Urban Street Trees Help Protect Pedestrians
Urban street trees, those planted between the curb and sidewalk in the public right of way, serve a number of purposes. These tend to help give the street a visually narrower feeling, a form of traffic calming. The help separate the pedestrian from passing traffic which makes the sidewalk more pleasant. And, as you shall see, the row of street trees can help keep a pedestrian from getting hit by a car.
Some, such as MoDot (Missouri Department of Transportation) and entities such as QuikTrip will argue that street trees endanger motorists — if they drive off the road they might get killed by hitting a tree. They don’t want that kind of liability. Little concern is paid to the liability of hitting a pedestrian.
Today this truck, most likely speeding, slammed directly into a street tree on 18th street across from Union Station and a very short distance from the MetroLink station. I almost always see pedestrians on this sidewalk, as I did later in the day.
Look at how the front of this massive truck wrapped around the tree, what if had been a person(s) instead? Of course street trees do not form a solid barrier of protection, but they do help. Parked cars along a street help provide another barrier from cars hitting pedestrians on the sidewalk. Plus, parked cars are more forgiving than this tree.
Back in August I got picture of this car shortly after it hit a tree in front of Ted Drewes on Grand. Here the car did made it onto the sidewalk but luckly it did not hit the many people who were hanging out enjoying frozen custard.
About 8 years ago I witnessed a guy, showing off his new 5.0 (aka Mustang) to his girl, completely lose control from the same spot as this car — barely missing the tree and ending up in the middle of Ted Drewes’ parking lot. Luckily, that time of the year the business was closed and the place was empty.
Earlier this month this van hit the corner of a building I have listed for sale at 5411 Virginia (shameless plug, see listing). In this case the street has both street trees and on-street parking but they managed to miss those than hit the corner of the structure. This section of Virginia is heavily traveled by pedestrians, a bus stop is located in front of this property. The building only suffered superficial damage.
On-street parking and street trees have a very important role in the city where we do have pedestrians at risk from getting hit by out of control cars. Next time someone argues against allowing onstreet parking or street trees in the interest of safety just picture the above cases.
Yes, Steve, I agree with you (headache coming on) on the value of trees and greenways along traffic corridors. HOWEVER, with that comes maintenance issues. Who is to take care of property in such a green strip? I know in neighborhoods, the resident property owner does, but what about South Grand or Lindell, or other busy corridors?
If there is no tree trimming, or worse, no weeding and seeding, the areas will look neglected and pull down the areas.
Personally I would love to see the streets lined again with hardy and properly placed and maintained trees…just don’t make me rake the leaves.
Street trees are owned and maintained by City Forestry Division. But yes the tree lawn (grassy area) is the responsibility of the property owner. In many commercial areas, then, you’ll find it’s been paved over , over the years.
Most definitely… we need more trees. Locally, the City of Clayton has inventoried such and calculate that the value of each mature tree is approximately $2-3 thousand depending on the type and condition. These valuations allow for proper budgeting, policies and procedures to protect and enhance these assets. Trees not only help clean our air but protect us from scorching summer heat and yes irresponsible auto drivers. Two of my favorite streets locally are Wydown and Lindell Blvds. which are both tree lined. By the way, do you think MoDOT is anti-green and against trees? We shouldn’t have trees because some motorists are irresponsible?
MoDot has an 13-foor clear zone on state highways where pretty much nothing is allowed. The only street trees on MoDot roads I have seen are in St. Louis, Maplewood and University City. The ones in U. City are new along Olive so maybe they will bend if pushed hard enough. The problem with the trees in U. City is they often narrow the sidewalk a lot because they are right in the middle in planting pots.
with the recent storms in july, december and now january, i found that most trees that caused damage were the trees in that strip between sidewalk and street. also with trees in this strip causing major sidewalk damage and city not fixing those as quickly as they should, the trees become almost dangerous to an extent. I am all for trees, do not get me wrong, but there are cons that play some importance as well.
Yes, in areas where a tree is planted in a sidewalk opening (Delmar and such), then all we need to worry about is keeping the tree in shape.
But in areas with flowers/grass, then the maint. issues become more time-consuming and I’m sorry, I just don’t see the Parks’ department or streets putting that much preventative maint. to this issue.
In other words, weeds will grow.
I have noticed the trees along Olive (state highway 340) in U City. Many appear to be recently installed as part of a streetscape improvement project. Although poorly designed, they did include trees. Also out in Creve Couer in the business area east of 270, there are many areas where trees are installed only about 5 feet from the sidewalk (which is poorly placed right next to the road).
The point is: If these communities have street trees along a state road, whether they demanded them or not, why shouldn’t St. Louis plant street trees along Gravois?
Besides the added maintenance, many retailers don’t like trees for the simple reason that they grow up and block their signs. It seems to be a relatively minor issue along urban corridors (where the signs are smaller, closer to the street and traffic moves more slowly), but it’s a major sticking paint in suburban areas where trees are included as part of a strip shopping center when it’s originally built. Since most cities don’t seem to do much follow-up to see that the required landscaping is maintained, more than a few trees “magically” disappear when stores and their signs start getting obstructed from passing traffic. One recent occurance I can think of is the Jack-in-the-Box on Watson in Crestwood – it’s suddenly a lot more visible.
The other part of the equation is that any fixed object, be it a tree or a power pole, close to any street or highway creates a greater risk of injury if a vehicle hits it. As your pictures grapically show, any sudden stop causes a whole lot more damage than hitting something that breaks away (or not hitting something that’s simply not there). That’s why interstate highways and freeways have breakaway signs and light posts and guardrails and median barriers to steer traffic away from hazards. That’s also why speed limits on city streets are lower – the degree of difficulty goes up substantially as the driving envelope shrinks. There’s always a tradeoff between designing “safer” roads for vehicles (minimize damage, increase speeds) versus protecting pedestrians and promoting good urban design. It’ll be interesting to see how well the replacement bridges on the Highway 40 respect both pedestrians and the adjacent neighborhoods – here are a couple of examples worth following:
http://www.trexproject.com/trex_channels/library/media_display.asp?prid=159
http://www.valleyhighway.com/feis/FEIS_Ch4Sec4_Aesthetics&UrbanDesign.pdf
Finally, the assumption that the first vehicle was “most likely speeding” probably isn’t correct. Most intersection collisions happen when one of the vehicles either runs a red light or turns left in front of an oncoming vehicle – failure to yield and inattentive driving is a bigger factor than speeding. – kind of like playing pool and the street trees are the corner pockets!
Street trees do much more than potentially protect pedestrians or property from vehicle impact! Urban trees provide shade and shelter, it has been shown that large numbers of urban trees can measurably reduce hot-spots and “heat island” effects in urban cores. Something I think StL desprately needs! They also provide pollution control to the air we breathe – again by a measurable amount. It’s also been shown recently that urban trees and greenery can have an impact on residents psychologically – we often “feel” better and less stressed when we experience nature, even if the interaction is superficial such as with street trees, it still makes a difference.
The ignorance of these benefits is another one of those things that to me, seems uniquely American in nature. Every large city/urban area I’ve been too in the world seems to be crammed with trees and “green spaces” at every available opportunity – and in some very creative ways.
Bring on the trees!
QT is against street trees for liability reasons? Gas stations should promote street trees. Filling stations are unique in that the customers are standing outside, exposed to the elements. If someone comes barreling through, a street tree can only protect the patrons and the pumps. I would think barriers between the street and flammable liquids would be a good thing. Go figure.
Will we get street trees planted along Kingshighway during the recent sidewalk facelift?
What happens in the area between the curb and right of way property line although usually the property owners responsibility to maintain, should be dictated by the municipality, not the property owner. How much concrete, how much grass, trees, street lights, curb cuts/drives, etc. should all be part of the equation, and should be a purposeful urban design decision. A municipality’s streets are its collective “front door†to the world, and should be made attractive and inviting. There should be no “opting out†of things like street trees, tree lawns, etc. allowed unless there is a valid reason such as adding sidewalk cafe seating. I can think of many areas as Joe points out where these areas have been asphalted over the years, or as Jim mentioned, trees have been removed. These areas would be a lot more attractive overall if the municipality took control of what is rightfully theirs (even in areas where the state maintains the road itself) and made deliberate decisions about how they look.
Yes, street trees are lovely and serve many purposes creating purely aesthetic to environmental benefits. However, street trees, in my opinion, should never be considered as a device to protect pedestrians from street vehicles. This seems somewhat ridiculous to me. Lets say that a property owner has a legal duty to protect pedestrians and others on their property from street traffic that, for wahtever reason, loses control and ends up over the curb or on their property. Would you recommend to that property owner as an engineer or architect that planting street trees would be an acceptable form of complying with that duty. Probably not. What you would recommend would be concrete post, ballards or some similar device that would insure that the vehicle couldnt get through to the sidewalk or your property. While laws very in different jurisdictions, there are some cases out there that suggest a property owner may have a duty to protect visitors on its property from vehicles that may forseeably end up losing control and on your property. Assuming that this is not set in stone and remains an issue, would someone like Quik Trip want to tacitly imply that they would have a duty and must protect people on their property from negligent drivers, bad drivers, drunk drivers. Do you really think as a property owner that you have a resonsibility for protecting pedestrians on the sidewalk in front of your house from negligent, or drunk or simply bad drivers. If so, I doubt knowing that you could have some liability for the injuries sustained by that pedestrian, that you would rely on planting trees in front of your house to protect the pedestrians or your visitors, and neither would Quik Trip. So if the point of your post is to suggest that Quik Trip or MODOT should be protecting pedestrians from vehicular traffic on sidewalks or their property, perhaps suggesting adequate protection would be a good idea. Of course, I do not think that you would advocate MODOT, Quik Trip, or anyother property owner put up concrete barriers around their property. Wouldnt that be lovely.
Well Paul, here is a breath of fresh air. When the advertising firm purchased the old Holy Family Church in south Tower Grove, one of the first exterior things they did was remove the paved over area between the sidewalk and street. They did this on the side of the property but because of the way the church sits up on the street, they couldn’t do the same to the front of the building…but hey, its a step in the right direction.
Of course, if anyone drives by the church, they will see the remains of a tree stump that was recently taken down. But that was not anyone’s fault. It was severly damaged in the storms that we had last year. But I think they are going to be planting a new one.
But if municipalities are going to let property owners take care of them, they need to enforce and not be lax. You don’t see much of that happening in areas like Laf Sq where there are active neighborhoods.
If you really want to protect pedestrians, just go to the first photo in the previous post about MLK Drive, part 2 of 5! 😉
The most common method for producing Pink Dogwood trees is to remove a single bud from a Pink Dogwood tree and slip it under the bark of a White Dogwood seedling. This process is known as budding, and the seedling is known as the rootstock. This is usually done during the late summer months when the bark of the White Dogwood seedling can be easily separated from the tree,
The most common method for producing Pink Dogwood trees is to remove a single bud from a Pink Dogwood tree and slip it under the bark of a White Dogwood seedling. This process is known as budding, and the seedling is known as the rootstock. This is usually done during the late summer months when the bark of the White Dogwood seedling can be easily separated from the tree,
Before you start chopping away at the tree, you should wear proper eye and face protection in case any wood
chips fly towards your eyes. I’ve had wood and limbs fly into my face while cutting down a tree, so I hope
all of my readers will take my advice and where protective gear. Whenever you operate a power tool, always
be sure to wear proper protection for any exposed parts of your body-ears, eyes, and head at a minimum.