.....compared to how long you need to wait to get action with our urban forest. I have been waiting three years to get some major pruning done, trim large branches that present a potential hazard to my roof, but when I approach a private company I am told I can't get it down even if I pay for it and require a permit.....good luck. Trees are being trimmed on a regular basis when it comes to maintaining hydro wires and some neighbors have had additional pruning done with under the counter payoffs....why didn't I think of that........
T.O. is up the proverbial tree
The city won't let homeowners cut them down, but staff can't maintain them properly
By SUE-ANN LEVY
A report to this morning's parks and recreation committee meeting is yet more evidence of what I've long been saying about Mayor David Miller, tree advocate Joe Pantlone and council's green team: They can't see the forest for the trees.
The report suggests that while millions of capital and operating dollars are being spent by council's self-professed environmentalists each year to increase the city's tree canopy -- and to police homeowners who for often very valid reasons want to take down one of their trees -- City Hall's urban forestry staff can't keep up with maintaining all the trees.
This year the city will spend about $4 million in capital and operating funds to plant new trees. It will also spend about $700,000 on an army of tree police to make sure homeowners don't take down their own trees without permission.
Yet as they plant like mad, city officials aren't really sure how many trees they actually have in their inventory. The report says there are 500,000 trees they know of but "few trees in parks are inventoried" and some of the street trees in commercial and industrial areas are not counted either.
MORE
No comments:
Post a Comment