Closing the loopholes in the Tree Preservation Ordinance is again on the agenda this Wednesday, April 9, at Programs & Services, 7:45 pm in Room 222. Since the last discussion there and on Village14, further discussions with aldermen found a reluctance to infringe on the rights of genuine long-term homeowners to cut down whatever trees they want. So Marc Welch and the Legal Department, with the support of the Urban Tree Commission, came up with another approach which basically tightens up the existing ordinance so that it can be enforced the way it was intended to be enforced, i.e. on developers and other short-term owners flipping properties.
The key changes are stricter requirements for what is an exempt lot, and defining “occupied” lot, which the current ordinance does not do. You can read a summary of the differences between current and proposed ordinances, which is included in the Friday Packet along with the annotated draft ordinance here. It won’t please everyone — if you’re not happy that your next door neighbor cut down all the trees screening you from their mega-addition or swimming pool or whatever, without at least having to pay for replacement caliper inches somewhere, this ordinance wouldn’t help.
But it should discourage situations like the above at 73 Williston Road in Auburndale, a property which recently sold, where the house will be a teardown, and the buyer had the seller cut down the trees before the sale. This is what it looks like today:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okoKhx8DUDM]
Even the revised ordinance would not prevent the tree cutting, but it would be a lot harder to avoid paying into the Tree Preservation Fund or planting replacement caliper inches, either of which would partially offset the loss of canopy.
Feel free to “Red Team” the language and see if there are still any loopholes to try to close.
Julia,
What do you mean that an offender is, “.. having to pay for replacement caliper inches somewhere?
Pay how much ? Somewhere ? Replacement of what size tree ? A 3” twig ? Is the loss of so much canopy really compensated by the replacements ? Who does the replacing,.. the city or private contractors?
Julia,
It took me a second look to realize the imagery was before and after. When this demolition was reviewed by the Historical Commission I had only seen the property ‘after’. It’s unrecognizable in the before photo. I know the neighbors were horrified. Any small / modest home on such a large lot ( 10,000 SF +) is almost a sure goner. And all the Commission can do is delay demolition for one year. And It has NO jurisdiction over tree loss,.. sadly ! I would argue however that a tree is a historic structure, and like any building 50 years of age or older, the Commission should be able to delay it’s loss. Like you do or hope to?
Why shouldn’t it be possible to build a significantly larger new home on this property without whacking all of these trees.
I don’t see how the city things it’s their business to tell people what they can do with their own property… oh wait, it’s Newton.
I know my parents are terrified of whoever buys their neighbors house putting up a McMansion, but as I told them, unless you buy the house to stop it, it’s up to the new (or current) owners to do as they please. Don’t like it, move somewhere where you have more than a 5K Square foot lot and you can have as many of your own trees as you’d like.
Mike
Mike
And yes maybe you would like to get rid of zoning too. And stop signs, and driving on the left. This is a society of regulations and laws. I’d regulate trees so that their loss doesn’t ruin the investment I have in my home and community. You might like living next to a trailer park or an oil refinery, I want to live in a ‘Garden City”. to each his own.
Not your trees. Pretty simple concept. Try to understand the difference between public and private property… like the trees that line the streets for example, that your tax money helps maintain.
I have no desire to live in a trailer park, but I also don’t have the audacity to think I could tell my neighbor he cant cut down the trees he owns on the property he owns.
If you want guaranteed trees, get your own, its really very simple.
Mike