Hedge latest bone of contention at Randwood
Development opponents are concerned the century-old boxwood may have been cut down
There is nothing unusual about debate over development in Niagara-on-the-Lake — however, the latest target of controversy, an application to build a six-storey hotel on the historic Randwood Estate, has provoked a heated discussion over the state of a boxwood hedge singled out for protection in the town’s official plan.
Its condition has been uncertain since a photo of a row of stumps appeared on social media recently, indicating the hedge, more than 100 years old, had been cut down.
It hasn’t — at least not entirely. With the exception of six or seven stumps, the hedge is intact, but won’t remain in its current location much longer, said developer Benny Marotta of Two Sisters Resort.
The condition of the boxwood hedge has been one of many issues of contention between Marotta and development opponents. The hedge has become a symbol of the distrust on both sides.
During a council meeting last week to discuss the development, Coun. Betty Disero asked that before any site plan approval of development applications, the town send staff to investigate and report on the hedge.
She suggested a staff arborist look at the stumps and report.
The early 19th-century estate on John Street includes not only significant historic buildings but identified cultural landscape heritage value as well, with trees and shrubs planted by a renowned landscape company of the day. The boxwood hedge was protected in the town’s official plan in a 2011 amendment — the only hedge in town to be granted such distinction, said town planning director Craig Larmour.
The official plan amendment says it should be properly protected and preserved to insure its continued growth, and at site plan stage measures to mitigate construction impacts to protect the hedge are required.
An October 2017 heritage impact assessment on the property prepared for Two Sisters Resort by consultant Leah Wallace, former heritage planner for the town, says the hedge will be retained and, “if necessary, carefully moved a short distance to ensure its survival when the underground parking is constructed.”
Opponents to the development have been concerned the hedge had been cut down, or if still standing, it would be moved, but were unable to confirm what they saw in the photo.
Bob Ziraldo, who has the contract to relocate the hedge, said he’s done similar work with boxwood of a similar age and it survived. The remaining hedge has been tied up to facilitate the move and should look even better with new shoots that will come from the bottom. Boxwood roots are matted and shallow, making the hedge a good candidate for relocation, he said.
The few that were cut down were not vigorous enough to withstand the move, and the remaining stumps that can be seen in the photo are a mix of pine, cedar and spruce, said Ziraldo, whose expertise is moving large trees.
“The photo didn’t show that,” said Marotta, pointing to the long row of mature boxwood hedge. “It just showed stumps. It looked like everything had been cut down.”
Tom Elltoft is a real estate agent and resident who has been advocating for the preservation of trees on the property. He said the hedge in its current location is of significance for two reasons — it’s survived for more than a century as an important part of the cultural landscape of the property, and it provides a buffer between the hotel development and neighbours behind. Elltoft questions whether a hedge that’s more than 100 years old can survive being moved.
Marotta said it may be moved closer to the border — or it may not. It will be up to landscape architect John Morley to decide where it will fit best. If it isn’t moved from its present location, the digging for the underground parking lot on the property will kill it, he said.
Disero’s motion to have staff report on the condition of the hedge passed unanimously, and Marotta said if the town wants to send staff to look at it, he welcomes showing them around.
He’s not so welcoming to development opponents — he will charge with trespassing anyone found on his property without his permission, he said.
Elltoft said neighbours have asked permission to view the hedge, with no success. They’ve been given various explanations for the stumps — the boxwood is fine, some had been cut down by accident, or they were cedars.
“We’ve asked for proof — we’ve asked all sorts of questions about the the hedge,” he said.
Marotta said nobody has contacted him with a request to see it. If they do, he said, “I might say yes, I might say no.”
As for concern about trees on the property, there are some that are marked to come down, but he has stopped all cutting. He’s not even allowing pruning as he doesn’t want neighbours calling the town if they hear a chainsaw, as they did during an attempt to clean up the property, he said. “I’m not interested in more lies.”
Town staff have been on site to conduct a tree inventory, he said, but he hasn’t seen the report.
There are 48 dead ash trees marked for removal, Marotta said, on advice from Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority. So far, eight or nine dead pine trees and one dead ash have been cut, he said. Opponents have said 130 trees have been cut down since he bought the property, but he disputes that and maintains the number is closer to 10, while about 14 new trees have been planted.
Council has not made a decision on the Randwood application, and will not do so until after reports and recommendations from the planning department are complete.