Aurora council leaves tree preservation bylaw as is

Yorkregion.com
Feb. 5, 2016
By Teresa Latchford

Revision to the rules surrounding tree preservation has failed to take root in Aurora.

A lengthy discussion regarding the proposed injury or destruction of trees on private property bylaw saw two revision options rejected and put the town right back to square one when it comes to limiting the number of trees residents and golf courses can remove annually without a permit.

Councillor Wendy Gaertner has been advocating for these changes from the beginning and supported the idea of golf courses looking to remove more than 10 trees in one year requiring a permit to do so.

However, a number of council members felt the rule was unnecessary, including Councillor Jeff Thom.

“Golfers like trees,” he said.

“If we wanted to golf in cow pastures we would golf in cow pastures.”

Tree removal is also part of a golf course’s property management duties and is sometimes necessary to provide airflow and sunlight to greens. Taking that ability away could have an economic impact to a business that is fighting to stay competitive in a declining industry, he added.

The option was voted down.

The second option was to exempt golf courses from the proposed bylaw that would require residents to obtain a permit to remove more than two trees in a year.

Mayor Geoff Dawe didn’t agree with limiting residents since it is private property and owners should be able to remove trees if desired. Many residents plant trees on their own properties as well, he added.

This option was also defeated in a vote.

“There were residents in council chambers showing support for these changes, but they have stopped coming because they lost hope,” Councillor Wendy Gaertner pointed out.

One of those residents is Isobel Ralston who has made a number of appearances at town hall to express the need for the revision to the current bylaw.

“We have fought for changes to the tree protection bylaw over the last five years and all we have asked for is removal of the exemption for golf courses,” she wrote in an email. “I am not willing to spend any more time and energy on this issue as I have lost count of my delegations and changing travel plans to accommodate meetings.”

She has vowed to spend her time on other environmental issues, but not at the municipal level.

“When progress means the removal of forests and replacing them with subdivisions, I can only feel we are stepping backwards and ignoring the issues at hand that our children and grandchildren are going to be left to deal with,” fellow resident Paul McIntosh said. “You would think, in these days of environmental awareness, that more effort would be placed on preserving these (woodland) areas as opposed to bulldozing and chain sawing down these natural helpers of our environment.”

The report was received for information.