have achieved full righteousness.
When the Avondale commissioners voted as to whether or not to cut down the tree, I noticed that the 2 commissioners that said it should be cut down were men, and the 2 commissioners that said to save it were women. I am reading a best selling new book called “A New Earth” by Eckhart Tolle. The following is an excerpt I came across on the same day I saw the article about the tree in the AJC. It sort of struck me as being linked in some way. Interesting to ponder. (I hope its ok to post a book excerpt?)
ā¦ā¦ā¦The suppression of the feminine principle over the last 2 thousand years has enabled the ego to gain absolute supremacy in the collective human psyche. Although women have egos, of course, the ego can take root and grow more easily in the male form than in the female. This is because women are less mind-identified than men. They are more in touch with the inner body and the intelligence of the organism where the intuitive faculties originate. The female form is less rigidly encapsulated than the male, has greater openness and sensitivity toward other life forms and is more attuned to the natural world.
If the balance between the male and female energies had not been destroyed on our planet, the egoās growth would have been greatly curtailed. We would not have declared war on nature, and we would not have been so alienated by our Being.
Nobody knows the exact figure because records were not kept, but it seems certain that during a three-hundred year period between four and six million women were tortured and killed by the āHoly Inquisitionā, an institution formed by the Roman Catholic Church to suppress heresy. This ranks with the Holocaust as one of the darkest chapters in human history. It was enough for a woman to show a love for animals, walk alone in the fields or woods, or gather medicinal plants to be branded a witch, and tortured and burned at the stake. The sacred feminine was declared demonic, and an entire dimension largely disappeared from human experience. Other cultures and religions including Judaism, Islam, and even Buddhism, also suppressed the female dimension, although in a less violent way. Womenās status was reduced to being child bearers and menās property. Males who denied the feminine, even within themselves were now running the world, a world that was totally out of balance. The rest is history, or rather a case history of insanity.
Who was responsible for this fear of the feminine that could only be described as collective paranoia? We could say: Of course, men were responsible. But then why in many ancient pre-Christian civilizations such as the Sumerian, Egyptian, and Celtic were women respected and the feminine principle not feared but revered? What is it that suddenly made men feel threatened by the female? The ego evolving in them. In it it could gain full control of our planet only through the male form, and to do so, it had to render the female powerless.
In time, the ego also took over most women, although it can never become as deeply entrenched in them as in men. We now have a situation which the suppression of the feminine has become internalized, even in most women. The sacred feminine, because it is suppressed, is felt by many women as emotional pain. In fact it has become collective pain together with the accumulated pain suffered by women over millennia through childbirth, rape, slavery, torture, and violent death.
But things are changing rapidly now. With more and more people becoming conscious, the ego is beginning to lose its hold on the human mind. Because the ego was never as deeply rooted in women, it is losing its hold on women more quickly than on menā¦ā¦ā¦ā¦..
Sorry, Josie, but I fail to see the connection between your rant and the trees at 315 W Ponce.
Scott:
Sorry to be unclear. I was suggesting that you don’t/can’t get the (what I interpreted) tree-lined effect many of us were use to when kids. Trees are now planted, but I think they are of smaller scale now due to root invasiveness, etc.
Also, a walk around virtually any neighborhood will edvidence what havoc can be wrought on sidewalks( big deal here in Decatur with all our babies, etc) by the wrong trees being planted.
Thanks for the chance to clarify…I love trees!
Newbie, you say “that building and the parking lot it sits in is what MAKES IT ANYWHERE USA!!!!! This development would be unique due to the existing conditions of the site and the context of the city.” You are right about the parking lot and that building that looks like a prison. But slapping up some pedestrian friendly condos with retail storefronts is also becoming “Anywhere USA.” I am not against the density, I am against the lack of charachter that it taken into consideration when building a dense community. Your pedestrian friendly condos can be found in any walkable city area these days..Alexandria VA, Capitol Hill in Seattle, Dudley Square in Boston. Its the quality of the density that is created as a result of some type of charachter that is built into the city. What makes a city is interesting (often historic) quality architecture, pocket parks with beautiful trees/flowers/fountains, etc. Just having a commerical strip without taking the charachter of the strip into consideration (as well as the quality of the arteries that feed the strip) will fill the city with people but it will be a MEDIOCRE city. Those trees do add alot to downtown Decatur. Its seems for years the city would do anything to attract developers. The city is entering into a reverse position where it just doesn’t have to accept any proposal and how can you trust anything the developer and the politicians say if its found that they have lied. If they lied to the public about being able to preserve the trees maybe they are lying about the parking situation? Decatur is a hot area. Given high gas prices there isn’t a huge amount of opportunity to develop in the suburbs anymore. They developers know the intown areas are where there is $$$ to be made.
E, you say “I canāt believe the nitpicking that these developers have to go through. This is an unwise battle to choose.”
I say its even more unwise to get into a battle with a tree hugger.
It’s definitely unwise to get into a battle with a tree hugger. Rational discussion goes out the window. Constructive viewpoints are shouted down.
See Josey’s rant above.
These tree people are experts when it comes to other people’s property and money.
I’ll bow out of this ridiculous discussion. Unbelievable.
Tree huggers are a specialist, single-issue breed in the big-picture, generalist world of urban growth and development. They’re one voice and, accordingly, deserve one seat at the table, right along with building huggers, bike laners, pedestrian advocates, NIMBYs, retailers, city boosters, watershed protectors, transportation engineers and all the other folks who speak for one small component in a big complicated affair.
Everyone deserves a voice. But letting one piece of the puzzle drive the entire process is a mistake. Reality is not that cut and dried.
E, I apologize…I know I sounded self righteous and confrontational. I’m actually a good guy. I understand your point about constuctive dialog. I can get a bit emotional about trees for whatever reason. I grew up in the woods and have a deep respect for nature…I admit getting this mostly from my Dad. I guess I just get frustrated. I realize I need to face reality but I just get frustrated with ozone days and unbridled development by corporations that just don’t care about anything but the bottom line. I get sickened by more and more pavement and strip malls and Walmarts and McDonalds and trees knocked down. I am just so sick and tired of it. I look at Decatur as a special place within Georgia where people can rise above some of the development mediocrity that exists all around us and find people care about creating a truly beautiful city that will stand out as an exemplary (sp?) place to live not only for this generation but for future generations.
And yes I saw Josey’s rant. A blog is a blog and some people are going to rant. I knew nothing about the Holy Inquisition…sounds like a sad piece of history…That is what I took from it. ..whether its relevant for this discussion..well..hey who am I to say. Its a blog.
Have a great day.
Rick
I think this site, fronting Ponce, needs density and height…not really a spot for greenspace (to me). There are two pocket parks, on the residential side, that look like they could be nice. There will be street trees too. People will hang flowers from thier decks. Ponce is the road to have buildings on the street, off Ponce is where it makes since to put open space (like the part of this project front Montgomery). There may even be fountains in there too.
Sounds like what you are looking for is public art, not placed on private property. ie-Buckingham fountain in Chicago. The problem with Decatur is that there is no public land, other than the square and Marta stop, to develop such ammenities. Its too bad, but it is what it is. So we now have to work with that.
The trees are nice, no doubt about it. Two of the trees are further out, the other three should be protected as best they can, but, IMO shouldnt drive the whether or not the development gets built.
Keep in mind there are many great streets that are just long facads of buildings. Chicago (Michigan ave mile – only park is where the old water works building is..public land) Paris – Avenue Des Champs-Elysees while it has two trees on each side Ponce could do the same with just one tree on each side. That street goes for ages w/out parks, its just beautiful architecture facade. On a smaller scale Athens GA – East Clayton is a nice street.
I think we all want the same thing at the end of the day, just different opinions on how to do it (a great town to live in). Its these difference of opinions, and thus solutions to the problem, that will make it great!
For years the bankers, developers, government officials did as they pleased with cities. That’s changing now. If it’s for better only time will tell but with blogs like this one and its ability to mobilize citizens we have a lot better chance than we did before.
Now we’ve just got to get off our lazy butts and go to these meetings.
Oh, and make sure they don’t hold important agenda items for those 10:00am weekday meetings when no one can attend.
Josie sounds like a girl I dated back in Berkeley in the 60’s. My head still hurts.
[Oh, and make sure they donāt hold important agenda items for those 10:00am weekday meetings when no one can attend]
I’m not aware that Decatur has any such 10AM meetings. To the contrary, Boards and Commission meetings are always in the evening because they are made up of ordinary, concerned citizens who have usually other things to do during the day. Even better, David, one can join one of the bodies and become a part of the decision making process. Decatur makes the whole process more open than any other place I’ve ever been.
Sorry I wasn’t trying to impugn Decatur I was speaking in generalities as in Dekalb County.
I still stand by the trees being an asset, not a liability, for the development. Wouldn’t you like to look out on those trees if you lived there? Don’t those trees make the whole development look better? Is it too much to ask for a little architectural creativity? These aren’t ordinary random trees in Gwinnett. Unless they are near the end of their life or something, the trees were there first, so let them be. If architecture can’t live with nature, then I’d rather see giving the developer another floor of height to make up for any units that couldn’t be built as a result of the trees.
Dedogur, now you’re getting somewhere, because you’ve evolved the conversation beyond one of uninvolved outsiders with no stake in the game trying to dictate what the owner should do with their land. Your take is infinitely better because it speaks to the goals of the developer. Given the drive-through back there, the units with a back building view (if there are any) will be more marketable with the trees there. Plain and simple. They’re beautiful; balconies (especially upper floors) will be like a tree fort in the forest; and they provide a great privacy screen.
People always assume developers get off on leveling trees. That may be true of the clear-cutting subdivision crowd but I happen to work with a host of developers who go to great lengths to preserve mature trees. Why? Because it can make for a more desirable and marketable product. If you invest $2K in tree save measures but emerge with a home that commands an $8K premium because of the shaded lot, it doesn’t take a tree-hugger to realize it makes good sense.
Of course, if the Ponce-facing building is designed so all the units are fed by a hallway along the rear wall, the impact may have less positive impact on a per-unit basis but it’s nothing a competent architect couldn’t rework to accommodate.
Just curious…is the ‘owner’ a human being or a corporation?
Right on Scott.
Everyone’s putting their armor back on and carrying around all kinds of preconceived notions that will more likely cause a stalemate than evoke any sort of resolution. It not all that unusual to think your position is right. The novel thing is respecting (and maybe even considering) the opinions of others.
And BTW…Josey wasn’t “ranting”…simply quoting. And though there’s some interesting terminology in the quote, her basic point that women take a wider, more all encompassing view of life isn’t without merit….even if it was a bit more big picture than we normally rant about on this site. In fact, I think the guys that blew her off, went a long way in proving her point.
Hey, just curious. What is the history of this property ownership? Was it owned by an actual person? Was it bank property that got bought by the development corporation? Anyone know?