Tree Preservation Ordinance Review

Per the direction of the Board at the January meeting, Staff has compiled tree preservation ordinances from various communities around the metro area.  Staff looked at similar growing communities (Andover, Blaine, Elk River and Lakeville) as well as a fairly built-out community (Plymouth) and have attached their ordinances/policies for the Board to review.

Following is a brief summary of each community's standards:

Andover

• Significant tree is considered to be four (4) inches or greater in size.
• Requires two (2) replacement trees for every one (1) significant tree removed.
• Replacement trees must be at least 1.75 inches for deciduous and six (6) feet for coniferous trees.

Blaine:

• Significant tree is considered to be six (6) inches or greater in size.
• All significant trees removed as part of development must be replaced or payment to reforestation fund must be made.
  • Non-residential lots, replacement trees capped to eight (8) trees per acre.
  • Residential lots: replacement trees capped to eight (8) trees per acre on parcels over one (1) acre in size and on lots less than one (1) acre, replacement is at a 1:1 ratio, capped at seven (7) trees per lot.
• Replacement trees must be at least 2.5 inches for deciduous trees and six (6) feet for coniferous trees.
• Limits removal of trees on lots without construction to no more than two (2) significant trees per year without an approved forest management plan.

Elk River

• Requires tree preservation plan prior to removing trees or commencing construction.
• For each tree greater than four (4) inches but less than eight (8) inches that is preserved, credit for one (1) required new tree is giving.  For each tree eight (8) inches or greater that is preserved, credit for two (2) required new trees is giving.

Lakeville

• Significant tree is considered to be six (6) inches or greater in size.
• Requires tree preservation plan for each development and a tree preservation plan for each lot that has at least one (1) significant tree on it.
• Requires written status by licensed forester or landscape architect of all designated saved trees after construction is complete (as well as any designated removed trees that were saved).
• Requires a $1,500.00 surety for each lot with at least one (1) significant tree to be saved during mass grading (from developer).
• Requires a $1,000.00 surety from builder for tree protection measures.
• Requires replacement of every significant tree designated as 'save' trees that were ultimately destroyed or damaged with two (2) replacement trees.
• Replacement trees must be at least 2.5 inches for deciduous trees and eight (8) feet in height for coniferous trees.

Plymouth

• Significant tree is considered eight (8) inches for deciduous and four (4) inches for coniferous trees.
• On residential development, can disturb/remove up to fifty percent (50%) of total DBH on site.
• On commercial development, can disturb/remove up to seventy-five percent (75%) of total DBH on site.
• Disturbance/removals beyond those thresholds require replacement of 1.25 inches for every 1 inch removed/disturbed or pay $125.00 restitution.
• Disturbance/removals for water treatment ponds, public trails/sidewalks, and right-of-way for arterial and major collector roads through developments are excluded from replacement calculations.
• Replacement trees are credited toward required landscaping for project.

As is evidenced from these summaries, tree preservation standards are fairly common for metro area communities.  Standards vary from fairly generic to complex.  Ramsey's standards appear to fall somewhere in between. 

Section 117-327 (h) (11) of City Code pertains to 'tree preservation tree density standard calculation' and reads as follows:

a.  All multifamily residential developments shall retain 40 percent of the inches of tree DBH existing on the site after   subdivision.

b.  If in excess of 60 percent of desirable trees are removed from the plat due to construction, they shall be replaced, on a one-to-one basis, in addition to the required plantings specified within the applicable zoning district.

This has always been interpreted as pertaining only to multifamily developments.  However, b. does not specifically reference any particular zoning district.  Thus, it could be interpreted as being applicable in every zoning district.  Staff would like feedback from the Board regarding their interpretation of this section of City Code (and it's original intent) as to whether its applicable 'across the board' or only to multifamily developments.

If the Board believes that the intent was to be applied to all zoning districts, than there is a replacement standard already in City Code. If that is the case, the Board may wish to consider several items:

• Should the term 'desirable trees' be replaced with 'significant trees' since 'desirable trees' is not defined?
• Should there be considerations given to exclude trees removed for certain aspects of a project (e.g. for water treatment ponds, trails/sidewalks, main roads, etc)?
• Should the required replacement trees be in addition to required landscaping (as is stated currently) or count toward required landscaping?

If the Board believes that the intent was to be applied only to multifamily developments, the Board may wish to consider the following:

• Should this replacement standard be expanded to apply to all districts?
• Whether it expanded or not, should this section be amended to clarify exactly where it is applicable?
• One paragraph refers to retaining a percentage of total DBH inches while the other references retaining a percentage of total trees, should these both reference the same thing (i.e. either total DBH inches or trees)?
   

Based on discussion.