Developer appeals after city halts tree-cutting on brow
Officials denied permit, calling it a ‘clear-cut’ in a significant woodland
The developer who axed 100 trees without permission in a brow-lands woodlot this spring is appealing the city’s decision to deny a cutting permit.
Angry Scenic Drive residents complained in late March after evergreen, ash and maple trees started falling in a woodlot near Sanatorium Road. Bylaw officers issued a stop-work order, but the city says 106 trees still came down.
A few days later, the city refused the developer’s tree-cutting permit request, arguing it amounted to a “clearcut” of many healthy trees in a significant woodland that is part of a environmentally sensitive area (ESA).
Now Valery Developments Inc. has appealed that permit refusal even as a charge looms under the city’s urban woodland conservation bylaw for trees already axed.
Valery officials weren’t available for an interview Tuesday, but a company appeal argues the city was wrong to refuse the permit and took too long to make the decision.
“The proposed cutting will not remove every tree in the area and is therefore not clear-cutting as alleged,” said the appeal, which also called the cutting plan “good forestry practices” and notes Valery’s intention to replant native species.
The appeal was slated to be heard by the planning committee Tuesday but was put off until Aug. 15.
It’s not clear how many more trees the builder wants to remove.
The original permit request refers to targeted tree removal in a 0.28-hectare area. The company’s forestry expert wrote the area contained many “invasive” tree species like Norway maple and buckthorn as well as ash killed or infected by the emerald ash borer.
Coun. Terry Whitehead said he wouldn’t comment on the pending appeal other than to reiterate he agreed with the original decision to order tree-cutting stopped.
“People were extremely upset and understandably so,” said the Ward 8 councillor, who has also pitched using business licences to hold forestry companies liable for illegal cutting.
The Chedoke brow lands have spurred a decade of protest over planned development.
A former owner fought the city and residents at the Ontario Municipal Board for permission to build 600-plus units on the brow. That developer later sold to Valery, which pitched a 200-unit mix of townhomes and condos.
Steve Fawcett, whose family has lived near the brow lands for decades, said he thought the OMB decision would preserve the most heavily wooded areas.
“It’s a significant forest … it’s supposed to be protected,” said Fawcett, who alerted the media to treecutting in March. He added nearby residents are still “keeping an eye out” in case more trees come down.
Bylaw director Ken Leendertse said the city expects to lay a charge under the woodlands bylaw related to trees cut on the brow in March.
City tree-cutting charges have so far proved tough to prosecute in Hamilton.
Prosecutors dropped two charges in 2013 filed by the city against another developer related to felled trees on woodlots at either end of Stone Church Road.
The only other urban tree-cutting charge still before the courts was laid in 2014 against an Ancaster property owner who ignored a stop-work order to axe dozens of mature trees on a woodlot at the corner of McNiven and Golf Links roads.