Our View of the Times – August 7

On August 7, 2019, in Latest News, by The Somerville Times

The City of Somerville recently passed an updated Tree Preservation Ordinance, setting guidelines and certain restrictions for homeowners and developers to cut down trees on their private property.

Somerville property owners must apply for a permit to take down any tree over eight inches in diameter, which is considered a “significant” tree.

According to the city, the permit application process requires property owners to include a plan showing the location, species, and DBH (diameters) for each tree on the property and must indicate clearly which trees are to be removed.

A replacement planting plan is also required, where plantings have to match the removals. If the property owner takes down a tree twelve inches in diameter, there must be a plan to plant younger trees whose diameters total 12 inches.

The purpose of the ordinance is multi-faceted. On the one hand, it will help perpetuate the green spaces in the city, and on the other hand hinder the practice of “flipping” properties by over-eager developers.

While all of this seems good for the welfare of the city, for some it is also an annoyance. Some folks are ill equipped financially to adhere to the letter of the ordinance. Some are just plain put out that there is so much regulation of what they feel ought to remain their own business.

Whatever the consensus, it is now the law of the land. So enjoy the cool shade of the trees around us and know that there will be plenty more around for us to enjoy in the future.

 

1 Response » to “Our View of the Times – August 7”

  1. joe says:

    Horrible ordinance. A developer looking to build additional units absolutely will cut down a tree, ordinance or not. Just pay the fine and roll it into the cost of the unit. Private owners, myself included, will completely ignore the rules. I for one am definitely not paying for a survey and a permit in order to maybe be approved to cut down a tree that I own. And the most alarming part is that this ordinance, like the so-called protections for elderly and low-income renters ordinance, is creating a longterm disincentive. If you want trees, you don’t add to the total cost of tree ownership! Similarly, if you want to look out for elderly renters, you don’t make it more annoying in the long run to rent to elderly people. It might preserve the ones currently in place… but the hell if you’re getting new ones.