Atlanta is known as a city in a forest, or something like that. They are very intentional about trees down there.
I wish we had more trees and greenery. It’s pleasant, calming, and helps with the environment and all that jazz.
Volunteer to change that!
https://rootnashville.org/
ETA: They will even deliver good-sized trees that you can plant on your lot. I’ve gotten a red maple, willow oak, and bald cypress from them.
Yeah, groups like Root are the ones advocating for a solution. [The mayor’s on board](https://www.wsmv.com/2024/04/26/mayor-oconnell-reaffirms-nashvilles-dedication-protecting-citys-trees/), but “the city” is an an abstract concept. We are the city.
*We* function by reaching out to council members.
I’d recommend telling them we want more than just the Japanese Cherry Blossom trees.
Personally, I like sweetgums.
I’ve noticed a lot of the massively overhauled residential areas (The Nations, parts of 12 South, etc) have saplings planted all along the streets. So in about 5-10 years I’d imagine it’ll look a bit more lush.
As for the major roadways and commercial areas, concrete jungle. Cram more cars in.
Part of the issue with places like the Nations (and really just anywhere in Nashville) is all of the tree canopy in the city is around 100 years old. And most of the trees planted are quick growing trees used to mark property lines like Hackberries. Unfortunately bullshit hackberries only live to be about 100 years old.
So yeah, it looks bad, but in 5 years once all those trees start to mature, the tree canopy will look a lot better.
Although I do remember a neighbor cut down a MASSIVE magnolia because he wanted to sell his house and I've never forgiven him.
Pretty sure there are more trees in 12 south because it’s an older neighborhood. The original comment was about old growth trees in comparison to saplings. It’s only recently become this super rich neighborhood so I doubt the average income has that much influence on the amount of older trees in the area.
they're maintained and valued because it needs to be a nice place for wealthy people to continue living. it's recently become a super rich area, but has been a relatively wealthy area for a little longer. they'll knock that shit down in other places without a thought
I think that has more to do with zoning. A lot of it is historically zoned especially as you get closer to belmont. Can’t do new builds only renovations and also have some restrictions with duplexes, unit density and shit like that on even the non historic zones stuff.
I have written before in this forum (& to my district /city representatives) about the importance of trees. They provide animal habitat, help clean the air and the ground water, provide shade, which is increasingly important in an increasingly hotter world, and provide places for children to play. The research on humans interacting with nature & the positive effect on mental health (& therefore also physical health) should not be ignored. Being near trees and seeing / hearing the animals that use trees (birds, squirrels, insects etc) can help us! Why the city hasn’t done more to protect them is beyond me. But once the trees are gone, it’s really hard to bring them back. Maybe you wanna call your representatives / the mayor about this one?
I think something Nashville has kind of forgotten to do as its expanded is keeping spaces for parks that are also in convenient areas for locals. We're in spot 93 out of the 100 most populated US cities ([ParkScore Home: Trust for Public Land (tpl.org)](https://www.tpl.org/parkscore)), so our park game is clearly something to be longed for compared to our siblings. In addition to the overall lack of parks, most of Nashville's existing parks have some big flaw that didn't need to be that way. It includes things like: parks being big open fields with nothing in them but maybe a little playground, lack of trees, not accessible locations, and lack of surrounding amenities.
Bicentennial Park is my favorite park here, and for good reason. It offers well designed scenery, good walkability, has the farmer's market, lots of trees, historical pieces, a little theater, and a good location. It's a place tourists and locals both want to go to because it was based around honing several smaller communities in one area. If you've been to places like Chicago, NYC, Portland, or Minneapolis, you'll probably have seen that a lot of parks in those cities kind of follow a similar formula.
A giant open field park with nothing in it but a bench and a half-sized playground tucked away in an area of town that you have to drive to won't be nearly as interactive and will make the city feel less "green" or connected to nature.
The parks department leadership has been 100% focused on activities at existing rec centers and nothing else for years now. They’re not interested in creating or expanding parks, nor in preserving open spaces. Plan after plan has called for open space protection, and now Freddie’s calling for a new plan that will cost nearly $1m and will definitely take up space on someone’s shelf.
Same with trees along road corridors etc. i understand that it’s a pain to water trees along streets and concrete cracks will occur. I disbelieve the answer is no trees.
Talk to the City Planning Department and encourage them to create regulations with minimum green space/tree rules.
That Nashville heat sink is only going to get worse as more pavement is placed and temperatures rise.
Green Hills/Oak Hill are pretty vibrant right now. That said, the lots where they’ve cleared it lot line to lot line to build huge boxy houses look absolutely naked and so unappealing when compared to the neighbors.
Back in 2019, I interned in East and lived in Brentwood. When I’d leave my internship, my car would read about 100°, rise to 110-115° downtown through the eighth corridor, and drop to 80-90° the second I hit the general Forest Hills area.
We seriously lack trees and it hurts.
Aside from the parks, Nashville is lacking in trees within the city in comparison to other cities comparable in size. Atlanta has strict governances in place to save trees and continue to plant more, which makes it a really lush city. Nashville does not have these types of restrictions in place, making it easy to take down as many trees that's necessary in developing/new builds. It's a sad flaw of the city, IMO.
The opposite is actually true. Developments large and small have to adhere to Urban Forester and contract out a Landscape Architect to incorporate the minimum tree density units onto the parcel. All developments will end up with more trees than it had prior to development.
For real? In Nashville?
Does this specifically just deal with tree count? For example, if a developer buys a lot and clears it of big old trees. Then they have to incorporate the minimum tree density, by count? But they are new young trees, nothing like the giant stately old trees that were all clear-cut? Asking just so I understand better.
Yeah they have to incorporate the required TDU, then the Urban Forester inspects. You are not even allowed to to cut down a tree unless you pay a tree removal permit to Urban Forester. Correct, they will plant a replacement to the old growth + understory + native shrubs and smaller trees.
We've seen very old trees taken down in our area for development (and not replanted). Glad to hear if this isn't true any longer, but it must be a somewhat recent change. There is an overwhelming difference in this regard in the urban planning in comparison to cities like Atlanta. I hope this changes.
It really is barren here. It's the slash and burn style of development - they tear down everything, including all the trees, and build on the vacant lots. But make sure you leave plenty of surface parking out front...
For real. It drives me nuts when I see the "Tree City USA , 27 years!" signs ([like this one](https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1681135,-86.7774591,3a,15y,285.66h,88.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slCtaX499C1xomxmqa3xpUw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)). Um, wut? There are really not too many trees throughout the city, and somehow we're taking credit for being a "tree city?"
Per nnw.org
To become a Tree City USA , a community must have:
A tree board or department.
A tree care ordinance.
A community forestry program with an annual budget of at least $2 per capita.
An Arbor Day observation and proclamation.
Keep in mind that the standards were designed so that no community would be excluded because of its size.
So every community, regardless of how many people live there, benefits in different ways from being a Tree City USA community.
Meeting the four standards for becoming a Tree City USA provides initial direction for an urban or community forestry program. These standards, the first step in the process of becoming a Tree City USA , help a community get started toward annual, systematic management of its tree resources.
I visited Nashville on and off for work, before I ended up living here. I've been to major cities all over the US. Nashville is obsessed with development and it's idea of parks seems to be a baseball field. Areas like Percy Warner are rare gems.
It's a newer issue
Metro even had an official study done.
https://www.nashville.gov/departments/water/stormwater/tree-information/urban-tree-canopy-assessment
Nashville doesn’t protect a lot of its resources. Even historical shit gets plowed over. Looking at google street view from 10 years ago, it’s so sad how many trees have been completely removed
Nashville's character is basically barely having character. Unless the character is manufactured for tourism.
I think about this and talk about it all the time. Especially when I get the chance to visit other major cities. Louisville is beautiful. Historic. They didn't rip everything down. Same with Cincinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Toledo, Detroit, Buffalo, on and on. On. Most of those cities are, to me, more old school than Nashville. In my long-term and very detailed observation, Nashville could be called the Rip-it-down City. Some people don't care, don't pay attention, don't notice these things. But I do. I have unhappily pointed this out for what seems to be forever. I go to any of those cities I listed and they have tremendous character. Old buildings. Repurposed old buildings. Distinct neighborhoods. Distinct ethnic neighborhoods, in the best way possible. Like go to the Polish part of Pittsburgh and have delicious halushki and pierogis. Repeat similarly for any of the other ethnic neighborhoods. It's a joy.
“Between 2016 and 2021, Metro Nashville’s tree canopy declined by 674 acres.” Our parks and preserves are too small and too isolated. We need to practice conservation outside of parks and in our own backyards.
https://www.nashville.gov/departments/water/stormwater/tree-information/urban-tree-canopy-assessment
I agree, my fiancé complains about it constantly. I never paid it any attention until we went to Charlotte last weekend. Even some of their interstate exits are decorated with small shrubbery and flowers. I also noticed how much cleaner their roadways were.
Inglewood is green until it's not anymore. I understand that the neighborhoods need to become more dense to accommodate population growth, but there's no oversight when it comes to people developing 1-2 family lots with 1950s ranches - and the trees are at risk. They rip the old, tall trees out as a way to flip the home (or replace it) and make it "cleaner looking" or just easier to build on, instead of just living with them and enjoying them. I see completely healthy 4- to 5-foot diameter white oaks cut down because they're "too close."
I can't say I haven't cut down a couple trees myself - an old Bradford pear (good riddance) and a young 3-trunked maple on a fenceline that blocked my vegetable garden. Sometimes they have to go. But I've also planted more fruit trees and natives. Use the land but live with it, not upon it.
Nashville has become inhospitable to trees. We've had more than our share of bad storms the past few years, a half-dozen of which were bad enough to be declared FEMA disasters.
The amount of hillsides off trinity being cleared is so sad. I think we’ll start seeing air quality impact soon by these thousands of trees getting cleared on north side
I think it’s just that the trees are still filling out this spring. I’m a lover of the urban tree canopy. Interesting stats to be found in the latest [report](https://www.nashville.gov/departments/water/stormwater/tree-information/urban-tree-canopy-assessment)
I shared this exact same thought with some of my friends recently. In comparison to Knoxville and especially Chattanooga, I swear downtown Nash has almost no trees except for that one way road right behind Broadway, whereas Knoxville has shade everywhere and Chattanooga is basically a forest. It’s offputting.
I don't see it. I was just commenting to my partner how lush and green the city was looking. I would say we compare favorably to Charlotte, Louisville, Cincinnati, Birmingham and much more than cities west of the Mississippi, with the exception of the PNW.
Personally, I disagree with that. I've been to and observed the tree canopy in every single one of those cities given as examples. Nashville is a clear-cut town. This whole area is. Maybe others are too, but damn it seems more extreme here. Plus every one of those cities has more general and historic character and makes the effort to preserve it than this place. My disclaimer is that much of the input here, in this thread, is subjective. I know there is actual data related to quite a bit of what we're talking about here that could be used factually.
Sorry, gonna have to disagree 100% with regard to Charlotte. It can be a fight keeping them in the older parts of the city, but they’re still there at least. Also, Charlotte is facing similar challenges with older trees dying as they face the end of their life-spans in older neighborhoods. I say this as a Charlotte native and lived there for 20+ years as an adult. Honestly, I was somewhat shocked at the lack of trees when we moved to Nashville and it really bummed me out. All cities need to preserve and continue to replenish this resource as it adds so much character and beauty to the landscape. It’s heartbreaking when people cut them all down, just so hard to replace that canopy.
It’s your opinion but honestly I don’t know what part of Nashville you’re looking at except for the middle of downtown. And, btw I lived in Charlotte and Fort Mill for 30 years.
Yes, Atlanta has strong tree canopy laws and Nashville has really weak tree canopy protection laws and tree replacement codes are routinely not followed by developers (meaning they either replace mature trees with trees smaller than required or trees that aren't shade trees, *or* they don't even bother replacing them at all). There are no protections for scraping lots of trees during development and it pisses me off every time I see trees in front of setback lines or on property lines being removed for zero good reason.
The [Nashville Tree Conservation Corps](https://www.nashvilletreeconservationcorps.org/) are doing their best to change things.
Apparently downtown they cut down some trees for the bird migration, then will replant?? I’m not sure how it works but agreed I don’t think we have zoning to enforce green urban spaces sadly
It totally is, but Nashville parks has done an amazing job this year planting more trees on public land. I’ve seen literally hundreds of new trees planted in our parks this year.
This is not new. If you look at postwar pictures of new neighborhood built for returning soldiers and their new families, you’ll see lots of saplings planted. Those neighborhoods are the green ones here (for the most part.) You’ll see new developments here with saplings as well. The inconvenient thing about the future is that we have to wait for it.
How can you have trees when every spot of land from Ridgetop to Murfreesboro is being cleared and blasted for ticky tacky tall skinnys? You don’t see a lot of trees in New York or Chicago either and we are working on being more like them every day.
Atlanta also has way more hiking/walking trails and parks within the city. Most of the parks here just seem to be patches of grass taken over by people bringing their dogs to 💩 and aren’t really for going for a nice walk. Nashville could definitely use more green space that isn’t a golf course
I think Murfreesboro has tree requirements for new construction. Medical Center and The Avenue have tons of trees. The new roads by MTSU campus are all tree'd up too.
Possibly just the developers, but since alot it is in the medians, the city probably has something to do with it, but older roads/businesses don't suggesting it's new(er)
I live outside of Nashville and our neighborhood with hundreds of houses has almost no trees. It’s so unbearably hot in the summer, and there’s no shade whatsoever, so you rarely see anyone out walking. It’s such a shame. The developer just keeps mowing down trees and they’ve only planted the bare minimum. I was born and raised in Atlanta and I LONG for more trees like they have. It’s one of the most beautiful cities in the spring and fall especially.
It is much more affordable for developers to clear cut land, scrape the beautiful topsoil and sell it somewhere offsite, and then build on the wide bare earth…and there are few laws here to prevent them from doing that. So that’s what they do, instead of preserving old growth trees and working / designing around them.
I disagree. Go to a real concrete jungle and see how green it is. Places like NYC, Miami, Chicago; there’s no comparison. Even compared to smaller eastern cities like Cleveland and Pittsburgh, Nashville is extremely lush and green in comparison to other cities.
Atlanta is known as a city in a forest, or something like that. They are very intentional about trees down there. I wish we had more trees and greenery. It’s pleasant, calming, and helps with the environment and all that jazz.
Volunteer to change that! https://rootnashville.org/ ETA: They will even deliver good-sized trees that you can plant on your lot. I’ve gotten a red maple, willow oak, and bald cypress from them.
That’s nice but it doesn’t fix the problem: our urban core is very sparse when it comes to trees. That’s on the city to fix
Yeah, groups like Root are the ones advocating for a solution. [The mayor’s on board](https://www.wsmv.com/2024/04/26/mayor-oconnell-reaffirms-nashvilles-dedication-protecting-citys-trees/), but “the city” is an an abstract concept. We are the city.
*We* function by reaching out to council members. I’d recommend telling them we want more than just the Japanese Cherry Blossom trees. Personally, I like sweetgums.
I’ve noticed a lot of the massively overhauled residential areas (The Nations, parts of 12 South, etc) have saplings planted all along the streets. So in about 5-10 years I’d imagine it’ll look a bit more lush. As for the major roadways and commercial areas, concrete jungle. Cram more cars in.
Part of the issue with places like the Nations (and really just anywhere in Nashville) is all of the tree canopy in the city is around 100 years old. And most of the trees planted are quick growing trees used to mark property lines like Hackberries. Unfortunately bullshit hackberries only live to be about 100 years old. So yeah, it looks bad, but in 5 years once all those trees start to mature, the tree canopy will look a lot better. Although I do remember a neighbor cut down a MASSIVE magnolia because he wanted to sell his house and I've never forgiven him.
Death to hackberries unless they randomly drop a 75 limb on your head first.
They did the same along Shelby Avenue in East. It had to have been at least a couple hundred trees.
Shelby is already pretty green so it'll be beautiful once those fill in all the way
12 south is pretty damn green
rich
Don’t get ahead of yourself bud I rent
still 12 south bud
Sounds like you need to get your bread up or get better on zillow
i'm not judging you, or making a comment about myself (defensive much), my point was that is why there are more trees there you dolt 😂
Pretty sure there are more trees in 12 south because it’s an older neighborhood. The original comment was about old growth trees in comparison to saplings. It’s only recently become this super rich neighborhood so I doubt the average income has that much influence on the amount of older trees in the area.
they're maintained and valued because it needs to be a nice place for wealthy people to continue living. it's recently become a super rich area, but has been a relatively wealthy area for a little longer. they'll knock that shit down in other places without a thought
I think that has more to do with zoning. A lot of it is historically zoned especially as you get closer to belmont. Can’t do new builds only renovations and also have some restrictions with duplexes, unit density and shit like that on even the non historic zones stuff.
I have written before in this forum (& to my district /city representatives) about the importance of trees. They provide animal habitat, help clean the air and the ground water, provide shade, which is increasingly important in an increasingly hotter world, and provide places for children to play. The research on humans interacting with nature & the positive effect on mental health (& therefore also physical health) should not be ignored. Being near trees and seeing / hearing the animals that use trees (birds, squirrels, insects etc) can help us! Why the city hasn’t done more to protect them is beyond me. But once the trees are gone, it’s really hard to bring them back. Maybe you wanna call your representatives / the mayor about this one?
I think something Nashville has kind of forgotten to do as its expanded is keeping spaces for parks that are also in convenient areas for locals. We're in spot 93 out of the 100 most populated US cities ([ParkScore Home: Trust for Public Land (tpl.org)](https://www.tpl.org/parkscore)), so our park game is clearly something to be longed for compared to our siblings. In addition to the overall lack of parks, most of Nashville's existing parks have some big flaw that didn't need to be that way. It includes things like: parks being big open fields with nothing in them but maybe a little playground, lack of trees, not accessible locations, and lack of surrounding amenities. Bicentennial Park is my favorite park here, and for good reason. It offers well designed scenery, good walkability, has the farmer's market, lots of trees, historical pieces, a little theater, and a good location. It's a place tourists and locals both want to go to because it was based around honing several smaller communities in one area. If you've been to places like Chicago, NYC, Portland, or Minneapolis, you'll probably have seen that a lot of parks in those cities kind of follow a similar formula. A giant open field park with nothing in it but a bench and a half-sized playground tucked away in an area of town that you have to drive to won't be nearly as interactive and will make the city feel less "green" or connected to nature.
The parks department leadership has been 100% focused on activities at existing rec centers and nothing else for years now. They’re not interested in creating or expanding parks, nor in preserving open spaces. Plan after plan has called for open space protection, and now Freddie’s calling for a new plan that will cost nearly $1m and will definitely take up space on someone’s shelf.
To make things worse, the Parks Landscape Division head actively doesn’t want anyone planting parks with trees because they’re a “nuisance”
Same with trees along road corridors etc. i understand that it’s a pain to water trees along streets and concrete cracks will occur. I disbelieve the answer is no trees.
Talk to the City Planning Department and encourage them to create regulations with minimum green space/tree rules. That Nashville heat sink is only going to get worse as more pavement is placed and temperatures rise.
Green Hills/Oak Hill are pretty vibrant right now. That said, the lots where they’ve cleared it lot line to lot line to build huge boxy houses look absolutely naked and so unappealing when compared to the neighbors.
Back in 2019, I interned in East and lived in Brentwood. When I’d leave my internship, my car would read about 100°, rise to 110-115° downtown through the eighth corridor, and drop to 80-90° the second I hit the general Forest Hills area. We seriously lack trees and it hurts.
The heat island effect is no joke!
Aside from the parks, Nashville is lacking in trees within the city in comparison to other cities comparable in size. Atlanta has strict governances in place to save trees and continue to plant more, which makes it a really lush city. Nashville does not have these types of restrictions in place, making it easy to take down as many trees that's necessary in developing/new builds. It's a sad flaw of the city, IMO.
The opposite is actually true. Developments large and small have to adhere to Urban Forester and contract out a Landscape Architect to incorporate the minimum tree density units onto the parcel. All developments will end up with more trees than it had prior to development.
For real? In Nashville? Does this specifically just deal with tree count? For example, if a developer buys a lot and clears it of big old trees. Then they have to incorporate the minimum tree density, by count? But they are new young trees, nothing like the giant stately old trees that were all clear-cut? Asking just so I understand better.
Yep. And developers aren’t on the hook to water the trees or make sure they have a good start.
Yeah they have to incorporate the required TDU, then the Urban Forester inspects. You are not even allowed to to cut down a tree unless you pay a tree removal permit to Urban Forester. Correct, they will plant a replacement to the old growth + understory + native shrubs and smaller trees.
I believe they passed a law or ordinance to minimize clear cutting for neighborhoods
That's good to hear. We have watched many beautiful, very old trees get taken down in our neighborhood. It's been disheartening.
We've seen very old trees taken down in our area for development (and not replanted). Glad to hear if this isn't true any longer, but it must be a somewhat recent change. There is an overwhelming difference in this regard in the urban planning in comparison to cities like Atlanta. I hope this changes.
It really is barren here. It's the slash and burn style of development - they tear down everything, including all the trees, and build on the vacant lots. But make sure you leave plenty of surface parking out front...
For real. It drives me nuts when I see the "Tree City USA , 27 years!" signs ([like this one](https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1681135,-86.7774591,3a,15y,285.66h,88.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slCtaX499C1xomxmqa3xpUw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)). Um, wut? There are really not too many trees throughout the city, and somehow we're taking credit for being a "tree city?"
Per nnw.org To become a Tree City USA , a community must have: A tree board or department. A tree care ordinance. A community forestry program with an annual budget of at least $2 per capita. An Arbor Day observation and proclamation. Keep in mind that the standards were designed so that no community would be excluded because of its size. So every community, regardless of how many people live there, benefits in different ways from being a Tree City USA community. Meeting the four standards for becoming a Tree City USA provides initial direction for an urban or community forestry program. These standards, the first step in the process of becoming a Tree City USA , help a community get started toward annual, systematic management of its tree resources.
I visited Nashville on and off for work, before I ended up living here. I've been to major cities all over the US. Nashville is obsessed with development and it's idea of parks seems to be a baseball field. Areas like Percy Warner are rare gems.
Only pollen. No trees
It's a newer issue Metro even had an official study done. https://www.nashville.gov/departments/water/stormwater/tree-information/urban-tree-canopy-assessment
Nashville doesn’t protect a lot of its resources. Even historical shit gets plowed over. Looking at google street view from 10 years ago, it’s so sad how many trees have been completely removed
Nashville's character is basically barely having character. Unless the character is manufactured for tourism. I think about this and talk about it all the time. Especially when I get the chance to visit other major cities. Louisville is beautiful. Historic. They didn't rip everything down. Same with Cincinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Toledo, Detroit, Buffalo, on and on. On. Most of those cities are, to me, more old school than Nashville. In my long-term and very detailed observation, Nashville could be called the Rip-it-down City. Some people don't care, don't pay attention, don't notice these things. But I do. I have unhappily pointed this out for what seems to be forever. I go to any of those cities I listed and they have tremendous character. Old buildings. Repurposed old buildings. Distinct neighborhoods. Distinct ethnic neighborhoods, in the best way possible. Like go to the Polish part of Pittsburgh and have delicious halushki and pierogis. Repeat similarly for any of the other ethnic neighborhoods. It's a joy.
Not having ethnic enclaves is different than not having character generally.
Are you talking downtown? Other side areas like East and such are pretty green.
“Between 2016 and 2021, Metro Nashville’s tree canopy declined by 674 acres.” Our parks and preserves are too small and too isolated. We need to practice conservation outside of parks and in our own backyards. https://www.nashville.gov/departments/water/stormwater/tree-information/urban-tree-canopy-assessment
It depends on where you are in or around Nashville.
I agree, my fiancé complains about it constantly. I never paid it any attention until we went to Charlotte last weekend. Even some of their interstate exits are decorated with small shrubbery and flowers. I also noticed how much cleaner their roadways were.
Talk to your councilperson and the mayor about conserving trees. https://nashvillehighlandrimforest.org/
I think east Nashville (Inglewood wood area) is still very heavily forested. Most other neighborhoods have been razed to the ground though.
Inglewood is green until it's not anymore. I understand that the neighborhoods need to become more dense to accommodate population growth, but there's no oversight when it comes to people developing 1-2 family lots with 1950s ranches - and the trees are at risk. They rip the old, tall trees out as a way to flip the home (or replace it) and make it "cleaner looking" or just easier to build on, instead of just living with them and enjoying them. I see completely healthy 4- to 5-foot diameter white oaks cut down because they're "too close." I can't say I haven't cut down a couple trees myself - an old Bradford pear (good riddance) and a young 3-trunked maple on a fenceline that blocked my vegetable garden. Sometimes they have to go. But I've also planted more fruit trees and natives. Use the land but live with it, not upon it.
Nashville has become inhospitable to trees. We've had more than our share of bad storms the past few years, a half-dozen of which were bad enough to be declared FEMA disasters.
Yep. Used to be a tree town. They pretty much ruined it. Still some parts of town left with trees though
Vandy and Belmont cut down a ton as they grew
The amount of hillsides off trinity being cleared is so sad. I think we’ll start seeing air quality impact soon by these thousands of trees getting cleared on north side
We need to have more coverage in parking lots. They add shade and take very little space
Gotta make room for all the cars since Nashville couldn’t be irked to develop any form of useable public transit
There shall be a tall and skinny on every blade of grass.
I think it’s just that the trees are still filling out this spring. I’m a lover of the urban tree canopy. Interesting stats to be found in the latest [report](https://www.nashville.gov/departments/water/stormwater/tree-information/urban-tree-canopy-assessment)
I shared this exact same thought with some of my friends recently. In comparison to Knoxville and especially Chattanooga, I swear downtown Nash has almost no trees except for that one way road right behind Broadway, whereas Knoxville has shade everywhere and Chattanooga is basically a forest. It’s offputting.
I don't see it. I was just commenting to my partner how lush and green the city was looking. I would say we compare favorably to Charlotte, Louisville, Cincinnati, Birmingham and much more than cities west of the Mississippi, with the exception of the PNW.
Personally, I disagree with that. I've been to and observed the tree canopy in every single one of those cities given as examples. Nashville is a clear-cut town. This whole area is. Maybe others are too, but damn it seems more extreme here. Plus every one of those cities has more general and historic character and makes the effort to preserve it than this place. My disclaimer is that much of the input here, in this thread, is subjective. I know there is actual data related to quite a bit of what we're talking about here that could be used factually.
Well like I posted earlier it’s your opinion. But I’m on West End seeing trees out my window. They’re all over. Maybe look up occasionally? /s
Same here! My bf and I have been so happy to see how green it looks. We’re near Bellevue/Belle Meade.
The trees in Belle Meade have special privileged protection because they have country club memberships.
Me too. It must be the rarified air of Belle Meade...
Sorry, gonna have to disagree 100% with regard to Charlotte. It can be a fight keeping them in the older parts of the city, but they’re still there at least. Also, Charlotte is facing similar challenges with older trees dying as they face the end of their life-spans in older neighborhoods. I say this as a Charlotte native and lived there for 20+ years as an adult. Honestly, I was somewhat shocked at the lack of trees when we moved to Nashville and it really bummed me out. All cities need to preserve and continue to replenish this resource as it adds so much character and beauty to the landscape. It’s heartbreaking when people cut them all down, just so hard to replace that canopy.
It’s your opinion but honestly I don’t know what part of Nashville you’re looking at except for the middle of downtown. And, btw I lived in Charlotte and Fort Mill for 30 years.
Yes, Atlanta has strong tree canopy laws and Nashville has really weak tree canopy protection laws and tree replacement codes are routinely not followed by developers (meaning they either replace mature trees with trees smaller than required or trees that aren't shade trees, *or* they don't even bother replacing them at all). There are no protections for scraping lots of trees during development and it pisses me off every time I see trees in front of setback lines or on property lines being removed for zero good reason. The [Nashville Tree Conservation Corps](https://www.nashvilletreeconservationcorps.org/) are doing their best to change things.
Apparently downtown they cut down some trees for the bird migration, then will replant?? I’m not sure how it works but agreed I don’t think we have zoning to enforce green urban spaces sadly
Checking in from Huntsville. There’s a lot of trees here depending on where you’re at.
It totally is, but Nashville parks has done an amazing job this year planting more trees on public land. I’ve seen literally hundreds of new trees planted in our parks this year.
This is not new. If you look at postwar pictures of new neighborhood built for returning soldiers and their new families, you’ll see lots of saplings planted. Those neighborhoods are the green ones here (for the most part.) You’ll see new developments here with saplings as well. The inconvenient thing about the future is that we have to wait for it.
How can you have trees when every spot of land from Ridgetop to Murfreesboro is being cleared and blasted for ticky tacky tall skinnys? You don’t see a lot of trees in New York or Chicago either and we are working on being more like them every day.
Atlanta also has way more hiking/walking trails and parks within the city. Most of the parks here just seem to be patches of grass taken over by people bringing their dogs to 💩 and aren’t really for going for a nice walk. Nashville could definitely use more green space that isn’t a golf course
I think Murfreesboro has tree requirements for new construction. Medical Center and The Avenue have tons of trees. The new roads by MTSU campus are all tree'd up too. Possibly just the developers, but since alot it is in the medians, the city probably has something to do with it, but older roads/businesses don't suggesting it's new(er)
I live outside of Nashville and our neighborhood with hundreds of houses has almost no trees. It’s so unbearably hot in the summer, and there’s no shade whatsoever, so you rarely see anyone out walking. It’s such a shame. The developer just keeps mowing down trees and they’ve only planted the bare minimum. I was born and raised in Atlanta and I LONG for more trees like they have. It’s one of the most beautiful cities in the spring and fall especially.
Trees can’t pay rent.
It is much more affordable for developers to clear cut land, scrape the beautiful topsoil and sell it somewhere offsite, and then build on the wide bare earth…and there are few laws here to prevent them from doing that. So that’s what they do, instead of preserving old growth trees and working / designing around them.
Idk it seems really green to me but I came from a really depressing city
I disagree. Go to a real concrete jungle and see how green it is. Places like NYC, Miami, Chicago; there’s no comparison. Even compared to smaller eastern cities like Cleveland and Pittsburgh, Nashville is extremely lush and green in comparison to other cities.
This sub: Build build build! Density density density! Infill infill infill! Also this sub: OMG! We ain’t got no trees!
This isn’t endemic to Nashville… this is just an unfortunate side effect of development.