Toronto Grass and Weeds bylaw proposed amendments

[Greg Knittl]

Hi All

In case you are not on the Toronto Planning and Housing Committee
notification list. Here is the link to the MLS Bylaw 489 submission in
the subject line.
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2021.PH23.11

I will have more comments once I have time to cut and paste the known
changes into the existing bylaw. At first glance it has major issues to
the point where I think it may be worse than the already bad existing
bylaw.

If you have any private land in Toronto with vegetation you probably
want to look at this draft.

thanks
Greg

[Gerda R Wekerle]

I read the proposed changes. Am I correct that this draft retains the natural garden exemption. Does this mean that I have to obtain an  exemption to grow a natural garden? Or does it mean that if I have a natural garden I'm exempt and allowed to grow the listed non-approved plants? 

---

From: toronto-ur...@googlegroups.com <toronto-ur...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Greg Knittl <gkn...@sympatico.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2021 12:53 PM
To: Toronto Urban Growers <Toronto-ur...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [Toronto Urban Growers] Toronto Grass and Weeds bylaw proposed amendments

 

--
You received this message because you subscribed to the "Toronto Urban Growers" Google group.

To reply or post to this group, send email to toronto-ur...@googlegroups.com

Questions?
You can reach us at in...@torontourbangrowers.org

Mailing address
c/o Greenest City
220 Cowan Avenue
Toronto, Ontario
M6K 2N6
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Toronto Urban Growers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to toronto-urban-gr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/toronto-urban-growers/b68cf7f1-b927-a87a-9512-ff884fbcbb60%40sympatico.ca.

[Rhonda Teitel-Payne]

Hi Gerda,

My understanding is the bylaw is doing away with the exemption process. Everyone is allowed to have a "natural" or any other kind of garden, as long as the plants don't obstruct sightlines or paths, and as long as the garden does not include the plants on the banned list (plants that cause health or safety concerns or ecological harm). Height restrictions will only apply to turf grass. 

The problem is that enforcement is still not very clear, and there is still the possibility that cranky neighbours can report you and trigger an investigation even if your garden isn't contravening the bylaw. 

Best,

Rhonda

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/toronto-urban-growers/YTBPR01MB3935EC3CB4CF95EC241B8FFCAC519%40YTBPR01MB3935.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

--

Rhonda Teitel-Payne (uses she/her pronouns)
Co-coordinator
Toronto Urban Growers
www.torontourbangrowers.org
@TOurbangrowers

TUG would like to acknowledge that the land on which we work is the historical territory of the Wendat, Anishinaabe, Haudenosaunee, Senecas and, most recently, the Mississaugas of the Credit River nations.  The territory is covered by the Dish With One Spoon Covenant, an agreement between the Anishinaabe, Haudenosaunee and allied nations to peaceably share and care for the resources around the Great Lakes. All of us who live and work in Tkaronto (Toronto) are treaty people, so we invite everyone to think about our responsibilities to this land and water, and to the peoples who have cared for this place for thousands of years.

[Lorraine Johnson]

Hi Gerda and TUG,

The staff report released today recommends dispensing with the Natural Garden Exemption. I think this is a good thing. It means that people growing "natural gardens" (whatever that means!) won't be singled out as requiring a special exemption because they're not growing a lawn or a conventional garden.

Whatever sort of landscape you have, the staff report released today lists 12 (14 depending on how you count them) prohibited plants that you will be ordered to remove if someone complains. It doesn't matter whether it's a food garden or a "natural garden" or a traditional ornamental garden...if someone complains and you have any of those 12 plants, you will be in violation, ordered to remove them or face a fine.

There's lots more to say about the staff report and its recommendations (some of which are very problematic), which will be going to the Planning and Housing Committee on May 20th. A number of folks who have been involved with this issue are going over the report and will offer some thoughts asap.

thanks,

Lorraine

Lorraine Johnson

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/toronto-urban-growers/YTBPR01MB3935EC3CB4CF95EC241B8FFCAC519%40YTBPR01MB3935.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Greg Knittl]

Hi Gerda,

This isn't exactly your question, but for those that have existing
Natural Garden Exemptions, my impression is that the new bylaw is not
backward compatible. That is, those that currently have exemptions may
find themselves in contravention of the draft bylaw if it were to come
into effect on 2022-01-01.

Examples:
- Toronto has been hit and miss on the exact weeds it enforces. Burdock
has not been a $100,000 concern for them (It's not explicitly listed in
my current exemption).
- Toronto has been hit and miss on enforcing "line of sight"
restrictions, (I have no such restriction in my current exemption) that
you may now find yourself contravening
- there has been no height restriction on grass under the exemption. A
clump of over 20cm tall grass that the City deems to be mowable would
now become a contravention

I read the draft bylaw to cut the other way too. It's no longer
sufficient to mow your lawn. You have to be able to recognize and
effectively eradicate the listed weeds. Ragweed and DSV can happily
exist among 20cm turf grass or even shorter. In my experience most of my
neighbours can't identify Ragweed or DSV, let alone any of the other
prohibited plants. There doesn't seem to be any education plan as part
of the bylaw rollout. Heaven help anybody that has Japanese Knotweed.
While, I understand there are good reasons to be very concerned about
Japanese knotweed, these property owners are going to find themselves
suddenly more or less forced to dig up their property to some
considerable depth and seive out the roots etc. If it's not done
properly - for example due to MLS imposing some arbitrary tight
compliance deadline, the property owners will just dump the knotweed
infested soil and spread it even further.

All private property will now be subject to vague line of sight
requirements.

This is a very poorly thought out draft with lots of unintended
consequences. It should not go forward to council without a lot more
review. Unless councillors want to deal with a lot of very upset
constituents as they encounter the bylaw over the coming years...

thanks,
Greg