|
TO: |
Roger L. Stancil, Town Manager |
|
FROM: |
J. B. Culpepper, Planning Director Gene Poveromo, Development Coordinator Curtis Brooks, Urban Forester |
|
SUBJECT: |
Land Use Management Ordinance Text Amendments-Modifications to Tree Protection Regulations |
|
DATE: |
June 11, 2007 |
Enactment of the attached Ordinance would amend the Land Use Management Ordinance to allow for an expansion of the Town’s current tree protection regulations. The proposed changes to the ordinance would require a permit to remove trees in a cumulative area of more than 5,000 square feet even if a building permit is not involved. The proposed changes will also lower the threshold of trees that must be surveyed.
On May 14, 2007, the Council held a Public Hearing to consider this interim expansion of the Town’s tree protection regulations.
To develop new tree regulations, the Council has endorsed a two-phased approach – moderate restrictions in the short term, as described in the memorandum, followed by more substantive changes in the future. The Council plans to hire a consultant with expertise in specialized tree ordinances to develop the more substantive changes to the Tree Protection Ordinance.
More comprehensive revisions in the future could include regulations that apply to all regulated land uses, including existing single-family and two-family residential regardless of the amount of clearing proposed; regulations that account for variation among species, particular to our region, climate, and eco-systems; and, regulations that include a permitting process for tree removal with financial disincentives for unauthorized tree removal.
The Planning Board Tree Committee recommended interim changes to the tree protection regulations as a temporary protective measure for the community. The justification for the proposed ordinance revision is linked to a Town-wide commitment to sustainability, with potential to reduce carbon emissions and decrease the urban “heat-island” effect.
The proposed changes would address tree removal on single-family/two-family lots and would lower the threshold size of trees to be surveyed and shown on Landscape Protection Plans for all projects.
Single-family/Two-family homes: Chapel Hill’s existing Tree Protection Ordinance requires residents to submit tree protection plans including tree surveys as part of a building project (such as a house addition), if the project affects 5,000 square feet or more of land. This requirement applies to existing single-family/two-family homes as well as new construction. The recommended changes to the ordinance (Attachment 1) would require permits to remove trees in a cumulative area of more than 5,000 square feet even if a building permit is not involved.
With the clearing threshold at 5,000 sq. ft., or approximately one-eighth of an acre, we believe that relatively few homeowners will be affected by the proposed interim changes. It has been our experience that it is uncommon for homeowners in Chapel Hill to clear sections of this size on existing lots when they are not already considering other site changes that would necessitate a building permit. The interim measures, as proposed, would not regulate the removal of individual trees on single-and two-family properties if the tree cover is less than 5,000 square feet.
Lower threshold of trees to be surveyed: The proposed changes would also lower the size threshold for various trees to be surveyed as part of a Landscape Protection Plan. This recommended change would impact single-family and two-family projects as well as multi-family and non-residential projects. The proposed changes to the ordinance would amend the definition of a specimen tree to include the following trees:
To further refine the information shown on tree surveys, the ordinance would no longer require certain invasive trees to be located, regardless of size. Eleven (11) invasive species have been identified as undesirable for planting or protecting during construction. Two examples are mimosa and callery bradford pear.
Issues discussed during the May 14, 2007 Public Hearing on the proposed interim changes to the tree protection regulations included comments on:
Key issues discussed concerning the proposed interim changes included:
Each is discussed below.
A. Informing and educating citizens. During the Planning Board review and the Public Hearing several comments focused on the need to inform citizens about the interim changes. In order for the amended tree protection regulations to be effective, citizens must be educated and informed in a timely manner once the Council enacts new regulations.
Comment: The Town Information Officer will produce print and electronic information pieces about the tree regulations. These will include a brochure or one-page information sheet to offer citizens when they apply for permits. Information will appear on the Town’s webpage including a link for individuals who inquire by e-mail. In addition, a news release will be issued to area media to announce the changes.
B. Circumstances in which a permit for tree removal would be denied under the proposed interim ordinance changes. A citizen asked if there would be any circumstance by which a permit to clear an area more than 5,000 sq. ft. would be denied by the Town staff.
Comment: The recommended changes do not include provisions for denial of a valid permit request. We believe the interim changes to the ordinance are intended to increase public awareness of the value of trees and to require a permit, along with the associated review process, for significant clearing on single and two-family residential properties. We believe this permitting process will provide property owners an opportunity to discuss tree removal plans with the Town’s professional staff, and may result in less overall clearing and less unintended damage to trees that are to be retained. Accordingly, under the interim change to the ordinance, citizens will not be prohibited from removing trees from a residential property, regardless of whether they are required to obtain a permit.
We believe that during the development of the next phase of ordinance revisions, a major component of the consultant’s work will be to establish specific provisions for approval or denial of tree removal permit applications. These provisions may include tree preservation requirements for certain sections of residential properties, for example perimeter buffer areas, as well as a schedule of specific fees, fines and replanting requirements the staff will need to enforce these tree removal restrictions.
At the Public Hearing, citizens and Council members stated other concerns and benefits of an ordinance that would result in broader tree protection regulations, beyond the temporary changes under consideration. Our brief response on these topics follows.
C) Several citizens commented on a number of issues associated with: the additional costs of an expanded permitting process; tree protection and community benefits; conflicts between ordinance requirements and solar access; enhanced long term tree protection and/maintenance; and establishment of measurable goals.
Comment: We believe these issues relate to the broader comprehensive revisions proposed to the tree protection regulations. We recommend that the consultant be provided with a copy of the Council minutes from the May 14, 2007 Public Hearing as well as minutes from tonight’s meeting, as more extensive changes to the tree protection regulations are developed. We recommend that the consultant be prepared to respond to each of the issues discussed at future Council meetings.
D) Council members expressed a desire for greater protection of the root systems of protected trees during and after land disturbance and construction activities.
Comment: The Land Use Management Ordinance requires the installation of tree protection fencing during land disturbance and construction activities. Recent improvements to tree protection techniques, including the use of chain-linked fence in place of the standard woven orange fencing in certain circumstances, provide increased protection to the sensitive root system of protected trees.
We believe that the success of tree protection measures can be enhanced by developing greater awareness by property owners, builders, and the public. We suggest that this issue also be referred to the consultant for recommendations to the Council as part of the second phase of revision to the ordinance.
Analysis of the amendment proposal is organized around the requirement of the Land Use Management Ordinance which states that the Ordinance shall not be amended except: a) to correct a manifest error in the chapter; b) because of changed or changing conditions in a particular area or in the jurisdiction generally; or c) to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan.
a) An amendment is justified to correct a manifest error.
Comment: We believe the information in the record to date can be summarized as follows:
Arguments in Support or Opposition: We were unable to identify any arguments in support or opposition of a manifest error.
b) An amendment is justified because of changed or changing conditions in a particular area or in the jurisdiction generally.
Comment: We believe the information in the record thus far can be summarized as follows:
Arguments in Support: We are unable to identify any arguments in support of changed conditions.
Arguments in Opposition: We are not aware of changed conditions.
c) An amendment is justified to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan.
Comment: We believe the information in the record thus far can be summarized as follows:
Arguments in Support: Arguments in support of this finding can be summarized as follows:
The justification for the proposed ordinance revision is linked to a Town-wide commitment to protecting natural resources and a commitment to sustainability, with potential to reduce carbon emissions and decrease the urban “heat-island” effect.
Arguments in Opposition: No arguments in opposition have been submitted to date.
We believe the justification of the text amendment application is to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan particularly as it relates to protecting natural resources.
Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board reviewed the proposed Land Use Management Ordinance Text Amendment on May 1, 2007. The Board voted 8-0 to recommend that the Council approve the application with the enactment of the attached Ordinance. The Board also recommended that the Council implement a public awareness campaign soon after the enactment of the ordinance in order to inform the community of the expanded tree protection issues.
Staff Recommendation: We recommend that the Council enact the attached Ordinance which proposes phased adjustment to the tree protection regulations. The proposed interim changes to the ordinance would require a permit to remove trees in a cumulative area of more than 5,000 square feet even if a building permit is not involved. The interim change will also lower the threshold of trees that must be surveyed, with exemptions for invasive exotic trees listed.