Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!
One doesn't cut down tress on someone else's property, without permission, without paying the piper 3 times their value and the city's fines, plus the cost of the investigation and the sacking of all involved must also occur. In addition, the motel should go entirely signless for one year of atonement.
I would require the company officers responsible for this action to be "housed" atop a large tree for at least one month, a la Julia Butterfly Hill, with no shelter other than canvass sleeping bags, and food limited to whole wheat organic oatmeal and soy milk.
It seems they got off pretty free. Are there any areas of the city where lack of funds have eliminated tree maintenance and replantings? Any town gateways that need landscaping? The motel should be required to pay for an arborist, tree planting crew, and all maintenance costs for a significant period of time.
Maybe that's implied in the article, but I would make it farily serious.
It seems they are getting off easy and the city is selling out. Frankly, planting trees as part of a city road project is the city's responsibility. I would begin by making them acquire and preserve a similar tree stand elsewhere in the city (if possible). Secondly, there should be a guaranteed minimum size on the replacement trees on the hillside - 4" caliper, at least. They should also be of the same type as what was removed. Don't go repacing quercus macrocarpa or carya ovata with acer platinoides or (eek!) acer negundo. Recognizing that the environment of a mature savanna or woodland is far different than that of these new, much smaller trees, some additional environmental mitigation should be required. In addition to all of this mitigation, there should be a fine for every tree cut down.
Needless to say, the company should fire the dumb-ass responsible for this. If it was a franchise operator, they should loose their franchse.
My brother is the Parks & Planning Director in Highland Park, Illinois, a rich suburb on Chicago's north shore. Periodically, they have had some near lakeshore property owners go onto city land(!) to cut down mature hardwoods that block their view of the lake. Of course, they also have the problem of people tearing down beautiful Victorian mansions to build big uglys.
"The solution, since the damage is done, is fair,"
WRONGO BUCKO !
No way, it’s a sell out! The responsible parties should be forking over far more for actual damages and punitive fines. It sounds like they are getting their way and then planting landscaping that they should have been doing in the first place.
What about the concept of replacing the lost trees with an identical amount of biomass? Calculate the cubic feet (metres)of mass lost by having the trees cut down, and require that an equal amount be replaced.
Yeah, not my normal conservative take on things. I'll agree with you. But say I steal 30 Cadillac Escalades off your new car lot. I get caught and the city makes me give $3000 to the Car Dealers Association and tells me to give you 30 Yugos. Fair?
These guys did the crime - they should do the time or pay the fine.
I think he was alluding to the natural inclination of some conservatives to give "an honest businessman" the benefit of the doubt and assume it was a legit mistake. I on the other hand took the "pay for a crime against nature stance" that is not common among people of my tribe.
A six year old knows you get a spanking for destroying someone else's property. This CEO knows they were wrong and got a good deal but didn't meet his moral obligation to make it right. Unfortunately "making it right" never appears on the ledger sheets of corporate America. This is one of the most glairing failures of capitalism - Which is still the best system by a long shot.