Public Comment: Sunset / Fearing Neighborhood Trees Should Be Preserved

The following public comment was submitted to the shade tree committee on March 8, 2022, concerning the disposition of two silver maple trees in the public way at 174 Sunset Avenue. For another story on the proposed tree removal on Sunset and Fearing in the Daily Hampshire Gazette, look here.

As you consider the fate of these trees tonight, I would like to call your attention to some specific parts of the town’s shade tree regulations, parts which should be weighed more heavily in this instance due to the particular and unique nature of the neighborhood where these trees are located (in a residential neighborhood at the periphery of UMass). I have highlighted relevant sections in BOLD. I urge you to not grant permission to remove trees from the public way at 174 Sunset Avenue.

From The Town’s Shade Tree Regulations
a. Intent and Purpose

i. The town of Amherst recognizes mature trees to be an asset to the community, as

they beautify and improve the health of the environment. Trees provide oxygen,

shade, wind protection, flood control, alleviation from noise pollution, wildlife

habitats, and a respite from urban infrastructure….improve the quality of life in Amherst.

My Comments
1. Cutting down these trees will significantly reduce the quality of life in our neighborhood. The property at 174 Sunset Avenue is a transition point between a quiet residential neighborhood and the UMass campus. The canopy of the trees in question reduces noise pollution and provides a visual screen between residential houses on Sunset Avenue and the towering Southwest dorms housing 5,500 students, thus providing a sense of neighborhood rather than the feeling of living on campus. The stately mature maple on the corner of Sunset and Fearing Street significantly contributes to th defined boundary between a residential neighborhood and the southwest dorms. Currently, several hundred pedestrians pass by this corner each weekend (see attached photo). These pedestrians, a large percentage of whom are drunk, proceed along Fearing Street toward the town center. Mr. Roberts’ proposal to cut this tree down in order to create a new sidewalk along the east side of the property will invite drunk pedestrians into a quiet residential neighborhood along a sidewalk that currently does not exist. I advise that the applicant not install a new sidewalk and thus does not need to cut down the tree.

2. These trees should be pruned and cared for – not cut down. While the applicant contends these trees are compromised to justify taking them down, many nearby trees are in similar condition and it would be absurd to take down any/all trees based on this assertion. These trees have long been neglected but they are not dying and presumably will survive many more years. Mature trees should remain in place while smaller plantings grow and become established.

3. Saplings are likely to be trampled and will not survive to maturity. Related to the high volume of pedestrian traffic, cutting down mature shade trees and replacing them with saplings and ornamentals is inadequate. Require larger plantings with the condition that they be replaced as needed until they become established.

4. Consider tree wells and/or redesign of the sewer/sidewalk project. What other remedies are available?

Background
Mr. Roberts recently purchased several properties in the Sunset-Pleasant neighborhood. Last summer, he removed 19 trees at 52 Fearing Street, including several hemlocks, walnut, jumpier, and dawn redwoods. Mr. Reidy mentioned upwards of 20 trees to be cut down at 174

Sunset, in addition to the maples in the public way. Cutting down 40+ trees is a huge assault to our neighborhood, especially when every tree counts toward mediating climate change. This is a lot of trees for our neighborhood to lose on account of one person!

Paige Wilder is a resident of Amherst