Planting trees in the street. St. Louis

[Tucson]

If this was April 1, I would think it was a joke. But, here it is. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d31_1265849497

You may need to let that load.

[bucketdad96]

Watch the guys face when the reporter asks him about the street damage from the roots. You can see that he hadn't even considered that.

[nohesitation]

I like the trees. They do have trees that are deep rooting, and don’t damage the sidewalk.

[Dugout Dad]

Trees in the street?? The city may be out more money after the first drunk driver hits the tree and sues the city for his injuries because the city planted trees in the street. Hey, but they can know claim they are "green"

[GIMNEPIWO]

On a quick look those trees appear to be an Ornamental Pear ... similar to Bradford ... although Bradford had some inherent problems, tearing up streets was not one of them .... They are very suseptible to to wind, ice & storm damage and will usually die or need to be removed from that ... The improved varieties were somewhat less prone to damage ... City planners love to use them because they don't have to think too much and the tress are easy to find ... All that being said, yes ... there are varieties that could be planted in that area, not damage the street, not be a maintenance problem, help the city ' be greener ' and improve the view ... The Nursery Industry knows all this and in spite of their repeated recomendations for planners and architects to do so, it ain't happening ... plus half the contractors don't know sh*t from shinola either ...

[3'sDad]

Far be it from a reporter to let the alderman's mostly correct answers to get in the way of a good story. Had the reporetr looked at what the project was looking to achieve - redoing sidewalks, adding trees and TRAFFIC CALMING - he might have understood why the tress were planted where they were. Pinching and narrowing pavement sections slows cars down - proven via study and accepted as a trafiic slowing tehcnique by traffic enginers.