Laserfiche WebLink
Environmental Policy Board (EPB) 5. 2. <br />Meeting Date: 12/10/2012 <br />By: Chris Anderson, Community <br />Development <br />Title: <br />Tree Preservation Ordinance Review <br />Information <br />Background: <br />An action item of the current Work Plan is to consider/develop tree replacement standards for inclusion in the Tree <br />Preservation Ordinance The ordinance, as presently written, essentially requires a tree inventory to be completed <br />by an ISA Certified Arborist or a Society of American Foresters Certified Forester for all 'significant' trees with no <br />specific replacement requirements. <br />Observations: <br />City Code defines significant trees: (1) All oaks with a DBH of four (4) inches or more; (2) All evergreens with a <br />DBH of four (4) inches or more; and (3) All other trees with a DBH of eight (8) inches or more. When a <br />development proposal is contemplated, the submittal must include a tree inventory. Typically, the inventory simply <br />locates the existing trees and identifies those that will be removed and those that will remain after the initial rough <br />grading and infrastructure improvements. Often times, additional tree removal is also necessary as individual lots <br />are developed with homes. <br />As previously mentioned, there are no specified replacement requirements for single family home developments. <br />The ordinance does state that the City may require clustering of homes or alternate locations of homes to avoid <br />removal of significant trees, although practically applying this during the plat review/approval process is <br />difficult. All lots are required to be landscaped with a minimum of two (2) trees (minimum planting size of one [1] <br />inch DBH for deciduous trees and five [5] feet in height for evergreen trees). <br />In multi -family developments, the ordinance does require a project to retain forty percent (40%) of the inches of <br />tree DBH existing on the site after development. There is a replacement requirement in this scenario that requires a <br />one to one replacement of desirable trees if in excess of sixty percent (60%) of the inches of tree DBH are <br />removed. This is in addition to the required landscaping, which is determined by a canopy cover <br />formula (determine ratio of impervious area to entire site area, multiply the impervious area/site area ratio by the <br />square footage of the pervious area to determine the required canopy cover square footage). <br />Recommendation: <br />Staff is not seeking any immediate action this topic. Rather, Staff wanted the Board to have an opportunity to <br />familiarize itself with the current regulations, which may lead to further discussion on the matter. A significant <br />question that should be contemplated is whether the Board believes, in general, that the landscaping requirements <br />are sufficient in lieu of any replacement standards or if further review and research is warranted related to <br />replacement standards that would be in addition to the landscaping requirements. This is also a good time to review <br />at least one complication that arises occasionally between tree preservation and requiring topsoil. <br />EPB Action: <br />Based on discussion. <br />Tree Preservation Ordinance <br />Attachments <br />