Downtown trees destroyed: shame on U.S. Bank and City of Salem

Who doesn't love trees?

Well, yesterday and today the Statesman Journal ran stories about two Salem entities which don't: U.S. Bank and the City of Salem.

(photo by me and my iPhone; taken this afternoon while trees are still standing)

Tuesday some tree lovers protested the decision to allow U.S. Bank to remove five beautiful trees that grace the street in front of the downtown Ladd and Bush branch.

A city decision to permit the removal of five Japanese Zelkova trees on the north side of the Ladd and Bush branch of U.S. Bank prompted protest Tuesday at Commercial and State streets.

For Salem resident Mark Wigg, the trees are part of what makes downtown Salem unique.

“It’s such an iconic image of what Salem is,” Wigg said. “This is one of the most beautiful parts of Salem. They’re trying to destroy the thing we advertise as what makes Salem beautiful.”

The Shade Tree Advisory Committee, a subcommittee of the Salem Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, heard the bank’s request for the permit on Jan. 9. The shade tree committee recommended that the trees not be removed.

But that recommendation was overturned by someone. I don't know who. Probably doesn't matter. In Salem, money and the Chamber of Commerce usually get their way. What big business wants, big business gets.

What this leads to in downtown (and elsewhere) is what's been called the "tragedy of the commons." This happens when everybody does their own thing, like grazing lots of sheep on a grassy common area belonging to everyone.

Result: overgrazing ruins the commons for everyone.

In Salem's case, downtown businesses want to do what they think is best for their bottom line. City officials give them a lot of leeway. 

So we end up with atrocities like the ugly Ross Dress for Less sign that graces (not!) one of the main entrances to downtown Salem. And the cutting down of this wonderful tree that I, and countless others, enjoy looking at every time I drive by the downtown U.S. Bank branch.

The end result is that the "commons," downtown Salem, becomes less attractive to residents and visitors. If people want a tasteless, bland, concrete and asphalt-filled shopping area, convenient outlying malls with unlimited free parking beckon. 

With fewer people coming to a un-beckoning downtown, the businesses that helped make it unattractive wonder "where are all the customers?"

They don't realize that each of their seemingly insignificant uglifying actions -- a big white sign here, a gorgeous tree cut down there -- add up to the aforementioned tragedy of the commons. A downtown that belongs to every business ends up being wrecked by the semi-well-intentioned actions of many (not all) businesses.

I said "semi-well-intentioned." 

This morning my wife phoned the downtown U.S. Bank branch. She complained about the trees being cut down. An employee offered to have someone call her back with an explanation. To the bank's credit, a manager did return her call fairly soon.

He said that the trees needed to be removed for liability reasons. Roots were causing the sidewalk to become uneven. The bank has elderly customers who could trip and fall. This seemed to be the main reason. Other reasons are offered up by a city official in today's newspaper story.

To which I reply: if these trees truly were valued by U.S. Bank and the City of Salem, they'd find a way to preserve them. 

Salem's tree lovers would help. U.S. Bank should have asked its customers, along with other people who frequent downtown businesses, whether they'd rather have a perfectly smooth sidewalk or those beautiful trees.

These trees could have been used to bring Salem residents together, rather than split them apart.

As it stands, I and many others now look upon U.S. Bank more negatively than we did before. Giant banks don't have a great reputation for caring about local concerns; this tree-killing episode reinforces that point of view.

U.S. Bank could have reached out with a "how do we save the trees?" campaign. Maybe creative changes could have been made to the sidewalk; maybe artistic signs could have warned of tree root bumps ahead. 

We could have ended up with a quirkier, more vibrant, interesting, and, yes, stranger Salem (a favorite subject of mine). Now, it looks like we're going to get five fewer large trees in downtown.

Hopefully people will remember who was responsible for this.

(When I took the photo I didn't notice that the crossing signal had changed to a "stop" symbol; appropriate; too bad U.S. Bank won't take this message to heart.)

Comments

[Breakfast on Bikes]

But in your first and third photos, you can't see the building.

The cast iron architecture is unique in Salem, and is from the 1860s. There were two buildings with nearly identical plans constructed at almost exactly the same time, the Ladd & Tilton bank in Portland, and the Ladd & Bush bank in Salem. They are twins. When the Ladd & Bush bank was rebuilt in the 1960s, the cast iron elements that had been salvaged from the Ladd & Tilton bank's demolition were incorporated into the enlarged Ladd & Bush bank.

Now, reasonable people will disagree on this, but some value the rarity of the cast iron architecture and wish for smaller trees. We argue that there might be greater beauty in preserving the visibility of the rare cast iron. It is full of character, far from tasteless and bland! There are many trees; there is only one complete cast iron facade in Salem. It is the unique element here, not the trees.

To say that removing the trees makes the streetscape more ugly is not a conclusion shared by all - and it may be a stretch to say it is a tragedy of the commons.

Again, reasonable people will disagree, but I think you exaggerate the value of the mature trees and discount the value of the Ladd & Bush building - which, it is important to note, preceded US Bank, and quite possibly will outlast it.

[Brian Hines]

Breakfast on Bikes: well, for about half a year there are no leaves on the trees, so no or little obstruction of the building.

In the 36 years I've lived in Salem, I've passed by that building many, many times. Each time the trees have been leafed out, I've enjoyed the greenery much more than the building.

This isn't an either/or thing. Such is the main reason I disagree with the premise of your comment. Virtually all of downtown, as is true of most cities, is the "built environment."

The "natural environment" (no one can build a tree) gets short shrift. To demolish some of the most wonderful displays of the natural environment because they mildly interfere with the viewing of some built environment for part of the year strikes me as wrong.

Especially in a city that once was proud to be a "Tree City USA" locale. Seems like those days are gone, given the policies of city government.

I not-so-fondly remember the similar shock I felt when marvelous oaks along south Liberty Road were cut down bu George Suniga, also for no reason other than they might someday create a problem with sidewalks that hadn't even been built yet in a new uncreative subdivision. See:

http://hinessight.blogs.com/hinessight/2007/04/salem_developer.html

I suppose the U.S. Bank tree-killing is creating sort of a post-traumatic stress response in me, because this needless destruction of large trees almost exactly parallels the Suniga destruction that bothered me even more. I just don't believe that perfectly smooth sidewalks and perfectly visible old buildings are what make for a livable, lovable city.

Salem lacks the "soul" which cities that make you go "Wow!" have. The way our city businesses and leadership are acting, we never will get that soulfulness.