The Tree Can Be Retained. So Why Is It Still Threatened?
TLDR: The "Private Discretion" Loophole Threatening Our Public Canopy
The Tree is Currently Safe and Healthy.
Let's be clear about one thing: despite the recent removal of the underground oil tank on the adjacent property, the 120-year-old Horse Chestnut is perfectly fine right now. An independent, certified arborist assessed the tree and confirmed it is a "nice specimen with good vigor". The root loss from the initial tank removal (completed without having notified Parks) was "moderate to minimal," the risk of the tree failing is officially "low," and there is absolutely zero current danger to the public. In fact, the City's Urban Forestry department stated in writing that "if there is no further soil removal the tree can be retained".
The Absurd Loophole: The only reason this tree is facing the chainsaws is because the City is allowing a dangerous, unofficial loophole: if a public tree's roots extend onto your private property, you can cut them off to suit your personal preferences, even if it kills the tree.
Contradicting the City's Own Climate Goals The homeowner's contractor wants to completely excavate the remaining soil to get an "environmental clean bill of health" for the private property. They want to do this even though provincial regulators have confirmed in writing that instead, the homeowner is allowed to use a non-destructive, risk-based approach to monitor the soil safely in place.
Rather than protecting a shared municipal asset, the Vancouver Park Board is stepping aside, claiming the excavation is at the "discretion of the private property owner". By allowing a private owner's preferred decontamination method to destroy a massive, healthy street tree, the City is contradicting its own 2025 Urban Forest Strategy, which aims to increase our tree canopy to 30% to protect neighbourhoods from extreme heat and climate change.
The Bottom Line: The tree isn't a hazard; the homeowner's proposed digging is the hazard. The City is letting the “private property owner’s preference” destroy our shared public climate infrastructure.
Please share this petition to demand that City Council and the Park Board permanently halt the removal, enforce the Street Tree By-law, and compel the property owner to use the legal, non-destructive risk-based remediation pathway to save our canopy!
Timeline of Our Actions & Stakeholder Responses
Late March – Mid-April 2026: The Initial Damage
The Action: The homeowner’s contractor (Speedy Solutions) removes the underground oil tank cutting some of the tree's structural roots before consulting the City's Urban Forestry department
The Response: The contractor posts a "Notice of Tree Removal" on April 17, stating the tree must be removed due to contaminated soil and anticipated excavation
Late April 2026: The Community Demands Evidence
The Action: Neighbours rally and ask the City, Park Board, and contractor for the environmental data and the formal arborist report justifying the removal.
The Response: The Park Board admits that no formal arborist report was ever prepared by Urban Forestry. They approved the removal based on an "internal assessment" of the contractor's anticipated future digging. The contractor claims they consulted a private arborist (Burley Boys), but Burley Boys later confirmed that they were never contracted for services and only provided a cost estimate for services.
April 27–28, 2026: Wildlife Habitat Flagged & FOI Filed
The Action: UBC Zoology Professor Dr. Leticia Avilés notifies the City that the tree is documented habitat for protected avian species, including the Cooper's Hawk, and demands a pause during nesting season.
We also officially file a Freedom of Information (FOI) request (FOI0011180) to uncover the internal communications regarding the tree.
The Response: The Park Board sends a biologist to look for nests. Still awaiting response from FOI request.
April 30 - May 4, 2026: Community Steps Up with Independent Assessments
The Action: Realizing that the City never ordered an arborist report, the community pools funds and hires Davey Resource Group to conduct an independent ISA-certified assessment. We also reach out to the City's Heritage Department to pursue heritage designation.
The Response: The independent arborist concludes that the root loss so far is "moderate to minimal," rates the risk of the tree failing as "Low," and officially recommends the tree be retained. Furthermore, Burley Boys confirms in writing that they were never contracted to write an arborist report for the contractor, but were only called for an estimate. The City temporarily pauses the removal.
May 8, 2026: The "Discretion" Loophole is Exposed
The Response: Despite the independent arborist proving that the tree does not constitute a public hazard, the Park Board reverses its pause. They state in an email that while the tree could be retained if no further digging occurred, the extent of the soil remediation is at the "discretion of the private property owner".
Mid-May 2026: Securing the Provincial Truth
The Action: We escalate the issue to the BC Ministry of Environment's Site Remediation team, asking if provincial law mandates this highly destructive full excavation.
The Response: The Ministry officially confirms in writing that they do not force property owners to use destructive methods. They explicitly state that "ENV accepts both numerical [full excavation] or risk-based [managing in place] approaches".
The conclusion: The Province doesn't require the tree's destruction. The independent arborist cleared the tree as not a hazard. The only thing threatening this 120-year-old ecological asset is the City of Vancouver allowing a private property owner's preferred, destructive excavation method to override the protection of shared public climate infrastructure.
Please share and sign.