[CANUFNET] Wood Waste Utilization RFP
Sean Gorham
sean at urbantreesalvage.com
Thu Feb 21 06:11:40 EST 2008
Karen,
Care in the movement of the waste wood for manufacturing and end
usage(firewood) should be considered. If these trees were removed because
of insect/diseases then movement out of city limits could also spread the
insect/diseases. A possible inner city operation could reduce the chance of
movement and spreading of anything. KDHT of all lumber is necessary for the
sale and movement and exporting to USA and abroad. Heat treating of firewood
that will be transported may be a good idea if movement is into or through a
sensitive area.
Sincerely
Sean Gorham - President
T: 647-438-7516
F: 647-438-7518
www.urbantreesalvage.com
sean at urbantreesalvage.com
-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net]
On Behalf Of canufnet-request at list.web.net
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 12:00 PM
To: canufnet at list.web.net
Subject: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 39, Issue 11
Send CANUFNET mailing list submissions to
canufnet at list.web.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://list.web.net/lists/listinfo/canufnet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
canufnet-request at list.web.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
canufnet-owner at list.web.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CANUFNET digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Wood Waste Utilization RFP (Asmundson, Karen)
2. Re: Privately owned trees on publicly owned road right of way
(Ian Wilson)
3. Re: Privately owned trees on publicly owned road right of way
(pwynnyczuk at richmondhill.ca)
4. Re: Privately owned trees on publicly owned road right of way
(Ron Carter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 08:31:23 -0600
From: "Asmundson, Karen" <kasmundson at winnipeg.ca>
Subject: [CANUFNET] Wood Waste Utilization RFP
To: <canufnet at list.web.net>
Message-ID:
<41C761AFC2F4D946A0FE1CAD5B82B3930290A58E at COWSVPEMB2.ad.cityofwpg.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi everyone,
I'm writing an RFP (Request for Proposal) that will be used to select a
private company to process and sell our urban timber (mostly American
elm). It will be great to have all this great wood salvaged from the
landfill. The idea is that the company that receives the award will not
necessarily have to bid the best price on the wood or even any price on
the wood at all - they will primarily be judged on the conciseness and
feasibility of their product idea and marketing plan. We will be open
to all kinds of products - from hog fuel to furniture and anything in
between. Has anyone ever heard of this kind of arrangement happening in
another city? Does anyone have a copy of a similar RFP that I could use
as a template or know where I might find one or who I might ask?
Thanks very much!
Karen Asmundson
City of Winnipeg Urban Forestry Branch
(204) 986-4248
kasmundson at winnipeg.ca
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://list.web.net/archives/canufnet/attachments/20080220/c089593a/attachme
nt-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 07:28:23 -0800
From: "Ian Wilson" <IWilson at kelowna.ca>
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Privately owned trees on publicly owned road
right of way
To: "Canadian Urban Forest Network" <canufnet at list.web.net>
Message-ID:
<63C8F69A3250564AAAEE162EF144217F0D0B10A6 at kelexchange.city.kelowna.bc.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi Sheila,
We often have the same type of issue. Even if we didn't plant the tree
we could be held legally responsible if it's hazardous and planted on
public property. Sometimes we are able to use "moral persuasion" to
convince the owner to help look after the tree themselves. If you've
done a tree risk assessment and it's not a hazard then you can certainly
choose to leave the tree alone.
Regarding the driveway, sounds like he just wants to get rid of the tree
and is looking for any excuse. If it's damaging the portion of the
driveway that is on the County-owned ROW then he may not have any
recourse since it's not his land anyway. If it's damaging his property
then you may have to do something to mitigate the damage - you might
consider root pruning and putting in a root barrier if the tree is worth
preserving.
Ian Wilson
City of Kelowna
-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
[mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Sheila Flint
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 11:55 AM
To: canufnet at list.web.net
Subject: [CANUFNET] Privately owned trees on publicly owned road right
of way
Good day to all. A resident has approached us to remove a spruce tree
located on his property. The tree is actually on County road right of
way but was not planted by the County or the developer. The tree has
never been maintained by our Parks department. Our legal department has
informed us that it is our responsibility as it is on road right of way.
The resident claims that the tree is hazardous and questions who would
be liable if it were to fall on his vehicle. We have done a hazard
assessment and the tree poses no risk that we can see.
Legal has informed us that the tree is ours to maintain in the future.
The resident was told that he could not remove the tree as it belongs to
our County.
Here is the question: The resident has come back stating that the tree
roots from this spruce are damaging his driveway. Does anyone have a
by-law or policy that covers this?
Sheila Flint
(780) 464-8496
(780) 893-5829
Host of the 2008 Canadian Urban Forest Conference
"You can judge the health of your community by the health of your urban
forest" - Jim Skiera This communication is intended for the recipient to
whom it is
addressed, and may contain confidential, personal, and or privileged
information. Please contact the sender immediately if you are not the
intended recipient of this communication, and do not copy, distribute,
or take action relying on it. Any communication received in error, or
subsequent reply, should be deleted or destroyed.
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:06:56 -0500
From: pwynnyczuk at richmondhill.ca
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Privately owned trees on publicly owned road
right of way
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network <canufnet at list.web.net>
Message-ID:
<OF53A32311.2060940E-ON852573F5.00580043-852573F5.00588643 at richmondhill.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi there,
Short answer in my understanding property owners no matter who they are
own up to the property line. Not a policy, but a practice
You have the option of trimming the offending roots at the property line
to prevent any further impact on the driveway taking into account:
1) Impacts on tree health buy root pruning
2) the age of the driveway
3) pre-existing condition of the driveway
4) surface texture of drive, interlock, gravel. paved etc.
5) determining the risks to the Municipality of doing nothing to the
roots
Regards,
Peter Wynnyczuk
"Sheila Flint" <flint at strathcona.ab.ca>
Sent by: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
02/19/2008 02:54 PM
Please respond to
Canadian Urban Forest Network <canufnet at list.web.net>
To
<canufnet at list.web.net>
cc
Subject
[CANUFNET] Privately owned trees on publicly owned road right of way
Good day to all. A resident has approached us to remove a spruce tree
located on his property. The tree is actually on County road right of
way but was not planted by the County or the developer. The tree has
never been maintained by our Parks department. Our legal department has
informed us that it is our responsibility as it is on road right of way.
The resident claims that the tree is hazardous and questions who would
be liable if it were to fall on his vehicle. We have done a hazard
assessment and the tree poses no risk that we can see.
Legal has informed us that the tree is ours to maintain in the future.
The resident was told that he could not remove the tree as it belongs to
our County.
Here is the question: The resident has come back stating that the tree
roots from this spruce are damaging his driveway. Does anyone have a
by-law or policy that covers this?
Sheila Flint
(780) 464-8496
(780) 893-5829
Host of the 2008 Canadian Urban Forest Conference
"You can judge the health of your community by the health of your urban
forest" - Jim Skiera
This communication is intended for the recipient to whom it is
addressed, and may contain confidential, personal, and or privileged
information. Please contact the sender immediately if you are not the
intended recipient of this communication, and do not copy, distribute,
or take action relying on it. Any communication received in error, or
subsequent reply, should be deleted or destroyed.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://list.web.net/archives/canufnet/attachments/20080220/c6965496/attachme
nt-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 08:11:57 -0800
From: "Ron Carter" <Ron.Carter at saanich.ca>
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Privately owned trees on publicly owned road
right of way
To: <canufnet at list.web.net>
Message-ID: <47BBE0CD.2C0B.0016.0 at saanich.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sheila.
We have similar situations and do accept responsibility for trees on
municipal property regardless of history good or bad.
When our trees are damaging private side structures (driveways, waterlines,
etc.) the owners are advised to take it up with our claims dept.
If the tree is worthy of preserving, we keep the tree and usually assist the
owner with repairs. If the tree is not worthy and has been linked with the
damage, we remove it for sure and leave it to our Claims to settle.
Then there's the boundary tree. A bit more complicated but if its nice and
important to the streetscape, it's better for us to at least cost share and
do the required maintenance so the tree gets proper care on our terms.
The private side repairs are done by contractor whether we pay anything or
not.
Hope that helps.
Ron Carter
Saanich Parks
>>> "Sheila Flint" <flint at strathcona.ab.ca> 2/19/2008 11:54 AM >>>
Good day to all. A resident has approached us to remove a spruce tree
located on his property. The tree is actually on County road right of
way but was not planted by the County or the developer. The tree has
never been maintained by our Parks department. Our legal department has
informed us that it is our responsibility as it is on road right of way.
The resident claims that the tree is hazardous and questions who would
be liable if it were to fall on his vehicle. We have done a hazard
assessment and the tree poses no risk that we can see.
Legal has informed us that the tree is ours to maintain in the future.
The resident was told that he could not remove the tree as it belongs to
our County.
Here is the question: The resident has come back stating that the tree
roots from this spruce are damaging his driveway. Does anyone have a
by-law or policy that covers this?
Sheila Flint
(780) 464-8496
(780) 893-5829
Host of the 2008 Canadian Urban Forest Conference
"You can judge the health of your community by the health of your urban
forest" - Jim Skiera
This communication is intended for the recipient to whom it is
addressed, and may contain confidential, personal, and or privileged
information. Please contact the sender immediately if you are not the
intended recipient of this communication, and do not copy, distribute,
or take action relying on it. Any communication received in error, or
subsequent reply, should be deleted or destroyed.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://list.web.net/archives/canufnet/attachments/20080220/511288c8/attachme
nt-0001.htm
End of CANUFNET Digest, Vol 39, Issue 11
****************************************
More information about the CANUFNET
mailing list