I wouldn’t say that I am a tree hugger, but what attracted my wife and I to Chestertown when we moved here eight years ago wasn’t just the collection of 18th and 19th century houses, but the lovely tree canopy throughout the town. However, since that time, I have seen many very stately trees taken down in Chestertown with no real justification and no replacement.
This has concerned me because many older trees are already stressed from climate change, but what concerns me the most is the indiscriminate removal of trees without justification by the Town of Chestertown.
The most recent case was the removal of a beautiful and healthy sycamore at 109 N. Water Street that had to be 75 to 100 years old. When I saw it being tagged for removal on Thursday, I called the Town Manager, Larry DiRe, to inquire why the tree was being taken down and he told me that the new owner of 109 N. Water Street offered to pay for the tree’s removal even though the tree was in the public right-of-way and not on his property. I asked what was the justification for the removal and Mr. DiRe got defensive and told me that he had the authority to permit trees in the public right-of-way to be removed, which I don’t doubt, however, there should be a justification for removing a beautiful old tree. His response was that sycamores are not really appropriate for an urban environment and that trees have the potential for clogging sewer lines with their roots.
Unfortunately, I did not have much time to appeal Mr. DiRe’s arbitrary decision and the following day the tree came down.
Subsequently, I reached out to the Tree Committee to find out why they had approved the removal of the tree. They were not aware of the tree’s removal, nor were they approached by Mr. DiRe to get their approval to remove the tree. They were as angry as I was at the removal of this wonderful tree.
Since that time, Mr. DiRe has changed his story and has stated that the tree was causing a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by encroaching on the sidewalk. Using that logic, there are several trees in Chestertown that encroach on the sidewalks, so are all of these trees doomed to meet ADA compliance? If that is the case, then all the trees on the 100 block of N. Queen Street would need to be taken down. Is that what will happen? Are all our trees in peril due to an over-zealous Town Manager?
At Tuesday night’s Mayor and Town Council meeting, revisions to the Town’s tree ordinance will be discussed. I would like to see that the ordinance be strengthened to give the Tree Committee the authority to approve or deny all non-emergency tree removal requests. The Town Manager should still have the authority to approve emergency tree removals, however, these are extremely infrequent occurrences. If the Tree Committee reviews applications for tree removal, there should be notification to the citizens of the Town that a review is pending and, most importantly, that neighbors near the tree should be notified through either a letter sent to them or postings on telephone poles in their neighborhood. This would improve the transparency of decision-making, which the Town is sorely lacking.
If the policy allowing one person to decide the fate of the trees in Chestertown remains, then I am afraid that in a few years Chestertown will look like a 21st century tract housing development from New Jersey.
Steven Mitchell
William Minus says
Amen. A few years back a 100+ year Elm was removed on Queen St. In my opinion, for no good reason. So sad. Thanks for speaking up.
Clark Bjorke says
Sycamores are actually perfectly suited to urban environments. Sycamores are tolerant of pollution in the air from automobile and heating system exhaust. Sycamores stabilize the soil and prevent erosion in waterfront areas. Their large leaves provide an efficient shade canopy.
Sycamores have had some trouble with Anthracnose in recent years, but if this one was healthy, why remove it?
I am in favor of the proposal to have the tree committee review and approve all non-emergency tree removals on town property.
Tim O’Brien says
This is an unfortunate editorial that is not reflective of the full story and mischaracterizing the actions of the new town manager who is working hard to improve town transparency and communication. Council was informed of the reasons justifying the tree removal and I agree with the decision. It is unfortunate and only done when absolutely needed to protect public safety or town infrastructure. As a councilmember I have worked to strengthen the tree committees influence, update the old town tree ordinance to protect and plant more trees. This very issue will be discussed at the next public tree committee meeting this Friday at 4pm town hall. I encourage anyone interested in town tree matters to voice their concerns then rather than in premature public editorials.
Steven Mitchell says
Could you enlighten us all with why the tree was removed? I was at the entire Mayor and Town Council meeting tonight, spoke about this, and was still not provided with the reason the tree was removed. What’s the big secret? So much for transparency. Was it because the resident was willing to pay for the tree removal and the town didn’t have to fit the bill?
Perry Conte says
Little men with lots of time and access to the internet often shout from the mountain tops, hear me! Remember, first seek to understand, then to be understood. Which they never do. Let’s move forward. The historic district is not its namesakes because of the trees but for the houses that make it so. New homeowner from NJ.
Alice Marie Barron says
Pretty sure the reasoning is something like this: you remove a tree you must replace the removal with ANOTHER TREE. Climate change would be lessened with the planting of numerous trees.
Deirdre LaMotte says
Yeah, we see that in Quaker Neck. Someone buys land and tears down gorgeous oaks for whatever reason. Bad
I believe.
Then in another part of the property, they plant quick growing “trash” trees.
The County has no problem with this.
Joe Cavallaro says
Well – per Mr. O’Brien’s comments perhaps there are unknown reasons which could justify the tree coming down, but he doesn’t elaborate other than to vaguely refer to “public safety” and “town infrastructure” which doesn’t tell me much – and, if he’s primarily referring to a bumpy sidewalk and roots growing into the sewer line, then that issue exists all over town as Mr. Mitchell indicates. I do know the street well as I have walked my dog down this sidewalk twice a day for many years – and IMO there was no material safety issue at hand. Further, while I fully appreciate that it makes no sense to have community debates over every town decision, I do find it odd and kind of sad than an individual homeowner can apparently dictate a heathy tree coming down simply because they find it inconvenient or whatever. Finally, I’m hard pressed to understand how engaged citizens expressing their opinions can be characterized as “premature editorials” given the tree has already been taken down.
Sally Woodall says
I grew up in Georgetown, DE–a charming small town with tree-lined streets. At some point, when curbing was put in, the trees were removed, and the town is no longer charming. I recently bought a house in Chestertown and will be moving there soon.
David A Turner says
Welcomed Sally Woodall.
Alice Cory says
Being a true tree hugger, I am saddened from hearing this. I agree with a requirement for Tree Committee involvement.
Alan Boisvert says
I have to chuckle at all the tree greenies here. You all worry about a tree but pay no concern about driving your carbon eating car down to Easton for medical visits or up to Middletown for decent/reasonable shopping. No, can’t have a Walmart in Chestertown to help save the environment. But oh goodness those tree lined street in the summer smog are mighty lovely.
Deirdre LaMotte says
Well I am a “tree hugger” and find this a distressing story. What is the deal with the new owners asking for the sycamore’s removal, and it was not on their property! Reminds me when Dan Snyder, the Redskins coach,
had gorgeous trees destroyed on their Potomac property so the
view was better.
Not good. There needs to be accountability.
Martha Rasin says
Think the tree that was removed on Water Street was in a critical area. Should that have any bearing on removing it?