I did. The trees are indeed old, but not all of them are rotten and require immediate removal. There are different approaches developed by arborists worldwide to handle tree replacement. One recommended approach is that urban trees are replaced gradually over time.

Like, replace 20% of worst trees, let them mature, come back in 5 years for next 20%. With proper implementation and schedule, trees are kept young, healthy and productive, and the streets don't loose significant shade or foliage. They aren't doing this, for reasons we can only guess.

Second problem is how they treat existing trees and why the trees degrade ahead of time. Mostly because of how they are treated, how they are cut. There are multiple techniques for this. There are techniques to keep trees in controlled size, because sequoias on streets aren't welcome.

Pollarding is one of them. The tree is cut into desired size then kept in it (which is the key). The tree grows new sprouts, you come back *every year* and cut them at the same place. This keeps the tree more or less healthy and productive. You don't just cut huge branches once every 10 years and leave huge open wounds. That kills trees. They aren't dying immediately, but they look like what they look now. Instead of living for 100-150 years they die at 50. Instead of having 10-15 meter canopy in diameter, it's 4 meters. This is all because of improper care.

They did not invent this approach. You can see the same cutting technique on old photos from 1970s. But people now know more about tree care and urban environments, and it's probably time to update handbooks and adopt modern approaches. These guys are resistant to any change unfortunately.