Gordon Robinson | Who paved paradise?

Recently, Twitter has outdone itself for intrusiveness It’s the only social media I use because it allows immediate (and pithy) commentary on breaking news. But my antisocial nature ensures that I “follow” very few other users outside of family. Previously, I would receive content my “follows” retweeted. But re-energised Twitter has been crowding my Muskline with arbitrary tweets from anybody they follow, tweets from anyone Twitter thinks I should read, and spam.

Blechhh!

So on December 21, a tweet from KSAMC Councillor Andrew “No Movement Day” Bellamy popped up unannounced and uninvited. It included a photo of the newly redeveloped Devon House Courtyard and his comment:

“Re: renovations taking place at Devon’s House.

I stopped by today and was impressed.

This is a much needed upgrade that will enhance and preserve the royalty of the space. It flows better, welcomes heavy foot traffic, and is very inviting.”

Weeeeeelll, THAT didn’t go down smoothly with many. I guess “preserving royalty” ain’t as popular as it once was. Blowback from Twitter users ranging from the perennially to suddenly environmentally aware was instant and biting. Joni Mitchell captured the perspective perfectly over 50 years ago ( Big Yellow Taxi):

Don’t you know that’s how it go

that you don’t know what you’ve got

’til it’s gone.

They paved Paradise

put up a parking lot!

Some choice responses:

@leacroft_forden: “I’m at a lost (sic) as to what could have impressed you about this. Is it the colour of the bricks or the absence of greenery or just the open space? This is a disgrace ...”

@hcassamba: “I’m sure Mr Seaga must be turning over in his grave. What you have done here wasn’t his vision of a space for families at Devon House. It’s a topic we discussed.”

@CarolNarcisse: “ Devon House isn’t a mall & even malls are now being designed with greenscapes. That courtyard has been transformed from a cool oasis to a bare, heat attracting space. We are going in the opposite direction from being climate smart ...”

@peterissaja: “looks great”

And my personal favourite:

@iamtraviidon: “Lawn maintenance probably did a breed them hence this result.”

GOODMAN’S LAW

Yep! Hard to believe Goodman’s Law isn’t a factor here. Remember Goodman’s Law? Don’t ask if it’s about the money. It’s ALWAYS about the money! So it’s possible a combo of political obsession to spread scarce benefits and a long-term savings justification paved (ouch) the way.

The extreme criticism brought forth a “Statement” not from Jamaica National Heritage Trust (JNHT), the agency charged with preservation of heritage sites like Devon House, but from cash-rich Tourism Enhancement Fund (TEF). The TEF said the work wasn’t finished, and the yard was only opened for Christmas. More green was promised. Also “lusher”. In time. Plenty time.

But green was already there. Lush was everywhere.

Snout-feeding capable TEF, seemingly struck by stones thrown at the JNHT, produced a longer, stouter defence than Desmond Lewis:

“We wish to assure the public the project isn’t completed and doesn’t include upgrades to other areas of the property. To allow the public to use the facility for Christmas, TEF suspended rehabilitation work for the holidays.”

Nice to know. So why not announce this noble intent BEFORE the grand suspension/opening? How come we only learn of this AFTER nuff stone t’row?

“The completed space will consist of more plants to ensure the public can continue to enjoy the oasis in the middle of the city … . Furthermore, we assure the public the area will appear lusher after trees are allowed to mature, shrubs are planted, and vines begin to grow on the pergolas.”

Lusher. Than. What? Twin Gates Plaza? The bricks are already laid. Will they be dug up? btw don’t think we don’t see the cute political-style deflection “in the middle of the city”, which implies that we are naïve or stupid to expect preservation or expansion of green spaces in a city. One last thing (said Lieutenant Colombo). Not that it matters (environmentally speaking) but St Andrew is NOT a city. Kingston is a city.

“… only one tree was removed. TEF decided to remove the Poinciana tree after a review by the Forestry Department, which recommended its removal for public safety. They also advised it was ‘ultimately better to err on the side of caution by replacing the old tree with a young sapling that can be trained to conform to contextually acceptable standards of safety.’ We followed this advice and planted a young Lignum Vitae tree in its place. Additionally, with the removal of the Poinciana tree, six other trees have been planted, including a Blue Mahoe, Lignum Vitae, and Cordia Sebestena, as well as assorted plants and shrubs.”

Well, whoop-di-doo! The Old Ball and Chain, my landscaping expert, assures me that the story of the dangerous Poincianna Tree is credible. She also confirms the Lignum Vitae, a sturdier (very tough wood) so better substitute (and its flower is the national flower). The Blue Mahoe, Jamaica’s national tree, grows swiftly and high with a straight trunk, broad green leaves and beautiful hibiscus-like flowers, so is also appropriate. Cordia Sebastena is more shrub than tree.

Only one tree was removed. But too many other important bits of greenery were also discarded. WHY? Were they also dangerous?

“Given the rich history and importance of Devon House …, there must be continued maintenance and rehabilitation to ensure its sustainability. The redevelopment was, therefore, very timely as we strive to maintain our historical and cultural spaces across the island.”

Kiss my red wrinkled rungus kungus minungus! Since when, in what dictionary, in which language is “redevelopment” synonymous with “maintenance and rehabilitation”?

POTENTIAL DANGER

The TEF spoke of “uneven surfaces” posing “a potential danger to patrons”; “flooding following rainfall” preventing easy access; “number of seats in the area inadequate” and “the previous design … didn’t allow for ease of movement … .and didn’t include enough ramps to allow for ... .differently abled, or persons with baby strollers, to have access to seating”.

Uneven surfaces aren’t made even by greenery removal. Flooding isn’t cured or mitigated by “development” hostile to climate sensitivity. Ramps can be built without removing one leaf, and the baby stroller argument is infantile.

But nothing in this world is as it appears, so we must dispel political illusion. The TEF’s diatribe (which included details of the entire process from concept through procurement to practical completion) implies that the JNHT abdicated its public duty and unlawfully delegated it to the TEF.

One public commentator hit the nail squarely on its head. Architect Patricia Green was quoted by The Gleaner thusly:

“Devon House is a historic structure, and the historic environment is also a part of it. It isn’t just the building. It’s the entire environment, [which] is listed by the [JNHT].

“We, as the nation of Jamaica, have placed responsibility in [JNHT] to ensure the historic environment is retained, and what has happened is [Devon House’s] historic environment has been compromised and it has been compromised negatively ... . How could something like this happen to even go through [JNHT] and get approval for execution?”

Did it? The TEF’s thou-dost-protest-too-much (me thinks) statement appears to exclude the JNHT’s involvement. Who made the decisions? The TEF says it decided to remove the Poincianna tree. Was the JNHT involved at all?

In 1985, a new Jamaica Heritage Trust Act created a new JNHT.

Relevant JNHT duties are:

“(a) to promote the preservation of national monuments and anything designated as protected national heritage for the benefit of the Island;…

(c) to carry out such development as it considers necessary for the preservation of any national monument or anything designated as protected national heritage”

Only “development” to “preserve” a national monument is lawful. The JNHT declared Devon House as such in 1990. “RE-development” (TEF’s word) is prohibited.

The JNHT website records its mission as “to inspire a sense of national pride through the promotion, preservation, and development of our material cultural heritage, utilizing a highly motivated and qualified team in conjunction with all our partners”.

According to that website, JNHT Trustees are Orville Hill (chairman); Lenford Salmon (deputy chairman); Elizabeth Pigou-Dennis; James Robertson; Peter Francis; Charles Ramdatt; Zachary Beier; Gianna Fakhourie; David Brown; Christopher Whyms-Stone; Vivian Crawford; Elizabeth Stair; Peter Knight; Robert Hill; Michele Creed-Nelson.

TEF Board Members (source: tef.gov.jm): Godfrey Dyer (chairman); Carey Wallace (executive director); Jordan Samuda; Joseph Issa; Donovan White; Ian Dear; Judy Schoenbein; Carolyn Campbell; Barbara Russell; David Dobson; Clifton Reader; Marc Williams; Omar Robinson; Tanisha Cunningham (board secretary). Nary a one from the JNHT!

So let’s ignore irrelevant TEF blather. Ask JNHT Trustees to name the “highly motivated and qualified” JNHT team that worked on this project. If it worked with “partners”, who was senior partner? And did the JNHT decide to approve such a wholesale, detrimental “upgrade” to a national monument disguised as “preservation”. If so, why?

Peace and Love.

Gordon Robinson is an attorney-at-law. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.