Commissioner Erwin,
Thank you for the update on changes to the redesign of the Sculpture Garden.
It's encouraging to know that MPRB Commissioners are looking closely at the
plans from an ecological perspective and are actively involved in making
changes that better align the plan with environmental needs and priorities.
Such changes to the plan in no way diminish the work of the Citizens Advisory
Committee that approved the redesign of the Garden, but rather expand the scope
of community engagement. It sounds as though the CAC was not sufficiently
informed [at the beginning of the process] that current environmental
challenges and priorities necessitate that healthy trees be preserved, and that
it is not necessary to clear the trees in order to accomplish the requirements
of the legislative mandate. Hopefully the MPRB's Ecological Systems Plan
currently under development will set robust guidelines for environmental
protection and sustainability that were not available during this CAC's work.
Now that other experts and citizens are weighing in, it's great to hear that
MPRB recognizes these inputs as equally valid forms of community engagement.
It seems important to state that planting more trees throughout the city, while
wise and fabulous (thank you!), does not justify the loss of the healthy and
mature trees in the Sculpture Garden (or elsewhere). While many people are
grateful that MPRB Commissioners support the priority to plant more trees,
serious and growing environmental challenges require a new paradigm in
designing these types of projects. Just as you pointed out that planting
ornamental landscapes in essentially monoculture plantings is inconsistent with
this new paradigm, trees should no longer be considered expendable and easily
replaced with purchases from a nursery.
The environmental reasons alone would suffice to prevent the loss of the
healthy mature trees in the Sculpture Garden. Others in this forum have said it
better than I could:
"The existence of trees in the fight against climate change is paramount. We
should not be cutting them down, but planting more in an intelligent way,
managed by people who are most interested in a viable ecosystem. We need to
take better care of the ones we have...A young tree will not produce the
incredible shade, habitat and air-cleaning services that a mature tree does."
"Seems like, as a modern museum in this day and age, the emphasis should be on
sustainable design.... trees are more than Garden accessories. And mature trees
are going to be more rare in our city as diseases such as Dutch Elm and Ash
Borer continue to take their toll on the urban canopy. Currently this garden
serves as a sculptural showcase and an urban oasis. Both are important.
βAnd since this garden is surrounded by freeways and heavy traffic, I for one
am very glad to have mature trees sucking up more of the carbon etc. They also
help buffer some of the urban traffic noise and provide habitat. All things
that should be priorities in any sustainable design."
In addition to the compelling environmental reasons to save the trees, it is
simply unnecessary to clear the 425 trees, because the infrastructure problems
can be fixed without clearing those trees. The legislature did not say clear
the trees, it said fix the infrastructure.
As I understand it, the Commissioners have already altered the plans to save as
many of the linden trees in the most-compacted part of the garden (thank you!);
i.e., methods do exist and will be implemented to protect the roots of those
trees while fixing the paths and improving the growing conditions in that area.
It appears that most of the infrastructure repairs are needed in that southern
section, making the potential loss of the trees north of the Spoonbridge and
Cherry not only optional, but egregious.
Fortunately, since construction is not scheduled until 2016, there is ample
time to continue rethinking the design and ensuring that the existing healthy
and mature trees are integrated into the final design of our Sculpture Garden.