Re:If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity
by CaliforniaKarl on Saturday July 29, 2023 @06:59PM
(#36925696)
Closer to where I work, over the four-year period ending one year ago, we had one tree per year fall during the Winter season. The period ended when the campus arborist did a detailed check of all the trees in the immediate area, and a number were removed.
In the wider area, this part Winter had multiple trees fall. Not tree limbs, entire trees. One came down in front of a minivan carrying a local bus driver & his supervisor. I've got pictures.
I'm a pedestrian: I own neither a car nor a bike. But I understand why some trees are removed. I don't think the trees here are not watered deeply enough, so they don't have a deep hold on the ground.
Re:If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity
by Guvante on Sunday July 30, 2023 @12:51AM
(#36927917)
I don't mean never remove trees.
I mean that we removed healthy trees in the name of safety.
Certainly verifying the health of trees and removing those that aren't healthy is a good thing.
My point is removing all trees within X distance on a non-highway was common practice.
Certainly clearing for highways is good as well.
No shot those reasons would justify millions in tree removal fees.
However the huge budgets for roads could do it trivially.
You underestimate the impact of measuring fatalities as the only way of verifying success of transportation policy...
Certainly if other benefits were weighed properly it might not happen but if you ignore the upsides... (certainly we historically ignored shade for pedestrians).