02-19-08-WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION - February 19, 2008 9 Planner 1 Beekman presented a draft tree preservation ordinance and revised landscaping ordinance, and stated that the City has few regulations in place dealing with tree loss and tree replacement. She explained staff would like to compile the landscaping ordinance into one section of the code that would be more user friendly. She added that the drafts have gone to the Planning Commission for initial review as well as internally to members of staff that would be impacted, including public works staff, the city foresters, and the city attorney. She stated that since this is part of the zoning code, a recommendation will be made by the Planning Commission with a public hearing held. She noted the revised code will impact any future projects; any past properties that may have cut trees will not be impacted. She stated the City Council needs to consider how restrictive it wants to be but still get a good product out of a development. Planner I Beekman stated a question came up about those properties that do not currently mt;et the City's landscape requirements and whether those properties would be required to meet these new landscaping requirements. She noted that other cities have enacted similar regulations, which allow a three year timeline to bring the landscape requirements up for existing properties to code. She stated in order to cut down trees in your yard, regardless if you are grading or expanding, a permit would be required if the City wanted to regulate all tree removal. Staff does not recommend this: however, the City would require mitigation if the threshold of 10% or more is reached. Discussion ensued regarding what will trigger the tree preservation requirements, resulting mitigation, and the definition of a significant tree. Commissioner Modesette expressed concern about the City's ability to enforce the ordinance. Mayor Harpstead asked about heritage trees and whether a neighborhood could petition to have a tree designated a heritage tree. Discussion ensued regarding heritage trees and responsibility for maintaining trees that might be designated a heritage tree. Planner I Beekman explained that mitigation of trees should ideally be done on a tree for tree basis and stated the proposed ordinance states that significant trees be replaced by planting that number of caliper inches of trees determined at a rate of 1:2 or one inch replaced for every two inches lost. In addition, planting practices have to meet national nursery stock standards. Planner I Beekman stated another issue to be addressed is whether owners should be able to give the City cash in lieu, and indicated that St. Paul currently does this. For example, if you have a piece of property and you have to replace 100 caliper inches of trees but a landscape architect says you only have room for 50 caliper inches, the City can then (a) find alternative locations for those trees, or (b) set up an account where the cost of those trees plus 10% for installation would go into an account for tree preservation, buckthorn removal, etc. Chair Larson stated he was concerned the proposed ordinance may create a burden to a business owner wanting to expand its business because the tree preservation requirements may prohibit the business from completing its expansion.