Elise Hudson 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?

Nashville needs a formal Urban Forestry Department which will be responsible for tree education, enforcement of laws, and serve in an advisory role to other groups in Nashville on issues regarding trees and landscaping. That department would then evaluate how best to communicate across all city organizations for tree-related issues. It will take time to build such a department and implement processes city-wide so we can update tree codes, set inspections of existing tree and landscape provisions, work with NES and public works on tree maintenance regulations, and work with the community to develop ongoing programs and education. Nashville’s current approved budget is not strong enough to support the needs of this growing city. In the future, I hope we are able to re-evaluate our spending and revenue in a comprehensive way that would include urban forestry. The reason I think we can prioritize this is because increasing our tree canopy can address so many issues regarding the environment, quality of life, stormwater (trees absorb water and mitigate flooding), reduce home heating and cooling costs by providing thermal protection, reduce health costs (both physical and mental health is higher in areas with many trees), calming traffic in neighborhoods (if placed properly), and adding value to our properties. Trees can be a creative solution for myriad problems in Nashville.

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?

Yes, and I spoke in favor of it at the Metro Planning Commission hearing on 6/13. I believe I was the only council candidate (not currently in office) who came to the hearing and spoke in favor. The bill is amazing, and I commend the authors on how much work it took to get it together, but it is just the first step in preserving our amazing tree canopy in Davidson County. We have to expand the same protections to single-family residential subdivisions and individual lots and increase education about trees in Nashville.

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 believe such legislation would make a difference for tree protection in Nashville. And it must be approved with the appropriate budget and oversight to enforce such laws.

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?

The Trees Atlanta model works to have 50% tree canopy in their city. I believe Nashville should work towards that goal as well. Nashville needs standards such as identifying “high value” trees and involving our arborists early in a planning/zoning process. When we get these standards implemented, they must have tangible incentives to abide by the laws we create. If the punishments for breaking the law are not severe enough, there is no reason for developers and land owners to abide by it.

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?

People in Nashville already have a special affection for trees. My friends and I still bemoan the loss of dozens of humongous magnolias from the Opryland theme park. We can take that existing passion and dedication to our city’s trees and expand education programs to show how people and families can get involved.  With a stronger education program on the benefits of trees and how trees can help increase property values, reduce home heating and cooling costs, and provide traffic calming effects in neighborhoods, perhaps families can demand more out of their builders. We can identify more award winning tree programs like the Nashville Tree Foundation’s “Big Old Tree” contest. We could begin to include highlighting property owners who are working to preserve trees in creative and meaningful ways so that the culture of saving trees is something that everyone wants to be a part of. It will take slow and steady education and shifts in mindset, but I believe we can make it work.

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, if we are going to prioritize trees in Nashville, we will have to ensure enforcement. See my answer to Question #1. I believe the long term cost/benefit analysis of creating an Urban Forestry department as part of a larger budget and revenue overhaul would show that preserving and building tree canopies now will save Nashville money in the decades to come.

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?  

Incremental change that inches us towards our goals may be a great place to start. We need more bills like BL2018-1416 that codify our value of trees in Nashville. We need to acknowledge honestly the constraints that developers have in saving trees when creating subdivisions and work to limit unintended consequences from any future legislation. Perhaps we could begin with amendments to add tree density to ordinances like the Cluster Lot option which allows developers to gain more density in exchange for saving open space. Or adapt our language around Special Plan (SP) zoning to require more landscaping and tree canopy in residential developments. Tree canopy preservation should certainly be a key part of any upcoming Nashville Next review sessions. We should also find ways to benefit developers who do tree preservation well – so that there is an incentive to protect trees in place of a punishment for not preserving them. Of course, education and cultural perception of tree preservation and restoration can also move us towards this goal as well. It will not be quick, nor will it be easy, but I believe that we can make a difference for the future of trees in Nashville.