[CANUFNET] Compensation for removal of municipally-owned trees

[Brian Geerts]

City of Cambridge, ON

Our City tree bylaw 71-06 has the following clause:

6. Where the removal of a live and healthy tree is requested for the purpose of providing
an entrance to private property, for the protection of buildings, or where such removal
is requested for the preservation or construction of a utility, the person or corporation
requesting such removal shall:
(a) Pay all costs and expenses incurred in such removal; and
(b) Pay to the Municipality as compensation for the tree to be removed an amount
equal to the value thereof in accordance with the most recent shade tree
valuation formula as set out by the International Society of Arboriculture.

It isn't always successful getting compensation, as the valuation can sometimes be quite high.  We apply the valuation using trunk formula, by the book.

Brian Geerts
Manager of Forestry & Horticulture

From: CANUFNET [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Alex Satel
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 9:56 AM
To: canufnet at list.web.net
Subject: [CANUFNET] Compensation for removal of municipally-owned trees

Hello fellow CANUFNET members,

I am looking to compile some basic information about municipalities which currently request compensation for the removal of municipally-owned trees (such as street trees), particularly in relation to development on private lands.

I would greatly appreciate any input from CANUFNET members in response to some or all of the following questions. Any level of detail would be great, and if you don't feel comfortable broadcasting to the list (although that's encouraged so we can all share the information), feel free to email me directly.

Questions:



1.       Does your municipality seek compensation for municipally-owned trees removed through development on private lands?



2.       If so, do you seek (A) to cover removal/replacement costs, (B) amenity value, (C) both amenity and removal/replacement, or (D) other?



3.       If your municipality seeks to recover (B or C) amenity value, do you determine amenity value using (A) the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers (CTLA) Trunk Formula Method (TFM), or (B) an alternate method?



4.       Can you provide some more details about the method you use (e.g., TFM by-the-book, TFM with modifications, negotiated value, etc.)?



5.       Can you provide any comments about the successes/challenges in seeking compensation for the removal of municipally-owned trees?



Thank you all kindly in advance, and kudos to everyone for continuing to use CANUFNET! I always enjoy seeing everyone's contributions and think it really helps to connect the UF community.


--Alex Satel

Alex Satel, MFC
ISA Certified Arborist ON-1353A
Urban Forest Innovations, Inc.
1248 Minnewaska Trail
Mississauga, ON L5G 3S5
P: (905) 274-1022
asatel at ufis.ca<mailto:asatel at ufis.ca>
urbanforestinnovations.com<http://www.urbanforestinnovations.com/>
[UFI new logo very small]



This communication is confidential and may contain information protected by Privacy
legislation.  Unauthorized use is strictly prohibited.  If you are not the intended
recipient or have received this communication in error, please notify the sender 
immediately by telephone.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20150123/fcdc08d6/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3274 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20150123/fcdc08d6/attachment-0001.jpg>