Curious case of a damaged maple tree
Kristin Sieroka says lack of clarity around bylaw on tree protection killed her Norway maple
Awoman in the Beach says a grey area in city building bylaws has signed the death warrant of her beloved Norway maple.
Krista Sieroka, a financial adviser at CIBC, said her neighbours on Beaufort Rd. dug a pool in their backyard and damaged the roots of the 40-year-old maple, which sits close to the property line.
“I’m heartbroken that the tree is damaged and I’m disappointed that our neighbours did this without first consulting us,” Sieroka said.
Ken Hunt, the publisher of Toronto Life magazine, and his wife Erica Baron, a lawyer at a top Toronto law firm, bought the property on Beaufort Rd. in February for $2.15 million.
When the Star contacted Hunt for an interview, he explained it was the first he’d heard of the incident. “That certainly is bad news,” Hunt said in an email. He explained that the original plans for the pool had it in a different location on his property. Those plans would have required the removal of a city-owned tree, but the city denied the application, forcing Hunt’s contractor to move the pool.
The hole comes right up to the property line, leaving no room between the hole’s edge and the fence separating Sieroka’s yard from her neighbours. The tree’s damaged roots could be seen sticking out of the earth.
The dig happened without notice and there was never a tree-protection zone put up around the maple, she said.
An arborist’s report commissioned by Sieroka says the tree, which was already suffering from a split in its trunk, is now in decline and needs to be cut down — at a cost of nearly $3,000.
Sieroka complained to the city, which did an inspection. Forestry department spokesperson Matthew Cutler said an investigation is ongoing.
“Since the trees in question are some distance from the pool, it never occurred to us that they were in any danger,” Hunt wrote.
“We, and our contractor, had no intention to violate the tree protection rules with this project.”
Brent Clark, the contractor hired by Hunt, said the damage was an honest mistake.
“In the case of the Norway maple . . . the guys over-graded a bit and hit the root system,” he said.
“We’d never really assessed (that tree) in the first place, and we missed it,” Clark said.
Given the grade of the ground and surrounding brush at the time, Clark said the Sieroka’s tree simply wasn’t on his radar. It’s a slip that he’s sorry for, but a second opinion from the city before digging began could have prevented it, he said.
“There’s only one town, Mississauga, that does pre-inspections. And it’s because it’s a second pair of eyes. It’s rare that we miss, but I know it happens,” he said.
“(In Toronto) if something goes off your radar, there’s nobody there to doublecheck. In Mississauga, it never happens, because they have their people come out beforehand,” he said.
After an inspection, Clark said the city ordered him to prune the damaged roots and cover them with rich top soil.
Clark said he’s not convinced the damage would kill the tree.
“I’ve been doing this a long time. I’ve yet to see a tree die unless it’s actually taken out,” Clark said. “I’ve never seen one die at that age.” So who is actually to blame for the Norway maple’s demise? Well, turns out it’s rather complicated.
As Cutler, from Urban Forestry, explained, the city has a strict bylaw protecting trees in the city. In most cases, applying for a building permit includes filling out an online tree declaration form that identifies trees on the property and submitting a tree protection plan.
Urban Forestry will review those plans and may require a tree protection zone around any trees at risk from construction work, Cutler said.
If you want to damage or remove a tree with a trunk size larger than 30 centimetres at shoulder height, you also need a special permit that includes notifying the neighbours of the planned work.
But there’s no permit required to dig a backyard pool, meaning there’s also no trigger for a tree declaration or protection plan and also no requirement to no- tify the neighbours.
“That does not, however, negate the need for a permit from Urban Forestry if the construction of the pool will injure or destroy a tree,” Cutler said.
Essentially, without an enforced tree protection zone, it’s up to the owner and contractor to ensure they don’t accidentally damage a protected tree.
And they won’t get any help from the city unless they ask for it, which Cutler suggests doing.
As far as the Sierokas and Hunt are concerned, that’s a grey area ripe for mistakes like the one that likely cost the life of Sieroka’s Norway Maple.
Without an enforced tree protection zone, it’s up to owners and contractors to ensure they don’t accidentally damage a protected tree
“The city has this huge program of increasing the canopy cover of the city,” said Sieroka’s husband, Dan.
“If there wasn’t actually something to stop people from doing what’s been done in this case, it seems counterproductive,” he said.
“It seems to me that the penalties aren’t severe enough to keep people from flouting the law.”