Impact of revisions to Newton’s Tree Preservation Ordinance

On December 18, 2023, the Newton City Council updated the 1999 Tree Preservation Ordinance (TPO) with stricter requirements, effective March 1, 2024. The revised TPO requires property owners to have a permit to remove any tree that is six inches or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH), as measured 4.5 feet above ground. Moreover, it says that removal of all trees in a singular area requires one of the following: a removal permit, exemption, the planting of replacement trees, or a payment in lieu. There is an exception for 1- and 2-family residential lots where there is no construction planned for the next 24 months. The Newton Cemetery & Arboretum has received an exemption for the removal of many trees because it is an arboretum implementing a multi-year replacement plan approved by the City Forester.

Newton’s City Forester, Marc Welch, told Fig City News that while Newton’s tree canopy has declined over the years, he does not have an estimate of the rate of that decline. He noted that there are many factors that have been contributing to this decline. For instance, trees that belong to the City and private properties have struggled to keep up with the changing climate, and in the past, both the City and private owners had difficulty keeping up with maintenance. Welch said, “In early 2000, we had a drought along with some insect problems that led to some tree decline everywhere all across Newton – both private and public areas.” Additionally, he noted that more trees have been removed to make room for an increase in home redevelopment. It is too early, he said, to specifically quantify the impact of the revised TPO on Newton’s tree canopy. 

Welch said that one of the big positives of the revised ordinance is that it requires residents to work with a qualified arborist before removing a tree. “It makes people think about why they’re removing trees and what alternatives there are to removals,” he said. City Councilor Julia Malakie also appreciates that there is a safeguard for abutters’ trees (trees located on a property adjacent to one’s own), which was not on the original TPO. “I’m very happy that we added protections for abutters’ trees and ramped up the replacement requirements for larger trees, which puts emphasis on the environmental impact of losing these larger trees,” she said.

Melissa Brown, co-founder of Protect Newton Trees, notes that the revised TPO has been successful in protecting Newton residents’ trees on their own properties from construction that occurs on their neighbors’ properties. “There have been some residents who have come forward at the Programs and Services Committee meetings to say that the Tree Preservation Ordinance has saved trees on their own property,” she said. “Others have said that it has allowed them to effectively talk with their neighbors and come up with a mutually agreed upon solution that saves the tree.”

Despite the positive aspects of the revised TPO, some people say that further revisions should be made. 

Although Malakie is glad that people are notified about abutters’ trees, she expressed concern over the vagueness of the requests notifying the tree owners. “Notifications need to specifically inform abutters that they have the right to have their own trees protected from construction damage,” she said. “Most letters I’ve seen don’t do that; they’re some variation of ‘I’m tearing down this house and building a new one.” Malakie said that she would like to see the notification requirement extend to all removals, not just those driven by construction. “Any tree loss impacts neighboring properties,” she said. “Increased basement flooding from these removals is a particular concern [because trees can sequester water].”

Another challenge Malakie highlights is the exemption of the 1- and 2-family residential lots, as she feels that all lots should have the same requirements to obtain a permit. “It’s time to value all trees and stop exempting trees on 1- and 2-family lots where no construction is planned,” she said. “Trees are our best defense against increased flooding, higher summer temperatures, and air pollution that is getting worse due to the Western wildfires. The ordinance will be more effective and easier to understand if all lots are treated the same.”

Brown is concerned that the revised ordinance allows healthy trees to be cut down, so Newton is still losing some of its overall tree canopy. “There are still many people unaware of how important it is for the livability of the neighborhood to retain as many healthy trees, and especially large healthy trees, as possible,” she said. “Even a single tree can provide so much ecoservice to a neighborhood.”

Don Berk, a Newton resident since 1982, has found that the revised TPO makes it difficult to remove a tree on a property and makes the process of obtaining a building permit more complicated. In recent years, Berk wanted to remove trees on his property that were reaching the end of their lives and were in the way of his plans to expand his home. With the trees unhealthy and no longer viable, Berk was frustrated that the process to remove them took almost two years. “The trees were having problems – dropping parts on my neighbors properties and mine,” he said. “The whole process took between 6-9 months to accomplish.”

Marc Welch encourages people to reach out to the Forestry Department if they have any questions. “It’s important to know that this is all still new,” he said. “There’s always misconceptions about what’s expected of people, and so consulting the City’s website is always the best way to go.”

Chloe Yu is a Fig City News summer intern and a rising junior at Cornell University.