By Pepper Parr

June 10th, 2106

BURLINGTON, ON

What is it about a city that can have hundreds of people out planting trees but can’t manage to pass a bylaw that would prevent people from cutting down a tree on their property just because they didn’t like the tree anymore?

This weekend there will be a crew out on Colonial Court doing some tree planting

More than 100 people turned out in the Beachway to plant trees.

Last weekend there were was a small crowd planting trees in the Norton Park in Alton.

The week before that there were close to 100 people doing a GreenUp in the Beachway where thousands of seedlings are being planted as part of a multi-year program that will give some stability to the sandy soil that much of the park is made up of.

The Appleby Line tree planting activity runs from 10 – 2 on the 11th – gather at 103 Colonial Court – Burlington.

Mayor Goldring’s private tree bylaw initiative seems to have ground to a halt – there was some traction in the Roseland community a few years ago but it didn’t get much beyond a community committee level. In a Roseland Community Organization report Don Baxter said:

At the Community Services Committee of Council, in 2012 – yes 2012, a positive recommendation was approved to accelerate a study regarding the potential of a Tree Protection By-law on private property within Burlington.

Roseland Community Organization supported this recommendation, and made a presentation to Committee to that end. This action by RCO was brought about by a growing concern about the alarming rate at which mature trees are being brought down in our community. In a recent memo, one resident quipped, “We will soon need a by-law to ban loud sneezing or else another tree will come down in Roseland.”

At the Committee, there were a number of key issues that need to be carefully considered in the staff research, including:

Effectiveness – will the by-law stop unnecessary removal of trees? What has been effectiveness of such by-laws in other jurisdictions? Some of the presentations and concerns raised at Committee dwelled on this question – should we take away property rights for something that may not do the job? While no regulation can be totally effective for this kind of situation, can we at least introduce a “second sober thought” into the process before a century old tree is taken down?

Different Needs – will the by-law deal with the different situations that arise around trees, including:

– Where a developer clears a site of trees before proceeding to apply for development approvals, and thereby, avoiding tree protection through the site plan process?

– Where the home owner a large lot takes the trees down prior to making a land division application to ensure the preservation of trees does not become either a neighbourhood or a site plan issue

– Where the home-owner who, for no reason other than their personal preferences, decides to remove a significant tree

These apple trees were cut down because the apartment building to the south and the church to the north didn’t like the way geese were attracted to the apples and were pooping on the roadway. Promises were made to plant different trees – nothing yet.

Obviously there is no intent to stop all tree removal particularly where safety is an issue, but there should be a process where these issues are raised prior to the tree coming down – too often our wake up call is the early morning sound of chain saws, and by then, it is too late to do anything.

Liability – There were concerns that a Tree By-law may increase the liability of the City. Of course trees are a liability in that sense. The absolute safest route would be to take all trees down, but that is why we have risk management. The municipalities who already have tree by-laws have same insurance companies as Burlington, and they will advise the City on how to address this issue. The City already deals with risk management for trees on public property, so this new by-law could be an extension of that approach.

Budget – Implementation of a Tree By-law will generate costs but does this mean taxes will need to be increased? Perhaps, but the more managerial approach would be to decide if this is a needed service? what priority level does it have in relation to other services? and then, set a tax rate needed to generate the revenues required to deliver necessary services. Burlington is not on the edge of a fiscal cliff, and it has exercised sound fiscal management in the past.

Sustainability – While the focus of the Committee discussion was on the Tree By-law for private property, there were a staff review proposed on a broader range of tree issues. Much of the tree loss in Roseland is on public property for trees that are becoming hazards. The issues are ones of both maintenance and replacement procedures, and possible role for more community involvement.

The city was “studying the “feasibility” of a private tree bylaw. That was in 2012 – The study was one of the 40 recommendations included in the city’s revised Urban Forest Management Plan, approved by city council in 2012.

The plan recognized the many benefits trees provide to the community and their importance to current and future generations, according to a press release issued by the city.

Residents in Alton turn out to plant 400 trees in Norton Park.

“Burlington’s urban forest grows predominantly on private property” said Cathy Robertson, director of roads and parks maintenance in the release. “We realize that the residents and other stakeholders who own or manage land in the city have the greatest ability to influence our urban forest. However, we also realize that there is a broad range of opinions on this subject.”

The feasibility study will include a variety of engagement opportunities for affected stakeholders to actively participate in developing options and alternatives that provide a balance between the ability to use and enjoy private property, and the desire to protect trees.
The city did conduct a citywide telephone survey, along with a number of online surveys and a community workshop.
The idea has gotten nowhere and isn’t going to go anywhere until there is a change in the makeup of the current city council – the will to pass such a bylaw just isn’t there.

Will streets in the Roseland community begin to look like this – with trees trimmed back to stumps for “public safety”?

Meanwhile several thousand people spend their time planting new trees – the residents of Roseland must look at some of those towering trees in their community that have been around for close to 80 years and wonder if they are in any better shape than the two willows that were cut down in Spencer Smith Park earlier this week.

Much of the value of homes in Roseland is directly related to the canopy of trees. The picture set out below is of Belvenia – image that street without those trees? How much would their loss reduce property values.

The value of the houses on this street is determined to a large degree by the tree canopy.

So where do things stand now? There is a 184 page staff report gathering dust where these report go to die. The Executive summary read thusly:

This report has been prepared to provide a summary of the Private Tree Bylaw Feasibility Study. Based on council discussions at Development and Infrastructure Committee on May 27, 2013, recommendations have not been included. However, the report provides options for council’s consideration and advises which ones are supported by staff. Unless council approves one or more options at this meeting or provides direction for staff to take no further actions related to these options, it is staff’s intent to bring a supplemental report with recommendations for consideration at the next meeting of Development and Infrastructure Committee in September 2013.