Street Trees along Legacy Oaks in Lower Macungie Township, Trees on the right will be removed.
This was after receiving a letter from the Legacy Oaks HOA regarding issues with the tree roots and the bike path along the street. I agree with the reasoning for removing the tree’s. However absolutely disagree with allowing a blanket waiver of the requirement to replace the trees without exploring ways to replant some trees into the setback or requiring trees be re-planted or re-placed in other areas of the township currently without street trees or that have damaged trees.
Red circles are trees that could be removed. Green Circles are places where I think trees can easily be replanted in the setback and still provide the function of a street tree. For the remaining 12 the money to replace should be put into an account to plant replacement trees throughout the township. This would have been a better solution to a complete waiver.
The reason the trees need to be removed is because when Legacy Oaks was built 10 years ago instead of installing a 4 foot sidewalk the developers were allowed to install a bike path instead (probably much cheaper for the developer). It seems the difference in the size between a bike path and sidewalk was made up by cutting into the planting green strip where the trees were placed instead of the large setback. This resulted in a 36 inch green strip for planting, entirely too thin.
Green strip on right of bike path is too thin to handle the trees
Because of this planning decision 10 years ago to allow for such a thin strip, as the trees have grown they have caused bulges in the bike path that have needed repair.
The reasoning was correct to remove the trees. However the reasoning to not replace the trees was flawed. Legacy Oaks argued that they have planted over 40 additional trees over the last couple years in and around their property. Note: Legacy Oaks is a private development.
I think it’s great Legacy Oaks is a tree friendly development and sees the value in additional plantings. My problem is these plantings are not street trees in the public right of way. Since Legacy Oaks is a posted private development any trees inside the property should not qualify as street trees.
The BOC clearly (with the exception of Doug Brown last night who did bring up the some of the many benefits) seems to not understand or buy into the value street trees. A street tree is specifically one that is in the public right of way directly adjacent to a street vs. an ornamental tree which is a part of the landscaping. With street trees placing and spacing is critical. Street trees serve a different purpose then landscaping trees.
This is a great article that outlines 22 benefits of street trees.
Last night before the vote I wanted to make a comment proposing a compromise. Unfortunately it was missed before the vote. I think it was a simple oversight as I was in the back of the room.
This photo shows an area where 8 trees can easily be replaced in the seback. Still serving the function of a street tree but safely away from the bike path.
Basically after taking a look at the area, I believe at least 8 of the trees could very easily be replaced by being moved into the setback. (see attached diagram/map, green circles) There is enough space so the trees can still provide the functions of a public street tree while being moved safely away from the path. For the remaining 12 trees that cannot be replaced in this area the HOA should be required to pay replacement costs so that trees can be installed in other areas of the township.
What do you think about this compromise?