Residents urge Phoenixville council to halt street‑tree removals, hire arborist

Phoenixville residents used the council’s April 14 public‑comment periods to press elected officials for immediate changes to how the borough manages public trees after a wave of recent removals, some performed by PECO with borough approval, that neighbors say were not publicly disclosed.

"These trees were not on the 2026 tree removal list," said Sharon of 233 4th Avenue, who told council that crews cut five mature maples and honey locusts on her block without prior notice. She cited the borough’s 2024 arborist assessment and said 63 trees appear on the 2026 removal list; of those, she said, 13 had been classified in 2024 as good or fair and 11 of those had a diameter at breast height greater than 20 inches. Sharon asked the council to stop removals of trees deemed good or fair, to reallocate maintenance funds toward pruning, and to hire a certified arborist to reassess trees before further action.

Others at the podium backed those requests. "Refocus efforts on pruning and replacements that have a documented strategy," said Ryan Merkovich, who recommended low‑cost canopy mapping and changes to tree pits so large canopy trees can be preserved in dense areas. Doug Chrisman urged the borough to exercise "restraint" and make removal a last resort, noting the long time it takes to replace mature canopy.

Andrea Ren Harden cited the borough code language that references a borough arborist, and said the budget includes funding for that role. She asked the council to add transparent reasons to the 2026 removal list (for example, "dead," "invasive," or "safety hazard") and to impose a moratorium on future removals until an arborist completes new assessments.

Heidi, who identified herself as a Tree Advisory Commission member, told council that TAC was not provided with a complete list of recent and upcoming removals and urged a closer, proactive partnership between TAC and the borough. "Hiring a qualified urban arborist must be a priority," she said, and she asked the council to clarify who makes removal decisions and to publish the criteria.

Council and committee responses in the meeting included scheduling and process items rather than an immediate policy change. Council President reiterated the TAC meeting scheduled for May 4 at 6 p.m. in borough chambers and several committee chairs said they would review processes and seek greater coordination. Tree Advisory Commission chair Mister Weiss told the council the recent removals had "triggered a review of our processes to see if, where, and how the tree advisory committee and the borough can best serve the community."

What happened next: Council did not adopt a moratorium or a new hiring action during the meeting. Residents requested that council (a) halt planned removals while new assessments are completed, (b) publish the full removal list and the borough's rationale for each tree slated for removal, and (c) fill the funded borough arborist position and involve TAC in future decisions. TAC and at least one council committee scheduled follow‑up meetings (TAC: May 4) and said they would revisit the issue.

Why it matters: Commenters framed mature canopy as a community asset that reduces heat, lowers energy bills, supports stormwater management and provides other public‑health and economic value. They said several trees removed recently were assessed as suitable for pruning rather than removal and pressed officials to improve transparency and technical review before more removals occur.