Two large trees have were removed this week in the 2300 block of High School Drive, and Brentwood resident Barry Williams was seething mad when he called 40 South News about it Friday morning.
“They were the picture of health. I can’t imagine why they were taken down,” he said. “Those were public trees. They belonged to me and all the residents of Brentwood.”
Williams said the trees, a sweet gum and swamp white oak, were 50 years old, and he used to walk under them on his way to McGrath Elementary. He said the sweet gum had some rot in the center, but the oak was perfectly healthy.
“Brentwood is a Tree City, USA, so does this mean sidewalks are more important to the city than 50-year-old trees? What’s the point?” he said. See also: Ailing oak at BHS: class of ’74 seeks help to save it
According to the city website, Brentwood’s forestry department maintains its Tree City, USA certification for the city, and has been recognized since 1980.
Williams said there was evidence of sidewalk concrete work next to each one, which maybe was the reason for their removal. He also said Ameren had attached wires to the two trees with steel clevises (brackets), and he had worked for five years to have those removed, which happened last week. Now he’s afraid maybe his efforts for the health of the trees could have led to their removal.
In an email to Brentwood City Administrator Bola Akande, (forwarded to 40 South News) Williams listed other large trees the city recently removed, and said he would work to have Brentwood disqualified as a Tree City USA if city policy didn’t change.
Akande replied to Williams and 40 South News later in the day.
As a resident of Brentwood who had 2 ill trees removed along the easement nine years ago, I understand the dilemma. I gave up a lot of shade in the process. Brentwood replaced my sweetgum trees with two beautiful red maples which have flourished. One of the nicest parts of the new trees is that they don’t dump sweetgum balls by the truck load onto my property or into the streets. My understanding was that the city purchased all those sweetgum trees for a song back in The 60s. Bad decision! When these older trees become ill or aged, they become hazards. There is a repair practice that I have questioned regarding the sidewalks issues. As the roots grow and cause uplift, it seems that in the past, the City would replace the sidewalk and simultaneously cut up the large tree roots that were causing the underlying problem. To me, this would seem to destabilize the tree itself. I’ve witnessed a few instances after storms, where those same trees have fallen, and simply toppled from the very base. I hope that practice is discontinued moving forward
You’re right about the adverse consequences of chopping out a tree’s roots when installing a new sidewalk. This practice will kill the tree every time, either in the short term, by leaving it unstable and unable to withstand strong winds, or in the long term, by giving fungi, bacteria, and insects a point of entry from which to penetrate the tree’s interior heartwood and destroy it. And once the heartwood is rotten, the tree will then be unable to withstand strong winds. Sadly, in the 2300 block of High School Drive, where the 2 big trees were just removed, only 3 big trees remain — on the opposite side of the street — but they are no longer healthy and will have to be removed, and that’s because some years ago, whoever replaced the adjacent sidewalk chopped out each of the trees’ roots, and the rotting process commenced. I didn’t see who replaced that sidewalk, but it’s a City sidewalk, so one can’t help but speculate.
Ok, I understand people want trees, I love them, as an alderman I tried to get support for a tree ordinance to protect them. But Barry, looking at the picture from above, I can see that asphalt has been added to the sidewalk because of the severe buckling and drop between two slabs of sidewalk. Also, I can see that the sidewalk is slanted to one side. If you look closely the last time the city installed the sidewalk, they indented it to allow the tree to continue to grow. All this tells me that the city has done a lot to keep this tree, and that this tree is much to big for the tree lawn. This is why I think that the homeowners, just like those in other municipalities should be responsible for the sidewalk in front of thier homes. A quick search on google shows an average cost of over $2,000 to replace the sidewalk (labor, planning, materials). See below:
http://www.homewyse.com/services/cost_to_install_concrete_sidewalk.html
I wonder how many people would pay to have this done over and over if it were their personal responsibility. Then why should the city (tax payers) pay for this over and over.
In a perfect world, I would love to live in a neighborhood with big trees lining the streets. But, after the severe storms a few years ago, a lot of people were haveing big trees taken down in fear of them coming down on their homes. We as a community have to look at the big picture and both sides.
Mike, please forgive this very late reply. You are right, it’s evident from the photo of the sweet gum that the City made efforts over the years to retain this tree and maintain a safe sidewalk. And bravo to the Public Works employees who poured the “scalloped” sidewalk panels that provided additional space for the tree, and who installed the asphalt ramps to eliminate the tripping hazard created by the raised sidewalk panel. For many years such actions were the norm in Brentwood and you rarely saw a healthy tree removed due to a sidewalk conflict. I arrived in Brentwood in 1960 and worked for Charlie Broughton in Public Works 1974-1977 and know this to be true.
I don’t know what has happened in recent years to cause the City to become so quick to remove healthy trees. Perhaps I’m in the minority on this, but I think cities are better off having big shade trees and imperfect sidewalks, than perfect sidewalks and small, shadeless trees. But it’s unfortunate that many of our streets were built with inadequate tree lawns (land between street and sidewalk). In my block of Pine Avenue, which was built in the 1930s, the tree lawn is 2.5 feet wide, too narrow for any species of shade tree. By contrast, in the 2300 block of High School Drive, where the sweet gum and swamp white oak were just removed, the tree lawn is 5.0 feet wide, which is ample for most shade tree species. It’s also unfortunate that, in some places, tree species were planted that were clearly unsuitable because they would require more space than was available. So the City was right to stop planting big-species trees in places where there won’t be enough room for them.
But, where big trees already exist, I feel the City should try, wherever possible, to “grandfather them in” and secure an easement from the adjacent homeowner to relay the sidewalk and bow it around the root zone, so the tree and sidewalk can coexist and pedestrians can have a safe and shady path to walk. You can see a great example of this at 8926 Lawn Avenue, where Public Works did a superb job of bowing the sidewalk around a big pin oak — and without injuring any of its roots. Such sidewalk bowings would be paid for by all taxpayers, since we all benefit from Brentwood’s urban forest, but I wouldn’t anticipate there being a lot of bowings, because there aren’t that many big trees left in narrow tree lawns, and because the life of a street tree is not an easy one, and many street trees don’t attain a great size due to the many adversities they face. Also, the City would not bow sidewalks around dying or declining trees, or (I suspect) around healthy ash trees, since it appears our ashes’ days are numbered thanks to the arrival of the lethal ash borer insect.
Diane Lammers told me she would have gladly granted the City an easement to bow the sidewalk around the oak tree in front of her house on High School Drive in order to save it.
I think Barry has some good points. How many years has he been an Arborist? Does he have a Certification # I can research?
Only arborists are allowed to have opinions and express them? Come on, now….
Everyone is entitled to an opinion Jane of course. I’m just concerned someone didn’t seek facts on the situation before trashing one of our City Departments publicly. Just not a typical route for someone who seems to so concerned about the City’s image.
There are many trees in Brentwood that were planted years ago in the tree lawns that are way to large. It causes problems with sewer laterals, sidewalks, gas lines and other utilities in the tree lawns. There had to be a reason it was removed, they don’t just find a tree and remove it. Has anyone contacted their alderman or the city and get the facts? Instead someone assumes the worst and goes on TV to complain. With everything that has happened in Ferguson, with people arrested in South County for supporting terrorist, and children dieing in house fires, Brentwood makes the nightly news because of a tree that was taken down.
Mike, you were a good alderman who clearly cared about our city. And you’re right, there’s a lot of tragic things happening around our region lately. But I think you’re wrong to criticize fellow residents who are concerned about their quality of life and their property values. Okay, maybe it doesn’t rise to the level of Ferguson, but does Ferguson require us in Brentwood to just stay quiet while city employees cut down the trees we love. Trees were a big reason why we moved here, and I feel sorry for the residents of that block of High School Drive, who in the last few years have watched the city cut down nearly all of their trees – green, living trees. I don’t know about you, but I am capable of being concerned about Ferguson, and fire victims, and preserving Brentwood’s special character. If it comes down to it, I would rather have a shady tree with an uneven sidewalk.
Sue…my gripe with the situation is the fact that people just assume that a department of the city just came up and decided to cut down a tree for no reason. It has always been my experience that the city arborist is conservative with the removal of trees. If they felt it should come down, I am sure there was a reason for it. Also, I have NO problem with Barry expressing his concerns for the loss of trees with fellow residents and tax payers of Brentwood. But does it really deserve or need to be on the nightly news for the entire St. Louis region?
Hi Mike! I share Sue’s high opinion of you. You always took your job as alderman very seriously and were always responsive and helpful to me whenever I contacted you. You served our city well and I know your hard work took its toll on you. I had a good idea the trees were cut down for a reason, the city manager subsequently confirmed that reason, and I went public because I strongly disagree with that reason — that large trees and safe sidewalks cannot coexist in Brentwood — that it’s an either-or proposition. Other Tree USA cities have found ways to achieve such coexistence and I want Brentwood to do the same. Cities should only remove healthy trees when in conflict with sidewalks, underground utilities, etc., as a very, very last resort. And I bet you’d agree with this. As for KSDK, I swear I didn’t put a gun to anybody’s head. Evidently the news director there felt this story had regional significance or he/she wouldn’t have broadcast it.
Barry…Thanks, I meant no disrespect to you. When I was an alderman, there were several streets with horrible buckled up sidewalks. The city would replace the sidewalks over and over. When ever we would talk about removing a tree, my phone would ring off the hook. I would love to keep every tree, but the reality is that safety comes first. There have been residents, young and old that have been tripped up by gum balls and buckled sidewalks. I have even tripped walking my dogs. Brentwood does a great job on the sidewalks, but eventually you have to address the cause. The cause is trees that are entirety to big for the tree lawns.
Barry, You seem to know so much about trees. I wonder if the City could tap into your skills in this area. As many have said, Brentwood seems to be slowly losing its trees. I live on Harrison and when I moved to Brentwood some 20+ years ago, there were many trees lining the streets. Now there are none. The most recent side walk replacement removed the last of them.
And Mike, although I too appreciate your years of service to the City, I agree with Barry that the City’s procedures in the area of sidewalks and trees is unclear and may be outdated (if we even have any; does anyone know what the current policy/procedure is for trees in Brentwood?). Unfortunately, in Brentwood, if one disagrees with the current procedures, one often has to resort to a public forum. For years, I was called all sorts of names and told I was a “vocal minority” for disagreeing with a Brentwood policy or procedure.
And I am not sure that the professional advice the City gets is always in our best interest (e.g., the parking consultant’s recommendation for the Promenade might be a good example)…so maybe we need to consider a different arborist for our City. I wonder if someone like Barry that appreciates the value that trees bring to a neighborhood wouldn’t be able to better balance how to approach tree maintenance in our City.
A recent tree study that the City had done listed tree lined streets as an asset…it improves the curb appeal of the neighborhoods and adds value to our homes. Properly maintained trees should not be a liability for our City if the City adopts and implements a good tree policy/procedure.
Karen, thanks for your comment and kind words. I am an arborist, but I lack ISA certification and suspect the City may require this. In addition, Brentwood’s arborist does a number of other public works tasks such as street and sidewalk paving, excavation, snow removal, land grading, etc., much of which I am not qualified to do. So, I would not be a good candidate for the job as it’s currently structured. If the City were to establish a citizens board to review proposed tree removals, I would be willing to serve as a member, but my hope is that the City will tighten its policy so as to generally remove only dead, dying, or damaged trees. It the City were to stop removing healthy trees except in the rarest of cases, there would be no need for a citizens board.
Not a big fan of Sweet Gums all over Brentwood, fast growing, bit of a nuisance tree. This one had some rot for sure, eventually dangerous. The White Oak stump on the other hand looks healthy, sad to see her go. Would like to hear opinion of Good Guy Brentwood Arborist in this matter.
Thanks, Mr. Torno. (By the way, I admire your work at KETC-9, as well as the architectural contributions your father has made to the city of Hermann!) Let me say this about sweet gums: Sure, nobody likes the gumballs, but every tree species has a shortcoming or two. Brentwood’s sweet gums provide a lot of greenery and shade in the summer and brilliant color in the fall, they are hardy in Missouri, they tolerate urban conditions amazingly well for a bottomland swamp tree, and they are not threatened by pests. And they will be among the only big trees left standing here after the Emerald Ash Borers kill our ash trees, if there are any sweet gums left by then. With the looming loss of a large percentage of our city trees to the ash borers, it’s criminal that city employees are willfully destroying healthy trees that are immune to this pest. And did you know that Public Works has dramatically reduced the planting of tall-species trees? This policy will, in time, lead to the loss of the tall, lush tree canopies over Brentwood’s streets. As tall trees are removed by Public Works, many are being replaced by short-species trees like red buds, dogwoods, hornbeams, and Bradford pears — trees that don’t grow tall enough to arch over our streets and preserve our tree canopies.
Barry, you are speaking my language. The exact same thing is happening in Maplewood. We are losing all of our mature trees to street and sewer projects. Let’s all mourn the loss of all the Sycamores around the region. What gorgeous trees that are being taken down by the dozens and not replaced. For those of you who think this is petty news, next time you are driving down Delmar near Big Bend in the winter, look up at those sycamores. Preferably you should do this on a sunny day. Those white branches are majestic. In addition to all the practical uses for a tree, they provide aesthetic beauty, which in turn raises our property values.
Plus I have to pick on these small trees for a minute. If not pruned properly, red buds are not pretty trees, except for a few weeks when they bloom in the spring. Give me a “nuisance” tree like a sweet gum or a sycamore any day over a red bud. Not to mention, the city of Maplewood keeps on citing safety as a reason to take down mature trees. In a storm, supposedly they might fall down and kill someone. I’m sure we’ve all seen what can happen to a perfectly healthy Bradford pear during a storm
Basically the cities want us to walk our neighborhoods in the summer in the full sun. This move to only plant small trees will result in more wear and tear on our streets (the sun is brutal on concrete long term), higher air conditioning bills, and an overall adverse effect on our daily lives. This is why we are complaining.
I think we need a committee, made up of residents in Brentwood, that overlooks the removal of trees in our community. Kind of like ARB, where the removal of any tree has to be approved by this committee.
Good idea. Since these are public trees that belong to all of Brentwood’s residents, why not have a citizens review board to rule on tree removals? As I understand it, the decision to remove our trees is presently made by a couple of guys in public works who don’t even live in Brentwood.
This type of citizens committee on trees has been done in nearby municipalities more for limiting developers from clear cutting a residential lot while doing a tear-down, in-fill build. The citizens seem to love it, the builders not so much. I was under the impression that the strip of earth between the street and sidewalk was not private property it’s an easement for the road and subject to whatever maintenance or other changes the city deems necessary.
I can see why the sweet gum was taken down, look at the terrible condition of the sidewalk. Thats a lawsuit waiting to happen. The area around the oak looks perfectly fine.
Although the trees’ roots did lift some sidewalk panels to some extent, the reason for the broken concrete you see in these photos is this: According to residents who witnessed the operation, Brentwood Public Works employees dropped the trees’ heavy limbs and sections of trunk onto the sidewalks, thus fracturing and cratering them. They also dropped them onto the front lawns of 2312 and 2318 High School, damaging them, too. The witnesses described the scene as an “Amateur Hour,” with the employees casually directing traffic through the work zone without safety vests, and with motorists and falling limbs having some close calls. City Manager Bola Akande explains the reason the trees were destroyed was to provide new, level sidewalks offering safer passage for pedestrians. Ironically, these sidewalks were damaged so badly by Public Works employees that they now pose a much greater risk to pedestrians, and the City doesn’t expect to replace the walks for “weeks” — weather permitting. And the City didn’t even place traffic cones, signs, or police tape at the site to warn pedestrians of the tripping hazards its own employees created. This is a city that’s committed to pedestrian safety?
Comments are closed.