Jennifer Gamble 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?

Protecting and expanding the existing canopy should be of utmost importance to Metro Government. As former Mayor Barry wrote in her Executive Order to protect trees on city-owned property, “the urban canopy is a public utility that improves air quality, manages stormwater, supports public health, provides economic benefits, and increases quality of life.” Both the Fort Negley clear-cutting and the NFL cherry tree incidents demonstrate the need for better communication, transparency and collaboration between the departments that manage trees, the Mayor’s office and the Metro Council to ensure better protection of the existing canopy. To address this, we need dedicated staff in the Metro Planning Department to manage and coordinate the job of protecting the tree canopy. The Planning Dept is the central office for community planning and development throughout the city, and the maintenance of our tree canopy should be a part of the planning process.

In addition, dedicated staff in the Planning Dept. should work with the Metro Tree Advisory Committee, which assist in educating the community and agencies of the Metropolitan Government regarding the value of trees and proper techniques for the planting, maintenance, and removal of trees. Planning and MTAC should work together in the development and recommendation of plans for maintaining, protecting, and growing the tree canopy in the city. Lastly, those plans should be shared with Metro Council members and respective communities within their districts to allow for public notice, communication and debate regarding the canopy plans.

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?

I support BL2018-1416 and I believe the Substitute bill goes even further in addressing tree protections particularly for single-family residential. There are areas in District 3 with zoning and land use policies for single-family housing residential that are categorized as tree deserts. These communities deserve the environmental, health, and economic benefits that come with increased tree density. This highlights a great way that Metro Council can and should harness its authority in zoning law to strengthen our urban canopy.   

Furthermore, I think the bill should go further in its regulations regarding the removal of trees. Public notice should be issued for the removal of any trees that fit the “protected tree” categorization as outlined in the bill to help avoid situations where the public is not informed and therefore unable to provide input before plans are made to remove trees such as in the NFL Cherry tree removal incident.

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, trees are considered to be a public utility so their removal impacts the entire community, not just the landowner. If a tree is not dead and doesn’t cause a hazard, its removal should be offset by a repayment and replacement program. 

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?

I believe that the Trees Atlanta program model is a great model for Nashville to follow as it relates to the protection and enforcement of Nashville’s tree code. Nashville has a long history of public/private cooperation efforts that leverages the support of private activists with the resources and power of the Metro Government. TREES ATLANTA’s program increases public buy-in to the urban canopy development by training neighborhood groups how to build up their own trees. By increasing neighborhoods’ responsibility for and awareness of their own portions of the canopy, we would ensure communities remain vigilant for any efforts to harm the canopy. In addition, by facilitating funding for canopy development in the ways that TREES ATLANTA does, we would help build up the canopy equitably, so that less cash-rich neighborhoods enjoy the same benefits of a dense canopy that richer neighborhoods do.

Lastly, by utilizing employees dedicated to the preservation of the canopy as on-site inspectors, we would increase both public buy-in and private accountability. Organized opposition to the NFL cherry tree removal shows that many residents care about the tree canopy; we should elevate them and support their service to this city through such a program.

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?

One way to encourage developers to keep mature trees in their design plans is to improve public education about the benefits trees to the community, such as how trees mitigate stormwater runoff and flooding.  Furthermore, increased public education on the benefits of trees would increase public pressure on commercial developers to save more trees. For example, as some communities have become more educated about the benefits of trees, saving trees has become a motivator for developers looking to gain favor with residents in established neighborhoods that are typically skeptical about new development. Root Nashville is a good example of a program that incentivizes developers to include tree planting and maintenance in their development plans for the benefit of the community.

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?

We absolutely need a fully-funded and sufficiently staff office to oversee the urban canopy. Additionally, Metro should continue to support groups like the Metro Tree Advisory Committee and programs like Root Nashville to build up the urban canopy, particularly in areas like those in my district that are considered tree deserts. Metro’s current tree density standard is far lower than surrounding areas and the national standard, which does not reflect the needs of our growing city. I am currently working to win grants for my district to help plant more trees in the area, and as the Metro Beautification and Environment Commissioner for District 3, I coordinate neighborhood clean-ups and educate the community about recycling and conservation. I have seen firsthand the need for greater collaboration between Metro Government and the public on improving the urban canopy, and I will seek to strengthen these connections as a councilmember.

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?  

As a Council member, I will work to bridge divisions between the community and builders by being transparent and communicating with neighbors regularly to ensure that they receive more timely notice of projects as they arise, and by having well-publicized community meetings to allow as many constituents as possible the opportunity to discuss and make informed decisions about how proposed projects will impact neighborhoods in the district. I believe that it is easier to work together when there is transparency and engagement from both parties on the front end.

            Metro government will have to establish better relationships with state legislatures in order to develop an open line of communication and build allies in state government, to avoid the risk of State pre-emption of any ordinances that the Metro initiates.