Edmonton city councillors consider new bylaw to protect trees on private land

The City of Edmonton is considering ways to protect trees on private land, as it works toward the goal of adding two million more trees to its urban forest.

At a meeting Tuesday, council's urban planning committee discussed creating a bylaw to regulate the removal of trees on private property. 

The city considers the urban forest to be a "significant municipal asset," which provides "many environmental, ecological, economic and social benefits to Edmontonians," according to a committee report. An estimated 380,000 trees exist on boulevards and in open spaces.

Coun. Aaron Paquette put forward a motion that administration outline ways the city can achieve its goal of adding two million trees, including the option of drafting a private property tree bylaw.

The committee heard from several people who support the idea of a private tree bylaw and others who oppose the idea. 

Kristine Kowalchuk with the Edmonton River Valley Conservation Coalition pressed councillors to adopt a new bylaw to protect trees, which she said would have numerous benefits. 

"Trees do critical work in mitigating climate change, cleaning the air, cooling the city, helping to prevent both drought and flooding," Kowalchuk said. "They also contribute greatly to Edmontonians' physical and mental health and are essential to the beauty of our city." 

Don Tolsma, a director with the Canadian Home Builders Association, said he doesn't think the city should introduce a bylaw to regulate tree removal.

Also the president of Timber Haus Developments, Tolsma said they try to preserve mature trees as much as possible, which are highly valued by most of their clients, but he would oppose a bylaw that affects trees on private land.

It's not feasible to save all of them, he argued, for a variety of reasons: trees may restrict the development area or impede access to the building, or the tree could be unhealthy and needs to be removed. 

Requiring permits or limiting the ability to remove trees will directly impede infill and new housing growth, Tolsma argued. 

"If densification is the way to go, which is the city plan, then you are going to lose more trees," Tolsma said. "So we need to keep planting more trees."

Kowalchuk suggested the city also consider an alternative approach to density like focusing on public transportation and repurposing parking lots.

"Densification cannot be a single-minded goal of fitting in more people," Kowalchuk said.