City passes updated Tree Preservation Ordinance

On July 31, 2019, in Latest News, by The Somerville Times

Chris Dwan is the co-chair of the Urban Forestry Committee and worked with city councilors on the ordinance which goes into effect August 1. A “significant” tree is one that measures 8 inches or more in diameter. — Photo by Denise Keniston

By Denise Keniston

The city of Somerville passed an updated and cohesive Tree Preservation Ordinance making it harder for homeowners and developers to cut down trees on their private property.

Chris Dwan, a member of the newly-formed Urban Forestry Committee, worked with city councilors on the new ordinance. “There are many changes to the old ordinance,” he says, “The biggest addition is the permitting process for cutting down trees on private property. Somerville property owners must apply for a permit to take down any tree over 8 inches in diameter – which is considered a ‘significant’ tree.”

The permit application process requires property owners to “include a plan showing the location, species, and DBH (diameters) for each tree on the property and must indicate clearly which trees are to be removed.”

A replacement planting plan is also required. “In other words,” says Dwan, “Inch for inch the plantings have to match the removals. If the property owner takes down a tree twelve inches in diameter, there must be a plan to plant younger trees whose diameters total 12 inches.”

Penalties will be assessed per day that a property owner doesn’t have a permit and the penalties kick in thirty days after the tree is illegally removed. “These are big trees and require a special contractor and, hopefully, this (penalty) serves as a disincentive to the property to stop coming in and cutting down large trees,” says ordinance co-sponsor Ward 2 Councilor J.D.Scott. “These penalties can really add up for the property owners!”

Penalties are assessed for every tree removed illegally without a permit. The fine is $300 a day and could easily go into the thousands if not addressed. — photo courtesy of Google Maps

The ordinance goes into effect August 1 and will likely impact developers looking to cash in on Somerville’s “buy and flip” real estate mania. “Private developers are coming in and buying up properties and cutting down all the trees and putting up this suburban-style landscaping which is apparently what luxury condo-buyers want,” says ordinance co-sponsor Ward 5 Councilor Mark Niedergang. “But, they’re getting rid of a lot of our trees, and it’s really just beginning, and we’ve been losing a lot of our tree cover. The trees on private property shouldn’t be up for clear-cutting by developers.”

Penalties will be assessed per day that a property owner does not have a permit and the penalties kick in thirty days after the tree is illegally removed. “These are big trees and require a special contractor and, hopefully, this [penalty] serves as a disincentive to the property to stop coming in and cutting down large trees,” says ordinance co-sponsor Ward 2 Councilor J.D.Scott. “These penalties can really add up for the property owners.”

“These are big trees and require a special contractor and, hopefully, this [penalty] serves as a disincentive to the contractor performing the work just to come in and start cutting down large trees,” says ordinance co-sponsor Ward 2 Councilor J.D.Scott. “That puts the responsibility on the contractor if they don’t see the permit.”

Property owners have the option to make a payment to the Street Tree Fund instead of replanting. According to Dwan, those funds are specifically earmarked for “the planting and care of trees in Somerville.”

There are exclusions written into the ordinance. Among them, property owners are free to take down invasive species such as a Norway Maple or a Tree of Heaven no matter the size. “If it’s an invasive tree it doesn’t count as a ‘significant’ tree,” says Vanessa Boukili, Senior Urban Forestry and Landscape Planner. “We are preparing a list of invasive trees so property owners can clearly understand these exclusions in the permit process.”

Somerville resident Mike Grunko attended a public hearing at city hall on Tuesday, March 12 and is in favor of the ordinance. “If we allow trees in our yards to grow, and we encourage them, that really helps our environment. The trees in our yards provide a place for wildlife, such as birds and other animals,” says Grunko. “We need to get away from paved yards that allow for run-off, and we need to have green things growing in our city.”

The ordinance goes into effect August 1 and can be downloaded in its entirety from the city’s website here https://www.somervillema.gov/sites/default/files/2019-15-tree-preservation.pdf.  The City of Somerville provides a thorough tree inventory online with detailed statistics and environmental benefits of more than 14,000 trees. You can access it with this link or going to www.somevillema.gov and searching “tree inventory”: https://www.somervillema.gov/departments/office-strategic-planning-and-community-development-ospcd/ospcd-urban-forestry.

 

8 Responses to “City passes updated Tree Preservation Ordinance”

  1. LindaS says:

    Funny, isn’t it, how the city takes away all the green space through constant development, then forces homeowners to keep the trees they have to make up the difference.

    Just one more way residents get the burden shifted onto them for what the city should be doing themselves.

  2. Old Taxpayer says:

    So glad I got rid of my trees and paved my yard. Next owners can deal with it. I live in the city, not the country.

  3. Somerville can have Shade says:

    Linda– it’s the developers’ desire to clear-cut trees from old lots that drove the good residents of this city to demand legislation like this. It’s not the homeowners who live in their homes who are going to be hurt by this. Most owners don’t want to clear-cut their yards, but developers sure do.

    Old Taxpayer– so glad my back yard is full of greenery and trees. I have my own little slice of country in the city, and I live in the city. Sucks to be you.

  4. New Taxpayer says:

    Old Taxpayer,

    So glad your opinion is that of a dwindling group, and that Somerville is responding to the demands of a changing voting public.

  5. Independently Somerville says:

    People who pave their yards do so because they are lazy. They can’t stand the thought of mowing a lawn or trimming hedges. Guy across the street from me has this set up and he rents parking spots where is front lawn should be. what a great neighbor!

  6. Oh really? says:

    Let’s see: the new law still allows owner-occupants to remove trees by right. But carry on baking in your sea of asphalt. You sure stuck it to the city, didn’t you?

  7. Old Taxpayer says:

    I have worked hard to own this house and will enjoy it my way. I am not having the city tell me everything I have to do to please them. This is a free country and I worked many long hours just so I can own this little piece of paradise. I fought to stop a tree from being planted in front of my house and won. I am not alone. My next door neighbor also did the same and the people behind me. I did the same to my last house which is still paved in Somerville. Some of us do like it this way. We use it a lot having cookouts and guests. Also comes in handy during snow emergencies so we have extra parking for our vehicles. Only because of the rise in the number of vehicles here we have less parking. If you want grass and a tree or two that’s fine. As a property owner you should have the right to do whatever it is that makes you happy. I don’t disapprove of whatever you do on your property.

  8. LindaS says:

    IndependentlySomerville:

    You call folks lazy who prefer not to deal with landscaping their yards. Well, I have plenty of greenery growing all over the place. I live by myself and can’t afford to have anyone do it for me, so it’s just overgrown everywhere, and I have to try and clear out what blocks the sidewalks, and sapling trees that are growing wild when I can all by myself, and when the weather allows for it. It gets harder and harder to do every year.

    I used to have it nice 20 years ago, but it got to the point where I just couldnt keep up with it, so I just gave up and let it go. As much as I like having plants in my yard, I wouldn’t mind having it all out if it meant I wouldn’t have to deal with it anymore.

    Everyone gets old eventually, and not everyone can afford to have their property maintained the way they want to. I suppose it’s folks like you that complain when people get rid of all of it, and also complain when people let it all grow wild. Good luck when you get too old to do it, and too old to care to do it.

    Like OldTaxpayer said, people should be able to do whatever they want with their property. If the City wants to pay for my landscaping, they are welcome to do whatever they want to my property.