Published October 21, 2020
By DAN TOMASELLO
LYNNFIELD — Fall Town Meeting voted to indefinitely postpone the proposed Tree Protection Bylaw on Saturday, Oct. 17.
Planning Board Chairman Brian Charville made a motion to indefinitely postpone Article 8, which resulted in gasps coming from the crowd.
“The Planning Board would like to proceed with Article 8, but we are making a political decision to indefinitely postpone it,” said Charville. “We would like a Tree Protection Bylaw to be considered at a future Town Meeting, hopefully next spring.”
Charville asked the crowd to raise their hands if they like trees, which prompted a majority of Town Meeting voters to raise their hands. He also asked the crowd to raise their hands if they would like “a little more regulation to protect trees.” The vast majority of attendees also raised their hands.
“Contrary to popular belief in some circles, I and the other four Planning Board members and our Planning and Conservation staff don’t want to become the tree police,” said Charville. “The board and our staff have heard a number of concerns expressed in the community in recent days, and that is why we are taking this step of indefinite postpone.”
Charville said the Planning and Conservation Department has received a number of calls from residents expressing concerns about trees getting cut down around town over the past several years. He said a number of recently approved subdivisions such as Tuttle Lane, Zepaj Lane and other new developments have led to trees being clear-cut, which resulted in abutters and other residents becoming upset.
“This isn’t just a subdivision problem,” said Charville. “It’s a single lot problem where individual lots have been destroyed. The destruction we have seen is why we created the bylaw. The Planning Board and town staff stay feel we need another tool in our toolkit to prevent further deforestation.”
Charville said the intention of the Tree Protection Bylaw was to maintain the town’s tree canopy. He said the bylaw would have restricted people from cutting down trees along the perimeter of lots unless new trees were planted or a payment was made to a tree replacement fund.
“There are very few protections for the trees in our town today,” said Charville. “The only limitations for protecting trees are wetlands protections and protections that relate to Scenic Roads and street trees. That’s it. That is all that stands between you and the lot next to your own being clear-cut.”
Charville also said the bylaw would have protected certain trees in zoning setback areas.
“It would not be all the trees there,” said Charville. “It would be trees that are 6-inches or greater in diameter. That is what you wouldn’t be able to clear-cut without going through a process. Trees that are smaller than 6-inches in diameter could still be cleared by you and you wouldn’t have to replace them or take any other action.”
Charville also said the proposed Tree Protection Bylaw included exemptions for hazardous trees.
“That is any tree that is sick, dead, dying, broken, fallen down and or is hanging over a house,” said Charville. “Hazardous trees don’t have to be replaced and you don’t have to make any contribution to the tree fund.”
Charville said trees located on any lot that is smaller than 7,500-square feet in size would have been exempt under the proposed bylaw.
“We realize it is already hard enough to work in small lots and we don’t want to impose an additional burden there,” said Charville.
Charville also addressed misinformation that has been circulating online and sent out in mailers about the Tree Protection Bylaw. He said the bylaw did not infringe on townspeople’s property rights.
“There are already innumerable things we give up to live in a nice town that looks a certain way,” said Charville. “There is a building height limit of 40-feet. You can’t do work in the wetlands buffer zone. There can’t be nuisances like oversized signs or bright lighting on homes. You can’t water your lawn when it is Draught Level 5. We are subject to the Building Code and we are subject to the Sanitary and Septic Codes. And we can’t build on zoning setbacks. There are infringements already. We don’t want to be unreasonable, but we think more can be done to protect trees.”
Charville said another rumor that had been circulating around town is the Planning Board would have required homeowners and developers to replace a tree that needs to be cut down with the same size tree. He said that rumor is false.
“We are not impractical and going to say if you cut a 6-inch tree, you have to plant another 6-inch tree,” said Charville. “That lie has been circulating out there. If you cut a tree that is 6-inches in diameter, you have to replace it with trees that are 6-inches or more. That could be three 2-inch trees to get to the 6-inches.”
Charville also dismissed opponents’ accusations that the proposed tree protection fund would be turned into a “slush fund” for the town.
“The idea of the tree fund is the town could use the money to plant more trees,” said Charville. “What is slushy about that?”
Charville also noted that the bylaw would have instituted fines if a developer or resident violated the bylaw. He said there would have been a $100 fine for the first offense, a $200 fine for the second offense and a $300 fine for the third offense. He said, “People would not be fined $300 out of the gate.” He asked residents to weigh-in on any proposed future fine structure.
“We are open to any suggestions,” said Charville.
If residents would like to give the Planning Board feedback about potential revisions to the Tree Protection Bylaw, Charville said they should send an email or call the Planning and Conservation Department’s staff. He also said they can email him at bcharville@gmail.com.
“I will take any email you send me, staff will pull it together and we will create a distribution list,” said Charville. “We will let you know when the Planning Board will be talking about tree protection. This is not a solution in search of a problem. The problem does exist. Tree protection bylaws have been adopted in other desirable towns such as Lynnfield: Arlington, Newton, Wellesley, Concord and Lexington. It can’t be a terrible idea if it has been done in places that we admire.”
Charville said the Planning Board hopes to present a revised Tree Protection Bylaw at next spring’s Town Meeting. He said it will be a General Bylaw and not a Zoning Bylaw, which would require a simple majority to approve it and not a two-thirds vote.
“We want to get the word out more and we hope to see you next spring,” said Charville.
After Charville concluded his remarks, Town Meeting voted to indefinitely postpone Article 8.
