Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Paschke reviewed the direction from the City Council instructing staff to draft <br /> the tree replacement policy as represented in Attachment A, and consult with the <br /> PWETC and Parks & Recreation Commission. Mr. Paschke reviewed some <br /> discussion points to facilitate and solicit that input (Attachment B). <br /> Mr. Paschke reviewed the Tree Preservation Ordinance and need for language <br /> built into city code for replacement of trees on public property if unable to be <br /> accommodated on the development site itself via a designated formula. Mr. <br /> Paschke advised that the City Council had approved a $500 per tree required in <br /> lieu of tree replacement based on caliper size of the removed trees. In summary, <br /> Mr. Paschke advised the developer could replace the trees on their site or within a <br /> certain area, or pay a fee accordingly. <br /> Attachment A <br /> Member Seigler stated that he was not familiar with this tree policy at all. <br /> Mr. Paschke reiterated that this was a new policy, still in draft form, and was <br /> being undertaken subsequent to the City Council's recently revised and now <br /> approved tree preservation ordinance adopted for any and all developments for <br /> preservation or replacement on site of by other means (e.g. fee) or replacement on <br /> other sites. Using several of the more recent community development projects, <br /> Mr. Paschke provided examples. <br /> At the request of Member Lenz, Mr. Paschke confirmed that this policy would not <br /> affect private property, but would function somewhat similarly to the city's <br /> designated Park Dedication Fund except this would affect developments of three <br /> or more lots (e.g. Wheaton Woods Project off Dale Street and Wheaton Avenue) <br /> with review of submitted tree plans. <br /> Member Seigler asked if adjacent communities had similar policies. <br /> Mr. Paschke responded that many metropolitan municipalities had such policies, <br /> especially now when urban communities were trying to preserve green space and <br /> mature trees. Mr. Paschke advised that he didn't have a list of those communities <br /> available, but was aware that the City of St. Paul did NOT have a tree <br /> preservation policy. Mr. Paschke noted it was difficult to compare policies as <br /> they varied so much based on other city-specific regulations, but admitted that <br /> staff had found few policies as extensive as Roseville City Code. As previously <br /> noted, Mr. Paschke advised that it was typical in a suburban landscape to preserve <br /> tree coverage, and the goal was to find a spot for trees being removed, and if not <br /> to require a fee of$500 per tree removed. <br /> Mr. Paschke advised that the city's intent is to get ahead of the policy before <br /> accumulating funding in the tree replacement fund for expending those dollars, <br /> and beyond just finding appropriate locations around the city. Mr. Paschke noted <br /> that staff was tasked with working with property owners to provide appropriate <br /> Page 3 of 17 <br />