• BobbyTables@lemmy.world
    24·
    11 months 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.netEnglish
      4·
      11 months 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
        4·
        11 months 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
      4·
      11 months 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.

    • Fifteen_Two
      19·
      11 months ago

      I agree in principle, but this just sounds like hell to me.