Quote:
Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker
Lots of factors - the main one is it's cheaper to clear cut, flatten the bedrock, lair a couple of inches of gravel, and throw down sod. And we do whatever's cheapest, for everything. However, we used to require developers to plant trees - and all areas of the city built during that time, at all elevations and classes, have decently-sized trees.
For example:
They're still much smaller here than the same species would be anywhere else. The landscape is bare bedrock or peat bogs at higher elevations, and then a thin layer of soil along the river valleys. The places where these houses are used to look like one of these three pictures:
Bare bedrock with thin, poor soil:
Peat bog:
Thin soil in valleys:
And then it's just preferences. Middle-aged people here, my parents included, think trees in the front is a lower-class or bush living thing. If they bought a house with a tree out front that was higher than the living room window, they'd certainly have it removed. |
Much of the areas around the city that were developed in the 50s and 60s were previously farmland, so were not all bedrock and peat. In the sixties, the city had a joint effort with property owners to plant trees at the front of the property when the areas were developed, and most of these streets look half decent now, while many older ones and certainly newer ones look terrible.
Regarding Nflders dislike of trees, that has been changing, but how do your parents explain older areas and streets like Pine Bud Avenue, and Waterford Bridge Road, etc., where the most upscale properties are, and are quite full of trees?
https://goo.gl/maps/Fkw37oywbPL2
https://goo.gl/maps/UAzXu2MyxiS2