• BobbyTables@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    I currently build a house. To get a permit for the building I have to plant and maintain(!) trees in the garden for the next 20 years - one large one (like beech or maple) or two smaller ones (like pear or hawthorn) for every 200 m2 of land. Only specific locally common trees are allowed. If I don’t have the trees I will be fined.

    I mean that’s not much but it is a start. Trees should be mandatory.

    • Solar Bear@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I was just looking at Google maps street view from previous years in my neighborhood. There used to be trees in front of almost every house, now it’s less than half. It’s really frustrating. The street used to look so much lovelier.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Get out there and talk to your neighbors! In my city we are trying to form a volunteer committee to plant trees in front yards in every neighborhood. It lowers the barrier of entry if people can have the trees planted, and if they know who to turn to for advice on care. Some local governments may have programs or arborists who can help, and others have tree planting non-profits you could try collaborating with.

    • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Agreed! Sounds like an interesting system. Many areas require trees planted as part of development but it’s great that they specify size and a long maintenance timeline. In my area the builders have no responsibility after sale and so they plant tiny ornamental trees or inappropriate species. As a result, many new developments will never have the level of canopy needed to keep things cool.