The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1914-12-02
From the Department Of Parks and
BouIevards.

To the Honorable the Common Councils;
Misunderstanding TO the petition
Baker protesting against the method
OF planting trees on Dexter boulevard
and referred TO this department, /
have TO say that by authority OF Sec
trees along Dexter boulevard was
done The section referred TO reads as
follows:
The Department OF Parks and
Boulevards shall have power and con-
troll over all trees, shrubs and plants
planted. or TO be planted In the streets
Detroit and the power 10 plant prune.
spray. cultivate. preserve ana other
wise maintain such trees within the
confines OF the public highways OF tho
Section also says: NO person.
firm or corporation shall plant In any
street or public highway tree at "A
distance OF less than 25 feet from any
than two feet from the established
sidewalk line OF said street except
upon written permit hrst obtained
from the Department OF Parks and
Boulevards"
AS stated in the petition, verbal no.
tice was served upon the people liv-
ing on Dexter boulevard or our inten-
tions 10 replace some or the trees ana
20 plant where none were already To-
Gated. This was matter OF courtesy
and not because OF any obligation TO
mentioned.
In placing the trees an attempt was
made TO keep as near as possible
block referred TO eight trees were
planted on each side with spaces be-
tween OF 81 feet, 81 feet 81 feet, 81
feet, SO feet six inches. So feet seven
inches The distance OF S3 feet six
inches was made necessary because OF
an automobile driveway.
There were few cases where mex
nQ psiN nj RI no al
rearranged and In such cases the Work
was done by our men and the prop
erty owner consulted. In several In.
stances small trees were taken up and
transplanted in tho owners back
yards The owner thus lost nothing
and was put 10 absolutely no expense
| by reason OF the slight changes made.
Relative to lot No. ll2, on which
your petitioners lay great stress we
! find that the owner some time ago had
gone 10 the expense OF one hundred
| 'front.' OF his property. This property
has 90 feet inches OF frontage His
! trees were planted 20 feet inches
apart which was not satisfactory TO
US. They were transplanted at dis
lance OF Ss feet apart and left In front
OF his own property He thus merely
retained what he already had and
paid for and secured from the city
nothing In addition.
Each OF your petitioners retained. in
some manner or other that which they
in front OF their property a four-inch
| elm tree.
II is the policy OF this department
| not to consider the individual property
| but rather the Identification Of the
streets as a whole; in fact, In at
| tempting the Identification OF the City
We could hardly afford TO take into
| consideration the claims OF a single
| individual as I'm many cases the indi-
| vidual would probably be obliged "a
sacrifice something or other whore the
! community as whole Is to be bene-
fitted
The planting on -ethe whole has
| greatly improved that thoroughfare
and we find that the people generally
| are pleased. II is TO be regretted that
the first efforts on the part OF the City
In the way OF improving the City
| streets through tree planting should
| arouse the jealousy and antagonism Of
! ePeff-twe- F-aia%fAts--
| Respectfully submitted.
WILLIAM T. DUST
Commissioners.
Referred 10 Committee on Parks and
BouleyardS