The Oakville Beaver, Wednesday June 21, 2006 - 5 Private tree bylaw now up for debate Continued from page 1 required for pruning or to satisfy subdivision or site plans authorized under the Planning Act. Permits would be handed out to remove trees for building, parking lot or pool installations or expansions. However, with no confirmed list of reasons why a permit wouldn't be handed out, a Town staff report indicates it's anticipated that permits could be denied for "purely cosmetic, convenience or arbitrary reasons." Under the proposed bylaw, a Town staff person would be in charge of granting permits -- on a case-by-case basis. The proposed bylaw also leaves the door open to the Town requiring as a condition of tree removal that replacement trees be planted, or a contribution be made to a municipal Tree Replacement Fund and up to two years of associated maintenance costs. Permits, once issued, would be valid for one year before being revoked and could not be transferred. The Town has a bylaw that governs trees on public property, but not on private property -- at least not yet. The draft bylaw will be out for public comment until Sept. 1 and then it will head back to the Town's Community Services Committee later that month. Anyone who contravenes the proposed bylaw will face a fine of not more than $10,000 or $1,000 per tree, whichever is greater; and on any subsequent conviction, a fine of not more than $25,000 or $2,500 per tree, whichever is greater. If a corporation is convicted, it would face a first conviction fine of not more than $50,000 or $5,000 per tree, whichever is greater; and on any subsequent conviction, a fine of not more than $100,000 or $10,000 per tree, whichever is greater. While there is growing concern about protection of trees in regard to development and particularly infill development, Town staff report that developers removing trees are regulated more by the Planning Act, not the private tree bylaw, which is a simpler process for an individual than the process for developers. Though the Town usually doesn't seek public comment during the summer, Ward 4 Councillors Allan Elgar and Renee Sandelowsky, who initially proposed the bylaw, hope the matter will be settled before 2006 budget delibera- tions begin. With the municipal election looming in November, council also becomes what's known as a lame duck council next fall. A private tree bylaw would have costs, not just for property owners, but also taxpayers. Town staff report there would be costs for staffing to handle administration, enforcement, permitting and inspection related to the bylaw, as well as any potential legal costs associated with enforcement. On a recorded vote at Monday's council meeting -- that saw only Ward 3 Councillor Keith Bird dissent (Ward 2 Councillor Fred Oliver was absent) -- council made some last-minute changes before granting approval for the draft bylaw to go out for public comment. The draft bylaw is available through the Town's Web site at www.oakville.ca. On Monday, council agreed to further restrict the proposed bylaw by seeking that removal in any one year of more than two trees with diameters of 15-30 cm. would also trigger the need for a permit -- up to a maximum total cost of $1,000. Originally, it had been proposed that someone would need a permit if more than three of such mid-sized trees was removed in a year. The draft bylaw would require property owners to obtain a permit for $250 from the Town to cut down or injure any tree with a diameter greater than 30 cm. That would be tightened to diameters of greater than 15 cm for trees on designated heritage properties. The proposed bylaw also sets out what may be considered injury to a tree, which includes harming or destroying it by removing, cutting, girdling, or smothering of the tree or roots; interfering with its water supply; setting fire to a tree; applying chemicals on, around, or near the tree; compaction or re-grading within the tree protection zone up to any existing paved surfaces; damage caused by new development or construction related activities, including the installation of driveways; storing any materials within a tree protection zone; or any other means resulting from neglect, accident or design. Also on Monday, council approved Ward 2 Councillor Cathy Duddeck's request for built-in financial consideration for seniors on fixed incomes for whom the cost of an arborist's Councillor Allan Elgar report may prove onerous. Duddeck suggested it could be as costly as the permit. Residents, who apply to cut down trees could appeal a refusal or conditions to a three-councillor Tree Appeals Committee, but an appeals fee would be charged. The proposed bylaw says only those applying to cut down trees, not other interest- ed parties, could appeal. An applicant who isn't then happy with the Tree Appeals Committee decision could further appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). Someone looking to cut trees that straddle a property line line would be required to get written permission from their neighbour and post notice of their permit, should they obtain one, before and after doing any work or removal on trees. Initially there was concern that even discussion of a private tree bylaw could spark a flurry of tree removal as has occurred elsewhere. However, the Town elected to take its chances and move ahead with consultation. Elgar, who also serves as a councillor for Halton Region which, like Toronto and Councillor Renee Sandelowsky Mississauga, has both public and private tree bylaws, is an advocate for the environment. The councillor has won a Carolinian Canada award, was a founder of Oakvillegreen Conservation Association Inc. and in an incident where a property owner clearcut a massive number of trees on the Oakville-Milton border, Elgar hired a plane with his own money to survey the aerial view of the damage. Elgar and Sandelowsky met with Mississauga city staff to learn about that city's private tree bylaw in efforts to come up with something suitable for Oakville. A private tree bylaw does not prevent a property owner from developing a property, which is a right protected under provincial law, however, it can be an alert that brings a property owner and the municipality together and often can lead to options or compromises that save trees. When the private tree bylaw was proposed, Sandelowsky noted with most of Oakville's trees growing on private property, they need protecting. Angela Blackburn can be reached at angela@oakvillebeaver.com.