People who like trees have a natural incentive to plant them. They are also expensive to remove, creating a natural barrier to keep them. However, property owners should be the ones to make this determination, not a City employee.

In what space is the right to self determination in all of this? This is being taken away and that is the problem. We need to trust residents to do the right thing, and based on the number of trees we have, they do already.

If the community is dedicated to the preservation of trees, we need to have a City-wide vote. When this came up in 2008 it was rejected.

Why don’t we spend money on actually developing parkland instead of creating more bureaucracy?

We have a good tree canopy without one as we have developed. I don’t see how trees are endangered so much so we need to take rights away from property owners and add to our government burden.

As others have pointed out, trees were cut down as neighborhoods were developed – every place where houses are present. However, homeowners plant trees and these grow over time. Then they are replaced at the discretion of the property owner.

Take a look at the Medlock Park aerial from the 50′s on this site. Then look at Google maps at the same area. I would say it is a radical increase in tree cover from then to today over Medlock Park, no ordinance present or necessary.