Art Allen Speaks for the Trees…

QUESTION #1

The Fort Negley clear-cutting and the NFL cherry-tree incidents illustrated something obvious: When it comes to the urban canopy, there is a breakdown of communication between the segments of Metro Government responsible for trees. The problem is that trees fall under the jurisdiction of many different departments (codes, stormwater, electrical, parks). What internal operational changes need to be made to better protect the existing canopy?

Fort Negley and the cherry trees were a clear indication that Metro does what it wants and begs for forgiveness later. This is not right. Both incidents were related to high profile developments and should have had far more public input. In terms of the multiple departments involved, it is time to streamline that process and put it under one roof. Clear, concise and effective communication will avoid potential conflicts.

QUESTION #2

Do you support the city’s first tree bill in over a decade (BL2018-1416) in its current form? If not, what changes do you want to see? Or should it be stronger and broader in scope? BL1416 impacts only commercial and multi-family land use types. Do you support enacting tree laws for single-family residential?

Nashville development has clear cut many trees and vegetation. Some developments certainly have not acted in good faith, and others have. I am concerned with removing a large tree and planting a new one, often an inferior tree that may or may not live a year or two. There are variables with soil and water that are unique to each development. I support the bill as it helps protect our trees but also don’t think it does enough and should be expanded. I would like to have more input and understanding on ways it can be strengthened from advocates.

QUESTION #3

Atlanta, Charlotte and Austin all have laws protecting a class of trees they consider to be “heritage trees; property owners must get approval for cutting them down and pay into a tree bank to offset the loss of a large trees in their communities. We feel this sets a tone that makes people more aware and respectful of the urban tree canopy. Do you approve of such legislation?

Yes. I would like more info on if a homeowner has to pay if the tree is dead/dying.

QUESTION #4

TREES ATLANTA is considered by many to be the model for a public/private cooperative that works to protect urban tree canopy. TREES ATLANTA employees even help the city as on-site inspectors who follow up to make sure developers have complied with tree ordinances. What do you think of this model, or what would you do to strengthen the implementation and enforcement of Nashville’s tree code?

If experts agree it is a solid model and has success then Nashville should absolutely consider the program and implement it here.

QUESTION #5

How could we entice private property owners not to cut down mature trees? How can we encourage developers/builders to keep mature trees in the designing of the home and lot?

I respect homeowners and their rights to their land, and want positive engagement and teamwork to ensure trees remain a part of our environment. They add immense pleasure and countless environmental aspects that are vital to our neighborhood, city, state, country and world. Nashville has seen a boom in putting multiple homes on single lots, which often maximized their profits. This practice led to the removal of untold amounts of trees, and they were often replaced with cheap and inferior options. In some areas it looks like a tornado came in and removed all of the trees, I know what this looks like as I lived through tornadoes in college. It is unsightly and the consequences are undeniable. Developers need to play a positive part in our environment. I think requiring a tree and landscaping bond on new developments would be a way to ensure the replacement options planted by developers are sustainable and not the cheapest option available to them.

QUESTION #6

Metro Nashville has just 3 employees to oversee all of Davidson County trees, while other peer cities with less tree canopy coverage have 15 to 20 employees on staff for trees. As a result, the Nashville Tree Conservation Corps has cataloged countless incidents where developers eluded complying with tree codes, the city has hundreds of hazardous trees that need to be replaced, and staff have trouble keeping up with just their everyday responsibilities. Do you support spending the money to bring us up to a par with our peer cities? If not, how will you fix this issue?

Yes I support adding resources and staff to ensure our tree canopy is protected. Some of this can be paid for by development fees.

BONUS QUESTION FOR COUNCIL CANDIDATES

QUESTION #7

How will you work to bridge the divisions we often experience when talking about advancing tree legislation in Nashville between the community-builder dynamic? How can we advance Nashville’s livability standards while avoiding the risk of State preemption?  

It is no secret that many developers are from out of town or out of state. Not all act in bad faith. Stronger protections for our neighborhoods and development will only enhance our community. The notion that every large tree must remain is unobtainable. It is frustrating the State keeps stepping into local matters, often with input of people who don’t live in our area code or time zone. This practice must stop, their hometowns wouldn’t want Nashville telling them what to do. Collaborative teamwork should be the process that drives this mission home.