Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-09-14-TREE-min-rptSeptember 12, 2023 1 Analysis of Town Manager Response to Tree Bylaw Enforcement Irregularities Reports of Irregularities and Town Manager response are included in August 21, 2023 Select Board Agenda packet (p.215) https://lexington.novusagenda.com/agendapublic/DisplayAgendaPDF.ashx?MeetingID=924 From Assessment Irregularities Report Town Manager Response Analysis Property Cert. of Occupancy Issued Irregularity Notes 203 Marrett 3/24/2023 Wrong Fee/Mitigation rate used All removed trees not accounted for a, c, d report on View Permit about hazard trees from a Certified Arborist Does not address wrong rate 5 trees removed; only 3 discussed by arborist 65 Locust 3/10/2023 All removed trees not accounted for c, d Finnegan was not charged the updated removal fees of $20 per inch Does not address unaccounted for trees 74 Oak 3/7/2023 Tree removed in ROW. c, d A Dead 8” tree was removed from the Town ROW with my permission Hazard documentation? 526 Marrett 2/1/2023 Tree(s) removed but no assessment a, b Chris Filadoro met with John Marquis from Marquis Tree and walked the site. The trees were all in very bad condition and taken down as hazards Hazard documentation? (19 hazards???) See also 546 Marrett Rd timeline in report 19 Hastings 1/4/2023 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c, d Mitigation fees were paid Does not address multiplier 19 Patterson 12/22/2022 Wrong Fee/Mitigation rate used a, c, d Paid a mitigation fee for all trees removed Does not address wrong rate 5 Munroe 12/9/2022 All removed trees not accounted for a, c, d, e They paid a mitigation fee of $30k Does not address unaccounted for trees 2 Rolfe 12/8/2022 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” All removed trees not accounted for a, b Mitigation fees paid; address was changed from Woburn to Rolfe road changing the setback area Does not address wrong rate Address change is irrelevant; removed trees in 30’ and 20’ corner setbacks 368 Mass Ave 10/28/2022 All removed trees not accounted for c, d, e Hazardous trees removed from back right side of the property; 6 trees were planted from the Recommended Planting List giving extra credit for planting Replanting does not cover removal of 2 28” trees in side setbacks 5 Skyview 9/27/2022 All removed trees not accounted for a, c, d, e 21 Trees planted for mitigation 16” tree was dead and no charge Hazard documentation? 9 Fair Oaks 8/25/2022 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c Mitigation fee paid Does not address multiplier 300 Bedford 7/19/2022 All removed trees not accounted for a, c, d, e Mitigation fees paid Does not address unaccounted for trees 92 Cedar 7/19/2022 Tree(s) removed but no assessment (242 replacement inches) c, d, e Several Hazardous Trees approved for removal Hazard documentation? September 12, 2023 2 59 Laconia 7/7/2022 Wrong Fee/Mitigation rate used a, d They planted several large birch trees on site for mitigation, they were charged the old rate of $10 per inch, and the bylaw had just been changed within a week or two Mitigation planting insufficient; see “collection report” 7 Holton 7/3/2022 Tree(s) removed but no assessment c, d They were approved for removing hazardous trees Hazard documentation? 212 Concord 6/22/2022 Tree(s) removed but no assessment b, c, d, e Hazardous tree was removed and not documented Hazard documentation? 6 Mill Brook 5/31/2022 All removed trees not accounted for Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c, d, e No response 68 Colony 5/27/2022 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” a, c The trees removed had two leads that totaled over 24”, not a single 24” stem Not true; plot plan does show tree double stemmed, but stem DBH’s are: 24” and 9” 155 Shade 4/28/2022 Tree removed in ROW c Dead 12” oak in the town ROW that was approved for removal Hazard documentation? 197-199 Bedford 3/10/2022 All removed trees not accounted for c Mitigation planting in the back and sides of the property as well as the front, no removal fees were charged and should have been Why were fees not collected at final inspection? 197 Cedar 3/9/2022 Tree(s) removed but no assessment c, d, e Several hazardous trees removed, n/c Hazard documentation? 7 Stevens 1/25/2022 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c Mitigation fees paid; permits were filed before the updated bylaw Why not? Bylaw was changed in 2017 25 Oxbow 1/20/2022 All removed trees not accounted for c, d Builder removed trees after inspection and did not bring this to my attention, removal fees should have been paid and were not Why not correct assessment at final inspection? 10 Wheeler 1/18/22 All removed trees not accounted for c, d, e Several hazardous trees removed but not documented Hazard documentation? 32 Middle 1/17/2022 All removed trees not accounted for c, d Mitigation fee of $1200 paid along with replanting What was replanted? 44 Paul Revere 1/14/2022 Tree(s) removed but no assessment b, d, e Several large hazardous trees removed and a mitigation fee was paid of $2700 Hazard documentation? 7 Bates 12/28/2021 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” Mitigation of $3300 paid and trees planted Does not address multiplier 19 Hudson 12/21/21 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c, d Builder was only charged 1 time the amount not 2 times the amount per the bylaw change Why not? Bylaw was changed in 2017 25 Wyman 12/20/2021 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c Builder was only charged 1 time the amount not 2 times the amount per the bylaw change Why not? Bylaw was changed in 2017 54 Robinson 11/26/21 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c, d Builder was only charged 1 time the amount not 2 times the amount per the bylaw change Why not? Bylaw was changed in 2017 37 Woodland 11/22/21 All removed trees not accounted for c, d, e 7 trees or 100” were permitted for removal, the builder wanted to remove more trees but we worked with him to leave them. More than 100” were removed. Mitigation payment not sufficient. 118 Cedar 11/9/2021 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c, d Builder was only charged 1 time the amount not 2 times the amount per the bylaw change Why not? Bylaw was changed in 2017 8 Oxford 10/18/2021 Tree removed in ROW b, c, d Tree removed in town ROW without permission, should have been charged a fine Why not correct assessment at final inspection? Is Chapter 87 mitigation being assessed now? 10 Constitution 10/12/2021 All removed trees not accounted for c, d, e Removed a 6” tree, paid removal fees, and replanted 2 3” trees Does not address unaccounted for trees September 12, 2023 3 378 Woburn 8/25/2021 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c, d Builder was only charged 1 time the amount not 2 times the amount per the bylaw change Why not? Bylaw was changed in 2017 5 Kimball 8/11/2021 Tree(s) removed but no assessment c, d, e Builder changed their mind, noted in comments that 0 tree were removed 8/4/2021 Many trees were actually removed; see ASB 193 Bedford 8/3/2021 All removed trees not accounted for c, d, e All trees remove were replanted, and several hazardous trees removed Hazard documentation? 14 Woodcliffe 6/15/2020 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c, d Builder was only charged 1 time the amount not 2 times the amount per the bylaw change Why not? Bylaw was changed in 2017 26 Volunteer 6/14/2021 Tree(s) removed but no assessment (450+ replacement inches) b, d, e Builder implied no trees were coming down at the time of inspection, they never updated me on any removals of hazardous trees. Removal fees were not paid and some trees were planted for mitigation Hazard documentation? (30 trees, 450+ inches of hazards???) Replanted 6 Callery pears 137 Wood 5/31/2021 Tree(s) removed but no assessment (274 replacement inches) c, d, e Several large hazardous trees removed, several trees were saved, 13 trees replanted Hazard documentation? 177 Cedar 5/13/2021 Tree(s) removed but no assessment c, d, e This was part of a planning board project that was part of a sub division. Mitigation planting was completed throughout the entire development Conventional Subdivision – all properties treated separately 68 Freemont 4/22/2021 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c, d Builder was only charged 1 time the amount not 2 times the amount per the bylaw change Why not? Bylaw was changed in 2017 272 Lowell 4/22/2021 Tree(s) removed but no assessment b, d Several hazardous trees removed, no mitigation or replanting required Hazard documentation? 101 Bedford 4/21/21 Tree(s) removed but no assessment c, d Several trees removed during construction no fees collected because they were hazardous Hazard documentation? 22 Washington 3/25/2021 All removed trees not accounted for c, d Several trees were allowed to be removed in the setback that were hazardous, the builder also did some replanting Does not address unaccounted for trees Hazard documentation? 14 Colony 2/4/2021 All removed trees not accounted for Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c, d Builder was only charged 1 time the amount not 2 times the amount per the bylaw change Why not? Bylaw was changed in 2017 48 Lincoln 1/12/2021 Tree(s) removed but no assessment b, c, d Several hazardous trees removed on the left side of the lot. No charges for hazardous trees Hazard documentation? 15 Hillcrest 12/16/2020 Problematic hazard declaration b Water and sewer service going through the stump, deemed hazardous, several failing pints of the tree. No charge for this hazardous tree removal or replanting Email evidence (available on request) sent to the Town Manager indicated that the hazard declaration was done as a favor to the builder. 110 Wood 12/16/2020 All removed trees not accounted for c, d Replanting was done, removal fees were never paid Does not address unaccounted for trees 290 Emerson 11/9/2020 All removed trees not accounted for Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c, d $420 paid in removal fees, trees larger than 24” where enforced at 100% at this time. Does not address unaccounted for trees Green sheet shows multiplier not used September 12, 2023 4 15 Flintlock 11/4/2020 All removed trees not accounted for d, “no trees to be removed” The builder had permission to remove hazardous tree. No replanting or fees Hazard documentation? 26 Dane 10/30/2020 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” c, d Builder was only charged 1 time the amount not 2 times the amount per the bylaw change Why not? Bylaw was changed in 2017 9 Dunham 9/14/2020 Tree(s) removed but no assessment c Builder removed trees after the inspection that were hazardous, no charge or replanting Hazard documentation? 24 Columbus 9/3/2020 All removed trees not accounted for d Builder removed trees that were hazardous, no charge or replanting Hazard documentation? 20 Hill 8/4/2020 Tree(s) removed but no assessment e Only hazard trees were removed after my inspection Hazard documentation? 56 Blossomcrest 7/16/20 All removed trees not accounted for 335 total replacement inches c, d 61” were approved for removal along with some hazardous trees approved for removal, mitigation planting was also done and some mitigation fees paid. Hazard documentation? 82 Spring 7/13/2020 All removed trees not accounted for c, e Builder removed 1-2 trees after inspection and did not let me know Why not correct assessment at final inspection? 51 Bertwell 6/24/2020 All removed trees not accounted for c, d, e The builder removed trees after the inspection and did not pay removal fees, some hazard trees were removed Why not correct assessment at final inspection? 7 Graham 3/10/2020 Multiplier not used for trees ≥ 24” Trees removed in ROW Builder/homeowner removed trees before he had proper sign off, he also removed town trees from Conservation Land. He was mandated to replant for the trees he removed as well as pay any mitigation fees. Does not address multiplier Does not address trees in ROW removed No mitigation was paid 198 Bedford 2/21/2020 Tree(s) removed but no assessment 127 DBH/246 replacement inches b, c, d, e Builder removed trees after inspection, most of them were hazardous, and replanting was also done Hazard documentation? – see earlier reports 2 Cushing 1/31/2020 All removed trees not accounted for Tree removed in ROW c, d, e 3 trees removed and permit fees paid, builder may have removed trees after the inspections Why not correct assessment at final inspection? 546 Lowell 1/27/2020 All removed trees not accounted for c, d Builder was approved to remove 9 trees, he paid the removal fees. Hazardous trees were also allowed to be removed Hazard documentation? 17 Volunteer 10/11/2019 Tree(s) removed but no assessment c Trees were removed more than one year before inspection, also removed trees after inspections Demo/Const permits filed in 7/19 and 12/19. When were trees removed? Why not correct assessment at final inspection? Open notable properties 2 Wheeler Tree warden accepted plot plan that did not reflect reality at the property b No open permit for this property at this time Does not address fact that the tree warden accepted a grossly wrong doctored plot plan September 12, 2023 5 72 Prospect Hill Trees removed with no permit, fee. Tree removed in ROW Tree Warden notified of above; no action taken. Open permit, Chris Filadoro has talked to the builder several times and let him know that he removed a tree in the Town ROW, this tree has been appraised, this will be taken care of before any CO is issued Does not address issue of many other trees removed – there is still no Tree Removal Permit 440 Bedford Trees removed in ROW c There is not a town ROW, this is state land ROW Did the state give approval for removal? a Property was called to attention of Tree Warden in May 2022 and October 2022 b Known evader of bylaw c Trees were indicated to be removed in paper plot plan, plot plan submitted online or in ViewPoint Cloud d As-built plot plan with trees shown was submitted e Tree(s) ≥ 24” removed are involved in irregularity Additional Observations Assessment report response observations • Claimed hazard trees: Which trees were declared hazards? Where is the documentation? • Mitigation Planting: What was planted? Where is the documentation? • “Mitigation Paid” – but did it reflect the correct assessment? • Issues in appendices not addressed Collection report response observations • Fees not collected – Table 1: Explanation by staff not relevant to the properties I identified; No credible explanation why fees not paid • Mitigation not collected – Tables 2,3: Not treating “duplicates” ignores many mitigation collection payment irregularities. Respectfully submitted, Gerry Paul