Trees could become election issue Mon, September 18, 2006 By JOE BELANGER, FREE PRESS CITY HALL REPORTER

A move to protect the Forest City's shrinking woodlands is headed for a pre-election showdown tonight at city council. On one side are city staff and council members who argue London's identity as the Forest City is at stake. On the other side are landowners, developers and politicians who say a proposed change -- which would allow more woodlots to be declared significant and be spared the developer's axe -- is unnecessary, infringes on property rights and lowers values. Already there are threats of a legal battle, regardless of the decision. Some say, it could also become a key municipal election issue. "I think it has the potential to be something significant for voters," said Andrew Sancton, a local government expert at the University of Western Ontario. "I think environmental issues will be significant in this election and trees and woodlands are an important element of the environment." London bills itself as the Forest City, but staff and various citizen groups say the city's tree cover lags behind other cities. Others say that's because each city measures tree cover differently.

Those opposed to the staff recommendation at a committee meeting last week were chairperson Coun. Roger Caranci, Deputy Mayor Tom Gosnell and Coun. Rob Alder. In favour were councillors Judy Bryant, Sandy White and Ab Chahbar. Councillors Joni Baechler and Bryant have led much of the push to protect the city's trees. "It is our responsibility to protect the city's interests," Baechler said in an interview. "Here we sit with the Forest City brand and we're letting our forests decline. If council members are not willing to defend the city's brand, they shouldn't be sitting at the council table."

The development industry has challenged the new policy. Gosnell called the staff recommendation a "knee-jerk" reaction to the city's dwindling forest cover. Property owners whose woodlands would be deemed significant should be more involved in the process because their land would be left as open space, he said. Gosnell also said there's confusion about London's tree cover, which may be low because of farmland the city absorbed with annexation in 1993. "I want to make sure we do what we can to protect our environment and significant woodlots. But, right now, I'm not persuaded by the evidence." Instead, Gosnell wants the city to step up its tree planting and forest management efforts.

Former city councillor Sandy Levin, a member of the Urban League of London, scoffed at Gosnell's proposal. "It's really puzzling to listen to the anti-environment sentiment that permeates this council," Levin said. "Once those woodlots are gone and subdivisions put on them, they can't be replaced." If council doesn't approve the policy, Levin says he'll appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board. If they do approve, he expects the development industry to appeal. Levin and others say allowing woodlots to be cut down for development violates provincial policy, the city's own corporate goals and the findings of the Creative Cities task force. The latter said an abundance of trees is not only healthier but a draw to keep and attract young professionals to London. The issue surfaces less than a year after the city celebrated its 150th anniversary that made tree planting a priority. A committee called Reforest London 150 was set up to oversee the effort. "This proposed policy change is the single most important policy factor affecting the future of London's forests," said Dean Sheppard, an environmental consultant and Reforest London member.

BACKGROUND - In a bid to protect the city's dwindling tree coverage, city staff propose an Official Plan amendment to ease the requirements for a woodland to be designated significant. Requirements include factors such as tree species, age and size of woodlot and quality. - Staff say that change would protect 96 per cent of the 135 woodlands on 1,700 hectares of undeveloped land outside the city's urban growth area. - That would leave the city with estimated 3,300 hectares of woodland equalling 7.8 per cent of the city's area. - The city's total tree cover is estimated at 16.2 per cent. - Last Monday, council's planning committee debated the issue. A tie vote defeated a motion to accept staff's recommendation.