Protecting Trees on Private Property

The consultation period for the Draft Private Tree By-law has closed. Please check this page regularly, or subscribe to this project for more updates.

Trees are a key part of our community, as they provide many benefits to residents and visitors alike. It is important for us to maintain and increase our urban tree canopy as King continues to grow. Help us increase our tree canopy by sharing your thoughts and opinions about healthy private trees, and how we can best protect them.

Please keep in mind that the proposed Draft Private Tree By-law only applies to healthy private trees located within the three Village Communities of King City, Nobleton, and Schomberg. You can also review the report for more information.

We want to hear from you!

We invite you to take part in this discussion about the value of trees on private property, and what they contribute to King as a whole.

You can take part by:

Register with us!

In order to get involved, you will need to create an account and register as a user. Once registered, you will be able to contribute to all aspects of this page.

The consultation period for the Draft Private Tree By-law has closed. Please check this page regularly, or subscribe to this project for more updates.

Trees are a key part of our community, as they provide many benefits to residents and visitors alike. It is important for us to maintain and increase our urban tree canopy as King continues to grow. Help us increase our tree canopy by sharing your thoughts and opinions about healthy private trees, and how we can best protect them.

Please keep in mind that the proposed Draft Private Tree By-law only applies to healthy private trees located within the three Village Communities of King City, Nobleton, and Schomberg. You can also review the report for more information.

We want to hear from you!

We invite you to take part in this discussion about the value of trees on private property, and what they contribute to King as a whole.

You can take part by:

Register with us!

In order to get involved, you will need to create an account and register as a user. Once registered, you will be able to contribute to all aspects of this page.

CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

  • Why is there no distinction made between long time home owner, new build resulting from tear down, and land developer? The outcome for trees is different for each scenario and should be described along with the measure to be taken for each example.

    Luigi Torrone asked 29 days ago

    Thank you for your question, I have tried to address it below.  

    The Draft Private Tree By-law does make reference to Building Permits, Site Plans, and Subdivision Agreements that would apply to any new build resulting from tear down or land developer. 

    The Draft By-law references that in order to obtain a Building Permit, any tree to be destroyed, injured, or moved/relocated to erect a building, structure, or thing must be accompanied by a Tree Plan of the property. Trees may only be removed under a Building Permit within fifteen (15) metres surrounding the building, structure, or thing. Any healthy tree that falls outside of this area would need to be replaced. A Building Permit would be required for any new build. 

    In terms of land developers, these situations fall under things such as subdivision agreements, or site plan agreements that use the Township standard practice of replacing any one tree cut down with three new trees. The Draft By-law states that any tree on property that is under a subdivision agreement or site plan agreement, must follow the terms and conditions named in the agreement (i.e. tree replacement). 

    - Jacqueline

  • What the township is proposing is unreasonable. The properties around King have many trees that are diseased and dying, and since we have to pay to have them removed, it should be at our discretion, without having to obtain a permit. You are suggesting it has to be 75% diseased and dying. Who pays for the arborist report? We own our properties, pay enough taxes and I do not wish for anyone to tell me what to do with the trees I planted.

    Sylvia Pirillo asked about 1 month ago

    Thank you for your comments, they will be added to the record and reviewed with all other feedback received.

    The proposed Draft By-law would allow property owners to remove dead, dying, or diseased trees, but require a permit (at no cost). The Township recognizes the costs associated with an Arborist’s Report, and through consultation, is seeking to understand if property owner’s agree that Township staff (i.e. an arborist) should evaluate the health of a tree. Specifically, there is a question in the survey that asks: “Determining the health of a tree will be evaluated (to identify whether a tree is dead, dying, or diseased) by Township staff (i.e. an arborist). Do you agree with this approach?”. For clarity, this means that the Township is proposing that the municipality would pay for an Arborist’s Report rather than the property owner.

    - Jacqueline 

  • From what you replied to Simrah.Ozel, you say that the tree replacement policy is intended to mirror what is currently imposed on land developers. Private existing residential homeowners are not developers who are seeking to profit from land development. Why should you you impose the same restrictions/penalties on homeowner/taxpayers?

    storminne asked about 1 month ago

    Thank you for your question. The replacement requirements are derived from a standard practice within the Township. The ratio of planting three trees when one tree is to be removed is applied across the three community villages (King City, Nobleton & Schomberg) to provide a fair and equitable standard that applies to all property owners regardless of whether they are a developer or a private property owner. 

    -Jacqueline

  • We purchased 2 homes in King City for a total of 46 years. We planted all the trees that we wished to make our property not only beautiful but for the environment. As far as i know, we OWN our land and home. Don't tell me that after 46 years of ownership and paying heavy taxes, that you are going to tell us what we can grow and what we can cut down. This will never never happen. Pay attention my dear township to the overgrown, unruly, unmanaged, lots that require a maintenance by-law. Do that and you will of accomplished something. Homeowners, as a whole in King City have pride of ownership. With this by-law you are proposing, you are alienating and causing much conflict. I would be in the forefront of a class action suit against the township if this goes through. Have some faith in the people that liv here to know the difference between saving a good tree and taking one down for whatever reason they see fit. After all IT IS THEIR PROPERTY. GREEDY KING SHAME ON YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    it conrad asked about 1 month ago

    Thank you for your comments. These will be considered and reviewed with all other comments through the engagement process. 

    - Jacqueline

  • Has the township considered this by-law only applying to larger properties and/or developers who buy land and clear for building? Regular sized lot owners shouldn’t be regulated. Most people love to plant and nurture trees on their properties. Trees die get diseased etc and it can already be a big expense to remove them. Also feel that the township shouldn’t interfere in the property rights of tax paying citizens. It’s just wrong.

    Simrah.Ozel asked about 1 month ago

    Thank you for your feedback. I have tried to address your questions and comments below.

    The Draft Private Tree By-law incorporates tree replacement ratios that mirror the established standards for the development approval process in King. When developers come to the Township with an application they must receive approval through site plan agreements, subdivision agreements, etc.  Part of this approval includes the regard for tree replacement. The common practice in the Township is a ratio of three replacement trees for every one tree that is cut down.

    Historically, there has been more risks to trees in the village areas (King City, Nobleton, and Schomberg). The Draft By-law is meant to address concerns of increased risks to trees, while still recognizing that outside of these core centres there is considerable rural landscape.

    I’m not sure, but it seems like you may be referring to replacement requirements when you mention dead and dying trees? Under the Draft By-law any tree that is dead, dying, or diseased will still need a permit, but does NOT require any replacement trees or cash-in-lieu contributions. Replacement trees are only needed when a healthy tree is to be removed.  

    I will ensure that these comments are added to the record of comments and engagement received by the Clerks Department. 

    – Jacqueline


  • Who authored the online survey? Staff or CCKT?

    storminne asked about 1 month ago

    Thank you for your question. The survey was created by the Tree Focus Working Group. This working group is primarily derived from King staff being the: Chief Administrative Officer, Director of Parks, Recreation & Culture, and Director of Clerks/By-law Enforcement, and members of Concerned Citizens of King Township (CCKT).

    - Jacqueline

  • Where will the replacement trees be planted if I don't have room on my own property?

    Debbie S asked 3 months ago

    The Parks, Recreation, and Culture Department will use cash-in-lieu contributions to plant replacement trees on municipal property. 

    - Jacqueline

  • I don't have room on my property in King City to plant the replacement trees. I have access to quality young native tree whips. Why can't I provide those for planting where ever you will plant the replacement trees purchased with my $500 x 3.

    Debbie S asked 3 months ago

    Under the Draft Private Tree By-law, replacement trees need to be 5-7cm DBH or larger. This is a standard size for replacement trees recommended by established practices and tree management used by the Parks, Recreation, and Culture Department.

    - Jacqueline  

  • I am quite surprised by the exceptions identified in section 15 a,b,and c. It sounds like there is no effort to reduce the tree destruction for new builds.

    Debbie S asked 3 months ago

    The Draft Private Tree By-law allows the removal of trees under a Building Permit. A Tree Plan is also a required element of the application which will take into consideration the number of trees the property owner wants to remove. 

    - Jacqueline

  • I my tree is dead or dying I understand that replacement trees are not required. Sounds reasonable. But doesn't sound reasonable that my application would required a landscape plan; and it doesn't sound reasonable that it would still take 14 days to process.

    Debbie S asked 3 months ago

    Thank you for providing feedback, we will take this into consideration. The allotment of 14 days is a standard time for all tree permits. If staff are able to process them faster than 14 days, they certainly will, but it gives administrative time to account for a volume of applications. 

    - Jacqueline

  • If someone who follows the rules needs to plant or fund 3 trees for every one cut down I think that when there has been a bylaw contravention the the "penalty" for such should be greater than 3 for each one.

    Debbie S asked 3 months ago

    Thank you, we have received your comments. Staff will be reviewing all feedback to be taken into consideration.