[CANUFNET] Trees and Capital Construction

[Grace Golightly]

An interesting article recently published in The Narwhal about the effects
of construction on urban trees:

https://thenarwhal.ca/opinion-urban-forests-construction-threat/

I agree, it is time to share the knowledge of what best practices are,
amongst the provinces, and amongst the general population.

Grace

On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 10:15 AM Ethier Elaine via CANUFNET <
canufnet at list.web.net> wrote:

> Bruno, the Montreal Tree bylaw was 2005.
>
> Please excuse my French for the Burroughs- burrows, it would in fact be a
> case of total biomass !!!
>
> Outremont is a case appart, Old Quary on the North face of the mountain.
> Beautiful views to and from the Ottawa river and Lakes as well as the Saint
> Lawrence. I lived 32 years on the wild side of the Mount-Royal. Lived and
> worked on Campus as it is said. Created and presided le Comité
> d’embellissement of Outremont. The first greening Committee. Worked with
> Georges Boizard on arboriculture projects to increase and maintain the
> Outremont urban forest. Outremont received its first Silver Iris Provincial
> prize for new landscape approches including trees and shrubs planted on
> avenues, some busy dense residential-school and commercial strips. Citizens
> were very proud and TREE DEMOCRACY became a BUZZ GREEN word. Burroughs like
> Montreal-East disregarded tress as they were staining the petroleum
> industrial zones and structures.
>
> Nevertheless, no matter the Burroughs, Tools are missing, some of them,
> very useful, disappeared. One listed magnificent remarkable trees in the
> Province. This great tool was abandoned late 1990’s.
>
> Since 1998, year of devastating Ice Storm, severely damaged trees are
> still standing and managed. Severe Structural  damages lead to diseases and
> … . It's around  that time, if not perfect in memory that The SIAQ
> International Society of Arboriculture, Quebec chapter,  stopped the
> edition of a great tool : Le repertoires des arbres Remaquables du Quebec.
> Heritage trees and all viable stem were well documented with a grid for
> health and economic analysis as well as public health monitoring, what we
> all call Canopy value. I used it as a management tool.
>
> Since then, a Lady from Quebec City has had contracts with Hydro to
> photograph and document great trees so to have a registry of species to be
> protected from questionable techniques by some power line Treeman. This
> tool is not made public.
> A few beautiful books have been edited but not promoted for the industry
> nor enough to bring a sense of recognition of our urban forest incentives
> at large.
>
> The International Society of Arboriculture Quebec is the respected
> organisation that should lead the way with a new tool for private or public
> tree assesment on city draw back limits, parks, riverbanks, etc., With
> today’s technology, so many tools not used enough. It is maybe time for a
> cross provincial knowledge transfer of urban forestry best bylaws, best
> practice, best distribution, best practitioners, best user friendly
> management, etc.
>
> Montreal is a good model for concertation, innovation; it is old, modern
> and contemporary, and young with thousands of students of all fields in the
> best schools, colleges and four Universities.
> UNESCO City of Design, complex, built and rebuilt, housing the UNESCO
> Chair in Urban Landscape at University of Montreal, surrounded by rivers,
> more than 32km of underground life and transport accessibility,
> unchangeable urban pattern other than industrial sectors or upright
> density. A city’s vitality is seen as healthy when counting the amount of
> cranes are in one area. Would'nt be nice to have cranes drop in large
> species and creat urban forest with big brothers instead od mostly juvenile
> trees.
> On comment about Urbanism ;
> Urban planners are organized, they are formed to plan cities, with all it
> means, the have taken their place over and above a numbers of urban
> professions.
>
>
>
> ELAINE
> elaine.ethier at umontreal.ca
>
>
> Confidentialité:
> Ce document est destiné uniquement à la personne ou à la société à
> laquelle il est envoyé. Le contenu de l’information est
> confidentiel et ne peut pas être lu, ni partagé, ni communiqué.
>
>
>
> Le 19 févr. 2021 à 10:33, Bruno PAQUET via CANUFNET <canufnet at list.web.net>
> a écrit :
>
> Interesting proposal Julian, working from under trees to get them better
> protected. I will work on it . 🙄
>
> Since 2002 and not 2005, the new City of Montreal is divided into 19
> boroughs, each of which is able to pass tree preservation by-laws mainly on
> private land via zoning by-laws. But the situation is quite distinct from
> one borough to another, as you point out.
>
> Thus, many of us agree that much remains to be done. Such as avoiding too
> great a disparity in the wording and application of by-laws from one
> borough to another, sometimes even from one side of the street to the
> other. And this, in the quest for greater equity among all citizens.
>
> For tree protection measures, some boroughs have been particularly
> innovative in adopting a management plan for the local urban forest. The
> Central City undertook to revise an existing tree protection specification
> during the work, but the project was not completed.
>
> In Outremont, the smallest borough with 24 000 citizens, we are in the
> process of revising the zoning by-law to improve the preservation of
> existing trees, both public and private, when work of any kind must take
> place in their immediate environment.
>
> The area of the new MIL campus of the Université de Montréal has been
> planned and built to offer a better future for trees: continuous tree pits,
> biodiversity, choice of large species, suspended sidewalks, etc.
>
> Now, we are trying to get involved in projects when the sheet is still
> white, so we can put ahead trees necessities and long-term growing needs.
> As I said, we are trying...
>
>
>  *SVP, prendre note de ma nouvelle adresse de courriel :*
> bruno.paquet at montreal.ca
>
>
> *Bruno Paquet*
> Cadre sur mandat
>
> Arrondissement d'Outremont
> 514 943 1287
>
>
> Le mer. 17 févr. 2021, à 14 h 00, Julian Dunster via CANUFNET <
> canufnet at list.web.net> a écrit :
>
>> Well now, I know that some Montrealers like to be part of an underground
>> movement, but maybe in boroughs not burrows.
>>
>> It is quite an image - les urban forestieres scurrying around underground
>> in burrows, popping up here and there to manage the trees :)
>>
>>
>> In all urban areas the problem is exacerbated because urban planners and
>> engineers leave no room for trees. So, until there is a more viable land
>> base where we can grow trees, this will always be an issue. Change the
>> urban design paradigm to allow for more land set aside for trees!
>>
>> On Behalf of Dunster and Associates Environmental Consultants Ltd.
>>
>>
>> Dr. Julian A Dunster R.P.F., R.P.P.., M.C.I.P., ISA Certified Arborist,
>> ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist # 378,
>> ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified
>> Honourary Life Member ISA + PNWISA
>>
>> North American distributor for Rinntech www.dunster.cawww.treelaw.infowww.rinntech.info
>>
>> On Wed/2/17/2021 9:33 AM, Ethier Elaine via CANUFNET wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> In Montreal, when burrows were legal municipal entities, all had bylaws
>> depending on the amounts of parks, their use and value of the residential
>> realty. Westmount, Outremont, Town of Mont Royal, the Golden Mile and some
>> Garden cities were ahead in applying innovative methods of green protection
>> and city scapes.
>>
>> As cities went into a major fusion to become almost an entire city
>> island, many new protection initiatives have been put in place with the
>> fusion, 2005 was the year marking urban forestry Best practices with new
>> bylaws. The Mount Royal heritage has its own protection plan as it is a
>> emblematic parc. But for other burrows, there is a fifteen year gap in
>> restoring, updating  or renewing street tree project. In highly densely
>> populated burrows, no new plans, street trees are replaced in the same
>> manner as planted 40/50 years ago, the same small rectangular pitch.
>>
>> In residential areas, Street corners are treated with new approaches but
>> not as many tall trees have space. The approach is for citizen gardening
>> take over.
>> Large tree removal is rarely appreciated for it’s wood mass value unless
>> it’s a remarkable speeches. Parc Jean Drapeau on a historical island had
>> massive cuttings of mature trees without consultation. There is a lot of
>> this happening with the greater montreal TOD plan and the REM. All natural
>> benefits are replaced by economic rendering for the cost of these
>> infrastructure.
>>
>> The urban canopy will not have the same biomass, populations of our
>> Nordic zone will have less tree canopy per inhabitants than in the past.
>> Announces of planting trees are welcome but the size of the selected mature
>> height and spread are tailored down because of vertical building density.
>> The human scope for major construction are trees just tall enough for two
>> stories.
>> Montréal has planted massively in parc all over, the Emerald Ash Borers
>> are devastating street scapes.
>>
>> Many boroughs (Park Extension/Hochelaga Maisonneuve/Rosemont/Montreal
>> North to name a few) have limited their bylaw to propose, when issuing
>> permit for tree removal, to plant a high dimension indigenous tree if and
>> when possible. So Yellow Birch is coming back to town as alley or street
>> trees because they are tall trees.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Elaine Ethier
>> Plani Gester
>> Aménagement, foresterie urbaine
>>
>> Le 17 févr. 2021 à 10:19, Wood, Crispin via CANUFNET
>> <canufnet at list.web.net> <canufnet at list.web.net> a écrit :
>>
>> 
>>
>> Hello Folks,
>>
>>
>>
>> A question or two for the municipalities if I may:
>>
>>
>>
>>    1. How does you municipality protect trees when *designing *(not
>>    constructing) streetscape renewal projects? i.e. Do you have policy,
>>    strategy, orders of council etc?
>>    2. How does your municipality compensate for mature trees removed
>>    during capital construction (do you have a calculation of value, and is it
>>    published in policy, bylaw or strategy)?
>>    3. How do you plan for new green infrastructure in the Road
>>    Right-of-way (do you have landscape design standards, streetscaping
>>    standards, policy to protect or enhance green infrastructure)?
>>    4. Are your current tools working?
>>
>>
>>
>> Any responses are appreciated
>>
>>
>>
>> *Crispin Wood, MSFM*
>>
>> *Superintendent of Urban Forestry*
>>
>> *Road Operations & Construction*
>>
>> Transportation & Public Works
>>
>> (902) 225-2774
>>
>>
>>
>> *HΛLIFΛX*
>>
>> PO BOX 1749
>>
>> HALIFAX NS B3J 3A5
>> halifax.ca <http://www.halifax.ca/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> *AVERTISSEMENT* : Ce courriel et les pièces qui y sont jointes sont
> destinés exclusivement au(x) destinataire(s) mentionné(s) ci-dessus et
> peuvent contenir de l’information privilégiée ou confidentielle. Si vous
> avez reçu ce courriel par erreur, ou s’il ne vous est pas destiné, veuillez
> le mentionner immédiatement à l’expéditeur et effacer ce courriel ainsi que
> les pièces jointes, le cas échéant. La copie ou la redistribution non
> autorisée de ce courriel peut être illégale. Le contenu de ce courriel ne
> peut être interprété qu’en conformité avec les lois et règlements qui
> régissent les pouvoirs des diverses instances décisionnelles compétentes de
> la Ville de Montréal.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20210222/98f7ae8e/attachment.htm>