We are two of the 46 appellants who filed the appeal asking the city commissioners to affirm the city arborist’s denial of a tree-removal permit that would allow the owners of 318 Country Club Drive to cut down the magnificent silver maple tree in their back yard.
As previously reported in this paper, Mayor Paul Kuhns, together with commissioners Lisa Schlosser and Richard Byrne, voted to issue the permit in a special meeting Dec. 20. Commissioner Toni Sharp dissented from the majority vote. The remaining commissioners did not participate in the proceeding.
In so voting, Mayor Kuhns and commissioners Schlosser and Byrne dismissed the concerns of dozens of city residents and property owners who argued strenuously to save the tree; they disregarded explicit requirements in the city tree ordinance for a tree-removal permit; they ignored the expert opinion of their own city arborist; they misconstrued the relevant facts; and they misapplied controlling Delaware law.
The implications of their action are ominously clear. If this perfectly healthy, 65-foot-tall tree with a leafy crown of over 50 feet is not worth preserving, the city’s entire tree canopy is at risk.
It was apparent from the start of the five-and-a-half-hour hearing that Mayor Kuhns was determined to allow the tree to be removed. First, he moved to eliminate most of the appellants from the proceeding and to dismiss the appeal entirely on specious legalistic grounds. When these motions were unsuccessful, he persuaded the other three commissioners to prohibit consideration of the expert report prepared by the city arborist based on her on-site inspection and technical assessment of the tree’s condition.
To obtain a tree-removal permit from the city, the property owners had to prove the tree is causing significant physical damage to structures on their property or is a significant safety hazard. They also had to show that any problems caused by the tree are not commonly associated with trees in general, and that the problems cannot be controlled by normal tree maintenance.
The city arborist’s report and technical assessment concluded, however, that there is no visible evidence that the tree is causing any harm to the structures. She also concluded that any damage to structures or hazards to pedestrians caused by the tree’s roots can be controlled by simple, inexpensive techniques commonly used by tree professionals, such as root cutting, installation of root barriers, mulching, and minor landscaping.
By voting to destroy the tree, the mayor and commissioners Schlosser and Byrne violated the city’s Comprehensive Development Plan, which calls for preservation, protection and conservation of the city’s trees, based on their valuable economic, recreational and environmental contributions to the city that distinguish it from any other coastal community.
Their vote also makes a mockery of the city’s status as a Tree City USA, an accolade awarded by the Arbor Day Foundation based on adoption by local governments of urban forest management techniques that recognize the importance of trees to the quality of life of a city’s residents, property owners, business community and visitors.
Finally, by voting for removal of a healthy, thriving specimen tree towering over Country Club Estates based on spurious, unproved allegations that the tree is a nuisance and safety hazard, the mayor and commissioners Schlosser and Byrne have unequivocally declared that private property rights trump the provisions of the city’s tree ordinance that protect and preserve the city’s tree canopy. With this decision as precedent, the city’s tree ordinance has been rendered worthless.
Julie W. Davis
John R. Metz
Rehoboth Beach
-
A letter to the editor expresses a reader's opinion and, as such, is not reflective of the editorial opinions of this newspaper.
To submit a letter to the editor for publishing, send an email to newsroom@capegazette.com. Letters must be signed and include a telephone number and address for verification. Please keep letters to 500 words or fewer. We reserve the right to edit for content and length. Letters should be responsive to issues addressed in the Cape Gazette rather than content from other publications or media. Only one letter per author will be published every 30 days. Letters restating information and opinions already offered by the same author will not be used. Letters must focus on issues of general, local concern, not personalities or specific businesses.
