Contrast virtually any South Philly neighborhood with a neighborhood like Fitler Square, and you’ll immediately understand how street trees make an enormous difference.
Yeah I think the Inquirer ran a piece a while back about the massive discrepancy in street trees in Philadelphia neighborhoods. upper class neighborhoods have plenty and lower class neighborhoods have virtually no trees at all.
Same for a lot of local councils in Australia. Sadly the one they planted suffered really bad wind scorch and died :(, we also had a very dry winter (it was planted towards the end of winter, their rationale being extra rainfall helps it get established) and an awfully long, dry summer with almost no rain in autumn.
Lemon trees on Lemon St. Walnut trees on Walnut Dr. Cherry trees on Cherry Ln. Wonder why the trees they waste water and effort on have no apricots? Sweet Gum trees have those dangerous round spike balls, cause me to fall down.
After about a little less than a year living in Philly, I just love finding random cute streets to stroll through when I get the chance and this makes it clear that most of the charm comes from the giant tree canopies that are just so welcoming
Love the short Philly vid! Maybe do one on the Philly Piers next? Pretty cool example of abandoned infrastructure turned into unsanctioned public green space
This is really interesting because the last time I was in Philly I specifically kept thinking: man, this town needs more tree coverage. (I was in South Philly when I had this thought; it does seem a lot better in some other parts of town.) I dunno… I’m a Chicago guy and I think we might be pretty close to the gold standard for tree canopy among big American cities, both because of the amount of the city with a full tree canopy and also because unlike nearly all of Philly and all the East Coast Corridor cities, we don’t have curbtight sidewalks on residential blocks, so you don’t have to dig up a chunk of sidewalk to plant a new trees; in fact people just do it guerilla-style sometimes. I’m actually a big fan of curbtight sidewalks, really narrow streets and Philly-style urbanism writ large. But I wouldn’t have picked tree coverage as the thing to praise about the way that urbanism manifests in the world.
Yup, sacramento will give you and plant a free street tree on request. They also maintain them. Our local public utility will give you a free non-street tree too.
Portland has some beautiful trees but god damn if it ain’t common for me to see a tree and think about how if any Philly arborists saw them they would weep. There are some apples that I know will only live a few years. There are some that absolutely are gonna get their roots choked. And we get enough rain to keep them alive
I’m from Chicago but I’ve read a lot about Philly’s street trees bc there’s lots of good research on it. From what I remember, there’s actually studies to suggest street trees reduce crime because they provide shade, and hot temperatures tend to be associated with more crime. Also the anti-tree sentiment some people have is so strange to me. Chicago also has quite good and coverage (both cities have a lot in common tbh) and it’s one of my favorite things about our urban design, though I think it’s more consistent here than Philly bc afaik South Philly has practically no tree coverage.
Savannah, GA also does quite well with tree coverage from when I visited. Couldn't agree more!!! Only thing is to not do it like the carolina's where they planted a monoculture of massive pollinators all over the place
its great for shading from the sun, but some might say its not so great because its blocking there natural light from their window. It just depends on how they implement it
Telling all these tales raises serious questions. Yale and many buildings been around since the 16th century, yet trees are only 200 years old. Wonder why there weren't any trees around before 300 years ago at most? Trees are easy to date, the rings inside say no trees much in 16th century, or 17th, massive planting of trees in 18th century, all in perfect alignment too. (some birds made)
Street Trees are the unsung heroes of cities. Trees in neighborhoods and developments in general are. Pennsylvanians have a disgusting obsession with 2 acre grass yards. It is like they have a contest to see who's grass is the greenest. I think there should be tax incentives to have tree canopy on your property.
The humble street tree is an unsung hero of urbanism. Provides shade, soaks up rainwater to help prevent flooding, provides a natural bollard of sorts to protect pedestrians, slows down traffic by putting more obstructions in drivers' line of sight, provides psychological and physical health benefits from adding more nature into the city, and just plain looks pretty. I'm lucky enough to live in another city with a great urban forest (Boulder, Colorado) and I think it's something every city should have.
Alan! You didn’t even mention the best part about Philly’s street trees, the legend around them! Copied from a reddit comment: Not sure if these are fact or apocryphal, but I've heard that when William Penn laid out the city streets (basically what is now Center City), the east-west streets were named after trees because most of the population was illiterate but everyone could identify the unique tree varieties planted along each street (the inverse of today!). Furthermore, the streets were ordered from north to south in terms of hardness (e.g. Pine is a softer wood than Walnut) which was commonly known and helped people orient themselves.
Cambridge MA has the same. I will say though, it makes walking on the sidewalk with somebody else kind of annoying. Also, the roots (at least in Cambridge) do wreck havoc on the sidewalks at times
I love street trees in the city. Philly and Boston are two cities that excel in that. Makes you feel like you are time traveling with the row homes and tight streets. Great bike city!
Uh, Chicago has a lot of tree-canopied streets. Yes, there are parts of the city that do not have as much coverage, but I'd say the majority of residential streets are like that and very dense coverage, too. It's one of the things I love about Chicago.
I feel like the south side of Chicago does really well with tree coverage. Hyde Park in particular is full of trees along streets. It’s pretty impressive that Philly has trees in such narrow streets though.
I would argue that Pittsburgh has the much better tree coverage. Granted we also have a much lower population lol. Pittsburgh also has a pretty amazing tree program too.
Just build geothermal/solar-powered structures that suck in carbon with umbrella canopies, problem easily solved! Street trees are so last century, and Philly proves that. When will we finally cut down the last tree in all of our major cities and replace them with more modern, sleek apparatuses?
i will never understand the people who complain about these. I’ve met some, talking about getting sap or pollen on their car mostly. I’d much rather wash off a bit of sap than dealing with UV-damaged bodywork… not to mention the car is cooler to get in!
I prefer NYCs street scaffolds. Blocks rain, more shade coverage, no clean up, no allergies. It sounds silly, but I'd like to see more artificial shade options. Narrower Streets and taller buildings also help provide shade.
I had some audio issues with the first version so that's why there were two notifications, my bad 😅
Contrast virtually any South Philly neighborhood with a neighborhood like Fitler Square, and you’ll immediately understand how street trees make an enormous difference.
I was just saying the other day that it'd be nice if we had more trees in my neighborhood in South Philly.
Yeah I think the Inquirer ran a piece a while back about the massive discrepancy in street trees in Philadelphia neighborhoods. upper class neighborhoods have plenty and lower class neighborhoods have virtually no trees at all.
The corner by where Korshak's used to be was brutal in the sun. Same over by John's Water Ice. I need some shade while I wait for my treats! 😂
Every city should have a free street tree program
Chicago has one of the
DC has one as well as free rain gardens, bayscaping, and rain barrels. They also have a free tree program for yards and other places too.
Same for a lot of local councils in Australia. Sadly the one they planted suffered really bad wind scorch and died :(, we also had a very dry winter (it was planted towards the end of winter, their rationale being extra rainfall helps it get established) and an awfully long, dry summer with almost no rain in autumn.
Lemon trees on Lemon St.
Walnut trees on Walnut Dr.
Cherry trees on Cherry Ln.
Wonder why the trees they waste water and effort on have no apricots? Sweet Gum trees have those dangerous round spike balls, cause me to fall down.
Was there any doubt. PHILLY!!!
Dense East Coast cities need way more street trees!
After about a little less than a year living in Philly, I just love finding random cute streets to stroll through when I get the chance and this makes it clear that most of the charm comes from the giant tree canopies that are just so welcoming
Love the short Philly vid! Maybe do one on the Philly Piers next? Pretty cool example of abandoned infrastructure turned into unsanctioned public green space
*Ann Arbor has entered the chat*
Street trees are great! I am jealous of Philly's little streets (and public transit obvs).
Some of the best street coverage, especially for older trees is out over in west!
This is really interesting because the last time I was in Philly I specifically kept thinking: man, this town needs more tree coverage. (I was in South Philly when I had this thought; it does seem a lot better in some other parts of town.) I dunno… I’m a Chicago guy and I think we might be pretty close to the gold standard for tree canopy among big American cities, both because of the amount of the city with a full tree canopy and also because unlike nearly all of Philly and all the East Coast Corridor cities, we don’t have curbtight sidewalks on residential blocks, so you don’t have to dig up a chunk of sidewalk to plant a new trees; in fact people just do it guerilla-style sometimes. I’m actually a big fan of curbtight sidewalks, really narrow streets and Philly-style urbanism writ large. But I wouldn’t have picked tree coverage as the thing to praise about the way that urbanism manifests in the world.
Visit Sacramento some time. The street tree coverage in downtown/midtown is really good.
Yup, sacramento will give you and plant a free street tree on request. They also maintain them.
Our local public utility will give you a free non-street tree too.
Portland has some beautiful trees but god damn if it ain’t common for me to see a tree and think about how if any Philly arborists saw them they would weep.
There are some apples that I know will only live a few years. There are some that absolutely are gonna get their roots choked. And we get enough rain to keep them alive
I’m from Chicago but I’ve read a lot about Philly’s street trees bc there’s lots of good research on it. From what I remember, there’s actually studies to suggest street trees reduce crime because they provide shade, and hot temperatures tend to be associated with more crime. Also the anti-tree sentiment some people have is so strange to me. Chicago also has quite good and coverage (both cities have a lot in common tbh) and it’s one of my favorite things about our urban design, though I think it’s more consistent here than Philly bc afaik South Philly has practically no tree coverage.
I am in
Savannah, GA also does quite well with tree coverage from when I visited. Couldn't agree more!!!
Only thing is to not do it like the carolina's where they planted a monoculture of massive pollinators all over the place
It does lovely. Do they pick special varieties that don't have a wide ball of roots?
The Fanatic and Gritty mural
its great for shading from the sun, but some might say its not so great because its blocking there natural light from their window. It just depends on how they implement it
Trees provide shade, shade is dark, darkness means crime? I guess?
Telling all these tales raises serious questions.
Yale and many buildings been around since the 16th century, yet trees are only 200 years old.
Wonder why there weren't any trees around before 300 years ago at most?
Trees are easy to date, the rings inside say no trees much in 16th century, or 17th, massive planting of trees in 18th century, all in perfect alignment too. (some birds made)
Looks great
Number of trees has an inverse correlation to crime rates
Street Trees are the unsung heroes of cities. Trees in neighborhoods and developments in general are. Pennsylvanians have a disgusting obsession with 2 acre grass yards. It is like they have a contest to see who's grass is the greenest. I think there should be tax incentives to have tree canopy on your property.
LONG LIVE PHILLY BITS
Is South Philly getting better with street trees? Last time I was in Passyunk 5 years ago, I was turns off at how little greenery was around.
so uh, you going to mention the stuff in Kensington and how to fix the drug problem?
I heard somewhere that you can lower crime by keeping the lawns mowed in a neighborhood is that true?
yeah sometimes the really short criminals go unnoticed if the grass is too tall
Lol people just think dark equals crime. Always the case even if it doesn't make sense.
I live in Philly. I am having the city remove the street tree in front of my house. It has agreed to do and is on their list.
Street trees... are good?!
No effort june!
hi
Weak sauce, take note from "The City of Trees"/
The humble street tree is an unsung hero of urbanism. Provides shade, soaks up rainwater to help prevent flooding, provides a natural bollard of sorts to protect pedestrians, slows down traffic by putting more obstructions in drivers' line of sight, provides psychological and physical health benefits from adding more nature into the city, and just plain looks pretty. I'm lucky enough to live in another city with a great urban forest (Boulder, Colorado) and I think it's something every city should have.
NYC can be hit or miss but still much better than LA, no shade.
@@bl00dkillz Yep, LA is awful with tree cover..
Alan! You didn’t even mention the best part about Philly’s street trees, the legend around them! Copied from a reddit comment:
Not sure if these are fact or apocryphal, but I've heard that when William Penn laid out the city streets (basically what is now Center City), the east-west streets were named after trees because most of the population was illiterate but everyone could identify the unique tree varieties planted along each street (the inverse of today!). Furthermore, the streets were ordered from north to south in terms of hardness (e.g. Pine is a softer wood than Walnut) which was commonly known and helped people orient themselves.
Another reason to have narrow streets; the tree canopy provides shade across the street instead of just on the sidewalk.
0:40 what pretty houses!
I love street trees
Cambridge MA has the same. I will say though, it makes walking on the sidewalk with somebody else kind of annoying. Also, the roots (at least in Cambridge) do wreck havoc on the sidewalks at times
I think trees help absorb noise as well. A lot of cities would look so much less "concrete jungle" with just a bit of street tree action.
Some of those sidewalks are not very accessible with all of the obstructions but I guess most of those places are low traffic streets.
Oh man, we should cut the Amazon forest down, who knows how much *C R I M E* goes in there! 😱😩
I love street trees in the city. Philly and Boston are two cities that excel in that. Makes you feel like you are time traveling with the row homes and tight streets. Great bike city!
Uh, Chicago has a lot of tree-canopied streets. Yes, there are parts of the city that do not have as much coverage, but I'd say the majority of residential streets are like that and very dense coverage, too. It's one of the things I love about Chicago.
I agree. I’ve never lived in Chicago, but I certainly remember the tree-lined streets from when my sister lived there decades ago.
I feel like the south side of Chicago does really well with tree coverage. Hyde Park in particular is full of trees along streets. It’s pretty impressive that Philly has trees in such narrow streets though.
I would argue that Pittsburgh has the much better tree coverage. Granted we also have a much lower population lol. Pittsburgh also has a pretty amazing tree program too.
Just build geothermal/solar-powered structures that suck in carbon with umbrella canopies, problem easily solved! Street trees are so last century, and Philly proves that. When will we finally cut down the last tree in all of our major cities and replace them with more modern, sleek apparatuses?
Do they cut down the trees when they get too big so they don't tear up the sidewalk?
Cheep rent in Kensington Ave shooting gallery.
Trees are doing great! If your a human, not so much!
Our street trees are great, but man the Ginkgo trees can be brutal!
Parts of Boston also have pretty excellent tree coverage, but Philly takes the W for sure
i will never understand the people who complain about these. I’ve met some, talking about getting sap or pollen on their car mostly. I’d much rather wash off a bit of sap than dealing with UV-damaged bodywork… not to mention the car is cooler to get in!
Tree sap is a legitimate complaint. They should choose non-sap dripping trees.
@@daveharrison84 it’s a legitimate annoyance, but it’s not a reason to prefer no trees. Which is what these people are saying.
insert deadly fixed object discourse here
Damn Philadelphia looks super cozy
Cleveland heights (and I believe Cleveland) has a free street tree program. I got one planted in front of the place I was renting
I had a friend who lives in DC visit me in Philly and this is one of the first things he noticed when we walked around the city.
More street trees 2024!
I prefer NYCs street scaffolds. Blocks rain, more shade coverage, no clean up, no allergies.
It sounds silly, but I'd like to see more artificial shade options. Narrower Streets and taller buildings also help provide shade.