11-20-07 PTRC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

destroying these trees and how to handle mitigation if the site is undevelopable without their removal. Replacement Tree replacement is a simple concept,but to be equitable it can become a very complex procedure. For example, an ordinance may require that the loss of a 30-inch diameter tree must be replaced with the planting of fifteen two-inch diameter trees.However, it can be difficult or impossible to find enough suitable planting Iocations for the replacement trees. In addition, this particular approach can fail to mitigate the environmental effect of mature tree loss. Other ordinances require that percentages of specific sizes and species of trees must be replaced based on what was there before the development occurred. The City Council and Planning Commission have expressed concerns over the policy of one to one tree replacement ratios. In other words, a mature tree is lost and replaced with one small tree. Instead,there has been an expression of interest in enacting an ordinance that requires one to one, or two to one,replacement of caliper inches lost rather than tree for tree, and even increasing the required mitigation ratio as the size of the lost trees increases. Each approach has its advantages and disadvantages,none is perfect. When replacement of trees is included in an ordinance, the questions,"why,how much, and where?" need to be primary considerations. Incentives Developing an ordinance which creates incentives can be a positive way to achieve compliance. Many incentives exist to encourage tree preservation. The priorities set by the City Council will dictate how much, or even if, incentives will be written into the code to encourage the type of development that is most desirable. If the goal is to create a policy of preservation,then the intent of a tree preservation ordinance should be to provide incentives for unique and creative project designs that complement the woodlands and replace excessive tree loss. Incentives discussed at the October 22 Joint Work Session included: • Small setback reductions for trees saved • Preserved trees credited to the landscaping that would typically be required for the project • A protected woodlot could be dedicated to the city in lieu of park dedication requirements • Parking requirements reduced for trees saved • Including a provision that allows the city to diverge from the code if favorable development came along. (Example: Page 6 of Mtka. Draft) • If the trees that are required to be planted do not all fit on site they can be dedicated to the City in the form of cash-in-lieu for tree preservation elsewhere in the community. City ofArden Hills PTRC Meeting for November 20, 2007 IlAhdocsIWI-AAHdatalPlanninglPlanning Cases120071OX--OXX Tree Preservation Ordinanee1112007-PTRC Report-Tree Preserration.doe Page 5 of 6