The action plan, proposed by the Forest Preserve Advisory Board (FPAB) and the Greenbelt Community Garden Club (GCGC) to address the problem of shading at the community gardens, was approved by the Greenbelt City Council with an amendment proposed by Councilmember Judith Davis to move forward in a phased approach. The vote took place at the September 27 council meeting, with Councilmembers Edward Putens and Rodney Roberts voting against. Phase One of this plan will be discussed at the council meeting on Monday, October 11 and the success or failure of the effort will determine what comes next on this long-standing and much debated issue, which Mayor Colin Byrd described as “controversial” and Davis as “sensitive and divisive.” Phase One, as conceived by Davis, would be small in scale and along the lines of a pilot program.
The plan is the result of six months of study by a host of experts in the fields of forestry and botany. It would ultimately call for the selective cutting of 175 trees in the Forest Preserve, along with their replacement with various other vegetation including shrubs and shorter stature trees. Emphasis was given to using native species and ones that would enhance the biodiversity and long-term survival of the Preserve.
Community gardener Stephanie Warner said that it was likely that far more trees would be replaced than initially removed. The plan would also combat invasive species that have created “a degraded ecosystem.”
The city has approved the cutting of an eight-foot buffer around the gardens. The limbing effort is close to fruition, with the last work to be done soon at the Gardenway plots. Shading continues to exist despite these measures.
Davis laid out her reasons for her amendment of the action plan, without which she would not support the plan, which she acknowledged as “well thought out.” She expressed concern over the possible waning of volunteer effort, which is essential to the plan’s success, as the city could not afford to take on the total cost itself. She also indicated the uncertainty of future developments that might call for a major shift in approach or perhaps a termination.
The majority of council agreed with a phased approach as the best way forward for all parties.
Assistant Director of Parks Brian Townsend said that he felt that phasing was always the plan, saying that he expected the process to take at least four to five years.
Roberts stressed again his opposition to the project. He cited the frailty of the city’s green spaces and their essential job in combatting climate change. With proposals like the maglev train, which could decimate large sections of the Preserve, the need to keep what the city has is even greater. He feared that any substantial removal of trees would set a precedent for even more in the future.
Forest Preserve board member Mary Ann Canter expressed her dissatisfaction with the plan as well. She was troubled by the number of trees to be cut which she calculated as 1.89 acres, calling it a nightmare. She also was concerned about the budget costs.
City Attorney Todd Pounds informed that the forest stewardship guidelines do not indicate an “absolute prohibition” on the type of steps that the action plan recommends. The question remains how that maintenance will be carried out.
Davis stated that depending on the effect of the still-to-be-agreed-upon Phase One, it may be a year or two before a Phase Two will even be warranted.
Byrd said that the introduction of Davis’ amendment provided a “more appealing posture” to this issue, saying that while not ideal, it is a way to move forward and get something accomplished.