We recently received notification of Resolution of Necessity #2730. Our main concern is the welfare and preservation of 6 magnificent, 30 ft. plus, fir trees that would perish in accordance with requirements of SDCL 9-46-3.
We have spent over $200.00 per year to have these trees treated to resist damaging diseases and pestilence. Therefore, we are proposing a concession that would satisfy the "Resolution of necessity", and save 4 of the 6 trees in question.
We would appreciate an opportunity to have a City Representative visit us in order for us to present our "Tree Saving Plan." [Arthur and June Gwynne, letter to Madison Sidewalk Committee, 2009.12.02]
The Gwynnes sound pretty level-headed in this letter. They're even willing to compromise, offering a plan that would still sacrifice two trees. But heck, I'd rather keep all six. Catherine Ave. is a nice quiet street. If it keeps that shade and windbreak there, let's run that sidewalk right along the curb, or just skip it all together.
The Gwynnes aren't the only unhappy residents facing sidewalk expense. See complaining missives from Mr. Brad Gilbert of 722 N. West Ave., on page 46 of the agenda packet, as well as K. Hein, Marlene Oldre (who would lose a crab tree and a safety rail), Ed Swanson (who thinks the city should put a sidewalk along the highway east from the Dairy Queen first), Roger Southmayd, Tom Halverson (who expresses the grouchiness of a lot of Madisonites when he says, "I assume this 'discussion & review' process is a mere formality and the decision has already been made"), and Omar El-Gayar.