CHANGE MY LOCATION
Ordinance could make it tough for homeowners to topple trees
SEE HOW THIS STORY DEVELOPED
Related Topics: WASHINGTON
)
A construction crew works on an addition to a home Monday on Marian Drive in Darnestown. Montgomery Council members Roger Berliner and Marc Elrich are working on an ordinance to restrict cutting of trees on private property.
WASHINGTON (Map, News) - Dick Backus has two tulip poplars whose roots are pulling up the driveway of his Potomac home. Three others have fallen in recent years, including one that knocked out a garage window.
Backus would like to remove the troublesome trees. He feels he better move swiftly or face long, potentially expensive delays if some on the Montgomery County Council get their way.
Council members Roger Berliner and Marc Elrich plan to introduce an ordinance that could make it more difficult for property owners to cut down a tree in their yard by requiring them to obtain a permit.
Though details are still being worked out, such an ordinance would be likely to force property owners who cut down a tree to replant others to replace the loss, Berliner said.
That would copy current regulations existing in Takoma Park and the District of Columbia.
Berliner and supporters say such an ordinance is needed to further protect the environment and public health in a county that has been heavily developed.
“We just can’t consider [trees] expendable anymore,” said West Montgomery Civic Association President Ginny Barnes.
Still, the bill is likely to spark debate over individual property rights versus environmental and public health.
Council member Nancy Floreen said Garrett Park considered a similar ordinance in that town when she was the mayor there several years ago. Residents balked, she said, suggesting her support of the bill could depend on enforcement and what she considers “reasonable regulation.”
Berliner said those details are still being worked out. He said he’s committed to coming up with “something that’s the least bureaucratic as possible but protects trees.”
Backus’ tree problems are not the only impetus behind his opposition to a tree ordinance. He bought his house in 1984 based, in part, on the fact that it’s surrounded by about 40 trees. Though he said he would never cut one down unnecessarily, he believes he should be able to cut one down if he chooses.
“The problem is, let’s say every time I have a tree taken down, I have to get a permit,” Backus said. “I don’t want to have to wait.”
cmabeus@dcexaminer.com
Comments from Examiner Readers
10:43 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 9, 2008 re: "Ordinance could make it tough for homeowners to topple trees"
Report as inappropriate
Som Karamchetty said:
As trees add beauty and benefits to the environment, there should be incentives to grow and keep trees and disincentives to cut them down. I urge that council members pass a measure to offer a property tax reduction of say, $10 per year per mature tree. In such a scenario, homeowners will be compensated for adding to the ecology of the county in proportion to their contribution. When there is need, a property owner gets a permit, cuts a tree, and loses tax benefits.
24 agree | 28 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree