Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Trees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges council to save large Taylor Park live oak as renovation plans proceed
Summary
A resident asked the council to preserve a mature live oak in the back of Taylor Park amid a $6 million renovation and proposed low-income housing; city staff said the approved site plan and driveway locations risk damaging root systems and urban forestry advised removal of trees that would be fatally harmed, and staff said they would review alternatives.
A Mobile resident told the City Council she wants the city to preserve a large live oak at Taylor Park while the city proceeds with a $6 million park improvement project that also contemplates low-income housing on the site.
Aan Warner described the tree, the community garden and flood concerns behind the gymnasium and said the project's drawings do not show removal of that back-of-property tree: "Please save a live oak tree... It's huge. It's beautiful." Warner said the community uses the shaded area and urged the city to mark and protect the tree on construction diagrams.
City administration responded that the site plan approved by the council last fall anticipates construction access and aprons that could damage the tree’s root ball and weaken or kill the canopy. An administration representative said staff consulted urban forestry, which shared concerns about root damage, and that one street-front tree (along Baltimore Street) is currently scheduled for removal but staff are looking for ways to avoid removing trees unless absolutely necessary.
Administration told the council it would review the specific back-of-property tree Warner highlighted and provide an answer. The transcript records staff offering to examine the photos and diagram Warner brought and to follow up with a location-specific response.
The council did not take a formal vote on the park design during the meeting segment captured in the transcript; staff indicated they would investigate alternatives where removal is not essential to the approved project alignment.
