| [Date Prev] | [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] |
| [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Author Index] | [Subject Index] |
I was raised in the Los Angeles area. After being aesthetically tortured by endless concrete and asphalt for many years I moved to Idaho in the 1970's, looking for a cleaner, more relaxed place to live.
Before I left, even Los Angelenos were becoming tired of a the rat raced and paved world and were making efforts to landscape roadways that had been cleared of trees and shrubs a few years earlier in the name of commerce.
True to it's image, in it's efforts to improve local aesthetics, Los Angelenos planted plastic trees along the freeway system. Plastic trees conserve water and save money on upkeep. Makes sense. Amusingly enough, the plastic trees collected the residue of air pollution which deteriorated the plastic and looked filthy. Eventually a sprinkler system was installed to clean the grit off of the plastic trees on a daily basis. The plastic trees grew more ragged, faded and gritty with each passing day, despite this daily and sometimes twice daily watering. Bummer. Eventually the Los Angelenos began to realize that plastic trees were a ludicrous solution. Plastic does not produce as cool a shade, does not produce oxygen nor does it particularly reduce stress. Birds don't seem to care much for plastic trees either.
The Los Angelenos discussed and disagreed. Some believed that because millions of dollars had been invested in these trees, they should remain. Others believed the concrete should cover the entire road strip to simplify matters. After much discussion, the Los Angelenos pulled the plastic and re-planted with real trees which required less water and upkeep in the long run.
Thereafter, several communities reviewed their policies on landscaping roadways. Landscaping new developments became requirements in these communities.
Some communities went without cable television for many years because they found telephone poles to be a blight on the land similar to plastic trees. They required all wiring to be underground. Cable companies initially refused to pay to bury cables. After decades of waiting for new community policies, the cable companies finally gave in and buried cable just like everyone else in these communities who wanted a clear sky and green calm streets.
Large malls were torn down, and in their places, small park areas next to small and quiet shopping areas took their places. Families began to shop in these places because it was far away from smelly, noisy, traffic. They realized it was safer to buffer fragile people on a shopping spree from careless automobiles, buses, trucks and other large vehicles with attractive landscaping and noise barriers.
Other communities continued to pave and dig up greenery in the name of commerce. In those communities, Los Angelenos pushed to build bigger and more shocking signs to attract business from passing motorists. Passing motorists on the other hand were experiencing sensory overload and began to rage at one another and to shoot passersby when motorists slowed to view the nearly naked lady billboards.
In the end, can you guess which communities have higher rates of road rage and crime? Which communities have higher home values?
Cheers,
Jennifer
Linda Pall wrote:
Dear Visionaries, I thought you might be interested in attending the meeting Dr. Jim Fazio talks about in this message he sent me. I, too, am very concerned that the lovely strip that frames our community's western entrance may be, literally, heading for the chopping block. The conifers do not appear to interfere with the utility lines and the ability to see the mall is quite unimpaired, indeed enhanced, by the roadside landscaping. What do you think? Try to attend the meeting and keep up on this important decision as it is addressed by city government. I'll do my best to keep you informed. All the best,Linda PallMoscow City Council Dr. Fazio mailto:jfazio@uidaho.edu writes: It is so beautiful outside that I hate to be the bearer of some
dismal news. However, I think that everyone who cares about
Moscow's trees and the appearance of our community needs to be
alerted to something unpleasant that is about to happen. And - your
help is needed to prevent it!At a meeting next Wednesday evening at 7:30 in city council
chambers, representatives of the Palouse Mall management have asked
to present a proposal to a joint meeting of the Moscow Tree Committee
and the Planning & Zoning Commission. The mall wishes to remove the
coniferous screening that currently creates a visual separation between
the mall parking lot and Pullman Highway. Their original plan that was
presented to the University of Idaho (owners of the property) was
absolutely outrageous. The goal was to remove all conifers and prune
other limbs to 8 feet so there would be "a horizontal window" the entire
length of the mall property! Fortunately, UI grounds people and auxiliary
property managers suggested that this would be too drastic. However,
the revised plan, which we viewed yesterday in a Tree Committee
meeting, is almost as bad. It proposes the removal of virtually all the
conifers, and opening "vertical windows" at various points along the
current landscape strip. Elimination of conifers, of course, means that
especially in winter (including the Christmas season when stores make
their most money), the view is wide open! Here are some other details
and my opinions about them:Themall will counter objections by pointing out that they also plan
a renovation of the parking area, including planting trees there. The
net effect would be an increase in the total number of trees.
(Landscaping the parking lot is fine, and probably has something to
do with another part of their plan - to eventually add more buildings
in parts of the parking lot! Anyway, they would be wise to add
trees, since research shows that shoppers prefer commercial districts
with trees. However, their main objective remains the same: to make
the mall more visible from Pullman Highway, which means doing
away with conifers and pruning lower limbs of all trees.)Themall wants to take over care of the landscaping. (This may seem
generous, but it also opens the way to abuse of the vegetation. It is
difficult to correct over-pruning or "accidental" trunk damage that
kills an unwanted tree. This function should remain the
responsibility of UI's Facilities Management).Theplan calls for leveling the strip of ground between the highway
and the trees, planting grass, and adding irrigation. (True, this may
look nice, but the irrigation will be from city wells and one more
waste of a limited resource. The current rustic appearance of
maturing vegetation, perhaps combined with a little better attention
to weed and litter control, is not only more aesthetic, it is more
environmentally responsible.)Themall will cite crime prevention as a reason for thinning out the
vegetation and destroying the pines and other conifers. (This is a
bogus argument. I doubt if records would show many thugs
jumping out of the existing landscaping. On the contrary, I think
police records would show various incidents over the years right in
the parking lot and close to and/or inside the mall itself.)Themall will also cite visual obstruction to cars entering the
highway. (One of our committee members checked the most
stringent standards and found that there is virtually no problem with
this at the present time. In a few places where a standard might be
slightly compromised, some very light pruning would bring it into
compliance.)Therehas been literally no public notice about these intentions.
The mall management has asked that approvals be put on a "fast
track" so that work can begin immediately and be finished before the
students return. (An action that impacts our community as much as
this one will if carried to the extremes desired by the mall
management is too important to shield from public scrutiny and
public comment. It does a disservice to the citizens of Moscow and
makes it much too easy for the supporters of the plan.)One member of our committee commented, "This seems like a
choice between having our primary commercial district look like one of
the better areas of Portland vs. having it look like Spokane's East
Sprague St." While that may be a little bit of an exaggeration, there is
definitely a clash of interests here between the commercial establishment
that looks with envy at University Inn's wide open frontage (which they
obtained several years ago over the objections of the Tree Committee
and by an approving vote of city council by a margin of one) and the
best interests of a community that values its semi-rural, aesthetic values.
The current landscaping would be a planner's dream in some of the more
progressive areas of the country. I urge you to speak up to help keep it
that way.What can you do? Direct comments to the people who will
have the final decision authority. One is the president of the university.
The mall is leased property and UI has the final say on alterations such
as are being requested. Apparently the university personnel involved to
this point have been quite divided on whether or not to support the
proposal. President Hoover could have a major say regarding the final
position taken by the UI. The other key players will be city council and
the mayor. You know the process there, in that they can support or
override the recommendations of the Tree Committee and P&Z (removing
the trees, for example, requires an exception to the city's tree ordinance).
You can also help bring this issue to the attention of a wider audience. I
have not had any luck to date in interesting either of our two major
newspapers, but perhaps you know a way to interest the media. Finally,
you can attend the meeting Wednesday evening, even though the public
has not been invited.Thanks for whatever help you can provide in keeping one of the
nicer-looking approaches to our city from being compromised.Jim Fazio
Dr. James R. Fazio
College of Forestry, Wildlife & Range Sciences
Dept. of Resource Recreation & Tourism
University of Idaho
Moscow, ID 83844
Linda Pall wrote:
Dear Visionaries, I thought you might be interested in attending the meeting Dr. Jim Fazio talks about in this message he sent me. I, too, am very concerned that the lovely strip that frames our community's western entrance may be, literally, heading for the chopping block. The conifers do not appear to interfere with the utility lines and the ability to see the mall is quite unimpaired, indeed enhanced, by the roadside landscaping. What do you think? Try to attend the meeting and keep up on this important decision as it is addressed by city government. I'll do my best to keep you informed. All the best,Linda PallMoscow City Council Dr. Fazio mailto:jfazio@uidaho.edu writes: It is so beautiful outside that I hate to be the bearer of some
dismal news. However, I think that everyone who cares about
Moscow's trees and the appearance of our community needs to be
alerted to something unpleasant that is about to happen. And - your
help is needed to prevent it!At a meeting next Wednesday evening at 7:30 in city council
chambers, representatives of the Palouse Mall management have asked
to present a proposal to a joint meeting of the Moscow Tree Committee
and the Planning & Zoning Commission. The mall wishes to remove the
coniferous screening that currently creates a visual separation between
the mall parking lot and Pullman Highway. Their original plan that was
presented to the University of Idaho (owners of the property) was
absolutely outrageous. The goal was to remove all conifers and prune
other limbs to 8 feet so there would be "a horizontal window" the entire
length of the mall property! Fortunately, UI grounds people and auxiliary
property managers suggested that this would be too drastic. However,
the revised plan, which we viewed yesterday in a Tree Committee
meeting, is almost as bad. It proposes the removal of virtually all the
conifers, and opening "vertical windows" at various points along the
current landscape strip. Elimination of conifers, of course, means that
especially in winter (including the Christmas season when stores make
their most money), the view is wide open! Here are some other details
and my opinions about them:Themall will counter objections by pointing out that they also plan
a renovation of the parking area, including planting trees there. The
net effect would be an increase in the total number of trees.
(Landscaping the parking lot is fine, and probably has something to
do with another part of their plan - to eventually add more buildings
in parts of the parking lot! Anyway, they would be wise to add
trees, since research shows that shoppers prefer commercial districts
with trees. However, their main objective remains the same: to make
the mall more visible from Pullman Highway, which means doing
away with conifers and pruning lower limbs of all trees.)Themall wants to take over care of the landscaping. (This may seem
generous, but it also opens the way to abuse of the vegetation. It is
difficult to correct over-pruning or "accidental" trunk damage that
kills an unwanted tree. This function should remain the
responsibility of UI's Facilities Management).Theplan calls for leveling the strip of ground between the highway
and the trees, planting grass, and adding irrigation. (True, this may
look nice, but the irrigation will be from city wells and one more
waste of a limited resource. The current rustic appearance of
maturing vegetation, perhaps combined with a little better attention
to weed and litter control, is not only more aesthetic, it is more
environmentally responsible.)Themall will cite crime prevention as a reason for thinning out the
vegetation and destroying the pines and other conifers. (This is a
bogus argument. I doubt if records would show many thugs
jumping out of the existing landscaping. On the contrary, I think
police records would show various incidents over the years right in
the parking lot and close to and/or inside the mall itself.)Themall will also cite visual obstruction to cars entering the
highway. (One of our committee members checked the most
stringent standards and found that there is virtually no problem with
this at the present time. In a few places where a standard might be
slightly compromised, some very light pruning would bring it into
compliance.)Therehas been literally no public notice about these intentions.
The mall management has asked that approvals be put on a "fast
track" so that work can begin immediately and be finished before the
students return. (An action that impacts our community as much as
this one will if carried to the extremes desired by the mall
management is too important to shield from public scrutiny and
public comment. It does a disservice to the citizens of Moscow and
makes it much too easy for the supporters of the plan.)One member of our committee commented, "This seems like a
choice between having our primary commercial district look like one of
the better areas of Portland vs. having it look like Spokane's East
Sprague St." While that may be a little bit of an exaggeration, there is
definitely a clash of interests here between the commercial establishment
that looks with envy at University Inn's wide open frontage (which they
obtained several years ago over the objections of the Tree Committee
and by an approving vote of city council by a margin of one) and the
best interests of a community that values its semi-rural, aesthetic values.
The current landscaping would be a planner's dream in some of the more
progressive areas of the country. I urge you to speak up to help keep it
that way.What can you do? Direct comments to the people who will
have the final decision authority. One is the president of the university.
The mall is leased property and UI has the final say on alterations such
as are being requested. Apparently the university personnel involved to
this point have been quite divided on whether or not to support the
proposal. President Hoover could have a major say regarding the final
position taken by the UI. The other key players will be city council and
the mayor. You know the process there, in that they can support or
override the recommendations of the Tree Committee and P&Z (removing
the trees, for example, requires an exception to the city's tree ordinance).
You can also help bring this issue to the attention of a wider audience. I
have not had any luck to date in interesting either of our two major
newspapers, but perhaps you know a way to interest the media. Finally,
you can attend the meeting Wednesday evening, even though the public
has not been invited.Thanks for whatever help you can provide in keeping one of the
nicer-looking approaches to our city from being compromised.Jim Fazio
Dr. James R. Fazio
College of Forestry, Wildlife & Range Sciences
Dept. of Resource Recreation & Tourism
University of Idaho
Moscow, ID 83844