Since there seem to be only a small handful of consistent posters on a group that claims nearly 400 members, as one of those, I feel compelled to try and play devils advocate (as usual, for those who know me) and offer a somewhat different perspective. Im all about rabble-rousing, soap-boxing, etc. I must state, unequivocally however, I find (many/several/all) of the posts on here a bit ironic and thus I felt compelled to offer another perspective, which I will say up front and willingly... goes AGAINST probably MOST of what is continuously harped about on here.. Firstly, I want to state that like everyone on here, i too LOVE trees. Ive always loved trees. I am actively and constantly aware of old trees, new trees, specially big and mature trees somewhere off in the woods (I forage for wild edibles regularly, such as berries, mushrooms, medicinal herbs, etc..), newly planted and big old street trees, landscaped yard trees, etc.. The next thing that I want to say, based on what I am reading, is that (the primary opinion of the folks on here? of this group? of people over 50? I havent figured this out yet, and I hesitate to make a generalization), seem to be conservative in their approach to conservation... That is to say: lets keep EVERYTHING the same. But I keep reading the same old, same old.. and frankly, Im a bit tired of the 1-sided nature of this particular conversation (pun intended). Well, seeing how this is America and I was invited onto this forum, I feel like I need to offer my perspective, if only as another angle for consideration. And Im pretty sure Harriet is going to say she disagrees with me, and you know what? Thats OK. I want to start out by stating that OUR ENTIRE LANDSCAPE, the city grid, the treed hillsides our topographically diverse city is fortunate to have, ALL of this is A MANUFACTURED (at some point) LANDSCAPE. Even that nice, old street you live on once looked like shit because it was new construction and the earth was disturbed and all of the plantings looked tiny and insignificant. And along these lines, and due to humankinds influence, pretty much ALL of the trees in the city parks, even the nice, big, mature ones - are a result of Succession - that is to say, NOT original to the landscape, but occurring because the space was made devoid for natural resource usage/extraction. As a result of this, our lovely city parks harbor drastically altered overall diversity compared with what existed 200 years ago. The PPC may not be perfect, but I do know one thing, (as someone whos enjoyed/cavorted through Frick EXTENSIVELY for OVER 22 years, who attended the original meeting by the city and the PPC to outline their multi-year master plan for the city parks [held at the Student Union @ Pitt some 12-15 years ago], whos attended NUMEROUS public meetings to discuss future plans in city parks [including the 3-4 meetings regarding the environmental center, which Im sure a few on here were also at], someone who has actively sought out, payed attention to, and informally indexed/cataloged the changing nature & introduction of native species in the park, whos attended informational sessions regarding ECO Stewardship, native plant, flower, trees ID walks, creek cleanups, whos on good personal terms with one of the PPC field ecologists [whom I know to have a GOOD heart], and an honest/sincere staff person at the environmental education center) I can say without a DOUBT - that the work the PPC has done over the last several years on the sustainable management of the parks, for ME, can be considered a success and is FAR above and beyond what ANY Parks & Rec Dept. in ANY city could/has achieved on their own. I can take you to SEVERAL places in Frick that were once weed and vine-choked, invasive tree loving spaces 10-12 years ago that have been transformed. And stretches of Nine Mile Run, chock full of debris, old tires, and other trash. And YES, for every so many trees planted, the forces of nature, man, animal (i.e. deer), etc. are going to knock over tree cages, plants and young saplings are going to be eaten. These parks are used by 10,000s of people a week, for crying out loud. They have privately raised and spent MILLIONS to help fix, maintain, and upgrade park infrastructure. Theyve had the foresight to implement a strategic plan, usually with due diligence for original park designs (note the Frick gatehouse @ the Reynolds roundabout, the old church in Riverview - now the Chapel Shelter, the transformation of a massive parking lot into the Schenley Plaza, the Frank Curto Visitors Center - long-dormant and formerly a pigeon roost). Im not trying to kiss the ass of the PPC, but for anyone who enjoys the parks around town, its pretty CLEAR theyve generally gone to SOME trouble to make things better/more enjoyable for park users. How is this the actions of an evil organization?! The thing I cant get is: that WHOLE AREA around the Env. Center was ALSO bulldozed, massively landscaped (with invasive NORWAY *not Northway* Maples mind you), not ONLY when the other Environmental Centers were built, but even before that, for the construction of the gate house/towers and when there used to be a fountain at the top of the knob of Clayton Hill (at the turn of the century, for Victorian-era enjoyment). That cute little frog pond behind the old center sure as hell wasnt natural. and the Green Path?! Puh-lease! I didnt like seeing those trees come down, but ??! And theres NO DOUBT the good-intentioned but failed Nature Trail and surrounding Nature Reserve needs updated/restored. From what Ive personally noted, many of the original native species in this zone were already decimated/lost due to time, neglect, overusage of off-trail areas well before the PPC showed. SO why is everybody getting so bent out of shape for the slight enlargement and alteration of a space that was formerly transformed from its original condition? I dont see 100 acres being decimated, I dont anticipate crap flowing down Falls Ravine (thats def NOT gonna happen folks). As to the cost of it - You know what?! Check into the $$ of building ANYTHING these days... Its Fing expen$ive, just for crap cookie-cutter, big box stuff. As a proponent of doing things progressively & realizing these things arent run-of-the-mill technologies and therefore (still) more expensive, Im still EXCITED to see this go up. Its gonna be one of the SMARTEST, LIVING energy building this areas ever seen. As of the end of 2014, there are ONLY 200 living buildings IN THE WORLD... This is a front-loaded investment, thats gonna pay off for years to come. And YEAH, (unfortunately) they had to clear some land to do it. Are you pissed off reading my thoughts about this? Is it making your blood boil? Well, constantly hearing a diatribe about how EVIL all this is, is a bit too much to read without commenting.. So, for all the posts Ive read and scoffed at, heres one back for you... It takes COLLABORATION to get shit done (just look at the Occupy or Global Commons movements), to change the way things work! No single union, city government, non-profit, business, group, organization is EVER gonna get change to happen on their own. You might not like the (admittedly, strong-arm-appearing) tactics of the PPC, but based on all of the ecological, storm-water mitigation, progressive action & implementation theyve done, using Frick & Schenley on a several times/week basis, the residents of Pittsburgh are BETTER OFF with this public/private partnership... Regarding the IRONY between destroying nature to make something natural, Im VERY familiar with the Organic Commandments and wish there wouldve been a greater attempt at a Wrightian plan, where the entire site couldve been assessed, and the LEAST amount of damage couldve been done. Im just as pissed as everyone else when I think of the business as usual that the building industry has over the whole industry, the standard of acceptance, the shortcuts. The site management of this structure is founded on standard practices, yet it will truly be a building that Pittsburgh can be proud to have in our city, one that resembles the future of building better. A LOT OF US have been waiting for the environmental center to be re-built (me, from the day it burned down). We cant go backward (yeah, Id like to grab those smallpox blankets before we give them to the Native North Americans...). With the understanding that its our DUTY to keep tabs on any/all public/private partnerships and try to ensure we are not getting hoodwinked, cheated, getting the wool pulled over our eyes, etc.. I know theres been some questions about this project, but having been in on the public planning component in the form of the planning meetings, Im just not entirely convinced (from MY PERSPECTIVE) THIS is one of those situations? Its impossible to make 100% of people happy; given what Ive seen, Ill spend the public dollars on this building/site plan. I think its worth it, and itll be a GOOD thing for the countless future generations of city kids. ALL due respect and consideration, cant we just end the griping and go forward? I look forward to any/all rational comments (for, against, or ambivalent) that seek to explain, clarify, and expand certain points Ive mentioned here. I sincerely hope that more than 2 or 3 people will be willing to engage in a dialogue about this that really gets the conversation going in many directions...
Posted on: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 02:28:54 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015