“Unfortunately, I signed the petition.  It was a ‘Do you love trees and hate evil-doers’ question that was easy to support at the time.  I’m sure most of those who signed, like me, were uninformed and reacted to an emotional question.   I am here because I deeply resent having been used in this manner for an issue that is way too important to be influenced in any way by the few seconds of consideration I had given it up to that point.”

“I don’t know how much the petitioners plan to raise for the restoration of Mount Vernon Place, but we should be extremely careful before torpedoing the plans of the only organization to commit to the restoration of MVP despite many decades of neglect and a city that has proven time and again that it cannot accomplish this vital goal.  Can you imagine the task ahead of them to raise the $18M needed?  Do we really want to gut their plan and demotivate them withOUT an overwhelmingly good reason???  I’ve given $$ in support of the development of the plan, and sure, I’ve got some of my own ideas, but this is a world class plan and I can tell those fundraisers not to come back to me for construction donations if they end up with a seriously compromised plan.”

A Tree Grows in Mount Vernon

Our view: Concerns over landscaping plans should not derail restoration of Mount Vernon Place and Washington Monument

Baltimore Sun
September 16, 2010

Not just a home to affluent Baltimoreans, Mount Vernon is a vibrant and historic neighborhood as well as a cultural center. Mess with Mount Vernon Place — or much else in its proximity — and you are bound to stir passion and debate.

In recent years there have been people up in arms over building heights (rejecting efforts by developers to allow taller construction), an art project that erected temporary chain link fences (taken down early after an outcry) and a proposed 7-Eleven on North Charles Street (built despite the complaints that it was inappropriate for the site).

That public engagement is a good thing. As much as it gives developers fits, it’s a sign that the neighborhood is held in high esteem and that residents have a deep-seated desire to protect it.

Given that tradition, it’s hardly a surprise that a proposal by the Mount Vernon Place Conservancy to redo the landscaping around the public squares has raised some concerns. The plan would mean cutting down 100 mature trees and replacing them with younger ones in a somewhat altered design.

Some area residents have grown attached to the trees as they are, and that is no surprise. But it’s also quite reasonable to consider how starting more or less from scratch — with new plant beds, an eco-friendly irrigation system and other upgrades — might make the public spaces even better. No tree, flower or bush lasts forever.

What’s encouraging is that it’s clear the conservancy is committed to keeping people informed about its plans, not just for landscaping but for restoration of Mount Vernon Place. The nonprofit group is doing a job that cash-strapped city government could not afford to accomplish on its own.

While the landscaping proposal deserves a thorough review by the city commission in charge of overseeing the project, we would hope this element of the revitalization process does not delay the most critical aspect, the repair of the Washington Monument.

Clearly, the primary focus needs to be on restoring the 178-foot tower and making Mount Vernon Place the showplace it has been for most of two centuries. The $18.5 million effort will need financial support from many sources.

But as long as the conservancy is open about its plans, continues to reach out to the community, provides greater details as they become available and incorporates modifications where appropriate, we remain confident that Mount Vernon Place can not only be restored but that this private-public partnership can be the model for restoring other notable city parks and landmarks.

That would be an tremendous achievement for Baltimore and for the proud, if sometimes hard to please, residents of Mount Vernon.