After the removal of two large trees estimated to be more than 100 years old on a residential Newtown Lane property where a house was recently demolished, East Hampton Village Mayor Jerry Larsen said this week that he will discuss with his colleagues on the village board possibly amending village code to require a permit to remove trees.
The property sits at the west end of Newtown Lane where it curves toward Long Lane, making the felling of the trees particularly noticeable to passers-by, among them Elizabeth Linker, whose Instagram posts last week about the trees have garnered hundreds of comments.
Ms. Linker, an owner of the Hedges and Gardens landscaping and design firm, posted videos questioning the felling of the trees. There is no law preventing the property owner from doing so, but Ms. Linker did not conceal her anger.
“I have spent my entire life planting trees for a living,” she said in one, “and also for saving the environment. Everyone talks about how they want to go green . . . and then we allow this to happen in our village.” She lamented the loss of the trees’ absorption of climate-warming carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, which they do through photosynthesis, storing it in their roots, branches, leaves, and the surrounding soil. “This is a sin,” she said. “Those were beautiful trees and they should have lived. I’m all for making money and I’m all for new construction, but this is unacceptable.”
In a second video, she asserted that the trees may have been closer to 200 years old. “There was absolutely no reason to take that tree down,” she said of one. “It had no disease or problems. . . . I really hope and pray that East Hampton will implement a permit to cut down trees, like they do at Old Westbury and Lloyd Harbor.” Many people shared her outrage, but many supported the property owner’s right to make the decision. “If they own the property they should be able to remove and replant as they wish,” one person commented.
The Sag Harbor Village code has a chapter on tree preservation. It stipulates that a permit is required to remove a tree unless it is dead, diseased, or severely damaged, as determined by the building inspector or an arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture; an emergency situation requires its removal for protection and preservation of life or property; removal is in connection with authorized activities of the village, or its diameter at 4.5 feet above the ground is less than 12 inches.
Mr. Larsen told The Star early last year that the village board was considering enacting legislation similar to Sag Harbor’s. On Monday, he said that he had learned of the felled trees on Newtown Lane after the fact. “Unfortunately, it was legal,” he said, adding that “I think we’re going to take another look. It is kind of sad that we lost trees that may not have had to come down.” But the trees were on private property, he said, “and there’s no restriction on what you can take down.”
Last year’s discussion about a code amendment did not yield agreement as to the parameters of preservation or enforcement, the mayor said. The board will reconvene to close the fiscal year on July 31. “I will bring it up to the board at the next meeting, and see how they want to proceed,” he said.
