Hopes, if not dashed, are seriously subdued. On June 2, with the stalwart environmentalists and concerned citizens sitting in attendance, the West Orange Township Council completed crafting an ordinance that would protect the town's trees. The ordinance was the result of nearly 11 months of collaboration, often frustrating and always challenging. The resulting ordinance was not perfect, but as stated previously, it was good enough. Even more than good enough given that for those 11 months West Orange had no protective ordinance at all.
We had hope as we left the Council chambers on the night of June 2 that the ordinance would be kept as is. We also had assurance from the Council members that the language unanimously accepted that night would be the language introduced for final reading.
Just 8 nights later, on June 10----the night of a religious holiday when many of the regulars could not be in attendance---- the council sliced and diced the ordinance, literally making it gutless in fending off development encroachment. Their definition of what a tree is in terms of size would leave a good number of trees throughout the township on the chopping block as they would be too small to be considered a tree. And almost every protective phrase still remaining from the ordinance passed on June 2 now has the caveat "to the greatest extent possible". This language leaves every thing open to interpretation. No tree stands a chance.
One powerful example of the folly of the new language suggested and adopted on the night of June 10 is the steep slope provision edit. The new language will now allow for trees to be removed on slopes FIVE TIMES steeper than the hill on Route 280.
Now any one who travels 280 with any regularity, and especially so when that hill is snow or ice covered, knows that the angle of that slope is formidable. Imagine then, if you will, a slope FIVE TIMES that angle now bereft of trees. Then imagine living down from the slope where all those trees have been removed. Visions of landslides no doubt spring to mind, and that is no dramatization. That no doubt will occur if this ordinance, now clearly a vehicle to invite and allow totally irresponsible development, comes to fruition.
And the ordinance will come to fruition unless there is full scale community turn out on June 24 for the 6:30 p.m discussion.
We need to be there en masse on June 24 to protest the edits that were made virtually behind the backs of those concerned with tree preservation and quality of life in West Orange.
We need to be there to protest the clearly evident bias on the part of town council members who are working on behalf of outside development corporations and not in accordance with their own constituencies. And most of all we need to be there to say we will no longer tolerate the duplicitous, deceptive, underhanded actions that have been taken with the turn-around language on this ordinance.
Are the council members a bunch of untrustworthy, opportunistic sharks looking for the moment to close in and make a kill that benefits them and puts every tree and every person in West Orange in peril?
I have seen no evidence that they are not, and if I have to swim in these waters as a town resident, you can bet I will arm myself. Words are my armament. I hope you will add your own on June 24 at 6:30 sharp.
3 comments:
A person should be able to cut down a tree in their back yard without approval from the town. Suppose someone wants to put in a pool or a patio? Suppose you want to thin out your trees so you can grow bigger ones? You remove the smaller ones. When you open a property you have a right to plant trees or cut them down.
I believe that one of the reasons this process for getting a protective tree ordinance is going on for a year (while no ordinance at all is in place) is the concern you have expressed about home owner's rights.
The ordinance that was accepted on June 2 did have sufficient protection for individual home owners, but also protected larger tracts of forest land.
This new ordinance does nothing to protect these larger tracts.
So less see where this goes tonight.
One of the town government’s responsibilities is to protect the landowner’s rights as well as safeguard the environment for future generations.
It is a gentle balance which the town’s representatives must be able to legislate.
We all know what a deforested town would look like. We all know how much more polluted our town would be. What landowner would like to live in such an environment???
It is not the question of allowing or not allowing cutting down trees. The question is to do it RESPONSIBLY.
The tree ordinance should be able to differentiate between the small property owner’s rights and the large development projects.
It needs to take into consideration the tree sizes, the tree densities and mainly the slopes ,where the effect of tree removals would have a devastating effect on the adjacent properties.
The originally drafted tree ordinance adopted on June 2nd was close to doing just that.
Post a Comment