Dear PoP – “Tree Box in front of Haydee’s has reappeared”

“Dear PoP,

I noticed this week that the tree box, sans tree has reappeared in front of Haydee’s in Mt. Pleasant. There was a lot of discussion about this back when you originally posted on the 8th, so I was wondering if the owner was forced to put it back?”

City Paper’s Lydia DePillis reports:

“The tree box has been replaced, according to DDOT, at Haydee’s expense (no word of fines). But the new tree won’t be planted for several months, since new saplings tend to perish in the summer. And since her sidewalk cafe application has been withdrawn, it’s likely that sidewalk will stay barren until then.”

31 Comment

  • the sidewalk cafe application has been withdrawn…for now. No doubt she’ll reapply when things have cooled down. Literally, and figuratively.

  • PoP = community activist commune. No organizing needed. I love it.

  • Hope she get’s fined just like any resident of Ward 1 who breaks the law. Especially since it seems she did it knowingly and intentionally.

  • Ha! This just made my day.

  • Tree new tree bix is smaller.

    • Yeah, what’s up with that? Is there a minimum square footage, and does this meet it? Is she just trying to fit those extra tables in when she inevitably submits the application again?

      • If everyone who walks by takes just one of those handily color-coded box-shrinking bricks home each time he or she walks by, we can have that thing up to regulation size by Monday. It’s not even stealing, since those parasitic bricks have plainly been abandoned on public land. Who’s in?

  • boo. yah.

  • Jim Graham is such a putz. Since he clearly can’t tell right from wrong, he just waits to see who, if anyone yells about anything.

  • Nice. The local ANC is having an (informal) meeting on August 3 to discuss how make Mt. Pleasant a ‘greener’ street – this is a step in the right direction!

  • I’m not sure why Mt. Pleasant St. needs to be “greener,” if greener means planting more trees, which can actually make streets more dangerous, according to Jane Jacobs:

    But if you really want to make Mt. Pleasant St. “greener” as in “more friendly to the environment,” you could have an ANC meeting about actually encouraging businesses to open in all the empty storefronts on the street, that would allow more residents to walk or bike to more local services which would make the city greener, be better for all businesses on Mt. Pleasant St., increase public safety, and create jobs.

    Actually, what am I saying? We should just throw an immature hissy fit over a dumb mistake made by a local business person that has already been paid for and had zero effect on the quality of life of a single resident of the neighborhood. Now THAT’S how important things get accomplished.

    • You’re mistaken and you present a false choice between allowing a shady business woman to openly flaunt regulations (with the acquiescence of someone who’s supposed to uphold the law) or having empty storefronts. Those of us who have lived through the past 30 years of law breaking for politically connected businesses, while new businesses face impossible uphill challenges, reject your argument.

      Jim Graham has staked his political career on an “anything goes” approach in Adam’s Morgan in exchange for political support from the business owners. While the tax money is sorely needed, I’d be surprised if 10% of the restaurants in AM are in full tax compliance (see recent IRS crackdown). Furthermore the secondary costs of the entertainment district that he’s created are not born by the businesses themselves –extra late night policing to curb rowdy drunks and late night metro to keep drunks from driving– they’re born by the rest of the tax paying population.

      If Jim Graham was truly pro business, he’d stop milking metro into self destruction and streamline the bureaucratic runaround that new business owners face. Instead he runs the Marion Barry Method of streamlined bureaucracy for a price.

      • But you can bet he’ll be the Ward 1 Council Member for years to come, as unfortunate as that may be.

      • The last two paragraphs of your argument, IMHO, refute the first. The neighborhood suffers from serious, substantial, and chronic problems. The Haydee’s Tree Crisis of ’10 just is not one of them. If the legal process isn’t working how it should, that is a problem, but the problems you elaborate upon in the rest of your post are far greater ones, and unfortunately civic activits only have so much bandwith and only so much ability to mobilize residents.

        There is a huge need to reduce the red tape that prevents new businesses from opening – just seeing all the empty storefronts on Mt. Pleasant Street confirms this. And there is a huge need to address serious social problems – like the situation on weekend nights on 18th St. NW and with the businesses there.

        All of this just has very little to do with a tree on Mt. Pleasant St., which is just of far less significance than the baffling barrage of outrage it has generated.

        • There’s always going to be outrage when people abuse public property to generate private income. Welcome to America!

          The outrage doubles when certain bespectacled representatives who are known for being less than aboveboard, take the side of the business when it’s so blatant a violation of common decency if not overt law.

  • I hope you Eco-Terrorists are happy now. Now go wage the war on something that actually matters like street tattoos or loud pubs.

Comments are closed.