It is outrageous that a majestic, 50 to 100-year-old oak was cut at 25 Normandy Rd. in our neighborhood, Woodhaven (attached photos taken on June 13, 2024). This 33 inch DBH (diameter at breast height, in other words 4 feet up from the ground) oak was cut by the resident — who has lived in the neighborhood for less than a few weeks — after the developer had committed to keep it.
Our Woodhaven neighborhood will have to be renamed Deserthaven, unless our now toothless tree bylaw is amended to say something like:
“No tree of 16 inches DBH or more shall be cut without a permit, which permit shall be issued only if (a) the tree represents a danger to a nearby structure, or (b) if the tree remains in place, the total cost of the projected improvement on the lot increases by at least 20% compared with what the cost would be if the tree was removed. If a permit is issued under (a) or (b), the lot owner shall mitigate per the requirements of the present bylaw, via replanting or payment into the Town’s tree replanting fund.”
Our Tree Committee — on which I sat when we wrote the original Lexington tree bylaw in 2000-01, then carefully designed to pass the Attorney General’s review — has become ineffective.
In short, no major tree should be cut in Lexington unless there is a VERY good reason for the tree to be removed, whether or not major construction is underway, and whether or not the tree is in the setback of the lot (layouts of new houses must, unlike today, take into account large trees, so as to accommodate them). Unlike in 2000-01 the Attorney General is now likely to approve the kind of language we need in our tree bylaw.
Unless our stated aim to become “climate resilient” as a Town is just empty words, which the (in)action of our Tree Committee suggests it is.
I so agree with you, Patrick. So many large old trees, even right on the street, have been cut down in our neighborhood as well. I cannot believe that we are coming anywhere close to making up for the loss of these beautiful anchor trees, even if people fool themselves into thinking they are replacing them by planting much smaller dogwoods and fruit trees. Ugh.
Lexington residents who are upset by how ineffective our Tree by-law has become can ask our Select Board to take action so that these majestic trees remain standing. You can email the Board at selectboard@lexingtonma.gov
Why isn’t something being written in purchase documents of residential real estate holding new buyers accountable for respecting the law or being fine a significant fine for failure to do so?!?
Dear Leslie Ghorbani:
This is not the issue. The new owner at 25 Normandy Rd did not violate any Town by-law by cutting this huge tree. The issue is that our Tree by-law allows that to happen, and THAT must be changed by amending our Tree by-law with the additional language I proposed above.
Furthermore, a private contract (in this case, the “purchase documents” you refer to) cannot impose fines, only a Town by-law can do that.
Thank you Mr. Mehr for the clarification.
In her posthumous Casting Deep Shade, C. D. Wright laments the lost of a majestic weeping beech by a homeowner cutting it to improve her view. Yes, we have millions of trees and a man’s home is his castle, but if everyone in Massachusetts cut just two large trees, we would reduce the photosynthesis generation power of our forest offset of annual oxygen consumption of 7 million adults. Trees have a place. With the MBTA housing construction mandate, however, any residential neighborhood in Lexington could face the prospect of five-story condominium whose cost-increase versus tree sustainment would very likely tip the favor to the cost-effective developer. It seems as if the bell tolls for trees in Lexington.