The Urban Forestry Committee

As I say in the letter below, Somerville is supposed to have an Urban Forestry Committee. Our Aldermen formally re-instated it in October of last year. As stated in our municipal code of ordinances, it will include seven residents, the tree warden, and the arborist.

This would be an amazingly powerful place for residents to come together with the city staff to share information and have the kind of face-to-face conversations that lead to the very most productive outcomes.

If you have the interest, you might forward the text below (or something of your own creation) to and

To the Honorable Mayor and Aldermen of Somerville,

In October of 2017, the Board of Aldermen formally re-established Somerville's Urban Forestry Committee. So far as I am aware, there has been no progress in bringing that committee to its first meeting in the eight months between October and today.

Mr Mayor, I am writing to ask that you fill the seats on the Urban Forestry committee without further delay.

Like other city committees, Urban Forestry will provide a critical point of communication between city staff and the residents. Its charter is to provide information, outreach, and advice both to residents and to city staff. This will help us all to work effectively together to achieve Somerville's potential.

Given the level of development and construction planned for 2018 and beyond, this coordination is absolutely critical.

I urge the mayor to advertise and to fill these committees seats without delay.

Chris Dwan
Resident, Ward 2

Open Letter – June 18, 2018

To the Honorable Mayor and the Board of Aldermen,

I am writing to ask you to take action to bring closure and a measure of justice regarding the trees of Beacon Street.


Somerville’s tradition of preserving and protecting trees, particularly those that give shade by roadsides, dates back hundreds of years. A book published in 1897, Somerville, Past and Present, describes rules imposed by the “selectmen” of the region as early as the mid-1600’s regulating what we now know as the town’s “shade trees.”

While these early rules predate the incorporation of the town of Somerville and have no legal standing, they are still useful as a guide.

More recently, in 2012, Somerville adopted the “Somervision” planning document. It calls for preservation of existing trees and commits to a steady increase in the population of trees both on public streets and in public land. This commitment is found in many sections of the document, including both transportation and development. Unfortunately, Somervision is no more legally binding than those ordinances from the 1600’s.

My point in sharing these examples is that our commitment to trees is not a recent fashion or some sort of emotional response to change.

Preservation of our roadside trees has been a part of our community for more than 300 years.

The Project

Between 2012 and 2015, Somerville contracted a firm named “Design Consultants Incorporated,” to develop a plan for the reconstruction of Beacon Street. This plan was approved by city staff in 2015 and was put out to bid by MassDOT. Newport Construction won the bid and has been operating according to this plan since 2016.

This plan, initiated, approved, and paid for by the city, specifies that Beacon Street should be clear-cut.

The public outreach around this project was misleading and factually incorrect. As late as 2015, posts on the city’s website and comments offered in public meetings stated that “several existing trees will need to be removed, but most will be preserved.”

Until October 2017, the actual plans were not made available on the city’s website. This changed in response to the outrage after a self described “scheduling mistake” by Newport Construction removed 37 trees in a single day, after they were specifically told to not proceed.

Based on information obtained from the city under a Freedom of Information Act request, the public notice and hearing process required under Massachusetts state law (Chapter 87, Section 3) was not followed. No hearings were held, no public notice was given, and no permits were issued for the removal of even one of the nearly 100 trees that were cut in 2016 and 2017, including the 37 cut on October 6 of last year.

The city has offered the technical excuse that these rules do not apply to “capital projects.” No mention of this exception is present under state law.

The city has also offered excuses for the lack of oversight based on the contractual relationship being between Newport and MassDOT, rather than between Newport and the city.


None of the above covers the fact that we were misled for nearly two years. In my opinion, both city staff and the contractors failed to provide even a bare minimum of consideration for the residents of Beacon Street.

To date, the only penalty imposed for any of this has been a negative performance review of the contractor by the state.

My attorney has counseled, and I agree, that the best path forward is one of collaboration with the city. Despite the fact that we live here, it is unlikely that the residents would have legal standing to bring suit against those responsible. Like those ordinances from the 1600’s, and like the Somervision document, I can at best offer guidance and advice.

It is up to the Board and the Mayor’s office to find some measure of justice in this sorry situation.

This project was planned by the city, implemented by the state, and overseen by both in an inadequate and occasionally illegal way.

Mr Mayor and honorable members of the Board, I am asking you to take action as you feel appropriate to give us the accounting, the justice, and the closure that we deserve. We residents were wronged in this process, and it is up to you to make us right.


Chris Dwan
Resident, Ward 2

Budgetary Requests for FY19

To the Mayor and the Board of Aldermen of the City of Somerville,

I am writing to ask for budgetary consideration for maintenance and protection of Somerville’s inventory of trees, particularly street or “shade,” trees. Below are three specific areas where I think that an investment is appropriate.

1) Balance the rate of tree planting with the rate of tree loss:

It is clear to me that 2017 and 2018 saw a significant reduction in Somerville’s population of street trees. This is true when we simply count up trees removed vs. trees planted. It becomes somewhat horrifying when I think of the biomass lost when we plant a sapling or two to replace a mature tree.

I understand that those saplings will grow. Still, it seems a reasonable goal that Somerville should not lose ground any given year.

Somerville is home to perhaps 14,000 trees. At a rough estimate, we lose 2 to 3 percent of those trees per year to various causes. This means that we should be replacing between 280 and 420 trees merely to maintain the number. In order to maintain the biomass – which is critical to the environmental benefits of an urban forest, we should plant perhaps double or triple that number.

My understanding is that the city’s budget for new tree plantings in FY18 was, perhaps, 100 saplings. This stark difference is a simple explanation for the number of standing dead trees that line our streets. Quite simply, we are cutting down many times more trees than we are planting, and we are doing this for several consecutive years.

I ask that the city significantly increase our investment in planting new trees, bringing plantings into alignment with expected loss for FY19.

Even a focused investment to take down and replace the standing deadwood around our city would be a good start.

2) Invest in beautifying Beacon Street:

The Beacon Street reconstruction project has been a long, frustrating, and ultimately disappointing project for many of us who live in Ward 2. Specifically, the decision to clear cut the street – leaving no mature trees whatsoever – means that we will be without shade trees of any significant size for decades. This has a significant impact on property values, on heating and cooling bills, on transit and pedestrian safety and comfort, and also simply on the experience of the residents as we go about our lives.

I ask that the city create a substantial fund to support large trees in planters, community maintained container gardens, parklets and other innovative uses of paved and parking lots along the street, and other similar features.

Based on conversations with other Beacon Street residents, I am confident that we will meet the city halfway on this, with shovels, trowels, seeds, bulbs, and cash in hand to support this effort.

3) Increase the consideration given to mature healthy trees in the all development and construction projects:

This is not a specific line-item in the budget. Rather, it is a request that the city shift to a policy of retaining our mature trees, scoping development to work around, rather than through them.

Succinctly, the city should not be cutting down mature, healthy trees. I understand that this will be both slower and more expensive. Based on my experience this year, and on conversations with many of my neighbors this year, I believe that this is appropriate.

Thank you for your consideration.


Chris Dwan

Neighborhoods Supporting Each Other

Last night, I had the opportunity to speak to the Union Square Neighborhood Council . I am deeply grateful and humbled that, having heard the story of the trees on Beacon Street, they have sent a letter to the Mayor and to the Board of Alderpeople, formally supporting our efforts to retain some of the mature trees along Beacon Street.

To the Mayor and the Board of Aldermen of the City of Somerville,

We are writing to in support of our neighbors who have put so much effort, energy, and emotion into saving the remaining trees on Beacon Street. We share their frustration with the community "process" around the removal of these trees, which seems to mirror so many processes in this city — an opportunity for city officials to listen without altering plans in any meaningful way based on public comment.

Note that mature trees are far more valuable than saplings, and it takes 20-40 years for a tree to provide the sheltering shade and ecosystem services that we rely on to keep our city livable. Though Somerville is a "tree city" according to the Arbor Day Foundation, recent events belie this designation's veracity.

We agree with our neighbors that that the rubber-stamp hearing for the last six trees on the street is a perfunctory afterthought to the unauthorized and unscheduled removal of 37 trees last October. It is a thin veneer of process for the final six out of nearly 100 trees sacrificed since work began in 2016.

This is a critical opportunity for the city to begin to rebuild trust with residents. We are asking you to act in the interest of the residents and the city itself, despite the fact that it may delay and additional expense.

We are asking you to preserve the remaining healthy trees.

There is another tree hearing scheduled for this coming Wed, May 2 – this one related to the removal of 37 mature trees along the southern end of Somerville Street. I encourage everyone who is interested in understanding and potentially improving this process to attend, to listen, and to be involved as early in the process as possible.

This public response is having an impact.

Direct phone calls to the Mayor’s office, combined with emails to both the Mayor and to the Board of Aldermen have changed the narrative. I learned yesterday that the construction crews have been instructed to hold off on both tree and curb removal until the city has had a chance to review the situation.

Please continue to share this page with your neighbors and to email and call. It is making a difference.

Letter to the Mayor and the Alderpeople

To the Mayor and the Board of Aldermen of the City of Somerville,

I am writing to express my continued strong concern and opposition to the planned removal of the remaining trees on Beacon Street. We are scheduled, within days or weeks, to lose the last six shade trees on the street. This is unacceptable to me, and I am asking you to act immediately to prevent this loss.

Many of us who attended the “tree hearing” on April 23rd came away with a strong impression of a deeply flawed process. Despite framing that meeting as a “hearing,” there was clearly no chance that it would result in change. The city staff present did a professional and dignified job in a difficult situation. It was clear that they have no option available except to recommend that the project continue without changes. Not even unanimous opposition among the attendees and those who provided written testimony could result in any change whatsoever.

A community input process that cannot cause change is worse than none at all.

The “full-depth reconstruction” project on Beacon was planned, approved, and implemented in a flawed and secretive manner. The planning and construction has lacked transparency and strong governance for nearly three years now. This week’s rubber-stamp hearing for the last six trees on the street is an insulting afterthought to the unauthorized and unscheduled removal of 37 trees last October. It is a thin veneer of process for the final six out of nearly 100 trees sacrificed since work began in 2016.

This is a critical opportunity for the city to begin to rebuild trust with the residents. I am asking you to act in the interest of the residents and the city itself, despite the fact that it will cause delay and additional expense.

I am asking the city to save one tree:

  • Issue an immediate stop-work order to Newport Construction and MassDOT to prevent the immediate loss of any trees.
  • Issue a change order on the project that will result in the preservation of at least one tree.

I believe that it should be possible to create a “bump-out” on the curb next to any tree to be saved. Similar bump-outs are in place already on the northern part of Beacon Street where are used to prevent cars from parking too close to intersections. This small modification would leave the existing curb closest to the tree intact, which would save the root structure of that particular tree without requiring major changes to drainage or to the path of the road.

I understand that this will incur additional time and expense on a project that is already into its second year of delay. This is worthwhile because it will be an important, visible, lasting step in the right direction after years of secrecy and neglect.

It did not have to be this way.

We could have had this conversation in the six months since the issue came to our attention, or in the nearly three years since the plans were issued.

Even after you act, the other major issues associated with this project will remain. In particular, we will still have a flawed process for community input, and we will still need to pursue financial penalties against Newport Construction for their unauthorized actions last fall.

We need to defer those conversations because we are now, because of the city’s six months of delay in engagement, in a race against time. Even a day or two of delay may make the difference in the survival of the last of the shade trees on Beacon.

Mr Mayor and Honorable Aldermen, I am asking you to act today.

Save one tree.

Chris Dwan
Ivaloo Street

Letter to the city, March 2018

This letter was sent to the Board of Aldermen and to the Mayor on March 8, 2018. It was entered into the public record as part of the March 22 meeting of the Board. That record is available at this link.

To Whom it may Concern

On the morning of October 6, 2017, crews from Northern Tree (“Northern”), under subcontract to Newport Construction (“Newport”), removed at least 37 trees from Beacon Street in Somerville. This work was done under contract to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (“MassDOT”) as part of the “full depth reconstruction,” project that has been underway on Beacon Street since 2016.

Outrageous Conduct

When the crews arrived early on a Friday morning, there was no traffic control or consideration for pedestrians in place. No police details were onsite. There had been no notice to the community, and the trees were not marked in any way to indicate that they were to be removed. Neither MassDOT nor city staff were onsite to provide supervision. Cars were parked in front of several trees, blocking access by the crews. Residents immediately began to express concern and to ask questions of the crews.

Faced with this obvious confusion and lack of coordination, rather than pausing to check in with MassDOT and the city, Northern and Newport clear-cut the street. Only seven trees were spared. Frustratingly, a dead tree that was clearly in need of removal remains standing five months later.

This is outrageous conduct. The situation on the ground was clearly not right. For the contractors to destroy dozens of trees under these conditions shows poor judgement and a lack of respect for both the city and its residents.

Pleasing Words

The Board of Aldermen took up the issue at their meeting on the 12th of October, just 6 days later. They passed orders seeking additional information, demanding reports, insisting on additional staffing, and suggesting clarifications to local ordinances around tree removal. The issue was discussed in both the Legislative Matters and in the Public Utilities and Public Works committees. Representatives from MassDOT and from the city appeared at that latter committee meeting. Neither Newport nor Northern are mentioned in the minutes as having attended. These representatives described the situation as a mix-up in communication and scheduling around long-planned work.

Around the same time, the Somerville Patch quoted Richard DeFelice, the President of Newport: “This was a contracted item and has been outlined by the engineering designs on file since they were approved.” The city’s website echoed this sentiment, describing the “early” removal of the trees as a regrettable scheduling mistake.

MassDOT later issued a pair of negative performance evaluations against Newport. To date, this is the only concrete penalty assessed in this situation.

No Plan To Be Found

If clear-cutting Beacon Street was the plan – it represents a departure from any plans that I have been able to find during five months of inquiry. The contract award documents and drawings (obtained from MassDOT under a public information request) show at least 71 pre-existing trees. These documents specify 30 particular trees to be removed. Of the original 71 trees, seven remain standing, substantially fewer than the 41 that we might expect, based on the plans.

Clear-cutting Beacon Street also marks a departure from what the community was told to expect. At the last public hearings and notices provided about this project, held in mid-2014, attendees were told that we would “retain many of the existing trees,” removing, “a total of twenty-two.” However, in the final project plans issued in 2015, only one tree is called out to be “preserved and protected,” the large tree at the Northeast corner of Park and Beacon Streets.

Unfortunately, even that one large tree is gone. It seems to have been removed sometime during in the summer of 2017, perhaps because it fell into ill health during the multi-year construction project. Despite repeated inquiries with the city, no details have been made available as to when or why it was removed.

In January of 2018, I submitted a petition to the Board of Aldermen and to the Mayor asking for a reconciliation of the trees that had been removed against construction documents and plans. My intention was to cause the city to look into the situation and verify whether the correct trees had been removed, and also whether an appropriate process had been followed in making changes to the published plans. This request echoed Alderman Heuston’s instruction to city staff from the October 2017 committee meeting. As of early March, no accounting has been forthcoming. Based on meetings and conversations with city staff, it seems unlikely that the city will answer even this straightforward, factual question.

More succinctly, we have repeatedly been told by both the city and by the contractor that this work was done according to a plan, but the city cannot produce either a plan or evidence that one ever existed.

The plans that are publicly available are specific that Beacon is not to be clear-cut.

A Measure of Quality

Since October, I have heard many times that nearly 200 new trees will be planted at the end of this project. These new trees are certainly shown in the plans from 2015. Based on spot checks of a single part of the project, I have little confidence that this has not also changed.

Trees are visible from the street and are easy for an amateur to measure and to count. The interested public can use the trees as a quick measurement of overall compliance and performance on a project. I have done that measurement, and I have found both these contractors and the city’s oversight and awareness of the project to be sorely lacking. I have no doubt that other, less visible details of the project have also wandered from the stated intentions.

More of the Same

The weather is warming up, and construction work is resuming throughout Somerville. In the weeks to come, crews from Newport and Northern will return to my neighborhood. Despite outcry from the community and despite substantial talk and writing, it seems that things will continue as we have all come to expect – contractors running roughshod without oversight or accountability from the city.

Somerville deserves better.

Chris Dwan
Ward 2, Somerville

Petition to the city, January 2018

This petition, signed by 23 residents, was submitted to the city in early January. It was entered into the record at the January 11, 2018 meeting of the Board of Aldermen. That record, as well as links to the minutes of meetings where it was discussed are all available at this link

A Petition to the Mayor and the Board of Aldermen of the City of Somerville

We, the undersigned, petition the Mayor and the Board of Aldermen to take the following actions related to the removal of 37 trees from Beacon Street on October 6, 2017:

Publish an accounting:

We ask that the City publish an accounting of all street trees removed from Beacon Street between January 2016 and the present. While this request is specific to the Beacon Street Reconstruction project, the list should also include trees removed for any other reason.

For each tree removed, the accounting should include:

  • Tree location (closest street address), diameter (“caliper”), and date of removal.
  • The relevant location information as stated on contract page A00802-4, if the tree is among the 30 listed in the Beacon Street Reconstruction contract (MassDOT Project 607209, Contract Number 90025).
  • A summary of the arborist’s report/engineer’s justification, if the tree was removed as part of the reconstruction project and is not listed in the contract (as required on contract page A00801-48).
  • A summary explanation if the tree was removed for some other reason or as part of some other project.

If any of the trees removed as part of the reconstruction project lack the above justification, we further petition for the following actions:

Refuse payment:

Instruct MassDOT to reduce payment to Newport Construction, Inc., by $1,000 per unauthorized removal. This is the amount that Newport bid for removal of a single tree.

Compensate the City:

We ask that the City demand cash compensation from the contractor. The contract (pages A00801-46 and A00801-50) specifies that the contractor must provide two–inch-diameter replacement trees, beyond the 191 specified in the contract bid, and totaling the “caliper” measure destroyed during the project. Instead of these additional saplings, we suggest a rate of $300 per inch of tree diameter destroyed, since the contracted price of a two–inch-diameter sapling is $600.

We ask that this money be placed in a fund to be used to support watering and other care for the trees of Beacon Street.

Bar Newport from Future Tree Work:

Because of the inappropriate manner in which Newport performed the work on October 6, 2017, we ask that they and their subcontractors be barred from performing any tree work in Somerville for the next five years.

Letter from December, 2017

I submitted this letter to the Board of Aldermen and to the Mayor in early December. Unfortunately, it did not make it into the public record.

To Whom It May Concern,

I am writing to express my disappointment and concern, and to demand accountability, over the way that both the city and Massachusetts Department of Transportation (Mass DoT) are handling the removal of dozens of trees by their contractor, Newport Construction (Newport), from Beacon Street in Somerville on the morning of October 6.

The City’s Conclusion
According to a communication from the city on October 26:

  • The removal of the trees was planned as part of the Beacon Street reconstruction.
  • An error on the part of a subcontractor (Newport) prevented the city from providing its customary notice to residents and abutters.
  • Newport has been given a pair of negative performance evaluations by MassDot, which may impact their competitiveness in bidding on future work with MassDoT
  • No separate hearing would have been held about these trees in any event, since they were removed as part of a capital project.

I am unsatisfied with this conclusion.

I believe that Newport is in violation of its contract on several points related to tree protection and removal. I believe that the city is in violation of its own ordinances and practice on this matter.

I am writing to urge the city, the Mayor, and MassDoT to take all possible steps to make this sort of vandalism and negligence prohibitively expensive for future contractors and city staff in the future.

What we were told

At the time that the trees were removed, many project documents were missing from the city website. Specifically, the finalized plans from 2015 were unavailable. The latest documents available were “75%” plans and hearing notes dating from 2014. While the final plans, dating from 2015, have subsequently been made available, there are no notes or even dates that public hearings might have been held related to those plans.

Bluntly, the last time that the public was given detailed information on the plans was more than three years ago, in June of 2014. At that time, MassDoT’s response to the question of tree removal was specific and unambiguous:

… through the project, we are going to add approximately two hundred new trees, plus we are going to retain many of the existing trees. We are taking down approximately eight trees of twelve inch to fourteen inch caliper and up, and then, we have a total of twenty-two trees that are being taken down for various reasons. They have been looked at by an arborist in advance.

A major change from the 75% to the 100% plans (dated June of 2015) is that only a single tree (at the Northeast corner of Park and Beacon) is marked to be “preserved and protected.” This is a stark contrast to earlier statements.

In early October, I made a request to MassDoT for all publicly available documents related to the project. After repeated requests, MassDoT determined that their website for submitting requests was nonfunctional. Shortly thereafter, I received a CD-ROM in the mail containing many contract documents and drawings.

Contract specifications for the project were issued on November 3, 2015. In that document, item 103, on page A00802-4 specifies the GPS coordinates of 30 specific trees and two stumps that are to be removed.

In the contract award documents, issued January of 2016, Newport’s bid includes exactly 30 trees to be removed, at a cost of $1,000 per tree, including stump grinding and removal of wood chips.

Item 102.51 is specific about the manner in which the contractor is to care for and preserve both the street trees and also any trees that might be affected by construction (those whose drip lines extend into the construction area). The contractor is to water any affected tree twice per week, to wrap exposed roots in moistened burlap, and so on.

These are the last documents available through either the city or MassDot.

Accountability and payment

To my knowledge, during the course of this project, none of this care has been taken. I challenge the city, MassDot, and Newport construction to provide any evidence to the contrary.

On the morning of October 6, Newport removed 37 trees without warning or notice. This was a coordinated action, started at first light, with multiple crews working to ensure that the maximum number of trees would be removed before the community could protest.

I honestly do not know how many more trees were removed as part of the project, prior to that morning. I challenge the city, the Mayor, and MassDoT to provide that number, along with evidence that it is accurate. I further challenge them to provide the required joint justification from the city’s Tree Warden and the Project Engineer that these removals were justified.

Per item 102.51 in the contract (“Basis of Payment”), that report is required before the contractor may be paid for removing our trees.


There are terms in the contract related to the contractor’s responsibilities if a tree is damaged during the project, I honestly do not think that they will matter at this point. The gross negligence and lack of accountability in this process is shared between the City and MassDot. In my opinion, Newport is only operating as they have come to expect.

I challenge the City and MassDoT to prove me wrong.

Chris Dwan
Resident, Ward 2, Somerville

A letter from Oct 10, 2017

This letter was submitted to the Board of Aldermen and to the Mayor on October 10, 2017, days after the trees were cut. It is agenda item 75 in the minutes of the Board’s October 12 meeting. The agenda item and my original PDF can be accessed at this link.

To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express my disappointment and concern over the removal of dozens of trees from Beacon Street in Somerville on the morning of October 6.

Tree removal
On the morning of the 6th, I commuted by bicycle down Beacon Street from my home on Ivaloo Street to an 8AM business meeting near Kendall Square. On the way, I saw a number of tree removal crews setting up between Park Street and the Cambridge/Somerville line.

By the time I made my way home, around 9:30AM, the majority of the trees were gone.

Once home, I logged into an online neighborhood forum. I found confusion, sorrow, and outrage. One neighbor had made a photographic tally of 37 fresh tree stumps. Frustratingly, I found no answers. By the end of the day, an update had been posted to the city website. The city shared our confusion and surprise. The update clarified that the city had not authorized the removals, and that a process of notification exists for removing even single trees – much less for razing an entire street.

Suggestions for the Trees
Before going into the process issues below, I have specific considerations for the replacement of the trees.

  • The replacement trees should be mature, comparable in age and number to the ones that were removed. We should not have to wait 20 years for our shady boulevard.
  • These trees should be of diverse species, to allow a steady cycle of replacement as they age or fall victim to insects or disease. This will avoid single-species blights like the emerald ash boring beetle, and similar mass die offs in the future.
  • The replacement should be done in an intentional and planned way, not rushed or cheapened to appease our current anger. Specifically, it should wait until after major construction is complete. The trees should be planted in Spring, when the trees have the best chance of survival.
  • The plan should include ongoing funding for tree care, including regular watering and treatment for insects and disease.
  • The city must not authorize any new construction or changes to the plan that would prevent full replacement and healthy growth of our trees. If we hope for a Beacon Street lined with mature trees in 20 years, we must act as if the trees are still there now. Otherwise, whatever new trees are planted will have no space or light to grow, making this weekend’s loss permanent. We must guard an empty space – tree stumps – with more vigilance than we accorded the original trees.
  • We must strengthen citywide protections against this sort of action by contractors. Once the trees are dead, we have no choice but to move forward. The penalties for this sort of unauthorized destruction should be severe enough to discourage crews from using vandalism to advance a project schedule or open the door to downstream work.

Transparency and Accountability

The city’s update says that the, “street trees were anticipated to be removed in Spring of 2018,” to accommodate “intricacies related to underground utilities and placement within the new sidewalk / street configuration.” It specifies that the trees were not sacrificed to accommodate a protected bicycle lane.

If there was a plan to remove some or all of these trees, if this was merely a mistake of scheduling and notification, residents deserve to see that plan. It should be specific as to which trees were to be removed, and why.

To that end, I am quite interested in learning how the crews on Friday morning were authorized and coordinated. The work I saw on Friday certainly looked planned. I would like to know how far in advance the tree crews were scheduled, and whether appropriate police details were on hand. I would like to know what specific trees were to be removed, and how that list aligns with the ones that were cut on Friday.

This sort of accountability, transparency, and attention to detail will be critical, given the amount of work being proposed, citywide, over the coming years.

Looking Forward
The work on Beacon Street has been long and tiresome for residents. Since 2015 we have had traffic disruptions, dust, dirt, and noise from dawn to dusk. This has had a significant negative impact on local business and home life. I understand the scale and complexity of the work: We are replacing an 1800’s era wooden sewer under an active commuter street, with all the surprises and changes that entails.

For all that, it has been getting worse for us. There have been several weeks this summer when we have had no usable sidewalk on either side of the street for blocks at a time. The parking and shoulder areas of Beacon near Park and Kirkland have been increasingly filled with construction equipment, pallets of bricks and pipe, and even the construction crew’s personal vehicles. The city should consider the impact of this sort of overlap, including equipment and material storage, when authorizing concurrent construction.

There is simply not enough space for all of the work currently being done. It makes accountability hard to define.

The trees must be a turning point. It is past time for the city and the residents to be treated as partners and stakeholders in this and other development projects.

Chris Dwan