Review Proposed Tree Preservation and Landscaping Ordinance Updates

The Planning Division is currently working on an overhaul of the Zoning Code, which includes topics such as Tree Preservation and Landscaping.  Attached to this case are the tree preservation standards of various communities that are generally similar in nature to Ramsey (developing community, rural and urban areas, etc.) for comparison purposes.  Also attached to this case are the drafts proposed by Staff. 

Landscaping
A general synopsis of proposed revisions to the landscaping standards is below.

• Eliminate much of the language related to the Ramsey Tree Book.
• Modify planting sizes so that there is consistency across all zoning districts.  This represents an increase in planting size in residential districts, and a reduction in planting size (for deciduous overstory trees) in commercial/industrial districts).
  • Deciduous overstory tree: 2 inch caliper
  • Deciduous understory tree: 1.5 inch caliper
  • Coniferous tree: 6 feet in height
  • Multi-stem deciduous tree: 6 feet in height
  • Shrubs: 24 inches in height or width, dependent upon growth characteristics
• Specify that internal landscaping is required in the COR district, based on the canopy cover formula.  But, built in flexibility in case space is too limiting to meet the minimum planting requirements.
• Simplified the bufferyard table by eliminating the requirement to buffer between commercial and industrial uses (bufferyards will only be required when commercial or industrial development occurs adjacent to existing residential development) and specifying a singular width of the bufferyard regardless of residential zoning designation.

Tree Preservation

• Expanded the purpose and intent sections.
• Eliminate (or relocate to other sections of City Code) language not specific to tree preservation.
• Added specific tree preservation plan content requirements.
• Simplified the tree protection measures.
• Section 117-328 (Hazardous and/or Nuisance Trees) has been removed from the tree preservation standards.  Staff intends to create a new chapter in City Code to address shade tree disease management, but did not have time to do so in this case.  Most of the language would remain unchanged or very similar, but Staff does plan to incorporate more preventative measures, which are much more cost effective than control measures.

Staff would like specific feedback from the Environmental Policy Board (EPB) on the current definition of significant tree (all oaks and evergreens that are four [4] inches or greater in diameter at breast height [DBH] and all other trees that are eight [8] inches or greater in DBH).  In reviewing other communities' standards, what is considered a significant tree varies somewhat, as indicated below:

• Andover: all trees with a DBH of four (4) inches or greater.
• Champlin and Elk River: all trees with a DBH of six (6) inches or greater.
• Lino Lakes: deciduous trees with a DBH of six (6) inches or greater and evergreens that are twelve (12) feet in height or taller.
• Rogers: deciduous trees with a DBH of six (6) inches or greater and evergreens that are six (6) feet in height or taller.
• Dayton: deciduous hardwood tree (defined as ironwood, catalpa, oak, maple (hard), walnut, ash, hickory, birch, black cherry, hackberry, locus, and basswood) with a DBH of six (6) inches or greater, a common tree (presumably any other type of deciduous tree) with a DBH of twelve (12) inches or greater, and evergreens that are twelve (12) feet in height or greater (specifies that every 3 feet of height is the equivalent to 1 inch of DBH).
• Plymouth: deciduous trees with a DBH of eight (8) inches or greater and evergreens with a DBH of four (4) inches or greater.

Ramsey's definition seems to be somewhere in the middle.  Staff is looking for consensus about whether the EPB is comfortable with the current definition of significant tree and whether there's any desire to place greater emphasis on certain genera or species' (this is something that we do already based on our definition of significant tree).  By default, this would mean there is less emphasis on other species (the 'soft' hardwoods, such as cottonwood, box elder, willows, silver maple, etc.).

Staff would also encourage feedback on any other topic or content within either of the two attached drafts.

This case is being handled as part of Staff's regular duties.

The Board's action will be based on discussion.  But, Staff is seeking feedback and direction on the proposed revisions.  Planning Division Staff are planning for a June Public Hearing for the rewrite of Chapter 117 and the intention would be to have the tree preservation and landscaping revisions completed so they can be included in that case.