[APA-New Urbanism Division] Awnings versus street trees

[Ray Chiaramonte]

I was on vacation when this was sent out so my answer might be a little late.  I do not think that it should be a choice because both are important for somewhat different reasons.  The awnings provide complete protection from the climate, including rain that trees alone cannot provide.  The trees provide however something much more.  Trees provide the softening over time of appearance of the community as it ages.  They add the maturity that makes a community a really a desirable place to live.  When I revisit the town of Celebration, as I did last week, I was impressed at how the trees have completely changed the feeling of the street as they have grown.  The starkness of the early years is completely gone and a new feeling of a mature community has taken over largely because of the tree canopy.  Besides that the negative effect on walking in the hot Florida summer is reduced greatly.  So if there is any way to include both covered walkways and trees do so, but trees are more important in the long run.  I think the con's are far outweighed by the benefits of the tree canopy.

Ramond A. Chiaramonte, AICP
Assistant Executive Director

Hillsborough County Planning Commission 
601 East Kennedy Blvd, 18th Floor
P O Box 1110
Tampa, FL 33601
(813) 272-5940 ext. 316 (office)
(813) 695-3154 (cell)
(813) 272-6258 (fax)
rayc at plancom.org
www.theplanningcommission.org 



-----Original Message-----
From: nud-bounces at list.planning.org [mailto:nud-bounces at list.planning.org] On Behalf Of Nathan Bilger
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 3:37 PM
To: nud at list.planning.org
Subject: [APA-New Urbanism Division] Awnings versus street trees


Here's an interesting situation that I'm looking at right now.

In a downtown area, or similar commercial core, what is the preference of New Urbanists between having awnings on buildings along a street versus street trees?  I know it is just a small detail, but it really could have a large impact on an important streetscape in a town or development.

I think that having one or the other would work best.  Having both awnings and trees seems redundant, and neither seems like it would create a stark uninviting streetscape.

My thoughts so far:

Street tree pro's
-They offer complete shade across the entire sidewalk. 
-They are natural in an manmade environment.  
-They cost nothing to the businesses, and are minimal maintenance to the municipality. 
-They are environmentally sound.

Street tree con's
-They drop leaves and limbs to be cleaned up.  
-They can heave sidewalks.  
-They die if not maintained. 
-They can pose a traffic hazard (dropped limbs, sight distance, etc).

Awnings pro's
-They can offer additional low-intensity signage area for the business. -Without street trees, the awnings provide shade to the business. -They can increase the visibility of the business. -They articulate the façade of the structure.

Awnings con's
-They can be expensive to install.
-They require some maintenance by the business.
-Additional signage may be undesirable.


So, any comments, opinions, or experiences out there?
	-Nathan


-------------
Nathan Bilger
Zoning Administrator
 
City of Greenfield
10 South State Street
Greenfield, IN 46140
(317) 477-4320
_______________________________________________
NUD mailing list
NUD at list.planning.org http://list.planning.org/mailman/listinfo/nud