Upper Freehold Township Committee throws out ordinances designed to protect the township’s trees because of concerns about homeowners’ rights.
By: Marisa Maldonado
UPPER FREEHOLD Two long-contested ordinances designed to protect the township’s trees have been killed by the Township Committee because of concerns about homeowners’ rights, but officials said they may revisit the issue in the future.
This is the second set of tree ordinances, originally written to protect the township’s environmental character, that has not worked. The Township Committee sent two ordinances one establishing tree-removal regulations for developers, the other for homeowners back to the drawing board last August after residents complained about how the regulations would affect their rights over their properties.
Committeeman David Horsnall, who asked that both ordinances be killed, said the committee had too much on its plate to continue "spinning wheels" on the ordinances. If the township reconsiders the issue in the future, the rights of residents over their properties need to be considered, he said.
"I think this is a serious issue we have to keep in mind," Mr. Horsnall said at a recent meeting of the governing body.
Deputy Mayor William Miscoski said the ordinances are not necessary in a township where residents have planted more trees than they have torn down.
"I don’t feel I have a right to tell people what to do with their land when it comes to trees and bushes," Mr. Miscoski said. "Next thing you know, we’ll tell people what color their houses should be or what color their barn should be."
The revised ordinances were introduced March 3 and public hearings were held throughout April and May.
Under the ordinances, both private and public landowners would have to submit an application to the township engineer and include the number of trees they wish to remove and a fee of $50. No land area larger than half an acre with trees more than 6 inches in diameter would have been allowed to be cut under the ordinance.
Homeowners who wanted to construct buildings for personal use and who had the proper zoning permits would have been exempt from the restrictions, as would have been any trees or shrubs that are part of a nursery, garden center, Christmas tree farm or orchard. Any trees considered hazardous by the township, county or state also would have been exempt.
The committee held another public hearing at its June 2 meeting, although Mr. Horsnall asked the committee to skip it before calling a vote. Committeemen Stephen Alexander and Mr. Horsnall, Mr. Miscoski and Mayor Sal Diecidue all voted down the ordinances. Committeeman Stephen Fleischacker arrived at the meeting after the vote because of a prior family commitment.
Residents who spoke before the vote expressed enthusiasm at the idea of getting rid of both ordinances.
Ray Johnson said the township’s 3-acre zoning policy already discourages residents from cutting down their trees.
"You take 3 acres of land they’re going to put trees on it," Mr. Johnson said.
One resident, Gerald Nathanson, warned the committee not to forget the ordinances. He said doing so would give critics an excuse to call the committeemen anti-environmentalists.
"At this point, delete it," Mr. Nathanson said. "But don’t give anybody ammunition to beat you up."
Mr. Alexander told residents that the committee still has the interest of the township’s environmentalists at heart.
"This does not mean we are anti-trees, anti-environment," he said after the vote was taken. "Up or down, it needs to get done."
He said any further discussion on the issue should include as many township officials as possible, including the entire Township Committee and the township’s forestry official. The township is "losing credibility" through the current process, he said.
"What we need to do is pull up the tables, have the professionals there and let’s knock it out," Mr. Alexander said.
Mayor Diecidue said he "slightly disagreed" with Mr. Alexander’s approach. Too much involvement had caused discussion on one ordinance to unravel in the planning stages, he said.
"(It) was close enough at one time that it might have worked out," he said. "But then it got out of hand when we had so many people in the mix."