Please comment on a tree removal request
As part of an ongoing infill construction project at 10006 83 Avenue, Krawford Construction has requested the removal of two (2) green ash trees from public property. These trees are located behind the sidewalk on the boulevard of the west side of 100 Street, between 83 and 84 Avenues, just south of the alley.
As per the City of Edmonton’s corporate tree management policy, Krawford Construction will be responsible for all of the costs of tree removal. They must also compensate the City for the asset value of the trees. Also, they are required to have community support to have the trees removed.
The trees will not be replaced at the present location. The asset value of the trees will be reinvested in Strathcona, if planting space is available in the neighborhood. If not, the funds will be invested in adjacent neighborhoods. The goal is to plant replacement trees in suitable sites as close to the removal site as possible.
If you have questions or concerns about the removal of these trees please contact Trevor Thistle by phone, 780-944-7833, or email, trevor.thistle@edmonton.ca, by Friday, March 25, 2016.
2 Comments
Good evening,
While I support infill developments as important for urban revitalization the removal of trees from our neighbourhood has a negative effect. I do not support the removal of trees from public spaces due to any development particularly private developers.
Thank you,
Tom Yohemas
If people were to take an inventory of trees lost in a one block radius of 101-100 St. and the north side of 83 Ave., they would discover that there has been a loss of 26 mature trees within the past 2 years due to two infill developments, and removal of trees in front of two apartment buildings. Unfortunately we cannot seem to stop removal on private property, but public property should not be up for sale for the convenience of developers. I met with this group many times to save the large elm tree just west of 100 St. and 83 Ave. At the time they also said they would save a total of seven trees on the property, only three of these actually remain! I was hoping this infill project would be different, but I’m starting to lose hope. I do not support the removal of these trees – especially given the rather loose policy of replacement, they wouldn’t even have to replace the trees in this area.
Regards,
Kari Heise