Preservation board shelves Scarborough historian's plan to protect Vimy oaks

Toronto's preservation board voted unanimously Thursday not to pursue an official designation of Scarborough's Vimy oaks as a historic site.

Instead, the board agreed to a less formal agreement to protect the trees,brokered byCoun. Jim Karygiannis.

"You can't cut them down,"Karygiannissaid. "These trees are large trees and if anybody wants to cut them down it has to come to [Scarborough]community council. And I'll be damned if I'm going to support cutting down those trees at community council."

The oaksgrewfrom acorns brought back to his Scarborough farm by a First World Warveteran whofought at Vimy Ridgein France in 1917. They're now located on property owned by the Scarborough Chinese Baptist Church at 3223 Kennedy Rd, north of McNicholl Avenue.

• New Vimy battle being waged over Scarborough oak trees

Local historian Richard Schofieldhad asked the board to fast track the designation so a plaque could be in place in time for next year's centennial celebration of the battle, won by Canadian soldiers.

But the churchopposed the designation because of concerns it could hinder their expansion plans.

Informal agreement will protect trees

At Thursday's meeting, the board voted toshelve a motion to speed up the designation processafterKarygiannissaidhe had helped broker an informal agreement with the churchthat will ensure the grove of about a dozentrees is protected.

"One of the things we're going to do is have some sort of a commemoration as well as designate this an area where people can go to celebrate the hundred years, and we're trying to come up with some money to see what we can do with the place," the councillorsaid after the meeting.

Karygiannis agreed that the trees will now have no official protection under the Ontario Heritage Act, but he said he would stake his reputation on their safety.

Richard Leung, a deacon at the church,later reiterated that the trees wil not be harmed during his church's planned expansion.

"The trees will remain. They are under good protection," he said. "The church has no intention of harming the trees."

Schofielddid not speak at Thursday's meeting but said later he was disappointed withthe board's decision.

Although he is confident the trees will be protected for now, "who knows 50 years from now who'll own the property and whether the bylaws [protecting trees]will have changed," he said.