You're viewing part of a thread.
@claralistensprechen5th @ECEC *sigh*
City streets are _not_ specifically for cars. Freeways aren't even specifically for cars (buses, trucks), but city streets in particular are definitely not just for cars.
Tree roots are a solved problem. Lots of city master plans and similar documents have a list of trees allowed in the public right-of-way that have root systems compatible with sidewalks and roads. Some trees have roots that buckle concrete, others have roots that don't. Choose wisely.
@Andres4NY @claralistensprechen5th @ECEC Trees were here first. Streets (pavement) are an attempt to tame the world. The arrogance of thinking we (humans) can & should assert our will over the world is the problem; street trees are a solution.
@rejinl @Andres4NY @ECEC
...except they are not. What you're in favor of is no cities. Not gonna happen.@claralistensprechen5th @rejinl @ECEC She said 'street trees', which are have shown clear benefits to dense cities all over the world. They're incompatible with on-street parking, though.
@Andres4NY @rejinl @ECEC
I was simply answering the "stupid question" part, so there's that.
@claralistensprechen5th @Andres4NY @ECEC You're saying pro street trees = anti cities? Lol, ok.