Descripción
On May 10, 2013 the large oak tree in front of 297-301 Howard Ave. was posted for removal. (Last year I had requested that it be trimmed of branches damaged when 305 was destroyed in a gas explosion.) I called the Parks Dept. number listed on the posting for info. and was told someone would call back. But they never did. So, because there is a 10-day deadline to object to a posted tree’s removal, I faxed and emailed the following:
To:
Christy Haas, Tree Warden
New Haven Dept. of Parks Recreation & Trees 180 Park Rd. Hamden, CT 06517 fax: 203-946-6556
Concerning the oak tree at 297-301 Howard Ave. that was posted for removal on May 10, 2013, I am hereby objecting to its removal and appealing the decision to remove this tree.
In accordance with Chap. 451 Sec. 23-59 of Ct. Gen. Statutes, I request that you hold a public hearing concerning said tree—and that I be notified of the time and place of such hearing.
Christopher Schaefer [my address and contact info was included here]
9 Comentars
Christopher Schaefer 4 Congress.Com (Usuario registrado)
Christopher Schaefer 4 Congress.Com (Usuario registrado)
BJG (Usuario registrado)
Christopher Schaefer 4 Congress.Com (Usuario registrado)
BJG (Usuario registrado)
LOL As a fellow tree hugger, I acknowledge your frustration and anger. Some trees are sad and dying, and there is nothing anyone can do about them. For instance, I reported a tree on Goffe St that was literally showing its insides. I cannot imagine anyone objecting to the removal of such a tree, sad as I am that it is one of NH's oldest, it must come down. Other trees are diseased. One in particular to which I objected showed no outward signs of disease to my naked eye, but the arborist insisted that it was diseased, and that allowing it to remain would have simply further spread the disease to other trees. You have a better chance of your objections being taken seriously if the tree is in front of your home, than if it is a tree on city property.
If UI is involved, they bring handouts and a slide show and they discuss when and why they remove, vs trim. They also have zoomed, enlarged photos of the trees showing why they need to be removed. Everyone discusses, and objectors get to ask questions and provide further objections if they are not satisfied.
After the hearings, and any tests that may be done on the trees (for disease, etc), Christy will email everyone her final decisions.
I wasn't thrilled with the decisions, but I do feel that Christy takes this all seriously, and has had no choice, since our recent climate changes and increase in storms. She has to attempt to achieve a balance, considering risks involved, since so many trees have fallen and caused damage.
CFPA has it right with their "right tree for the location," and unfortunately, since we do have so many old trees in New Haven, some of them are coming down now due to previously unforeseen circumstances. 50, 60, 70 years ago, who was thinking so much about power lines and cables and trees reaching 60 feet?
I hate to say that it all seems fruitless, but I feel that your skeptical take is justified, to a degree. That doesn't mean you shouldn't object and attend hearings. All tree huggers should remain invested and become actively involved. Christy WANTS PEOPLE TO SHOW UP AT THE HEARINGS. Don't just object and then ignore the hearing. Parks & Trees needs to know how residents feel about these issues, and if we can save a tree, even if for just a few more years, then it's worth it.
Trees removed from city property will automatically be replaced. Unfortunately, most residents are not tree huggers, and as such, URI no longer automatically replaces every tree in front of someone's house, unless they specifically request one, as people were actually - get this - sabotaging the new trees!! Sick.
Christopher Schaefer 4 Congress.Com (Usuario registrado)
BJG (Usuario registrado)
Cerrado Christopher Schaefer 4 Congress.Com (Usuario registrado)
Parks Department: Data Entry (Oficial verificado)