.jpg)
By Joseph Haney
Members of the Lexington City Tree Board addressed the Lexington City Council at its meeting last Thursday in response to the removal of trees at Jordans Point Park, and how Celia Raney, the city’s arborist, was either not consulted or “largely ignored” throughout the process.
Betty Beasel, a former arborist for the city and a member of the city’s tree board, which advises the arborist, planning department and City Council on tree-related matters, spoke on the work that was done, which she noted was part of the city’s Jordans Point Park Master Plan that was adopted in 2020.
Beasel noted that there were several agreements among the parties involved in crafting the master plan, one of which was that the city arborist would be present for any tree-related work in the park. Despite that agreement, she said, Raney was not present when the city began removing several trees in the park on March 2.
“Work crews knew they were supposed to call her and not do the work until she was on-site, but they didn’t call,” Beasel said.
When Raney learned that afternoon that work was being done, she went down to the park where Beasel said she found that an area of about 150 feet upstream from the overlook had been cleared and “many large trees had been removed.”
The area included part of the riparian buffer along the river, an area adjacent to a stream, lake, or wetland that contains a combination of trees, shrubs and/or other perennial plants and is managed differently from the surrounding landscape, primarily to provide conservation benefits.
Beasel cited a portion of a letter that City Manager Jim Halasz had written to The News-Gazette which ran on March 15. In the letter, Halasz said that the trees that were removed were “poorly formed or nonbeneficial trees.” Beasel countered that it should be up to the city arborist to decide which trees were “nonbeneficial” and that all plants in a riparian buffer were “valuable.”
In addition to the removal of trees, Beasel said that several invasive species were not treated as Raney had suggested and that there was “ground disturbance in the flood plain.”
Raney was called down to the park when work continued on March 6, but, according to Beasel, felt that many of her requests were ignored. “Crews, to her, seemed insensitive to a number of wild flowers and she thought there was excess use of equipment,” Beasel said.
After Raney discussed the situation with the work crews and her supervisor, she was given assurances that, with the exception of removing a large, half-dead sycamore that she had consulted on, no work would be done on the next section of the plan without her input. Raney then left town to attend a meeting of the Virginia Urban Forest Council on which she serves and upon her return on March 8, found that “there was indeed much disturbance,” Beasel said. Large sections of the river bank just above the flood plain had been cleared, leaving “a 4-foot bank with no vegetation.”
The reason for the work, Halasz said in his letter, was to “improve the aesthetic value of the wooded and buffer areas along the river bank” and to clear space for “two viewing areas with benches and picnic tables.”
“Was the scope of removal really necessary for two picnic tables and possibly benches?” Beasel asked. “I’m not sure of the vision there … The city manager’s letter mentioned aesthetics, but there’s more to an area like this than aesthetics. We may not all agree on ‘wild versus completely cleared’ but I think, between [those two extremes], we can find a better ground than what’s been found now.”
The consequences of the work that was done, Beasel said, includes having to establish a new riparian buffer and to eventually properly treat the invasive species that weren’t treated and removed by the work crews. What Beasel said she finds “most galling” about the situation is that Raney has been tasked with coming up with a remediation plan for the area, “even though her advice was ignored.”
Pamela White, another member of the tree board, posed several questions to Council, including, “Who is responsible and how do we keep this from happening again?” and “Why are we bringing in experts if we’re not going to listen to them?”
Members of Council and the city manager did not respond to Beasel and White’s comments directly, but Mayor Frank Friedman addressed the issue generally.
“There’s a lot to unpack with that, and it sounds like the bulk of it is personnel issues that management needs to vet and understand,” he said. “I know that the city manager will take on that task of meeting with the arborist and working with her and working with staff to make sure that we’re collaborating, not just at the beginning, but through the whole process to have a better outcome.”
