Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 48(1): January 2022 an arborist report, a replanting plan, and site and ele- vation plans if the application is related to construc- tion. The application cost is $124 or $370 CAD per tree for non-construction permits and construction-related permits, respectively. A site visit from a municipal arborist may occur after the permit application is sub- mitted. Toronto also requires a (minimum) 14-day period of public notice if the arborist determines the tree is in good health and not a hazard to nearby struc- tures (Private Tree By-Law, Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 813, Article III). While the decision to issue a permit is made by city staff, the local city council member is consulted before a permit is issued. Ulti- mately, removal permits are granted over 95% of the time (Rider 2016). When a permit is issued, property owners are required to plant at least one replacement tree for each tree removed. If no suitable planting site is available on the property, planting at another location or a cash in lieu payment may be accepted. Property owners are required to contact Urban Forestry once replacement trees are planted. A fine of $500 to $100,000 CAD per tree can be issued if the permit process is not fol- lowed (Private Tree By-Law, Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 813, Article III). A 2018 Auditor General’s Report focusing on per- mit issuance and by-law enforcement by Toronto’s Urban Forestry unit found significant flaws in the process. One issue highlighted in the report is the lack of follow-up by city officials to ensure compliance with the replacement tree planting requirement; city staff do not regularly complete site visits, and prop- erty owners frequently do not notify the city when they replant (Romeo-Beehler 2018). Additionally, there is no official review of the proposed replanting site and inconsistent recommendations about which spe- cies to plant (Romeo-Beehler 2018). Enforcement of required replanting is therefore minimal, and city staff indicate that fines are rarely issued. Non-compliance with replacement requirements is particularly concerning in Toronto, given the over- whelming percentage of private tree removal applica- tions that are approved at the same time as the city is implementing a long-term strategic management plan to increase total canopy cover and species diversity (City of Toronto 2013). While the rate of permit approval may be high in Toronto, limited enforce- ment and follow-up of private tree regulations is not unique to the city (Coughlin et al. 1988; Conway and Urbani 2007), so a better understanding of tree 11 replacement can highlight the strengths and chal- lenges of a private tree removal permit process more generally. Survey and Site Data In 2019, a total of 1,992 addresses associated with private tree removal permits issued in 2016 and 2017 for residential property were provided by staff in the Urban Forestry unit of the Parks, Forestry, and Recre- ation Division of the City of Toronto. The 2-year time period was chosen as it is recent enough to reduce the likelihood of a new owner since the permit was issued, but also allows several years for tree removal and replanting to have been reasonably completed by the time of the survey. The addresses received repre- sent a sample of all permits on residential property issued in that 2-year period, stratified by the 4 man- agement districts used by Urban Forestry: 280 in East, 517 in North, 714 in South, 481 in West (Figure 1). In the data provided by city staff, 484 addresses were labeled as tree removal permits associated with construc- tion activity, 1,077 were labeled as non-construction permits, and the permit type was not given for 431 addresses. Of the addresses, 43 were clearly for non-residential properties (e.g., a church, university property), so 1,949 addresses were retained for the study (Table 1). In the summer of 2019, a multi-contact approach was used to administer the mail-based survey follow- ing standard procedures to generate strong response rates (Dillman et al. 2014). First, information post- cards were sent to the addresses, notifying them a sur- vey would soon arrive in the mail or they could complete it online. Within a week, a package that included an information and consent letter, the sur- vey, a stamped return envelope, and a site visit per- mission form was mailed. Two weeks later, a reminder postcard, followed in two more weeks by a second copy of the survey packet, were sent if a survey for the address had not yet been completed. All survey materials were given a unique code so we could track completed surveys. The survey began by confirming that the home- owner who applied for the permit still lived at the address associated with the tree removals. Next, there were questions that assessed homeowners’ basic atti- tudes towards regulation of private tree removal; type of permit issued; status and characteristics of replace- ment trees, including species and source of any tree(s) planted; and basic socio-demographic characteristics ©2022 International Society of Arboriculture
January 2022
| Title Name |
Pages |
Delete |
Url |
| Empty |
Search Text Block
Page #page_num
#doc_title
Hi $receivername|$receiveremail,
$sendername|$senderemail wrote these comments for you:
$message
$sendername|$senderemail would like for you to view the following digital edition.
Please click on the page below to be directed to the digital edition:
$thumbnail$pagenum
$link$pagenum
Your form submission was a success. You will be contacted by Washington Gas with follow-up information regarding your request.
This process might take longer please wait
