Grand Prix tree tempest rages on
The "tempest in a tree pit" over the Baltimore Grand Prix continues.
A vocal critic of the tree-cutting for the three-day downtown event met with the race's CEO today, but says his demands were rebuffed. David Troy, a software entrepreneur who launched a petition drive against the tree removal, says he didn't got to court today to block any further tree removals, but says he's still weighing that option. UPDATE: Troy posted a "press alert" that he's filing a petition for an injunction this morning (8/5).
Troy, whose online petition has collected more than 1,500 signers, said he asked to see the memorandum of understanding between the city and the race. He also wanted the Grand Prix to provide a legally binding guarantee that it will plant and care for the nearly 200 trees it has promised to put in downtown in return for the city's blessing to remove 50 from to accommodate grandstands for race spectators.
Jay Davidson, chief executive officer for the racing organization, refused both requests, Troy said. Davidson did not respond to an email inquiring about his meeting with Troy. UPDATE: Davidson confirmed that he would not provide the $1 million letter of credit Troy asked for. He said the race is already paying for the trees, and has pledged to pay for an additional 5,000 saplings at a nursery to be used within the city.
"They just weren't able to offer any assurance one way or another," Troy said by telephone, adding that he was "just really disappointed" by the refusals. Although race officials had signed the agreement with the city on tree cutting and planting earlier this week, city officials refuse to release it until it has been reviewed by city attorneys and signed by the mayor.
Davidson had estimated yesterday that the tree planting would cost the race about $100,000. He pointed out that the Grand Prix already has posted a $750,000 performance bond guaranteeing to reimburse the city for its expenses in accommodating the Labor Day weekend event, which promoters hope will draw up to 100,000 spectators.
But Troy said he had no confidence that that bond would be enough to pay for the tree plantings along with all the other financial obligations the race would have should it be a bust and go bankrupt.
He also said he was shocked to see as he bicycled to the racing headquarters today another five trees had been removed by the Convention Center. Someone had carved the inititals BGP into one stump, he said, providing a photograph seen here.
Troy had vowed to file a lawsuit in Baltimore Circuit Court today seeking an injunction to block further tree removal, but after the meeting he said he had not done so yet and intended to consult his lawyer.
Erik Dihle, the city arborist, meanwhile, said that although the race's tree-cutting contractor didn't get required permits from the city forestry office before removing trees, he didn't intend to require permits after the fact or fine the organization.
"We would not normally recommend or levy a fine for failure to have a permit," he said, particularly in a case like this where city officials already had approved a plan for tree removal.
And while city forestry crews routinely post notices ahead of time on trees they plan to remove, Dihle said the city doesn't really enforce the notice requirement in the forestry code for private tree cutting.
The arborist did note that the number of trees the race has pledged to plant around downtown has grown by four - for a total of 139 trees to be put in tree pits now empty or occupied by dead trees. The race also is promising to plant another 59 trees along or near the race course, including 14 in movable oversized pots.
"Nobody loves taking down a portion of our tree canopy," Dihle said, but in this case he said the plantings far outnumbered the removals. He said the race is committed to watering and maintaining the downtown trees for two years - the ones planted along the race course are to be cared for up to five years. Two years is the most followup care the city requires on any tree plantings, he said.
The planting also helps augment a city forestry program that has had its budget cut from $4.4 million two years ago to $2.8 million now, Hilde pointed out.
For some, though, the tradeoff isn't worth it.
"I feel grief, absolute grief," said Rosalind Heid, who lives at the Inner Harbor and says she regularly walks down West Pratt Street to Camden Yards, past where some of the trees were cut. "Because I love trees, we all love our trees."
(Photo tree stump on West Pratt Street provided by David Troy)
Comments
It seems that this incident shows so much about why Baltimore City has problems. If there are laws or regulations about cutting trees but there are no fines imposed for ignoring them, what is the point ? And to allow something that can't be easily undone to occur before the paperwork was finished is naive at the least. At the worst, It gives the impression that someone wanted to get this done before anyone found out and maybe even that there was no binding plan to force replanting trees until the news got out.
Posted by: Bonnie | August 5, 2011 5:51 AM
How is THIS the issue that people are up in arms about with this Gran Prix? The removal of trees is obviously not a good thing, but, really, why is the city putting valuable resources and money into this event AT ALL when the city is experiencing multiple larger problems like violence, drugs, deteriorating neighborhoods, a failing education system, and debt. Yet Baltimore City feels the need to have this event. Typical short-term, "lipstick on a pig" Baltimore City BS. Where's the petitions and outrage for those things, people of Baltimore? Why should the Grand Prix take precedence over these larger issues, Baltimore administrators?
Posted by: Tommy | August 5, 2011 9:02 AM
What really bothers me about this whole controversy is that so many people think that because the trees will be replaced (which also looks uncertain), that will be good enough. It is so easy to forget that urban trees are a world apart from trees in the country. You can't just replace them and say that the new trees will provide all the environmental, economic, and aesthetic benefits that the old ones did.
Urban trees have to deal with compacted soil, increased pollution, increased heat, increased flooding, and a whole slew of things that make it that much harder to survive. A healthy, well-established urban tree is the result of years of time and effort. You can't cut one down, dig a new hole, toss in a sapling and call it done.
Posted by: Katrina Marland | August 5, 2011 9:03 AM
I'm not particularly shocked or offended by this. In fact, I think it is a good idea to replace the old, dead or dying trees with young ones which can more efficiently convert CO2. I don't understand why this guy is so upset about the trees being cut down. The entire city of Baltimore understands that the Grand Prix race is an inconvenience and probably unwanted, but it will bring a great deal of money to the economy. Granted that money will probably be squandered, but still. The guy rallying against this is an entrepreneur and one of his big mantras is to improve the economy of Baltimore. It's a little hypocritical if you ask me.
Posted by: Local Resident | August 5, 2011 9:26 AM
I don't get this clear cutting of mature trees at all. Baltimore has sold itself as a city that promotes trees and encourages tree planting in the city. From the city web site:
“TreeBaltimore is a mayoral initiative spearheaded by the Baltimore City Department of Recreation and Parks. This program strives to increase the urban tree canopy through the establishment, management and preservation of trees.
TreeBaltimore’s Goals Will Be Accomplished Through A Combination Of Activities:
• tree planting
• care of existing trees
• natural regeneration of our forests and
• fostering a sense of stewardship
The TreeBaltimore campaign is a ‘call to action’ to residents to plant a tree. By planting and caring for a tree at your home, business or park, you are helping to clean our air and water. Trees also help reduce summer air temperatures, save energy, buffer noise and increase the economic stability of Baltimore."
http://www.baltimorecity.gov/Government/AgenciesDepartments/RecreationandParks/TreeBaltimore.aspx
http://bmore-urbanforestproject.org/
Posted by: Mike | August 5, 2011 9:47 AM
Why are we paying a city arborist who does feel the need to enforce the city's rules because "We would not normally recommend or levy a fine for failure to have a permit." Why not take advantage of the opportunity to show businesses and people the city WILL enforce its rules. I doubt the fine is excessively punitive.
Posted by: ACA | August 5, 2011 10:27 AM
While it may seem egregious that trees will be removed, there is a great opportunity to put pressure on the City and Mahan Rykiel Associates to replant more appropriate species. Some of the outrage is due to removing 'mature trees.' Fact: not all trees live as long as the Wye Oak. In fact several of the trees that are being removed are nearing the end of their expected lifespan (i.e Bradford Pear). Aside from that many of these trees are invasive and should be replaced with species more appropriate for the Mid-Atlantic.
It's great that this issue has caused a stir and moved residents to act, but what would be even better is that those same people follow up with the replanting effort to ensure that better species are planted.
Posted by: A Master Gardener | August 5, 2011 1:38 PM
Trees don't make campaign contributions. Baltimore Racing Development does.
Posted by: Daniel Plainview | August 6, 2011 4:45 AM
Trees are a renewable resource... not a replaceable one. How is planting 135 little trees a replacement for 35 existing big trees? Isn't that no different than digging up a 6 lane road and leaving a gravel path? or tearing down a hospital and setting up a table and have someone with a first aid kit? Why not build the stands around the trees so people watching would have some shade?
Don't be too upset with the City Arborist. he may be ordered to do this and not allowed to speak out.
Posted by: Nick | August 6, 2011 12:50 PM