Back in the 80s, one of the more unfortunate quotes uttered by the 'Great Communicator' was that "trees cause more pollution than automobiles do." Which prompted Jim Brady, while aboard Ronald Reagan's campaign plane as it flew over a Louisiana forest fire, to shout, "Killer trees! Killer trees!" That kind of twisted humor makes Jim Brady our kind of guy.
In Park Ridge government, we haven't been able to find anyone with such a well developed sense of humor. But we haven't heard anyone in Park Ridge government accuse trees of being bad for the environment either. Still, it appears there's at least one alderman who believes trees may not be worth protecting.
The City Council Public Works Committee chairman, Don Bachtard (3rd Ward), has placed a discussion item on tonight's Public Works Committee agenda.pdf -- "Elimination of Tree Preservation Ordinance"
Maybe Alderman Bachtard finds trees annoying? We have heard a few developers complain about trees and the city's preservation ordinance. We have also heard some residents complain about trees and the city's preservation ordinance when they've wanted to construct an addition to their current homes or build new. And then there was what many refer to as 'Meatgate', which was discussed in the comments on one of our blog posts here ("Reggie", comment #14).
Anyone who is interested in reading the background memo for tonight's committee meeting can do so here (.pdf). You can find all the publicly posted documents for tonight's meeting here.
October 15, 2008
Killer Trees!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
In the case of improving our city only as voted by the people... Cut one down, plant 1 of same species. Otherwise leave our trees alone!!!
P.S. Dosn't our city look great with all the colors?
Good lord, what will that idiot come up with next?!
Bachtard hasn't thought this through. If all the trees get cut down, where will people hang their purple ribbons?
Yah know. . . if we *were* to cut down all the trees, the homeless folks would have a lot fewer places to hide behind. . . oh, never mind. There's always the library.
Guess we would no longer qualify as a Tree City, huh?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Tree_Cities_USA
I for one am absolutely thrilled about this! I've been fighting with the city for over a year about a filthy tree in my backyard. The tree produces nuts that have damaged my property, my dog, and my relatives. I literally cannot go in my backyard all summer, even to clean the disgusting mess the tree droppings leave. I've offered to replace it, but still they've said no. The tree ordinance, as it currently stands is too restrictive. You don't spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a home so every squirrel in town spends its days in my yard drunk from the nuts!
Didn't you notice the tree when you purchased the house?
Anonymous at 1:13:
I'm sorry to hear your nutty tree is damaging your property, your dog and your relatives. I hope you haven't had to shell out too much to repair any of them. I hear body work and bionic parts are expensive. You do make it sound as if you have a killer tree that won't even let you into your own backyard without attacking you! I must say I think you were exaggerating about every squirrel in town congregating in your backyard, but I'll make a deal with you. I'll take some squirrels off your hands and give you the bunnies that come munching on all my flowers every day.
However, I do think that throwing out the whole ordinance just because of some too restrictive areas is silly and foolish. It seems like an extremist response to me. But then this is another suggestion from alderman Bach, so silly, foolish and extreme seem about right.
Remember the Tree Preservation Survey in the June 2008, Vol. 35 No. 3, Spokesman? Did the City release the results?
Please complete this tree
preservation survey on
private property trees
The City of Park Ridge has a tree
preservation ordinance regarding the
protection of trees on private property.
To view this ordinance, please
refer to the City web site at
www.parkridge.us. (Select Government,
Municipal Code, Article 15,
Chapter 18.) Please take a moment to
complete the following survey. We
are interested in any comments you
have on our Tree Preservation Ordinance.
Clip and mail, or return in person
to Tree Survey c/o:
City Hall, 505 Butler Place
Park Ridge, IL 60068
Circle your response:
1. Were you aware the City of Park
Ridge has a Tree Preservation Ordinance
affecting property owner
rights for tree removals on private
property? Yes or No
2. Do you support the City having a
Tree Preservation Ordinance protecting
trees?
Yes or No
3. Do you feel the City’s Tree Preservation
Ordinance is:
a. Too restrictive.
b. Suitable for our community.
c. Too lenient.
4. Would you support the removal
of a large, healthy tree in your
neighborhood?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Indifferent
5. Do you think the overall tree
canopy of Park Ridge is:
a. Too dense.
b. Suitable for our community.
c. Too sparse.
6. Any additional comments you may
have on the Tree Preservation
Ordinance and its enforcement?
Now I understand. We can haul all the trees away in our new trucks!
Trees shield us from noxious aircraft fumes (volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon dioxide, benzene, formaldehyde, ultra fine particles) and reduce our summer energy bills. We'd be NUTS not to protect them.
It is true trees do all those things for us. But for me I like what they add to the asthetics and character of the city. One of the reasons we bought the house we did was that it has 7 huge trees on the property. We had a particularly bad summer for tree illness in my neighborhood - 6 trees right on my block are no longer with us. I am scrambling to try to do what I can to save mine and people want to cut down healthy trees??
I agree with 1:55. This is like throwing the baby out with the dirty bath water. If there are problems with the ordinance then fix it, but don't just toss out the whole thing.
To answer PRU about the tree...I looked at the house in the fall, purchased in the spring, and didn't know the it was a nut tree.
To answer anony@1:13...yes, I was exaggerating a bit, mainly due do to the frustration I'm having with the city over this. I actually don't want to see the ordinance completely thrown out, simply rewritten to make it more resident friendly.
I'm not exaggerating when I say you literally can't sit in my yard from the middle of July until early August. I can't plant any flowers because squirrels dig them up to bury the nuts from the trees.
My new neighbors moved in next door in June. They loved the tree and thought I was exaggerating. By mid July they were more upset than I was. The squirrels go crazy, it's like cat nip for them, and they fight.
Some trees are simply not meant to be in residential areas. I like trees. I'll plant 3 if they let me cut down 1.
Anon@4:57 --
Thank you for that considerate response. We feel you have a reasonable position.
The current tree ordinance was a knee jerk reaction brought on by a teacher from Maine South who lives in the Manor area when many small ranches were being torn down and McMansions were being built. It is restrictive and needs amending, not to be thrown out completely.
If I want to build an addition to my house and it necessitates taking down a tree I should not have to pay buckets of money to the city to plant trees around town. I should not be forced to replant inch for inch on my property.
A little common sense would go a long way with this and some of the other ordinances in town!
I do not know the existing ordinace word for word and was not in town when it was enacted. If a part of it states that if I take down a tree (due to a home addition for example), I have to pay to plant a tree that does not seem to me to be unreasonable.
Triple canopy - trees have been and will always save us from the pollution.
Let's not take the ax approach here and leave well enough alone.
What will they think of next ?
Thanks.
uh---where can I get that tree which tosses stuff at my relatives?
WOWEE, just in time for the holidays! fun!
I lived in a house with an apple tree that dropped ripe apples all over my deck and attracted bees, which scared me and my kids. My solution? Sweep the apples away every couple of days, and sit in the shade of that tree, looking at the pictures of my daughter beneath a pink-white cloud from Heaven -- that tree in bloom.
People who want to live in an environment where there are no deer, rabbits, birds, raccoons, opossums and other wildlife; and people who want outdoor areas with no disruptive natural processes going on in them should move to Chicago or to a manufactured subdivision where the trees and animals have not yet arrived.
Park Ridge is a primarily residential community, and not just because we can't get decent big-box retail here. It's next door to a bunch of forest preserves. It started out as a farming community, feeding the City. It's still a place where the rhythms of Nature are appreciated.
Even if you have no clue about the enormous, disproportionately wonderful health and other quality-of-life benefits trees provide to anyone who breathes oxygen, drinks water and eats food from the earth (or eats the animals who eat food from the earth)and how trees protect us from some of the worst ravages of "civilization," you should get that we are not "Tree City" because "Monster House City" was already taken.
Anything we do to amend our tree ordinance will diminish our charm, beauty, comfort, finances, and quality of life. I repeat, if you don't want lots of trees, big trees,old trees, many types of trees in your face and in your yard, there are plenty of places with fine houses but without these treasures. You can probably sell your house for more than the one you'd buy there, too, because trees add resale value.
Thanks for letting me rant on, PRU.
As someone who works in development in many of the communities we like to compare ourselves to, Park Ridge's ordinance in far more reasonable. As a matter of fact, if pressed to answer honestly, the local builder community don't really consider it much of a hindrance at all. They just gripe publicly because any restriction is a bad restriction.
The ordinance is fine. Leave it alone.
anon @ 4:57
What kind of nuts are they? Can you eat or sell them?
Its not a tree problem, its a squirrel problem. Get at dog.
Of course if you leave the dog out to chase away the squirrels, you will probably attract the local coyotes from the forest preserve!
Wow, my nut tree has caused a lot of comments. To the poster that wants to get one, I'm sure your local nursery sells them. They don't "throw" nuts at your relatives, and you'll need squirrels to come, (don't worry, they will.) Your relatives, need only be sitting on your porch. The tree will not distinguish who it hits, so wear a helmet if you sit with them.
My former home had an apple tree, and the home I grew up in had both an apple and a cherry tree. I spent my childhood picking up the apples in the yard. It was my favorite of the chores. This ain't no apple tree.
I went to the meeting last night. No one wants to throw out the ordinance. No one wants to get rid of all the trees. No one hates nature. There are times when a tree should not be where it is. Up until a month ago, you had no avenue to appeal. The ordinance is written in such a way that a tree cannot be removed unless it's dying.
I'm not a builder, I'm not even adding an addition or moving my garage. I simply want the right to sit on my patio, plant my flower pots, prune my landscaping, mow my yard, and enjoy the property that I worked hard to purchase and that I continue to work hard to maintain and improve.
I've owned 2 homes in this town. I dramatically improved the landscaping, according to all my neighbors, at both properties, using professonals to do the design. I purchased homes that had not been properly cared for and fixed them, adding to the beauty of the block and therefore the city.
I'm not anti-tree and I'm not too lazy to sweep up some mess. This is beyond that.
Anony at 9:12 AM. I have a dog. a big 75 lb dog. He got hit with one of the nuts falling from high in the tree. He was afraid to go out in the yard for a couple of weeks afterward. I work during the day, when the squirrels do their damage. I cannot leave a dog outside in the hot summer sun all day.
I've wondered about selling the nuts as well, but the machine you'd need to get to the nuts, cannot fit in my yard.
Anonymous at 9:23AM,
Thanks for sharing what you learned at the meeting last night. Did anyone explain why the item was on the agenda as "elimination" of the ordinance...in light of your reporting that "no one wants to throw out the ordinance"...?
It's very odd that the committee chair would place the item on the agenda in that way...was it a mistake...?
Alderman Bach explained that he "purposely worded it that way to attract attention and get people out to discuss it." He stated that he was not in favor of "eliminating" the ordinance but that it could be changed to address of the issues residents are having with it.
They also passed out the findings of the survey:
Were you aware that Park Ridge has a Tree Preservation Ordinance affecting property owner rights for tree removals on private property?
83% yes
17% no
Do you support the City having a Tree Preservation Ordinance protecting trees?
65% yes
35% no
Do you feel the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance is:
Too Restrictive: 50%
Suitable 34%
Too Lenient 17%
Would you support the removal of a large, healthy tree in your neighborhood?
37% yes
51% no
12% indifferent
Do you think the overall tree canopy of Park Ridge is:
Too Dense: 21%
Suitable: 61%
Too Sparse: 18%
I didn't take the survey, but for almost every question, I would agree with the majority.
Prior to last night, I didn't understand the 17% who feel the ordinance is too lenient. You can't cut down a tree unless it's dying. How can you be LESS lenient? What I found last night is that apparently builders have at times found ways around the ordinance, which has upset residents. I'm not familiar with any of those particular situations, but I would tend to agree with the residents. Park Ridge does not need any more McMansions; and certainly not at the expense of trees.
All trees however are not equal. Not all provide health benefits. The one in my yard is actually toxic and can aggrevate asthma and can be deadly to some animals and other plants.
It was an interesting meeting, and I will continue to attend.
Anon@1:09 --
Now it's our turn to thank you for your report of what was said at the meeting.
We wonder if Bachtard has included any other knowingly false and inflammatory statements on official city documents, or on other matters of public business -- for attention seeking purposes.
?????...OMG!!!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAA...
What a jackass...
Maybe PADS is not really happening. Maybe it is just to get our attention so that we can have all these valuable discussions.
geeeze, this might be my all time favorite sample of Bachtardation.
On the next Public Works Agenda:
Proposal to Eliminate All Property Taxes in Park Ridge.
Proposal to ban Dihydrogen Oxide in all forms.
Proposal to put speed bumps on every street, on every block.
Let the googling begin!
Dihydrogen Oxide??? I hear that stuff is nasty!!!
I used to work at a steel mill that used that as a cleaning solvent! And many power plants are still releasing it into the atmosphere! I hear it has been proven that traces of it can be found in our rivers and lakes!
Next thing you know, all our children will be ingesting this stuff!
Stop the madness!
I bet those killer trees had plenty of Dihydrogen Oxide...its pure evil!
Post a Comment