Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

btoy

Greenville's trees are dying

Recommended Posts

Here is an article from this morning's Greenville News. It is about the fact that the roots of the trees on mainstreet are impacted and that the trees are starting to die and are going to need to be replaced. What a shame. says the maples have about 3 years life left and the oaks 10.

The article itself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


That is unfortunate. At least they have recognixed the problem before it gets out of hand. The plan to replace the trees gradually is the best solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an article from this morning's Greenville News. It is about the fact that the roots of the trees on mainstreet are impacted and that the trees are starting to die and are going to need to be replaced. What a shame. says the maples have about 3 years life left and the oaks 10.

The article itself

Actually, I remember Main St. in the '50's, and in my opinion, looked better without trees. The trees obscure the more interesting architectural elements, and are not relly needed much for shade. IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I remember Main St. in the '50's, and in my opinion, looked better without trees. The trees obscure the more interesting architectural elements, and are not relly needed much for shade. IMHO.

Not needed for shade? :blink: Perhaps you should walk downtown dressed up in the summer where there aren't trees. It's hot and uncomfortable. Like infront of the city hall and the Westin or on just about any side street. I love walking downtown to get places, but you can count me out if there were no trees. For example: Charleston. I love it, but King Street is not much fun when sun is beating down on you and the heat is rising from the black asphalt. :sick:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I remember Main St. in the '50's, and in my opinion, looked better without trees. The trees obscure the more interesting architectural elements, and are not relly needed much for shade. IMHO.

Ok, weirdo. Thats a first for me hearing that somebody was against having trees on Main Street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I remember Main St. in the '50's, and in my opinion, looked better without trees. The trees obscure the more interesting architectural elements, and are not relly needed much for shade. IMHO.

I have to agree with GvilleSC. I'd hate to walk down Main Street between College Street and City Hall without those trees there during the summertime. The trees make it a pleasant experience. Without them, I'd just as soon go elsewhere. The interesting architectural elements of some of the buildings are accentuated by the trees, IMHO. :D

If only the trees completely obscured the, er, uh, "interesting" architecture of the City Tavern and Sharkey's Pub. :sick:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, weirdo. Thats a first for me hearing that somebody was against having trees on Main Street.

:rofl: 'chuckle' Fortunately, I have a thick skin. The 'weirdos' in Charleston have purposely left out trees on King St. and elsewhere for precisely the same reason. One of the contributing reasons why Charleston peninsula homes are routinely valued at well over $1mm is the careful preservation and showcasing of their great architecture.. But, I don't like to swelter either. In the old days, colored canvas awnings were common, and provided shade, and looked good too. The first time I saw the trees on Main St. they were way too bushy, perhaps trimming would help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think awnings look cheap and dated (at least, if places like Tassey's Tavern are representative).

I like the trees downtown. They give the city character (not to mention shade). I hope they can save/replant without messing up the ambiance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think awnings look cheap and dated (at least, if places like Tassey's Tavern are representative).

I like the trees downtown. They give the city character (not to mention shade). I hope they can save/replant without messing up the ambiance.

I agree Greenville. Although the trees make for some difficult photography of storefronts. I guess I'll live with that. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to WYFF, the tree replacement is scheduled occur in two phases, beginning the week of February 2. I'm not sure what "restoration" means in regard to the oaks, but I do like the sound of the last portion of this excerpt:

The second phase will include restoration of several oak trees on South and North Main Street, with some closures and removal of some sections of sidewalk.

City officials said that the goal of the project is to maintain the tree canopy and surrounding landscape and to preserve the aesthetics of Main Street for years to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what the City of Greenville's News Release says:

CITY TO BEGIN TREE REPLACEMENT AND PRESERVATION ON MAIN STREET

Project designed to maintain downtown tree canopy and enhance urban landscape

GREENVILLE (SC) The City of Greenville Parks and Recreation Department will begin a two-month tree replacement and preservation project on Main Street the week of February 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lately I have noticed that 385 and downtown along College St. have young Live Oaks planted .

This is a huge mistake as these tress need major room to thrive.

Within about 10-15 years the trees roots will have broken through sidewalks and through the raised concrete birms on 385 and the limbs will cause problems during ice storms.

I love Live Oaks and have a couple in my front yard but they are about 50 feet from the nearest concrete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lately I have noticed that 385 and downtown along College St. have young Live Oaks planted .

This is a huge mistake as these tress need major room to thrive.

Within about 10-15 years the trees roots will have broken through sidewalks and through the raised concrete birms on 385 and the limbs will cause problems during ice storms.

I love Live Oaks and have a couple in my front yard but they are about 50 feet from the nearest concrete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:rofl: 'chuckle' Fortunately, I have a thick skin. The 'weirdos' in Charleston have purposely left out trees on King St. and elsewhere for precisely the same reason. One of the contributing reasons why Charleston peninsula homes are routinely valued at well over $1mm is the careful preservation and showcasing of their great architecture.. But, I don't like to swelter either. In the old days, colored canvas awnings were common, and provided shade, and looked good too. The first time I saw the trees on Main St. they were way too bushy, perhaps trimming would help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that trees do look good on streets, but they need to be small trees. Raleigh's Fayetteville Street Mall, for example, had a dense tree canopy that made the place dark and scary. Some people were worried about how it would look without the trees, but when they cut down the big trees and replaced them with small ones, the vista down the street was unbelievable. So, replacing large, mature trees downtown doesn't have to be a bad thing. Cities are supposed to be cities, not forests, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. :blink: That's the first time i've ever heard anybody say a street should have small trees instead of big ones. If the City of Greenville were to tear down the trees along Main Street and not replace them, there would be so many complaints and lawsuits it would make your head spin. The trees on Main Street in downtown Greenville has gotten the attention of many other cities due to it being successful. It has also gotten Greenville many awards like the 2003 Great American Main Street Award.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who has seen Main Street before and after the trees I vote for large trees.

Main Street was a hot uncomfortable place in the summer when it was all asphalt, concrete, and brick. Not only does the canopy block direct sunlight but it absorbs a lot of reflected energy too. And in the winter even the bare trunks and limbs are enough to disrupt the wind and take a few degrees off the wind chill factor.

Small trees may work OK from a purely aesthetic viewpoint by providing a natural contrast with the man-made world but not so well for climate modification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that trees do look good on streets, but they need to be small trees. Raleigh's Fayetteville Street Mall, for example, had a dense tree canopy that made the place dark and scary. Some people were worried about how it would look without the trees, but when they cut down the big trees and replaced them with small ones, the vista down the street was unbelievable. So, replacing large, mature trees downtown doesn't have to be a bad thing. Cities are supposed to be cities, not forests, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.