No more tree veto: Hamilton will no longer ask permission to plant street trees near homes

It’s a popular program, attracting up to 1,500 requests annually. The city also proactively replaces dead street trees and plants in identified “gaps” in an effort to green shade-starved boulevards.

But until now, the city also routinely axed planting plans if nearby homeowners opposed adding a tree — maybe over concerns about root growth, a shaded garden or even raking leaves.

“In the past, we would say, ‘OK, we’ll just move on and look elsewhere,’” said environmental services director Cynthia Graham. “Now, we will definitely try to work with residents to alleviate their concerns, but we are still going to plant that tree … because it is on city property.”

Tree “denials” by residents have historically prevented hundreds of planned street tree plantings a year, according to a new report to council — with as many as 348 in 2021 and as few as 135 last year.

Those informal veto rights have resulted in “wasted resources to visit, plan and subsequently cancel work orders,” reads a report to council this week on Hamilton’s tree-planting strategy. “And more importantly, (it) reduced the city’s efforts to increase the number of street trees in the right-of-way.”

That’s increasingly viewed as a problem in a city with poor urban tree “canopy coverage” — estimated at around 20 per cent. (The goal is 40 per cent).

As a result, starting this spring, residents will no longer be able to refuse the planned addition of a street tree in front of their home — provided, critically, that is planted in the municipally owned right-of-way.

So just for clarity: the forestry department is not going to show up at your house and force you to plant a maple tree in your privately owned front yard or an oak beside your backyard shed.

However, it is aiming to plant in “all available locations” within the municipal right-of-way — which some residents may not realize can include a strip of front lawn or side garden along the road, depending on the width and age of the street.

The city report lists damage from roots, fall cleanup of leaves and branches and unwanted shade on gardens as typical reasons residents say “no” to a free street tree nearby.

Some of those worries are understandable, said Environment Hamilton head Ian Borsuk. “I am sympathetic to the concerns of an individual homeowner — but at the end of the day, the benefits that can be generated (by trees) for the wider community far exceed any negative impacts for one individual,” he argued.

Borsuk noted council is supporting more and faster tree-planting as part of a climate action strategy that is meant to help battle air pollution and extreme heat in a city that is high on asphalt and cement but low on protective shade. But if that doesn’t impress you, leafier neighbourhoods are considered good for property values, too.

Graham said forestry staff will try to work with residents to find a “compatible tree” that mitigates worries about height or messy dropped berries, for example. (The city offers dozens of mostly native tree species to choose from.)

The city has already identified 50,600 potential “gaps” in the urban street treescape where new saplings could be planted, but the aim for 2024 is to add 6,500 young trees in the right-of-way.

Hamilton is still working on an equity study that may impact priority locations for new trees this year. But don’t be surprised if areas of the city with the lowest street tree counts get special attention going forward.

Worth noting: the city’s new planting push does not mean your currently bare front lawn is guaranteed to see a tree soon — or ever.

Graham said the city has guidelines that determine whether a tree can safely be planted in the road allowance, including proximity to homes, driveways, the sidewalk, overhead wires or underground pipelines.

“We need a minimum plantable area and there are some properties that just do not have that amount of space available,” she said.