Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My neighborhood was built in the 1960s and it must of been a more environmentally aware time because they saved about half of the large trees in our community during development. Now 40 years later the neighborhood is very wooded with a combination of the saved trees which has grown even higher and planted landscaping trees. Other neighborhoods were not so lucky in recent years because they clear-cut an entire forest and now the homes bake in the sun using lots of extra energy for air conditioning to make the global warming even worse.
Developers for whatever reason seem to hate the idea of preserving mature trees in a new neighborhood these days. There is a tree ordinance in my county that requires that 20% of the existing trees in a development be preserved. What a joke...the developers simply responded by clear-cutting to the edge of the property and leaving the trees there.
Ummm, trees can grow pretty big in 40 years time. I'd bet you anything your neighborhood was a clear cut eyesore when it was built in the 60's! The brand new neighborhood I'm in did save a quite a few mature trees. However, one of the problems with saving mature trees from a heavily forested area in a new development is that the trees are almost always very tall and spindly. Trees in a forested environment spend their growth going up and not out so they wind up being more or less useless for shade or aesthetics and they're considerably less healthy to boot. It's actually better from the standpoint you're trying to make to bulldoze them all and replant with some decent size nursery trees. They'll develop into adequate shade more quickly and be healthier in the long run.
Ummm, trees can grow pretty big in 40 years time. I'd bet you anything your neighborhood was a clear cut eyesore when it was built in the 60's!
Yep. My area was built in 1952 and I suspect it was clear cut. But clearly many new residents (at the time) planted trees that now it looks as if it never was clear cut.
Still, I think developers could do a better job. Check out Charles Goodman's designs as an example of someone who purposely left lots of trees.
Yep. My area was built in 1952 and I suspect it was clear cut. But clearly many new residents (at the time) planted trees that now it looks as if it never was clear cut.
Still, I think developers could do a better job. Check out Charles Goodman's designs as an example of someone who purposely left lots of trees.
Oh I definitely agree they could do a better job! Many of the trees that were saved in the neighborhood I'm in right now are 40-50ft tall with boles way too small to support to their weight should they ever develop out into a shape that will serve purposes of shading the home. The developers would do wonders if they would select smaller trees to retain. At least in this neighborhood, they retained trees throughout and not just at the edges.
I HATE it when they build a new subdivision and all the trees are cut down! I really do! My neighborhood was build in the 40's and we have some GRAND trees. I was told that most of our oaks were over 75 years old. The neighborhood was named Bonnemeade, pretty meadow These babies are so big we all get a touch fidigity when the winds come up. Too bad the one in my front yard has those pointy skinny leaves that make a mess in the fall
Charlotte requires that developes leave 10% of the trees. I like the developers in other areas who clearcut the trees and then build "environmentally-friendly" housing.
My subdivision was built in the mid 80s, and the developer left all the oaks, and some of the pines. Bigger lots too. I think land was cheap then, and Jax had some sort of moritorium on cutting down trees whose girths were larger than some number of inches (I still think they have that law, but developers can get around it easily). It certainly does make the subdivisions more attractive to have the nice big oaks.
I live in Santa Clarita where Oak trees thrive. They are protected here so developers are not allowed to cut them down... they can move them but that's rarely done (it can kill the trees). Homeowners who have these trees in their yard aren't allowed to even trim them w/o a permit and they can only trim them a certain way. Even when they are allowed to be moved, tree huggers come and live in the trees to protect them... it's great.
I had a next door neighbor where I used to live who cut down their 30-40 foot tree by more than half. That tree was beautiful. When they were done... it was only 10 feet tall and looked pathetic. I admit, I never had any desire after that to be nice to them... I'd look at what was left of the tree then look at them... and shake my head walking away... bozos.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
These babies are so big we all get a touch fidigity when the winds come up. Too bad the one in my front yard has those pointy skinny leaves that make a mess in the fall 
and looked pathetic. I admit, I never had any desire after that to be nice to them... I'd look at what was left of the tree then look at them... and shake my head walking away... bozos.
