[CANUFNET] Municipal Tree Risk Assessment Policies

Wed Oct 19 11:51:16 EDT 2022

Hi Jack,

I can give an overview of how the Forestry department handles these cases at the City of Laval. If we notice a dead or hazardous privately-owned tree, if the situation is judged to not require immediate action, the first step is to mail to the owners what we call an "avis de courtoisie", essentially a friendly warning urging them to remove the tree (or in more rare cases, simply to prune the hazardous limbs). There's a bit of inconsistency amongst the different technicians in our office, but we generally only send this letter if there's public land (road, sidewalk, etc.) as a target. This letter hasn't much legal weight, rather just a friendly warning advising the owners of the hazard and encouraging them to act accordingly.

If the situation isn't remedied within a certain timeframe (up to the tech's discretion, generally 3-6 months), a second letter is sent that's more of an ultimatum: act now before a set deadline, otherwise the City will carry out the work and bill the cost to the owner.

A couple of notes: like Peter said, it's pretty rare that a situation escalates up to that point. As well, I've heard grumblings that the City's Legal department is reviewing our procedures, as they might be of the opinion that the City does have more responsibility to act if it's aware of a potentially dangerous situation, rather than urging and waiting for the property owner to do it. Finally, and again there is some internal debate over our methods, but we do generally send out at least the first letter (the avis de courtoisie) even when the tree isn't exactly """dangerous""" per se; because owners are legally obligated to replant a new tree after removal, we want owners to be aware of the by-laws of needing to remove a dead tree and replant a new one, in the optics of maintaining a canopy. So whether it's a dead 15-cm lilac or a 100-cm poplar, property owners receive essentially the same letter.

Hope this helps, I can provide more details on bylaws, specific cases, logistics, etc. if you wish.

Best,

___
Robert Liveanu, MFC, B.Sc.
Arboriculteur certifié de l'ISA
Technicien à la foresterie
Division Foresterie & Horticulture
Service des travaux publics
Tél. 450-978-6888 poste 4775
www.laval.ca<https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.laval.ca%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cmy.tremblay%40laval.ca%7Cec3b888e0037403d339708d8cf70014d%7C15ebd2ebb8cf40dd8e2bb2e67abb40ef%7C0%7C0%7C637487427315023800%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=YGbFwWfkPV1mwBIXvoyFz0MKfMe2vw0sbrYL09bU5n0%3D&reserved=0>

[logo_laval_couleur]

De : CANUFNET [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] De la part de Peter Shields via CANUFNET
Envoyé : 19 octobre 2022 10:59
À : Canadian Urban Forest Network <canufnet at list.web.net>
Cc : Peter Shields <peter.shields1 at hotmail.com>
Objet : Re: [CANUFNET] Municipal Tree Risk Assessment Policies

Hello Jack,

It has been my experience these details are in the actual bylaw. Some have a line stating they can enter adjacent lands to mitigate where a tree may negatively impact infrastructure.  Some have the ability to issue an order to a tree owner for the same. And if they do not, they can sometimes put the costs on their tax bill. Generally, they only manage Municipal Trees, not private trees.

It is impossible all risks are known to the municipality. Also, extreme risks are very rare as they are usually dealt with immediately so I may suggest to exercise caution in deeming a tree as such post casualty. Tree owners have a duty of care, including their trees and what a reasonable understanding of risks may be.

One last thing, municipalities generally do not assess private trees. If there is an obvious inherent risk, sometimes they may notify if seen. These would be for trees that are failing imminently or deemed an actual hazard. This is critically important to distinguish.

It sounds like it should be provable the municipality knew about the extreme risk and did not do anything to mitigate.

Cheers,

Peter Shields
RCA, ISA BCMA, TRAQ
www.shieldstree.com<olm://message-contents/AQACAAAAyQAAAAAAAAAAyAkBAAAAAAAA1AAAAAAAAQJDAAAAAAABCcgAAAAAAAECQwIAAIABAAAAMnBldGVyLnNoaWVsZHMxQGhvdG1haWwuY29tX0FjdGl2ZVN5bmNNaWNyb3NvZnRfSHhT/www.shieldstree.com>
(705) 500-4860<tel:+17055004860>
________________________________
From: CANUFNET <canufnet-bounces at list.web.net<mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net>> on behalf of Naomi Zurcher via CANUFNET <canufnet at list.web.net<mailto:canufnet at list.web.net>>
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2022 9:53:56 AM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network <canufnet at list.web.net<mailto:canufnet at list.web.net>>
Cc: Naomi Zurcher <treerap at sprintmail.com<mailto:treerap at sprintmail.com>>
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Municipal Tree Risk Assessment Policies

Does the municipality have a Right-of-Way ordinance which would have changed the status of the private tree to a public tree given its proximity to a publicly accessible roadway?

Naomi Zürcher

On Oct 19, 2022, at 9:02 AM, Jack Radecki via CANUFNET <canufnet at list.web.net<mailto:canufnet at list.web.net>> wrote:

I posted this morning on the American Society of Consulting Arborists Listserve the post as shown below. I know that many municipal tree managers subscribe to CANUFNET with hopes of getting an opinion or even a confirmation from within the Tree Risk Assessment Policy. Anyone is welcome to provide their opinions here. See below.

"I am looking for precedents or opinions on private trees targeting municipal rights of way. In this case a badly decayed willow had fallen across a roadway injuring a pedestrian. There was no sidewalk and the tree fell across the whole roadway. I have reviewed pictures showing extensive decay in a large open wound on the main stem easily visible from the roadway. This tree would easily have been labelled as an extreme risk for failure by a competent tree inspector. I do note that the shoot growth and foliage size and colour was still good despite the structural defect. As target is one of the 3 main components of tree risk assessment, should the municipality showed due diligence in inspecting this private tree targeting the road allowance that pedestrians frequently use? Does the responsibility fall to the municipality to note and take steps (action) to have the tree removed in terms of notice to the owners? Now that the tragedy has occured and litigation has begun what can be expected as a result? Remember that this is a private tree. I wonder how many municipal tree risk assessment policies include private trees? In 2005 I was retained within a coroners inquest sadly for a child death on an educational trail at a botanical garden. As a result of the decision from the inquest a mandate was initiated to have all Conservation Authorities, Municipalities and Private Institutions create and maintain a Tree Risk Assessment Policy."

Jack Radecki RCA 342 Lindsay, Ontario, Canada

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20221019/d0c83d70/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 4089 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20221019/d0c83d70/attachment.png>