Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Trees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tree board urges village to press utility contractors to reduce severe pruning during O'Connell/Go Net Speed work
Summary
Members of East Aurora’s Tree Board presented recommended protections for specimen and slow-growing trees and asked the village to press O'Connell Electric / Go Net Speed to reduce canopy loss and coordinate with a village or third-party arborist before heavy pruning or removals.
Members of the East Aurora Tree Board told the Village Board on Jan. 21 that planned utility work by O'Connell Electric on behalf of Go Net Speed has resulted in severe canopy loss and inconsistent trimming practices and asked the village to press for clearer standards, closer coordination and safeguards for high‑priority trees.
The tree board presentation focused on five practical recommendations: reduced-clearance standards for slow‑growing species; specimen‑tree protection (trees with diameter at breast height greater than 24 inches); a requirement that a certified arborist be consulted before any pruning that removes more than 40% of a tree’s canopy; identification of invasive species for removal; and a seasonal moratorium on oak pruning from April through October to reduce oak wilt risk.
“Just wanted to comment tonight about the work that we’re doing with you guys to try to minimize impacts from the O'Connell Electric,” said Tim Noon, a member of the Village Tree Board and an East Oakwood resident. Noon said the board has coordinated with other New York municipalities and found examples where proactive engagement led contractors to bury cable in short, high‑priority segments instead of performing heavy overhead pruning.
Jesse Griffith, chair of the Tree Board, said the group recommends using a 24‑inch DBH threshold to flag specimen trees for special handling. “We thought in that case, maybe that’s just a fair … way to say it’s the one that maybe we should take a second look at,” Griffith said.
Board members and staff discussed specifics and constraints. Village staff noted O'Connell sends an arborist ahead of cutters and that field crews generally receive instructions before they arrive at a block; the tree board asked the village to formalize notification and a “gateway check‑in” at which flagged trees would be reviewed. Board members asked the tree board to provide a mapped list of specimen trees and recommended species to preserve so staff could supply that to contractors in advance.
The tree board also urged the village to press NYSEG and Go Net Speed (contract principals identified by speakers) to accept reasonable adjustments such as shorter clearance distances for identified slow‑growing species. Noon and Griffith suggested the village request sealing of fresh oak cuts if pruning must occur during higher‑risk seasons and reported that in some neighboring municipalities utilities have donated replacement trees where removals were necessary.
Mayor Peter Mercurio said the board had reviewed the tree board’s draft and had sent it to the village attorney for formal review. Village staff asked the tree board to be available for follow‑up questions and to provide any mapping or lists the village could forward to the contractor.
The presentation closed with the board thanking the tree board for the work and asking staff to continue coordination and legal review.
