[CANUFNET] precedence regarding: 'nuisance-tree' removal request / resolution - Linden

[SOS Trees Coalition]

In reply to Daniels inquiry:
A few years ago a city councillor in Saskatoon tried to pass a Nuisance
Tree bylaw so that people could more easily have trees removed for many
different reasons - fruit on their sidewalks,  ugly tree,  sticky sap,
etc.  One of his residents complained that he walked through the sticky
sidewalk under the tree and then walked on his carpet and ruined it.  You
would think he would have taken his shoes off if he knew he had walked
through it!  In any case this was a 2 year battle within city council and
many reports written by parks defending the trees.  Our organization SOS
Trees Coalition also spent much time talking to councillors so that they
understood the ramifications of such a bylaw.  We had our members write
letters and we also spoke at a council meeting.  You have to be very vocal
with the help of citizens once they understand why this isn't a good idea.
Our council voted it down by a narrow margin, and the trees are
safe.........for now.

Linda Moskalyk
SOS Trees Coalition

On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 10:04 AM Daniel Corbett via CANUFNET <
canufnet at list.web.net> wrote:

> Good morning,
>
>                 On Monday October 16th (2023), our City Council heard a
> deputation from a Citizen requesting removal of this Linden tree due to the
> hardship it causes them (car and driveway washing – ‘ruined’ paint on the
> car).  There was, of course, significant correspondence with the Citizen
> (in advance of council) explaining other options and that we had followed
> process.  The Citizen was not interested in any option other than removal,
> which (removal) is contradictory to our bylaws and associated policies.
>
> We have now completed a crown thinning (approximately 30%) to increase air
> flow and make the tree less habitable to aphids.  Council is deliberating
> to decide if they should make an exception to our tree bylaw, and allow the
> removal.  In my view, this could be like opening the flood-gates for any (
> *every*) other removal request having to due with ‘undue hardship’ to the
> home owner.
>
>                 Our ‘nuisance-tree issue’ policies are clear on our
> website and in our Urban-Tree bylaw.  Council may be looking to ‘make an
> exception’.  At council I was able to identify this decision could impact
> 150-250 ‘nuisance-tree’ removal requests per year.  If any of you could
> provide some guidance or support, provide documentation of a similar
> situation and how it was resolved…etc, *I would greatly appreciate it*.
>
>
>
> The Citizen that made the deputation highlighted examples from *Vancouver*
> (which I have not fact-checked) in their deputation, so I can imagine our
> results could also affect your municipalities in the future.
>
>
>
> Thank you in advance for your assistance.
>
> Dan Corbett
>
> [image: Daniel Corbett]
> The information contained in this email message may be privileged,
> confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended
> recipient, any review, dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this email message in error, please notify
> the sender by reply email and delete the message and any attachments.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20231019/88297848/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 11940 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20231019/88297848/attachment.jpg>