Overview:
Denver Parks faces pushback as Montclair residents fight to save a 100-year-old elm slated for removal over safety concerns.
On October 27, Denver Parks and Recreation’s Forestry Team met with Montclair neighbors at the Montclair Civic Building to discuss the fate of a 100-year-old American Elm that towers over the park’s playground. The meeting, facilitated by City Forester Luke Killoran and Historic Montclair Community Association president Judy Baxter, became the latest flashpoint in a months-long fight over whether the tree should stay or go.
Earlier this year, Denver Parks and Recreation announced plans to replace the Montclair Park playground in 2026. The city released a community survey that closed in May, and residents say the resulting design included the elm as a central feature. Baxter noted that neighbors were “taken by surprise” when news of the tree’s removal surfaced in September, because the original playground plans were crafted with the intention of keeping it.
“After the announcement that we received in September, we, as a board [HMCA], began requesting a meeting to discuss and review and understand and actually hopefully think about reconsidering the decision to remove the legacy American elm tree that’s in the park,” Baxter said. One resident at the meeting added that they worried their input was now irrelevant: without the elm, they said, it would “drastically change what we chose” for the new playground.
That pivot to remove the elm came after a documented “failure” earlier this year, when a large limb broke off. In the last decade, the tree has experienced “seven failures,” according to the city’s Forestry Operations Manager Ben Rickenbacker. Forestry officials argued the incident in May underscored the risks of keeping such an aging tree in the middle of a children’s play area.
Residents, meanwhile, have hired their own arborist to challenge the city’s assessment. One resident argued that the news of several documented tree failures “shines light on the lack of process” DPR conducted prior to the playground’s design.
The controversy first went public on September 16, when Councilwoman Amanda Sawyer posted on Facebook that the tree would be removed by the end of the month due to “safety concerns.” The post promised that the trunk would be repurposed as a wood carving for the new playground. Sawyer later clarified that the decision was made solely by Forestry, not by City Council, though her office helped organize the October meeting.
Killoran opened the forum by explaining the city’s position as a certified arborist. “While you may not see it happening right now, it is in the process of failing, and it is going to fail,” Killoran said. “We’ve explored every opportunity, every possible way to preserve and protect this tree. It’s with a heavy heart that we’ve come to the conclusion of removing this tree.”
Montclair Park has a large number of trees planted throughout it, not just on the playground. Killoran described it as an “even-aged forest,” noting that because the trees grow at the same time, they frequently decline at the same time. One resident wondered if this was just the beginning of tree removal in Montclair Park. Because each tree is unique, Killoran said the DPR Forestry Team would be more “mindful” of other older trees in the area.
“American elm is susceptible to what’s called Dutch Elm Disease,” Killoran said. “Dutch Elm disease wasn’t found that far from this particular site. That disease can be responsible for killing our American elms.”
Concerns about disease, combined with seven documented failures, prompted the city to recommend removal.
A resident spoke out about his experience with a different tree failure last summer. In his neighbor’s yard was a tree that seemed to “spontaneously collapse.” The failure occurred when there was no adverse weather and caused damage to his neighbor’s property.
“That tree cannot be there, in my experience, especially with the playground under it,” he said. “If you want to talk about leaving it [the tree] there with no playground, I still think it’s probably a very high risk.”
Others at the meeting argued that a lack of foliage in the park creates an urban heat island. The size of the tree provided a lot of shade to the park and a relief to increasingly hotter summers. One resident had suggested ways that the shade be replaced: ”We need more trees planted by the city, and we need shade sails and shade canopies to provide instant shade for our kids, our seniors, all of us out here who live in the neighborhood.”
Killoran acknowledged the tree’s place in community memory. “This is what we are trying to protect,” he said, holding up a photo of a child walking beneath the elm.
But he added, “We are torn that we have come to the conclusion that we have to remove this. Now, as arborists, as trained professionals, it’s our responsibility, it’s our duty of care to look out for the community. That includes safety and liability … We can’t allow this tree to continue to stay in the community because someone is going to get hurt.”
As for the playground redesign, project manager Kyli Feather explained that the elm’s failure prompted the city to shift course. Gordon Robertson, DPR’s director of planning and design, warned that continued delays could eat into the budget.
“Time is money,” Robertson said. “The longer we work with our designer to redesign it, and the longer we wait to construct it, there’s going to be less budget for the project, and that will mean fewer amenities in the park.”
For now, the elm remains. Forestry has agreed to delay removal while an independent arborist reviews the city’s risk assessment. Another public meeting is expected to discuss possible redesign options, but no date has been set.
“I have a four-year-old, so I’m also a playground aficionado. We’re here a lot,” said resident Jason Hornyak, who works for Denver’s Department of Transportation and Infrastructure. “I don’t always love working for the city because sometimes processes and stuff don’t really line up.”
For the future of the tree, Hornyak would like to see the playground design honor what once stood there: “Maybe there is a way to incorporate the beautiful stump into the playground design to at least keep some of the legacy of the tree here within the new playground and then hopefully plant some of the other trees around it to increase the shade.”