Being new to London, I actually like the metal trees. I'd much rather see them clean up Dundas and Richmond and make that area more people friendly.

Wow Mike, I was with you up to the word Mayor. No doubt a lot of things are done to help friends or payback favours. I doubt any of us would do less if given the "power". Not saying it's right, just that it is. After that you totally lost me and any credibility you may have had.

I do not object to the metal trees. I object to the cost, though. I would also object if they were not done by a London artist.

It has been said that real trees and concrete don't mix. Art trees downtown sounds like a good compromise for The Forest City, as long as they are not trying to replace ALL trees, which they most certainly are not.

Back to cost: $6k a tree? Egads!

I didn't like the metal trees when they first were erected, but now I hardly notice them. If there's one thing I like about them, it is that it got Londoners in a critical discussion of public art, and there's nothing wrong with that.

real trees get killed by the salt from the snow that is ploughed off the road... the metal trees are a compromise, either dead trees or metal trees.

I strongly agree with you Trish I would not miss those those trees for second if the city got rid of them or at least maybe setup a place for them in Museum London, Citiplaza etc. just off the sidewalks at least.. It also would of been really thoughtful if cityhall asked us the local citizens if we wanted the trees in the first place.

@Trish Seriously read what I wrote - I didn't say the CURRENT trees were proto-types... I said there are metal carbon remvoing trees in-development (not by London) and that they sounded like something London would probably be interested in someday.

Leave the metal trees, but plant many many many many many more real trees.

Thanks for that link, Trish. $480K if the project is complete. I missed it in the article, is the artist from London? (Who is he related to?) I am not against art, but with all the artists and students we have in London I am sure we could get plenty of quality eye-candy for cost, just from local artists wanting to showcase their work and have a cool photo-op for their portfolios.

I cannot see removing them "improving" London. That too would cost $$. I can see not putting more in and spending the saved cash on maybe a street cleaner (human) or two to help clean up litter. (streets get cleaner and a couple jobs are created)

They are not proto-type designs for carbon removing trees, they are nothing more then metal sculptures that cost our city $6000 each to commission! (http://www.gazette.uwo.ca/pdf/Gazette-2008-09-30.pdf)

Unfortunately they are paid for already, but I still cringe every time I have to go downtown.

There are actually proto-type designs for carbon-removing metal trees (check physorg.com) Sounds right up London's alley!

What is the harm of leaving the metal trees there? There are paid for, people do like them. It is better to have real trees, but it is hard to grow trees in tight street area. The city will be experiment with a new way to grow trees on Clearence St this year.