The health of a single tree on Grovers Avenue was the biggest topic of discussion at last week’s town council meeting.
For several weeks, the town’s tree committee and the council have weighed the request made by the O’Learys at 170 Grovers Ave. to have the tree removed.
In one motion, the council approved the recommendation made by the tree warden to remove the tree. According to an arborist’s report submitted by the homeowners, the tree is not healthy and could constitute a hazard. Councilor Suzanne Swope, who expressed concerns about the taking of the tree, voted against the removal.
In a second motion, the council approved having the homeowners pay for the removal of the tree, as well as donate four new trees to the town to replace the tree which will be removed. One of the trees will be planted in front of 170 Grovers, a second in front of a neighbor’s house, and the remaining two will be planted at the town’s discretion.
Councilor Max Tassinari, who raised concerns that the donations could be considered a trade-off for approving the removal of the tree, abstained from the vote.
The tree removal would allow the homeowners to put a new driveway on the property, however, Nathan O’Leary said he would not have requested the removal of the tree if it was healthy. He said the removal will benefit the town with the donation of the new trees and remove a potential hazard, as well as provide the opportunity for the new driveway.
The council meeting featured a good amount of discussion on tree health, state regulations regarding removal, and the process the town has in place for tree removals.
“This was brought up at our last meeting on a request for the removal of a tree at 170 Grovers Avenue,” said Council President Jim Letterie. “There was some information that was requested by the town council.”
Tree Warden Paul O’Donnell said a report submitted by a certified arborist suggests that the tree is in declining health and should be removed.
“This tree possesses many traits that deem it to be a potentially hazardous tree,” said O’Leary, reading from the report. “Were this to fall, the likelihood of impact of a target is high.”
O’Leary said the report states that the tree could impact the sidewalk, the road and parked cars, and even nearby homes.
O’Leary added that while it would have been in his right as a homeowner to ask that a healthy tree be removed, he did not consider requesting the driveway until a similar tree in front of his house of the same age fell and revealed its rot and decay.
“Similarly, the tree 30 feet away exhibited the same symptoms, and we saw an opportunity to remove that tree, plant some new ones, and get a driveway,” said O’Leary. “We are trying to strike a balance here between what we would need in a driveway to reduce our need to park on the road, to reduce congestion on the road for the benefit of the town, and then, in place of the tree, to plant four for the benefit of the environment.”
Tassinari said the arborist’s report did convince him that there is a need to remove the hazardous tree, but that he did have concerns about the removal costs and the donations being included as part of the removal request.
“I would like to make a note that I don’t think the town should be doing business based on who can and cannot afford to buy their way out of an ordinance in terms of making a donation or paying for the removal of a tree,” he said. “I believe that you and Mrs. O’Leary made that in good faith, not just because you want a driveway, but because you also believe in having more green coverage on your street, which is excellent.”
O’Leary said he was not proposing the donations to gain leverage with the town, but said he was told that there was a formula in place for replacing full-grown trees with younger trees.
In a letter to the editor in this week’s paper, resident Diana Viens said the council should not have approved the taking of the tree.
She stated that the tree warden showed poor judgment in failing to refuse to deny the removal request at the onset, then failing to take the advice of the Tree Committee to preserve the tree, and then advocating in favor of the removal at the Town Council level.