HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-20-07 PTRC PARKS, TRAILS, & RECREATION COMMITTEE
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20TH
�.,,�� ,,., TIN
ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
1245 WEST HIGHWAY 96
AGENDA
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of October 23, 2007 Meeting Minutes
4. Minnesota Master Naturalist Program (DNR) —Kris O'Brien will be present to talk to
us about the program and the project they have taken on.
5. Buckthorn Criteria Discussion
6. Tree Preservation Ordinance Discussion — Meagan Beekman; Planner and James
Lehnhoff; City Planner will be present to discuss.
1
7. City Comprehensive Update—James Lehnhoff
8, City Council Update—Fran Holmes
9. Parks, Trails, and Recreation Update—Michelle Olson
10. Trail Map Discussion —Michelle Olson
A. Costs/Funding Sources
B. Current trail conditions
C. Small Group Map Activity
11. Next Meeting: Tuesday, December 18th - 6:30 p.m.
12. Adjourn
Attachments:
10123107 Minutes
Tree Preservation Information
Comp Plan Information
Strategies for Parks, Trails,and Community Building
Trail Segment Map—will have color copies at meeting
Arden Hills Pathway Map—will have larger map at meeting
Ramsey County Parks&Rec. Commission Meeting Agenda—11-13-07
Ramsey County Parks&Rec. Commission Minutes—9-11-07
A quorum of the City Council may be present at this meeting.
\\metro-inet.us\ArdenHills\Admin\Committees\Parks Trails and Recreation Committee\Agenda\2007\11-20-07
Agenda.doc
EN HILLS
Draft:
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
PARKS,TRAILS,AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING
TUESDAY,OCTOBER 23,2007;6:30 P.M.
ARDEN FALLS CITY HALL
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Henry called the October 23,2007 meeting of the Parks,Trails and Recreation Committee to order at 6:30
p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Committee Chair Bill Henry; Committee Members Roger Williams, John Peck, Jim
Crassweller,Lanny Baumann, Steve Zilmer, and Rich Straumann.
OTHERS PRESENT:David McClung,Council Liaison;Michelle Olson,Parks and Recreation Manager; Stan
Harpstead,Mayor; Greg Hoag; Public Works Director, Stacie Kvilvang, Ehlers &Associates
Tim Ronchak,Kay Reyerson and Mary Bremer from Arden Hills Association #3 were present until 8:00 p.m.
MEMBERS NOT PRESENT: Joani Werner
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
} MOTION: Committee Chair Henry motioned, seconded by Committee Member Williams to approve the
agenda as presented. The motion carried unanimously.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—September 18,2007
MOTION: Committee Member Williams motioned for approval of the minutes of the September 18
meeting. A correction was noted to state Joam Werner was at the meeting. Committee Member
Crassweller seconded. The motion carried.
4. REFERENDUMIBONDING DISCUSSION—Ehler's
Stacie gave an overview of basics on referendums and ways to finance. She indicated referendums placed out to
voters usually were for a term of 10 to 20 years and for General Obligation Equipment Certificates the term was
limited to 10 years.
Stacie suggested that when the City is looking to do any kind of park improvements it's best to have a plan in
place and know what they want to finance so that Ehlers can look at the various options that are available and
find the best tool to finance those improvements. Stacie indicated the City should have an overall plan for
everything they want to do for the next 20 years. She indicated Ehlers would look at the Comprehensive
Improvement Plan and then they would determine the best way to finance those improvements.
Stacie pointed out some legal parameters,the statutory guidance for referenda in Chapter 475 and Chapter 205,
and the list of things that the City will need to go through in order to do an election. One option is to have it at a
normal regular election in November or to call for a Special Election which will have some restrictions. She
stated the ballot language is very specific and must include the amount of the bond, the amount of debt the city
is going to issue to accomplish what they want to do,the term and rate of financing. It's looking at what the tax
impact will be to the homeowners and making the statement that by voting "yes" they are voting to increase
taxes.
PARKS,TRAILS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING
October 23, 2007 Page 2
Stacie indicated that the tax supported debt is limited to 2 percent of the city's taxable market value so for Arden
Hills the 2 percent limit is $22 million. She indicated most general obligation debt for street improvements is
paid on tax capacity and anything that is voter approved debt is paid on market value.
Stacie also indicated the restrictions are that the funds need to be used for what was specified and the City
cannot use any of those funds to advocate for passage of the referendum. She stated the City can do
communications for providing factual information to the voters and provided the Council with sample
communications of referendums that were done by other communities. She suggested that for a successful
referendum the City needs to define what the funding is for and what the problem is, also to let the taxpayers
know what options the City has looked at, and the process the City went through to arrive at their decision. She
indicated the key thing is to know what the City wants to finance and to get some fairly accurate estimates on
what the cost will be.
Chair Henry questioned if a referendum failed in the school would it also fail in the city. Stacie indicated "no",
that it could succeed in the City if it failed in the school.
In closing,Stacie indicated it is helpful to the Council when they're making budgetary decisions to lay the CIP
out in a 10-20 year timeframe.
5. SUEEHY TENNIS COURT DISCUSSION
Arden Hills No. 3 Association Input and Discussion: Arden Hills Association No. 3 residents Tim Ronchak,
Kay Reyerson and Mary Bremer attended the meeting to represent their position and to hear more information
regarding the Sheehy Tennis Court. The Association expressed their.desire to continue leasing the Tennis Court
as they had done in the past.
Parks and Recreation Manager Olson gave a history of the Tennis Court and indicated the reason this was
brought to Council with different options, which were discussed in a prior meeting, is because there was some
question as to why this was private and not public. She indicated with the option to lease there are concerns
regarding maintenance of the property.
The Association residents indicated they leased the tennis court in 1996 and in 1999 they put$5,000 into repairs
and they realize it is again in need of maintenance and indicated they are ready to repair. They also indicated
that when the Sheehys gave it to the City as a gift it was intended for neighborhood use and not for a public
park. They indicated the intent of the neighbors and the Association is to keep this in the neighborhood and that
this would also take the burden off the City for cost of repairs. They understand that private use of public land
is an issue, but they would like the Committee to reconsider and recommend to the City Council that the lease
for exclusive use of the tennis court be extended.
Committee Member Crassweller motioned to change the recommendation to Council by stating the City enter
into negotiations with the Association to lease the property but the Association be required to provide for
maintenance,insurance,signage and other issues,
Committee Member Peck seconded the motion.
Ms. Olson clarified the letter from the attorney stating the finding is that the City cannot just convey the land
since it was donated to the City, but they could sell it. She indicated it would have to go through the Planning
Commission as well so it is an involved process.
Mr. Ronchak indicated if that was an option that wanted to be explored by the City that in the interim they have
a lease arrangement.
PARKS,TRAILS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING
October 23,2007 Pam
Ms.Olson indicated the City could do that,and until fully resolved they would keep leasing.
Committee Member Williams asked if the association would be interested in purchasing.
Ms.Reyerson indicated they would be interested in owning but that would depend on price.
Committee Member Williams requested it be noted that Council asked the question on if the Association was
interested in purchasing,but that it did not necessarily indicate that the City would sell.
Public Works Director Hoag indicated he does have concerns about privately run operations on a public piece of
property.
Committee Williams also felt because of other needs of the City it was not in the City's best interest to spend
money on the tennis court and the City could accommodate the neighborhood and not have the burden of the
expense.
Chair Henry indicated the motion is to recommend to Council to extend the lease and include a commitment on
the part of the neighborhood for repairs,signage,insurance,and other factors.
The motion carried 6-1.
Ms. Olson indicated once Council made a decision she will work with the Association.
Council Liaison McClung asked Ms. Olson to be prepared to answer at the next Council Meeting out of all the
city parks,which ones have on-street parking and which have.off-street parking.
6. CITY COUNCIL UPDATE—David McClunLr
Council Liaison McClung provided the following updates:
• He thanked those who attended the second open house for the Comprehensive Plan. He indicated for those
hat were not able to attend that there was a link on the city website to look at the materials and
re mmended they look at that and provide input on the questions that were asked to City Planner Lenhoff.
• ouncil authorized a housing market study to be conducted, independently of the developer, to provide
input-into-some-of the decisions being worked on-in terms ofdensity for the TCAAP development. --The
firm selected is Maxfield. The study looks at what the potential is on the land and the housing market and
what housing and companies there currently are in Arden Hills.
• Development Cases:
o the Northwestern College Development Proposal Master Plan is coming to Council on Monday
evening;
o County Road E and Lexington is on the Planning Commission for November
• They are working on the budget and the truth in taxation meeting is set for the first week in December and
they have approved the preliminary levee at 4.9 percent. He indicated they can stay at 4.9 percent but
cannot raise it.
• Karen Barton has left to go to the Metropolitan Council and they are starting the interview process for her
replacement.
• Noah Simon, who was extended the Assistant City Administrator position, will be starting on Monday,
October 291h'and will be a great addition to the staff.
PARKS,TRAILS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING
October 23 2007 Page 4
Committee Member Williams had concern about the storm water for the Northwestern College expansion
running into Lake Johanna and asked Councilmember McClung to check on where the drainage would go. He
also had concern about a Walgreen's opening in Arden Plaza and does not feel there should be another drugstore
in the vicinity of three existing drugstores.
Council Liaison McClung indicated they are reviewing the B2 zone and understands the concern regarding the
drugstore,but that the City cannot regulate what type of tenant goes in.
Mayor Harpstead agreed the City can look at traffic but not dictate what tenant goes in there.
7. PARKS,TRAILS AND RECREATION UPDATE—Michelle Olson
Ms.Olson provided the following updates:
• She is working on the Safe Routes to School Grant and talked to Jim Tolaas from Ramsey County and they
are very much in support of the trail and are willing to work with the city. She indicated it is not much
different from the last application that was put in, the only thing is the engineering is not covered 100
percent; about 1/3 of the engineering is eligible for reimbursement so the City will have to pick up some of
that cost. On a good note that leaves $175,000 for improvement of trails.
• Engineering looked at the Cummings Park Tennis Court and that project is going to cost around $65,000 to
get the court back to where it needs to be. Because of the timing it will have to be postponed until the
spring. It will be going to Council this coming meeting. She indicated if it's a reconstruct it comes out of
the park fund and if it is a resurface it does not. The staff recommendation will be to bid the project this
spring.
• The liaison for the New Brighton Parks and Recreation Trail Committee called and wanted to know where
our committee stood on the old railroad bridge that goes across 35W because they see that as a temporary
fix to having no access across 35W. She indicated they should have discussions with MnDOT regarding
replacing the bridge since it would not be cost-effective to spend a lot of money on refurbishment if
MnDOT does not plan on keeping the bridge.
Public Works Director Hoag indicated the bridge is far enough north that it does not affect the 694 project.
Council Liaison McClung indicated that MnDOT stated the bridge will not be there when they reconstruct.
Ms. Olson stated she informed New Brighton that for Arden Hills to get involved we would need reassurance
from MnDOT that Arden Hills is wrong about the bridge not being.
Mayor Harpstead indicated the City has other things they should be spending their efforts on that are much more
important, but also stated the City would consider working with them on the County Road E bridge, sound
abatement,the Briarknoll neighborhood,or Lake Valentine Road,if they consider that.
• Ms. Olson stated she has researched the problem with the Round Lake Trail and it has to do with not having
a signed easement from Distribution Alternatives. She indicated they stated they would sell an easement for
around$50,000 and that is where talks stalled.
• Another item regarding the Safe Routes to School depends on whether Ramsey County moves the paving of
the underpass up to County Road E2 to 2008. Ms. Olson indicated if this occurs she would like to add to the
DNR grant to pave from Perry to the trailhead,in a cost-sharing effort.
• Ms. Olson also reminded everyone that the Buckthorn removal is this Saturday, October 27, at Hazelnut
from 8:45 a.m.to 1:00 p.m.
PARKS,TRAILS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING
October 23,2007 Page 5
8. TRAIL PRIORITY DISCUSSION—Michelle Olson
Ms. Olson indicated that with the referendum she would like them to identify the project and the other areas that
have funding possibilities,and feels they should do this in segments and set priorities.
Mr.Hoag indicated this will help in the CIP as well and felt some sort of pecking order should be in place.
Committee Member Crassweller feels the north/south and east/west connections are the two most critical pieces.
Mayor Harpstead indicated that on the illustration of the proposed trails it would be good to include the dollar
amount and also indicate if it could be a Safe Routes to School Grant Application or a possible referendum.
9. COMMITTEE TERM LIMIT APPOINTMENTS
Ms. Olson indicated the need to set term limits and the process of assigning those terms.
Mayor Harpstead clarified that members could be on three consecutive 3-year terms and any separation starts a
new term, so,therefore, Committee Member Werner would be on the first part of a new sequence.
Chair Henry informed them they need one third of the members to be on a 3-year term, a third to be on a 2-year
term and a third to be on a 1-year term.
The following are the terms that were assigned:
John Peck—3
Joani Werner—3
Rich Straumann—3
Lanny Baumann—2
Steve Zilmer—2
Roger Williams—2
Bill Henry-I
Jim Crassweller- I
10. ACTIVE LIVING RAMSEY COUNTY
Ms. Olson indicated the Active Living is scheduled for Thursday, November 8, and will start at Flaherty's and
the walk will continue down County Road E. There will also be a presentation and workshop where there will
be questions individuals can comment on. Ms. Olson indicated people invited are the Planning Commission,
PTRC,EDC,the City Council,all of the Parks and Public Works.
Mayor Harpstead mentioned they may want to have a handout for ideas.
Members also discussed where the walk should take place and what the presentation should include.
11. NEXT MEETING—NOVEMBER 20,2007
The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday,November 20,2007.
12. ADJOURN
MOTION: Chair Henry moved and the motion seconded. The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
\\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\Admin\Committees\Parks Trails and Recreation Committee\Minutes\2007\10-23-2007 doe
i
.■
. 5
5.��
1�
priorities and goals of the city should be regarding tree preservation. At this meeting Council
Members and Commissioners provided comments and direction to staff on this issue.
Staff is now in the process of gathering additional information and beginning to draft optional
code language for further review. Staff is consulting with the Parks, Trails, and Recreation
Committee in order to provide an update on the process and to gather additional input. Due to
the complexity of preparing tree preservation regulations, this process will likely be ongoing and
will require additional meetings.
Tree Preservation
The potential impact of a tree preservation ordinance is great. It can be written to regulate only
the most extreme and largest redevelopments,but it also has the potential to shape every
redevelopment within the city. The benefits of a well written tree preservation ordinance can
also be great. It has the potential to preserve open space,protect woodland areas, encourage
responsible land redevelopment, and protect the beauty of the natural landscape of a community.
However, a poorly written or misguided tree preservation ordinance can be cumbersome,
difficult to enforce, and unintentionally overwhelming for even small projects. If not crafted to
meet the goals of the City, the tree preservation could increase the complexity of many projects
without producing a clear and beneficial outcome. The ordinance can also add cost to projects
for the City review and for property owners.
The following discussion addresses both the economic and physical constraints of construction
on wooded lots as well as the benefits of established trees in our community.
Goals
Determining the goals and scope is an important part of developing this ordinance. It will flavor
the outcome of the regulations. For example, if the goal is tree preservation over tree
replacement, then an outcome might be a regulation that requires new development to impact as
few trees as possible during planning and construction. However, this regulation can affect the
location, size, scope, and economics of a project. The city might put in place incentives to
encourage tree preservation and help with the cost of development, such as height bonuses and
setback reductions for significant trees saved,or reduced landscaping requirements in return for
preserved trees.
The goals discussed at the October 22, 2007 Joint Work Session are as follows:
• Preserve existing significant trees during development
• Reduce significant tree loss during development
• Preserve significant trees during construction
City of Arden Hills
PTRC Meeting for November 20, 2007
lWhdocs]lARWHdataWlanninglPlanning CasesC00710X--OXX Tree Presenation OrdinanceU12007-PTRC Report-Ti ee Presen ation.doc
Page 2 of 6
• Provide adequate mitigation when significant trees are lost
• To NOT have this ordinance be a tool to turn down development
Scope
The scope of the ordinance, and the policies that will accompany it,will set the tone and
determine how much regulation a local authority desires to assert over the protection and/or
preservation of its forest resource. In addition,it will outline which trees are considered worthy
of saving and which are not.
The scope of this tree preservation ordinance is likely to include commercial, industrial, large-
scale residential developments, and subdivisions submitted after the date of adoption of the
ordinance. The Council and Commission also discussed including all subdivisions,plats, new
construction, and expansions of building footprints for all properties. This would include single
family residential as well as larger projects.
Regardless of scope, a tree survey will be required for those projects which are determined to fall
under the purview of the new ordinance. This survey must identify the significant or high
priority trees on the site, their sizes,root zone, and species.
In addition to identifying which properties will be affected by the tree preservation ordinance,
this code must also indicate the level of regulation to be undertaken, the extent to which lost trees
must be mitigated or replaced, and penalties for not complying with the regulations. Tree
preservation ordinances can be developed to coincide with current zoning or property
subdivision regulations in the form of landscape requirements. They can be very simple or
complex in their scope. For example, a simple ordinance may stipulate that the cutting of any
tree larger than a certain diameter can be done only by permit and must be within a designated
construction area. A complex ordinance, on the other hand, may include formulas to determine
percentage of tree loss,prioritize different sizes and clumps of trees, and regulate the mitigation
of the trees lost during construction with a specified number and species of newly planted trees.
Most tree preservation ordinances identify which trees are to be preserved or their loss mitigated,
and which do not fall under the scope of the ordinance. Arden Hills' tree preservation ordinance
will be no exception. Trees greater than a certain caliper inch will be considered significant,
trees smaller than this will not be included. In addition, dead, dying, or hazardous trees would be
able to be cut with no penalty. Lastly, certain species would be excluded from the ordinance
entirely; these could include Buckthorn, Box Elder, Cottonwoods, Elm,Willow, etc.
City ofArden Hills
P7RC Meeting for November 20, 2007
I Mhdocs]WHL4HdatalPlanninglPlanning Cases1200710X-OXX Tree Preservation Ordinancel112007-PTRC Report-Tree Preservation.doc
Page 3 of 6
Requirements
Tree Survey
The first step in regulating tree preservation and replacement is determining what trees are
present and what percentage are being impacted by a proposed project. Communities that have a
tree preservation ordinance also require that submitted plans include a tree survey. This is
essential in determining if the project will fall under the purview of the tree preservation and
replacement regulations. For commercial, industrial, and large scale residential projects this
would require a certified survey of trees from a licensed forester or landscape architect. For
single-family and two-family redevelopment projects, this survey will likely be in the form of an
informal sketch on an aerial photograph or drawing. In general, a tree survey would include only
the significant trees on the lot and any large clumps of insignificant trees. It would also need to
include an identification of the type.and size of any significant trees on the lot. Some ordinances
also require that any trees that were damaged from unnatural means within the last two years be
included on the survey as if they were still present.
Preservation
The heart of the ordinance should be the preservation of trees. There are many variations to the
intent of tree preservation,but the bottom line becomes what you want to preserve. Based on
comments from the Commission and the City Council it is likely that the tree preservation
ordinance for Arden Hills will be based on a percentage of total trees lost on a site. In other
words, the ordinance will identify a percentage of trees lost versus the total trees remaining in the
form of a tolerance barometer. For example, if more than 10 percent of the trees are removed by
a development, then the preservation ordinance would be triggered, and a tree survey and
preservation/replacement plan would have to be submitted for approval. In this case, if fewer
than 10 percent of the trees are impacted than the project could continue without a
preservation/replacement plan.
Currently, the City of Minnetonka has placed a moratorium on all development within the City
while they reexamine several ordinances regarding their natural environment, including a tree
preservation ordinance. They have drafted a unique tree preservation ordinance that
distinguishes between significant trees and high priority trees(Attachment 6-1). Their ordinance
allows cutting of significant trees within a certain construction and grading zone without any
replacement,but cutting high priority trees any where on the site or significant trees outside of
the construction zone requires stringent replacement. They have also identified woodland
preservation areas and buffer/screening areas that limit tree destruction regardless of tree size.
Comments from the October 22 Joint Work Session indicated that there may be an interest in
distinguishing"high priority"trees and woodlands that would be protected to a greater degree
than other kinds of trees. These might include 100 year oak trees or woodland areas that offer
significant screening. This would require additional regulations that address penalties for
City of Arden Hills
P7RC Meeting for November 20,2007
IlAhdocs]WTAAHdatalPlanninglPlanning Cases12007I0X--OXX Tree Preservation Ordinance 11120117-PTRC Report-Tree Preservation.doe
Page 4 of 6
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
Attachments
6-1 Current Arden Hills landscape Plan Requirements
6-2 Draft Minnetonka Tree Preservation Ordinance
6-3 "A Guide To Developing A Community Tree Preservation Ordinance"
City of Arden Hills
PTRC Meeting for November 20, 2007
I Mhdocs]IAHlAHdatalPtanninglPtanning Cases1200710X-OXX Tree Preservation 0rdinance1112007-PTRC Report-Tree Presen,ation.doc
Page 6 of 6
Attachment 6 - 1
Current Arden Hills landscape Plan
Requirements
-4�fBLLS
November 20,2007, PTRC Meeting
LANDSCAPE PLAN
A. CITY REVIEW PROCEDURE
In the submission requirements for some development proposals(such as Site Plan Review,
Special Use Permit and Planned Unit Development) the following landscape requirements
shall be followed in addition to the submission requirements for "Landscape Plan" as
defined in each type of application.
B. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
1. The extent of landscape and selection of plant and landscape materials shall
be appropriate to the scale and nature of the building(s)site.
2. On complex sites, the natural existing vegetation, earth forms,wetlands and
steep slopes shall be carefully evaluated, protected and enhanced as
appropriate.
3. Landscape berms and buffers will be used to screen and visually separate:
business sites from residential uses; business sites from public streets; and
one site from another.
5. Minimum planted tree sizes shall be 3"caliper for overstory deciduous trees,
2 inch caliper for ornamental trees and 8 foot height for coniferous trees.
Upright shrubs shall be 18" high for small mature plant size, 24" high for
medium mature plant size, and 30" high for tall mature plant size.
Spreading shrubs shall have a minimum horizontal dimension of 24". The
required height of evergreens used for required screening may be increased
by the City.
5. Minimum landscaping requirements shall relate to the gross square footage
of all floors of a building and the building height and shall be expressed as
the minimum number of total inches required per building site.
a. Minimum total caliper inches=Gross Square Footage of all Floors ofBuildinQ
320
b. The rninimum total caliper inches shall contain the following minimurn percentages
of trees in various size ranges:
Building Height Percents a of Trees of various Caliper Inches
In Stories 2.0" B 3.0" 3.5" B 4.0" 4.5" B 5.0"
1-2 50% 30% 20%
3-4 50% 30% 20%
5 and over 30% 50% 20%
29
C. Coniferous trees may be considered equivalent to the sizes shown by
dividing the coniferous tree height in feet by 2.4.
6. Adjoining sites shall be considered in terms of species, location of trees,
screening and overall landscape design.
7. Plant materials existing on a site at the time of development or expansion of
structures, may be used as a credit against the requirements of these
landscape regulations; the City Council shall determine the extent of the
credit allowed, based on an evaluation of species, size, location,.quality of
existing plant materials and the consistency with the intent of these
regulations.
8. A reasonable attempt shall be made to protect and preserve existing trees
and incorporate them into the landscape plan.
9. A landscape performance bond or other acceptable surety is required for all
screening or landscaping required in this ordinance.
a. The amount of the bond shall be I25% of the cost of materials and
installation.
b. The bond shall be provided prior to the issuance of any building
permits and shall be valid for one full year from the date of
installation.
30
Attachment 6- 2
Draft Minnetonka Tree Preservation
Ordinance
-ARPEN HILLS
November 20, 2007,PTRC Meeting
ORDINANCE NO. 2007-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE §300.28, SUBD. 19
REGARDING TREE PROTECTION
The City of Minnetonka Ordains_
Section 1. City code §300.28, subd. 19 is amended as follows:.
19-. Performance Standards Reg ulatinr. Tree RemovalP.rbte�tEon.
a) Purpose. Standards governing the preservation; protection;end planting of trees
are necessary to:
1) prevent tree loss by eliminating-or reducing compaction, filter or
excavation near tree roots;
2) prevent or reduce soil erosion and sedimentation and stormwater runoff;
3) improve air quality and.reduce noise pollut";
4) enhance energy conservation through natural rnulation and shading;
5) control the urban Feat island effect;
6) increasa and maintain property°values;
7) protect pnvacy by m6intaining buffers between similar land uses and
establishing sand maintaining"buffers between conflicting,land uses; and
preserve he variety and extent of trees which exist in the city and which
area, tegral part of this city's identity.
b) A„dpotain arms untint of#rera remea.a! is an inevitable consequence of the urban
elen
r utilities,
lots, driveways, pa*44g
buildings" :.:.
innifiGa tree-16
s ea,`;aeceliti�e
r
G) in eRf9F .CTTTg 046 nro� Gity i nrefeFeRGGe to the pFeseFvatien 0higheF qu "', ig "' int trees eveF less desirable trees. A tree may be Gensidere
higher-quality based OR its speGieG, size, leeatien, E)F other relevant faster-s. The-c-#jF
fOFesteF will establish a lost of speGies that are considered less desirable, and this list will
he Len# on fife in the planning department
d) The rite may require that a property he rezones# and developed as a planned unit.
i
th
The StFicken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 2
areas:Gity may require the GlusteFiRg of buildings wheFe this would presewe sigRifiGaRt tFeeG.
replaGement, in the following
within the width Of FeqUiFed easements for pub!iG stFeets and utilities and
2) within the areas improved fOF reasonably sized *,w'ow
tparking lotsand StMetures without frest footings and within ten feet
aose improvements-,
r
footings3) within the fGOtpFiRtS of buildings and 0 fe- _1.;IIj;ngS With frost
f) the provision of replaGem--f!"
freesees rimer acre
sJ,
some oF all of the th�4"es will not be
.
s m
above,minimum size in
a
reurr�tiKc ��"#�++.#2'or#,itiCti�- -
hInbIf
any +1417
meet the FniReFRUM 1andSGape
fey
7 ". must be varied p ,
mr-11-rip Species that are subjert to disease
epiderniG
--s desirable trees established by the Gity foresteF, and
-ons. They must be at least 2-1,42 inGhes in diameter fo
, :� .� ,
41.ey must be at least 1
feRGing, or similar deviGe must be plaGed aFeURd the dFip lines Of SigAifiGant trees tha
are to be preserved or that are !E)Gated ReaFby on adjaGent PFOpeFty. NO GORStFUGtiE)R,
GOFnpaGtiOR, or grading of any kind may E)GGUF within these dFip "Res, eXGept when
neGes6aFy to save additiORal signifiGaRtm trees and when the risk to the tFees designated
property ---ginaidevelo eFiftheycli within one year after installaflem
The StFwGke language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 3
foF pFeservatien is minimal. The develeper must plaGe signs en the fenGing prohibiting
GenstrurAion1 >
i) A SigRifiGant tree that was removed or otherwise destroyed within two years
before a development appliGation must be replaced in the same geRera! lOGation by two
trees meet'Rg the requiremeRtS of paragraph (g) abeve. The replaGemeRt trees will be
c,onsidered signifiGant trees existing at the time of the development appliGation and may
be removed and reloGated on the site only if the original significapA tree would have
been allowed to be removed under this ordin nGe
V.• allowed aV vV removed UI IV VI this V�VfFlLl1-ft�.
any 6 gRific-ant trees, URIess approved by the
be created in a mannei that prevents eresio into -Am be exempt fForn this new La nF�g iJ
subdivision,
eXGept
developmeRt
b) Definitions. For the purposes,of this subdivision, certain terms and words are
defined as follows:
1) "Diameter breast height (dbh)" —the diameter of a tree measured at 4.5
feet above the base of the tree
}
2) °Cnticaf.root zone --The cnbceJ root zone is the minimum area around a
tree that should remain undisturbed. To calculate the critical root radius measure the
tree's diameter at 13r64st height�1=or each inchnof tree diameter, 1.5 feet of root radius
must be protected. Fobxrnple: if ares riJ 'is 10 inches, then its critical root radius
is 15 fee �a 15) Rb critical root zone is 30 feet,
-- __ -�
41
"IProtected:tree° ',tree or trees that meet the definitions of woodland
prese ton area, high '0—My trees:or significant tree and that is required to be
preser #under this sectbb.
4) �1O/oodland preservation area" - a remnant woodland ecosystem that is at
least two acres *size afiImeets the criteria for one of the following types of
ecosystems;
DEFINITIONS OF ECO -TYPES TO BE INCLUDED IN A FUTURE DRAFT
a. °floodplain forest" - ;
b. "lowland hardwood forest" - ;
C. 11maple basswood forest" - ;
The stfiGken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 4
d. LLmesic oak forest"
e. "oak woodland brushland
f. "tamarack swamp" - ;or
Q. "willow swamp" -
5 "High priority tree'—a tree that does not qualifv a&oodland preservation
area but is still important to the site and the neighborhood ch _.� er that is structurall
sound and health and that meets at least one of the foll ' standards:
a. a deciduous tree that is at least 1 ches exce t box elders
elm poplar species, willow, silver maple, mulberm-Affid Norwa m
h;
b. an understory tree that is�t ast four inches dbh 'stin of
species such as ironwood serviceberry, chggiherrv, or oda do woo other
species that at maturity is typically no reater t twen a feet in hei ht
C. an evergreen tree_that is at lea's0 feet in height, except a
Colorado spruce that is not in a buffir described in bo ragraph (b)(5)(d); or
d. a group of decidus trees 1f} tare atirt eight inches dbh or
evergreen trees that are .Beast 15 feed, -hei L# 'fi v_i& a buffer or screening
alon-q an adjacent publ d that`are in 50 f6Mf an arterial road or 35 feet
of a minor collector, '
t or loe treet
6) "Sianfnt tree" tree tha n y that is
either a deciduous treCt.lea� -dWor a coniferous tree at least fifteen feet
in height
c) ity authontV� pres protected trees, the city may:
lad u. require an"hforce free preservation plan as described in paragraph (d)
below;
2 ifv tree r rou s of trees for preservation,•
3} speci F nading limits;
4) require the clustering of buildings or the relocation of roads, drives,
buildings, utilities or storm water facilities when this would preserve protected trees;
5) grant variances;
6) specify time periods in which tree cutting, trimming or iniury may not occur
in order to prevent the spread of disease; and
The stricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 5
7) require conservation easements to ensure that woodland preservation
areas or groups of high priority trees are not destroyed after the development has been
approved.
d) Tree Preservation Plan. A tree preservation plan is required as part of an
application for a preliminary plat, lot division, grading permit, site and building plan
review, wetland/floodplain alteration permit, or building permit for an addition or new
construction. A tree preservation plan must include: ,
1) a tree inventory showing the species, sizes anr tions of protected
trees on the property and significant trees to be removeq& in woodland
preservation areas may be grouped together. .
2 a site plan indicating the trees' dbh ttion and size Attie critical root
zone for each tree, trees to be removed, trees tome'±preserved, propos construction
limits, and proposed tree protection methods addition to constructionlWencing.
Applicants are encouraged to consult with citytaff conce ►g preservatrof protected
trees before developing a site plan.
e) Tree Removal and Preservat 6', ea-
-
1) Individual property ownbft ar&W6wpd to reM__,,e protected trees on their
Property if there is an existing principal�i�e with rl aired%Kigation if no construction
or development occurs ua tl e:tacation of Eje tr b"ivith nears thereafter.
2) A siq[ nt tree m t+ be removed for construction on an existing lot .
without required A tion, in the following as:
a. wtt 1-'1 mired easements for public streets and utilities
and the nadir s Ho race water po°iid nq;
b. ti►n thearas improved for reasonably-sized driveways, parking
lots. structures witH frost44tings and within ten feet around those
improver►ts; `
within 1h footprints of, and 20 feet around, buildings with frost
footings; and
d. aareas where trees are being removed for ecological restoration in
accordance with a city-approved restoration plan.
3) Except as provided below, mitigation is required for tree removal for
construction on an existing lot if the trees are in woodland preservation areas, are high
Priority trees, or are significant trees outside the allowable area for destruction. A tree
mitigation plan must be submitted and implemented in accordance with paragraph (f)
below.
The stricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 6
4) Removal of trees in woodland preservation areas and high priority trees is
prohibited on new subdivisions of land or redevelopment of land unless the council
determines that there is a greater public good such as;
a) providing reasonable use or access to the property;
b) providing affordable housing;
c) allowing for a public road or trail;
d) providing for a public utility service transmission line
ponding or a water tower; or a.
�..
e enabling cit -desired redevel ant in a desiiated
redevelopment area. ="
For purposes of this subsection redevelopm"eans removal of the pnn use by
more than 50 percent of its market value and rec structrQn of it This reauiAment does
not appiv where reconstruction would meet the na%04"ing use standards of section
300.29.
v
5 Removal of trees in wo-":= n ervafion r as and hi h Priority trees
may be allowed in new subdivisions o`r eve or is of tare,--only if the Property is
rezoned to planned unit de to ment `#e� Fis part of a negotiated
PUD master develo roM •-M- PLID a new subdivision will be approved only
if it demonstrates t ., _R;e new s = ivisioriz a reasonable number of lots or units and
has lot lines and ng Pads t Hminimiz .__ a loss. Mitigation must be provided for
any removal in woftod res fi i areas§4` high Driority trees. In order to Drotect
woodland Dreservati6hidr f ' 4` des the city may reduce the potential
density q j fi a ion'Tyk more than' third.
fl A 11 ee Mitigati kp,--T. �
f The applrcdt must mit a tree mitigation plan for staff review and
approvaL T ,plan must it dtcate the number of inches of mitigation trees the species
and quantit ch s ec and the caliper size for each replacement tree. The plan
may not be co ed ;ore than 25 percent of the same species or size unless
approved by the cry _ 1 Ian must comply with mitigation standards as outlined below.
The applicant must ffi Pment the tree mitigation plan approved by city staff.
2) Specific mitigation standards. Mitigation for tree removal of trees in
woodland preservation areas, high priority trees and significant trees outside of the
allowable removal areas provided in paragraph (e)(2) must meet the following specific
standards;
a. Mitigation rate
The smoke language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 7
1. A tree that is in a woodland preservation area or is a high
Priority tree must be replaced at an inch-for-inch in diameter for a deciduous tree and at
a foot-for-foot in height for an evergreen tree: and
2. A significant tree that is outside of the allowable tree removal
area specified in section (e)(2)must be replaced with one two-inch tree.
b. Mitigation species
1. Trees in woodland preservati no&must be replaced with
species found in that eco-type.
2. High priority trees must flee laced s ecies of a similar
type that are normally found growing in similar condi ns.
3. Significant trees Of, replaced with an s�ftes other
than box elder, silver maple, willow, and CO MO
" ,o s race
4. A list of acceptable miftlWIIreservation and high priority
replacement species is on file with .tanning deent
C. Mitigation size
� :
1 &eDlacemeizes=f d preservation areas and
high priority trees area �R g
a) ot less t one and one quarter inches but not
more than three ►nc` dbh fo A_'v.i uous baW and burla ped trees and not less than
three inches but not - LL bh tha " =r spade-moved deciduous trees; and
not less than six feet but not more than eight feet in
hei b balled an'A a _ •ver reen trees and not less than eight feet but not
morfeLfan 14 feet in h&Mbt for s b-e-moved evergreen trees.
2 e lacement size for a significant tree is a two-inch tree.
3) eral Aation standards:
a) eplacement trees must meet the American Standards for
Nursery Stock relatirZ to quality of stock and appropriate sizing of the root ball for balled
and burlapped and spade-moved trees.
b) If the city determines in its sole discretion that there is no
appropriate location for some or all of the required replacement trees, those trees may
not be required.
The strie-ken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 8
c) Replacement trees must be planted on the same property from
which the trees were removed:
d) A tree will be considered removed if 30 percent or more of the trunk
diameter is injured or if the following percentage of the critical root zone is compacted
cut, filled or paved: 30 percent of the critical root zone for oaks and sugar maples and
40 percent for other species:
e) Development that is subject to IandscapeFf&airements in sections
300.27 and 300.31 must meet the minimum_ landscape reauiQ ents of the applicable
section. Trees planted as part of a required landscaping - -Mav be counted as
replacement trees under this section at the sole discreft `"off ity.
4
f The required mitigation trees,MM be re lace the Dropertv
owner or original developer if they have died orA,,W6 severely declinUker the second
full growing season following installation. A twill be considered to be erel
declined if more than 25 percent of the crowrthh06 died
A tree removed that was re 1 "the citV to be saved must be
mitigated at a rate of 2:1 or two-indb`�`". _f trees re " _.for every inch of tree removed.
The city may also impose a financia erg . gommens "°te with the value of the tree
removed. This provision also applieslb a (R690e gtion e� y'- ent area that is disturbed
during or after development g
q) General tree pryMorffindards �z>
1 Bef constructEod " radinQ A d clearing begins, the city-approved
tree protection fenc -.r othe e =`,( must Winstalled and maintained at the critical
root zones of.the tree e ec e%f #.,Q.' tion of the fencingmust be in
conformar�� t `. e a # fed tree rese ation fan. This fencin must be ins ected
by city staff before: wore ms.
;. No constrn, coiaction stock piling of earth storage of equipment or
bwldmq i iterials. or gra g of an kind may occur within the critical root zone areas of
trees to b&&btected x#
e uv.
3 A `..4.thatiiiino s removed or otherwise destroyed by unnatural causes
within two years b £development application will be regarded as if it were present
at the time of constr` fion or a development application
4) The area of compensatory water storage may not be located where there
are woodland preservation areas high priority trees or significant trees unless
approved by the city. The compensatory storage area must be created in a manner that
prevents erosion into any nearby water resource
The stricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 9
Section 2. A violation of this ordinance is subject to the penalties and provisions of
Chapter XIII of the city code.
Section 3. This ordinance is effective upon adoption.
Adopted by the city council of the City of Minnetonka, Minnesota, on
zw-
Janis A. Callison, Mayor
e
ATTEST:
x.
David E. Maeda, City Clerk
ACTION ON THIS ORDINANCE:
Date of introduction
Date of adoption .
Motion for adoptiq ; _
Seconded by: r
Voted in favor of: 11Wx _x
Voted a
Absta' `
Abs�
Ordi e adopted. x
Date of p tion:
CERTIFIED
� ,
I certify that the foW , is a correct copy of an ordinance adopted by the city council
of the City of Minnetika, Minnesota, at a meeting held on
David E. Maeda, City Clerk
The str*Gken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
'i
Attachment 6-
"A Guide To Developing A Community
Tree Preservation Ordinance"
-AItpEN HILLS
' November 20, 2007, PTRC Meeting
A Guide To Developing A Community Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 1 of 8
NSTAC
MIbiNIsoTA Si iADE TRE:F- AoviSORY COM>w In—EE
A Guide To Developing A Community Tree
Preservation Ordinance
This guide was written by the Community Tree Preservation Task Force of the Minnesota
Shade Tree Advisory Committee(MnSTAC).The mission of the Task Force is to preserve
existing trees during development and to reforest land through:
■ education;
■ improved communication;
■ supporting the partnerships of builders, developers, foresters
and communities;
■ guiding communities in developing their own tree preservation
program.
This publication was funded in part by a grant from the USDA Forest Service Urban Forestry
Center for the Midwestern States, North Central Forest Experiment Station, Chicago, Illinois.
The Value of Trees
Trees have a great deal of financial value,from increased property values to various
environmental benefits.Trees stabilize the soil and control water pollution,yield
advantageous microclimatic effects which conserve energy,preserve and foster air quality by
removing carbon dioxide(CO2)and airborne pollutants,abate visual and noise pollution,and
provide a natural habitat for wildlife.They also provide welcome shade to people and add
color and interest to the urban landscape.Trees provide a psychological boost to urbanites.
People are generally more satisfied with their neighborhoods if there are trees.Workers are
more productive and hospital patients recover faster if they can see trees outside their
windows.The benefits of established trees in our communities are subtle and often
overlooked.
The Magnitude of the Problem
Communities have long recognized the importance of trees.Tree and woodland preservation
is an emerging environmental issue as communities also address concerns involving
wetlands,flood plains,storm water,water quality,steep slopes,and air quality. New
construction too often leads to tree loss and remaining trees lose vigor because of damage
sustained during construction.Communities can mitigate both tree loss and tree damage witl
well conceived tree preservation ordinances or policies.
The Purpose of This Guide
This guide outlines a process by which each community can develop a tree preservation
ordinance consistent with their own particular goals and needs. Communities are encourage(
http://www.mnstac.org/RFC/Preservationordguide.htm 11/14/2007
A Guide To Developing A Community Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 2 of 8
to educate and involve all of the potentially interested or affected parties in this process.Also
important elements of a successful ordinance are discussed.A listing of additional available
resources is also included.
Planning Process
Tree Inventory
The first step in defining the goals of the ordinance is to obtain an inventory of the current
situation.The initial resource assessment could include information regarding:
■ identification and location of the types of vegetation (i.e.,
cover types) which occur in the community;
■ identification of any unique ecosystems;
■ location of particularly large and/or historic trees;
■ profiles of the existing trees including species and size
distributions.
The initial evaluation should note areas of priority for preservation such as wooded 100 year
floodplains,wooded stream corridors,wooded slopes, buffer zones,and aesthetically or
environmentally fragile areas.A map of these areas can lead to comprehensive planning and
identify potential areas likely to be adversely affected by development activities. Knowing all
of these factors can help establish the emphasis of the ordinance.
Assessment
A community must first assess their tree resources before any constructive ordinance
decisions can be made.Each community's ordinance must reflect the unique assets of its
own urban forest. Once the current resources have been identified,informed and attainable
goals for protection can be established.This process can create an effective and usable tree
preservation ordinance.
Goals and Scope of a Community
Tree Preservation Ordinance or Policy
Each community must determine its own needs and goals,and design its ordinance to best
achieve these objectives.
The goals of tree preservation ordinances can include:
■ reducing tree loss during development;
■ reducing damage to standing trees during construction;
■ providing for replacement of trees lost during construction;
■ providing for planting trees where none occurred previously;
■ providing for the maintenance of preserved trees after
construction is completed.
The scope of the ordinance(or policy)may cover only projects undertaken by the city on
public land or it could also include work by utility companies,private residential, commercial
or industrial projects.There may be a minimum size for a project to be regulated, measured i
land area or in project cost.The ordinance may regulate only tree preservation or may also
http://www.mnstac.org/RFC/preservationordguide.htm 11/14/2007
A Guide To Developing A Community Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 3 of 8
include replacement and new planting. It may or may not include provisions for education or
enforcement. Determining the goals and scope will be an important part of developing
the ordinance.
Drafting an Ordinance
The process by which the ordinance is developed is as important as the actual language.An
ordinance should create a mechanism for the exchange of information.Therefore,the
relationships formed during the ordinance development process are crucial to its potential
success.
An ordinance marks the creation of a new"organization",composed of people brought
together from different professions,positions and interests for the purpose of tree protection.
This creation of a working organization takes time for meetings,discussions,and phone
conversations.The process must build trust amongst the various parties.
The challenge of an ordinance is not getting it passed,but getting people to follow its
provisions.The best ordinances come about when:
1. the ordinance provides for effective communication;
2. everyone affected has a role in developing the ordinance, starti
with the basic objectives;
3. the objectives are simple and easy to communicate.
Importance of Education
The most important element of a successful tree preservation program is education.The
exchange of practical information,unique concerns,and specific issues can lead to a better
understanding among those involved in drafting the ordinance.
Education should begin before an ordinance has been drafted and should address the
economic constraints of tree preservation and the physical constraints of constructing on
wooded lots.Unrealistic ordinances prohibit development and construction in wooded areas,
which may not be the goal of the community.
Education should be offered to the following persons:
■ City Planners
■ Engineers
■ Building Inspectors
■ City Advisory Commissions
■ Contractors/Subcontractors
■ Home/Property Owners
■ Neighborhood Associations
■ Foresters
■ Citizen Groups
■ City Councils
■ Utility Companies
■ Realtors
■ Developers
■ Landscape Architects
http://www.mnstac.org/RFC/preservationordguide.htm 11/14/2007
A Guide To Developing A Community Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 4 of 8
Home/property owners must understand the importance of their active involvement during the
construction process.They should also have a basic knowledge of proper tree care to l
successfully maintain the trees which remain on their lot.Construction workers must
understand the goals of a tree preservation program and the importance of preserving a tree'
root system.
Education can take many forms including:
■ Workshops
■ Workshops with Community Leaders and Advisory Groups
■ Contractor Seminars
■ Staff Training Sessions
■ Mailing to Interested/involved Parties
■ Newsletters
■ Handouts
■ Awards/Events
■
■ Recognize Contractors Who Excel at Tree Preservation (e.g.,
Builders Association of Minnesota, Awards of Environmental
Merit, etc.)
■ Historic Trees Brochures/Big Tree Contests
Typical Ordinance Elements
The scope of the ordinance(or policy)will set the tone and determine how much regulation a
local authority desires to assert over the protection and/or,preservation of its forest resource,
and the extent of the educational efforts directed towards the public.
Tree preservation ordinances have been developed locally and nationally to protect and
preserve trees on private and public property.They are usually developed to coincide with
zoning or property subdivision regulations.They can be very simple or complex in their
scope.A simple ordinance may stipulate that the cutting of any tree larger than a certain
diameter can be done only by permit and must be within a designated construction area.A
complex ordinance on the other hand may include formulas to determine percentage of tree
loss and the mitigation of the trees lost during construction with a specified number of newly
planted trees.
Purpose/Authority
In most cases,tree preservation ordinances have been upheld in the courts as reasonable
extensions of a local government's zoning authority. However,this authority needs to be
consistent with that given to the local governmental body through state statute. Once this is
determined,the ordinance should clearly state its purpose or goals..This will help with the
implementation,enforcement,and defense if the ordinance is challenged.
Definitions
Any terms or common phrases that have special meaning within the body of the ordinance
should be listed and defined. By using standard defined words the likelihood of
misunderstanding or confusion when reading or enforcing the ordinance will be reduced. Be
http://www.mnstac.org/RFC/preservationordguide.htrn 11/14/2007
A Guide To Developing A Community Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 5 of 8
specific in defining terms such as a"significant tree"(including "type" "species" "size'),
'Tree loss"and"construction damage"and/or"grading damage". Sometimes after writing
the ordinance, it will be necessary to add>or revise a definition to assist with its
readability.
Plan Review Process
The ordinance should explain the process of how a new/proposed development will be
reviewed.This section should walk the prospective developer through the review of the
project and detail the information to be submitted with a request for rezoning, platting or
permit.
Elements that may be required in the review process include an inventory or survey of the
existing trees(including species and size)on the site,(also,an accurate footprint of the
proposed building on the site should be provided by the developer),an estimate of the
proposed tree removals,an explanation of the tree protection techniques to be used such
as protective fencing, informationaltwarning signage,proper equipment and material
storage areas,and pre-and postconstruction care of the remaining trees. If replanting is
required,the developer may also need to submit a landscaping plan for approval.
It is critical that the ordinance specify the minimal tree protection methods that would be
acceptable.Also,a professional forester,certified arborist or landscape architect familiar
with tree preservation issues and techniques should have the authority to review the site
and development plans prior to their approval and any construction performed.
Preservation
The heart of the ordinance should be the preservation of trees in a woodland
development.There are many variations to the intent of tree preservation, but the bottom
line becomes what you want to preserve,"the forest or the trees"or"what aspects of the
forest or the trees that you want to preserve"?This often becomes an issue of just how
many trees make up a woodland.
Some ordinances will list a percentage of trees lost versus the total trees remaining in the
form of a tolerance barometer, i.e.,if more than 35%of the trees are removed by a
development, this would be unacceptable and a new plan would have to be submitted for
approval.
Another approach is to specify that the forest left following development will be similar to
the one existing before the project was completed, i.e.,if 15%of the trees on the site
were larger than 24 inches,then trees this size should make up 15%of the trees
remaining after construction.The intent of this provision is to have a woodland of similar
size distribution after development,thereby preserving the character of the woods.
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 2-inch diameter trees. However, not only
is it difficult, if not impossible(at times)to find enough suitable planting locations for the
http://www.mnstac.org/RFC/preservationordguide.htm 11/14/2007
A Guide To Developing A Community Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 6 of 8
replacement trees,this approach fails to mitigate the environmental effect of mature tree loss
A variety of replacement strategies are possible including: 1
■ requiring developers to set aside wooded areas as preserves;
■ sliding scales;
■ percentage replacement;
■ off-site reforestation;
■ flexible no-net loss formulas.
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.The intent of a tree preservation ordinance should be to provide
incentives for unique and creative project designs that complement the woodlands ani
replace excessive tree loss.
Implementation
The uniform and unbiased implementation of any ordinance can fail if some precautions are
not observed.Those who are charged with implementation must be able to do so without bia:
or prejudice(avoiding politics).The ordinance should be easy to read and understand for
everyone, including the developer,the staff,the elected officials, and the citizens of the
community,or frustration and mistrust may develop.
Incentives
Developing an ordinance which creates incentives is a positive way to achieve compliance.
Examples include the preserved trees being credited to the landscaping typically required on
a project.Also,a protected woodlot may be dedicated to the community in lieu of park
dedication requirements.
Enforcement
Most ordinances contain provisions for enforcement and penalties for violations should they
occur during the construction process.Enforcement usually involves an inspection process,
and,when violations occur,the developer may be held accountable by one of several
methods:
■ withholding of occupancy permits until the problem is
corrected;
■ loss of money in the form of a bond that was posted prior to
the start of construction;
■ fines;
■ stoppage of the project if violations are extreme.
Some developers have been taken to court,losing their case and required to reimburse
thousands of dollars related to the tree loss.Some ordinances require the violator to make
reparations to the community by donating trees to be planted on public property.
In some instances, an ordinance will cover the loss of trees through bonding for several year:
to protect against tree loss due to construction injury.These ordinances usually have a
decreasing bond clause which reduces the amount of money each year upon determination
http://www.mnstac.org/RFC/preservationordguide.htm 11/14/2007
A Guide To Developing A Community Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 7 of 8
of the health and condition of the trees impacted by the construction.
Summary
Trees and woodlands are valuable elements in any community's infrastructure.
Development in a community from the construction of a single building to the
improvements found in a new residential subdivision can have adverse and permanent
impacts upon this important natural resource.
Each community must decide upon its own appropriate balance of trees and
development. Both are important.The creation of a tree preservation ordinance can assist
in determining what an appropriate balance is for the community.When all of the affected
parties from property owners to developers/builders to city officials are involved in making
these decisions,and ultimately, creating the tree preservation ordinance,the community
inevitably improves the quality of life for its residents without sacrificing economic
progress.
Resources Available
Duerksen,C.J.and S. Richman. 1993.Tree Conservation Ordinances: Land-Use
Regulations Go Green.American Planning Association; Planning Advisory Service Report
Number 446.Chicago, Illinois.
Fazio,J. R.,ed. 1989."How to Save Trees During Construction".Tree City USA Bulletin
#7.The National Arbor Day Foundation. Nebraska City,Nebraska.
Fazio,J. R.,ed. 1991."A Systematic Approach to Building With Trees".Tree City USA
Bulletin#20.The National Arbor Day Foundation. Nebraska City,Nebraska.
Fazio,J.R.,ed. 1993."Tree Protection Ordinances".Tree City USA Bulletin#31.The
National Arbor Day Foundation.Nebraska City, Nebraska.
Hoefer, P. J., E. B.Himelick and D. F. DeVoto. 1990. Municipal Tree Manual
International Society of Arboriculture. Urbana, Illinois.
International Society of Arboriculture. 1989."Effects of Construction Damage on Wooded
Lots"(Video), and"Avoidance of Construction Damage to Trees on Wooded Lots(Video).
Urbana, Illinois.
Miller, N. L.,D. M. Rathke, and G. R.Johnson. 1993."Protecting Trees from Construction
Damage-A Homeowner's Guide". University of Minnesota Extension Service Publication
NR-FO-6135-S.St. Paul, Minnesota.
Stiegler,J. E.,ed.1990."Community Tree Preservation:$$$and Sense for Our
Community Trees". Proceedings of the 11th Annual Fall Conference, Minnesota Society
of Arboriculture, Chapter ISA. Duluth,Minnesota.
Department of Natural Resources
Division of Forestry
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul,Minnesota 55155-4044
612-296-6157 or 1-800-766-6000
http://www.mnstac.org/RFC/preservationordguide.htm 11/14/2007
A Guide To Developing A Community Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 8 of 8
Copyright 1995,State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources.
Equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from programs of the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources is available to all individuals regardless of race,color,
creed,religion,national origin,sex,marital status,status with regard to public assistance,
age,sexual orientation,or disability. Discrimination inquiries should be sent to MN-DNR,
500 Lafayette Road,St.Paul,MN.55155-4031;or the Equal Opportunity Office,
Department of the Interior,Washington,DC 20240.
This material is available in alternative formats upon request.
This web page is maintained by Dave Hanson,dlhansonD-umn.edu.
If you have any comments or would like to post something,please e-mail him.
http://www.mnstac.org/RFC/preservationordguide.htm 11/14/2007
_�
� r
15
r.
2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
Parks,Trails and Recreation
Vision: Parks, trails and recreation in Arden Hills enhance the health and well-
being of citizens,improve the value of citizens' property, and increase the
desirability of the city as a place to live or work.
Goals:
• Develop,maintain and encourage the use of arterial trails that span the City
from east to west and from north to south and which connect with
neighborhood trails within the city and with trails in neighboring
communities.
• Develop,maintain and encourage the use of a coherent system of
neighborhood parks that are safe and engaging.
• Provide recreation programs that address the interests of all segments of the
community, including children and youth, adults and families.
• Encourage non-motorized transportation and commuting within Arden Hills
and beyond.
• Protect and encourage access to lakes,marshes, and wooded areas for active
and passive recreation.
• Plan for parks,trails and recreation in TCAAP that address the interests both
of TCAAP residents and of residents in the currently-developed regions of
Arden Hills.
• Strengthen community among citizens.
I
I
tip
I;lp
a�4i7
GOi .
' * t
lam+ - `
,y��-T`y #i�•r:l'•�•,-7}].."�=4 ...v 4 TAB
� 5
r •1
P JP
-owt Von
YJry 1Ir};J
of ;._ •: �','.�'�� '� � s' '
M to O.1 N M 00 V N M (o O 00 T Lo O O M r CM M (o T o qT N n to O N o N a0 w w V O
rnrnODoo0o0orn (DOo (DD� rnrnmmU) woonnnr-- wmwrn rnoDco0ooD (Ornrnrntnl�
V
IL
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnn
ooOoo00o000000000000000000 00000000000
d O CD o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D 0 0 0 0 O O O CD (D (D O O O O O
U)N N N N N N N N N N N N Q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Na
n n n n n n n n n n I- [I- r- n n I- I,- n I- n n ao n n I- n n n n [I- n n n n n [I-
-CV n
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
U) 0) O O 0) 0) 0') 0) O O O CC) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) CD 0) 0) O O 0) O 0) 0) O 0) O O W O O O O O O
J O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 Co 0 0 0 0 (D 0 T O 0 0 o O O O O O O O O O O O
d
E
cc
Z
4)
U
� U U U U U U U U U U U U > > U U U U
v) a- aaaay. aa000ay. aa-rLn- 000 ¢ Q ¢ ¢ QQ ¢ QC om<< ¢ QQaV. aaQUQ
O 00 IT N 'ct N a0 O O 'IT O o O ED to O O N w m 'cr O O (D w w O Iq N O M T O cp M N (D O O
(D M n O N Lo O T Lo q (D to N r n N M n T n 0 KT (o tD 'V' (0 IT r N N N n tO (D qT n to (D O
IC O (D O n to M OD (O O n r T (D r T n Lo o (o O n O O N Cr T n 00 M Tq- n I- r O (D (D n (D
id Nn0 �.- � N d tnON � OCDooOM t()
Q T T r (V T r r (V r T T
d• NT (000 (D00 (o (D0000toL0tt) toLo000D00aomOoOaowao00N OaDOOOODW00MW00
WI r T T r
I
Or- m IgOMLnnaONO IqMtnONOrNMITONT (DtoTnanOLo W (D 'TNOCZ)
't (D n N to (D 00 M O (D Cl) Cr) O N (M 't O O 00 N M O N M CM -i - O 00 q ,' r n OD Lo 00 M N O
(D n N qr T O N It (D (o IT OD T to O r to n (O ' r r N M (D O 'I "T M n O M n n
C r N r 1-7 N N r N r N N s-
a1
J
Q O
C Q J p
O M_ Y
a) U N d ri a) L a
> cu >
LLI a) c >, ca Q a) cu rn 0) -p c H J Q c U to
�' �'o cU a 0 c O p` �. .E .c- � o c a) Y a) 0) o a) o p LL
z c (Dcc � > E °) m wE v E O 'erc , � �
a c - o -
0 0 .S o ;= 0 (U o a o �- � � E >> aa) cu cU c (U a) cU c a) co x E 5 o
1- Ua UJQti = QU LULL U Q � JU2 a n- v2U) a QUU
Y_
m
N
U)
w O
N 0 ` O
!Z sZ iZ sZ t
p w Q 0 0 0 0 L U
L c U O O O O a) i U)
m J J J J Q
(U
O !Z Q (U (U Y Y Y Y (D Y
N > '0 O 0 " F- m O w N IZ IZ Q. O_ of
LU Q V U) J J > U N > a s a_ a O O O O O c N 3
.Y .Y _3 Y to to N to .� J J J J _O > to a)
Q c 0 0 to T O d d N > c O ` N = L m m m N V � o O rn c a) w
rn a a) rn c6 c c c c c
E c .E -0 c c Emm .E c � U .S � � E E E E cU m a) a) a) .cc v' .� � 0) y a) EE (D c
O N O 0 0 .0 x 0 0 0 � p O D N U) Z 7 7 3 7 (U C (U fU (U (U O C tU 0 5 0 E 7 O
LL. UUJUUILJZL.LLL2QU c W 2H1- UUUU2w2222 JZU) e zm QU2
a)
N
U)
w 0
s
L D O
U
V � 0 m N
3 O .c L L L t "(a 'c 'co
> � vtftf � ZZ o- CLCLts
O E Q U Z Z Z Z Z Y Y Y > > > > > > > > > > > > > > O O O O 3
0- Z N cc c owwwww c`a m cQQQQQQQQQQQQQQJ - zU) U) (DU) c c c c c
j Z O N -6 •o -D Q v a_ a. a C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C c c c (o (D CO co (D 0 0 0 0 0 0
d °) c � � � � wmm m - - - - - - - - - - - - - - a) a) a) a) rnrnrnrnrn 0)m �m0�
as > L E E E E E E E E E E E E E E N N N N X x x X 'X
� NI— °) 0 `' L � � � 000mcacamc� mcrsmmc� cacamc� c� mcaco ' 000000
fgUUUUUUULLLL L! 22 = 22222222222222 = 2222 = JJJJJ �
(Oti ct CUN1� s- MCD � Mr.- " a -- tom Cl) 000
mF- wO � t- 00 wm1- 0to (Otl- Mr- NOOO
ti ti t` ti ti � ti r- t� t`
0 0 0 Co O O O O-0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O Q O O O O O O 0 0 0 .O O O Cl O O
NNNNNNC4NNNNNNNNN
N N N N
n ti ti ti N ti t- 00 OD C5 � C) �
(V N N N N CV CV N CV N O N N N C 3 O 0 0 0 0
m 0) m 0) WC—F) m m m m C6 3 m (03) O (D Cl C) C)
0000000000 � C) aa �- 0000
> > > > > > N N CU N (U N
> > > > > > > > > > > >
( (D (9 UUUU
(9 (9 < QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQC� C� C7C7C� C9
(NNN00C) 00CD000 V O (0ONO .- NOD (D (Ot'- OOOC> O000000
OLOtT '-T (0 'VM000c- MOON — NOrr — MOMW V Ot- LOtOt-
() M_ 'tOO tO � s-_NONMCOMOmot' O_� OD000Od CAtO00_OMM (D (A
A M C N N v-- N O �- CM � � v tO v -�CV N N (fl N CM M O 00 �-
N c-
M M M M 00 OD w w M OD w w w w 00 O O 00 00 w m O O O O O O O O co O O
mITM (fltO (flto � aMONO 'd' t0O0000rNM MmmtOd' (DntotOt--
Mt- — CDw CTONtoMtOa (ON (V 0co — MO � Orn 'Tmtr) 00C) m M (D 0.)
oo (O 'TMOM MtO . .- - V "�t NCO CO (MNNCD NMMOM 'T .--
`-" N c- c- <- N N —
-O
c
U) z w
O
t` FL- o o w in c
c c -' J 'v 3 _ � W m
J.J C 3 3 > c O L V) (n UJ
) ) in c 3 N (U N N U 'C C N
oommcNu hoc (L° 33J � 43
w � � > c� nnaa2ac = < U (nF- m F- if U)
(a
(U O
E r-
O -a
t
3 � � f6 (u
o E W W w
F- 2EEE
O '� OoO O
— � Comm
O
> ~ °- O > -'p c c c c O O CO
On / c >, m
( c
J c6 -6 ,O (0 i N (O > c c c CT O 7
V O z z z Q (D p N CU 0 tD C1 rn c N N 0 N N c O d Q� Cl c
0 15 c -2 fu O � -0 "(D O O O —O (0 �� O O O U � � � N cO � `p � 0
(n �- N M �-- U C� w , a a a vn cn � Q U c� U N (n 0 <- U F- F- F- U U
O O O O O
V) uJ V) V) V) V) O O O O O O
O O O O O O U U U U U A--
� � � cncn cncncn
� � � cnwwww
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
m m m m m m — —V) W m rn olio _ __ > > > > > > 0mmmmmm a) a> ID
Wwwwww LL _0 � � � A � »
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
W W W W W W - - - - —_ _ _ Y Y w w w W w W W W W W
O O O O O O L L '— L L L N N E E E E E J J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-C -C -CAF- F- F- F- F- F- F- � � O O O O Ova
♦+ YM/ Y L - �-/ w Y L Y L y
C C J J J _J J J J J J E E E E E Q Q 0 0 0 O O O O O O O
O O O O O O
zzzzzza- a- ixmc: as: aaa- a- ma_ a_ wwwwcn (ncnww0ww
i�AM� E COUNTY PARK ANpYR MI�S� ��4
„ V
M�� NG
e
TI
S _
L h�
NO em er 1;3, 20VZ
k {
RAMSEY COUNTY P ►RKS;AN� REc017A N DEP F T+�IENT
. 'Al
2015 NORTH VAN`DYKE $TWEET` " ' y
IwARLEWO0DMN109
77
1) CALL TO ORDER
2) APPROVAL OF AGENDA
3) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2007
4) REVIEW OF NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
5) ACTIVE LIVING RAMSEY COUNTY BICYCLE COMMITTEE
6) DIRECTOR'S REPORT
7) REPORTS FROM CHAIR AND OTHER COMMISSION MEMBERS
8) ADJOURNMENT
* * * COMMISSION MEMBERS
PLEASE CALL VICKTRAHLOUISTA T 651 748 2500,X307
IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND
€ 6 say
Ali
r _ tWitt
f
-
�The regular meeting of the Ramsey County Parks and Recreation Commission was called to order by Chair
Straumann at 6:00 p.m., at Ramsey County Parks and Recreation, 2015 North Van Dyke Street, Maplewood,
Minnesota.
Members Present: Deb Falkowski, Gale Pederson, Candace Petersen, Richard Straumann
Members Absent: Terry Huntrods, Phil Jenni
Staff Present: Greg Mack, Ken Wehrle
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chair Straumann asked for a motion to approve the minutes of the August 14, 2007 meeting. It was moved
by Ms. Pederson, seconded by Ms. Petersen that the minutes of the August 14,2007 meeting be
approved. Motion carried.
2008-2009 OPERATING BUDGET
Greg Mack distributed a budget summary of the proposed 2008-2009. Under the two-year budget format,
only the levy for 2008 will be approved at this time. The 2009 levy will be considered in 2008; however,the
Board focus in 2008 will be on performance measurement. Golf revenues are down by $400,000. Mr. Mack
made a presentation to the Board in March 2007 regarding declining golf revenue. Golf still provides
revenues in excess of operating expenses. The excess revenue is used to fund other programs. In the
proposed budget, additional levy is required to replace the decreasing golf revenues.
All other programs identified in the budget continue at the current levels. Revenues are expected to
decrease in some areas and increase in other areas. Fees for ice arenas and picnic shelters will increase in
2008. Golf fees will remain unchanged in 2008 and will increase in 2009.
Ms. Falkowski moved,seconded by Ms. Pederson,that the Commission recommend approval of the
2008-2009 budget as proposed. Motion carried.
RICE CREEK NORTH REGIONAL TRAIL ALIGNMENT
A contract was awarded to construct the trail within the 112-acre site on the former TCAAP property. Ken
Wehrle is working with planners regarding the County Road H/35-W/Rice Creek Parkway interchanges and
how they will intersect with the regional trails. The trail will run along the creek as much as possible. He
presented a routing plan for the trail through these intersections. The plan provides a safe and attractive trail
alignment through this high traffic area.
A mitigation plan is being prepared which will require approval by all agencies including the and National
Park Service. Environmental impact statements must be drafted as well. At some point, a letter will be sent
stating the County's support the plan with the understanding that all construction will be paid for by the
parties and we would receive comparable parkland in exchange for the property impacted by the roadways.
1
ACTIVE LIVING RAMSEY COUNTY(ALRC) 1,000 BENCHES PROGRAM
Application information for the 1,000 benches program was distributed to the Commission members.
Commission members were asked to bring the applications back to their communities and promote the
program. ALRC will pick up half the cost of the installed benches. Each bench location will cost between
$1200 and $1300. To date, 20 benches have been funded. Seven benches are installed in New Brighton
and 13 in the Rondo neighborhood of St. Paul. The benches are made with recycled plastic slats, cast
aluminum frames, and installed on concrete slabs. 12 x 12 bricks are set in concrete and include
inspirational messages and sponsorship information. The program will take some promotion to get going.
TAMARACK NATURE CENTER DESTINATION FOR DISCOVERY MASTER PLAN
Copies of the Master Plan were distributed to Commission members on August 14, 2007. Chair Straumann
asked if members had reviewed the plan and if there were questions. Commission members expressed
support for the plan.
Ms. Pederson moved, seconded by Ms. Petersen,to support Tamarack Nature Center's Destination
for Discovery Master Plan. Motion carried.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
♦ Working with Public Works on constructing Lower Afton Trail between Century Avenue and McKnight
Road. Public Health is providing some funding for the recycled products being used in trail
construction.
♦ Will begin paving cart paths and roadways at Keller Golf Course on 9/17/07.
Underpass and paved trail extension at Tony Schmidt Regional Park is complete.
♦ Crews are preparing to open the ice arenas for the season.
♦ Met with some legislators on the Tamarack Nature Center Destination for Discovery project. Project
was well received. Ramsey County Parks and Recreation received a second IMLS grant for
$118,000 to prepare design development documents for priority destinations. A State Bonding
request has been submitted for the Nature play, children's garden, pavilion and parking lot
improvements. Ramsey County has been invited to submit a proposal to the Conservation Fund
which is providing twenty$1 million to address grants based on "no child left inside."
♦ The County Board has approved a $100,000 appropriation to prepare preliminary design plans for
Keller Golf Course improvements.
MOTION TO ADJOURN
Upon appropriate motion, the meeting adjourned.
Vicki Dahlquist
2