HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.a. Tree Preservation OrdinanceP
City of Rosemount
Executive Summary for Action
City Council Meeting Date: August 20, 1996
Agenda Item: Tree Preservation Ordinance
Agenda Section:
New Business
Prepared By: Andrew Mack
Senior Planner
Agenda
Em # 64
A
Attachments: Ordinance; 8/13,7/23,6/25 Planning
Approved By:
Commission Executive Summaries, PC
Minutes; Developer Mailing List
Please refer to the attached Planning Commission summaries and information regarding the
proposed tree preservation regulations and various issues addressed by the Planning Commission.
These factors, including a series of revisions, have combined into the proposed ordinance now
before the City Council for adoption.
At it's meeting held on August 13, 1996, the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing
regarding this ordinance. In advance of the hearing, and in addition to the required pubic notice,
Staff notified representatives of the development community regarding the meeting to consider
adoption of the regulations. A copy of the mailing list for the notice has also been enclosed for
Council review. As of this date, no comments or input from the public or development
community have been received.
After their final review of the proposed tree regulations, the Planning Commission has
unanimously recommended approval to the City Council.
Recommended Action: MOTION to approve an ordinance amending the City Zoning Code
Ordinance B enhancing existing trees by preserving significant trees and woodlands
City Council Action:
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. B-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY ZONING CODE ORDINANCE B
ENHANCING EXISTING TREES BY PRESERVING SIGNIFICANT
TREES AND WOODLANDS
Section I. Rosemount City Zoning Code Ordinance B Section 3.2 is amended by adding the
following definitions:
CANOPY OF TREE: The horizontal extension of a tree's branches and
foliage in all directions from its trunk and upper -
layer of green crown.
CONIFEROUS/EVERGREEN TREES: A woody plant bearing seeds and cones often times,
but not always, retaining foliage throughout the
year.
CONSTRUCTION AREA: Any area in which movement of earth, alteration in
topography, soil compaction, disruption of
vegetation, change in soil chemistry, or any other
change in the natural character of the land occurs as
a result of site preparation, grading, building
construction or any other construction activity.
DECIDUOUS/HARDWOOD TREES: A woody plant which has a defined crown, and
which loses leaves annually.
DEVELOPER: Any person or entity who undertakes to improve a
parcel of land, by platting for the purposes of
establishing 2 or more dwelling units, or grading
which requires a grading permit. A Developer does
not include any public agency.
DIAMETER OF DECIDUOUS TREE: The length of a straight line measured through the
trunk of a tree at twenty-four (24) inches above the
ground.
DRIP LINE OR ROOT ZONE OF A TREE: An imaginary vertical line which extends from the
outermost branches of a tree's canopy to the
ground.
1
FORESTER: A person holding at least a Bachelor's degree in
forestry from an accredited four-year college of
forestry or any official appointed by the City.
HEALTHY TREE: Average or better condition and vigor for area.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: A person licensed by the State of Minnesota as a
Landscape Architect.
NEW DEVELOPMENT: A piece of property that is being platted for the
purpose of establishing urban residential use with
two or more dwelling units or is being improved by
grading which requires a grading permit. This
definition does not apply to Agricultural lot splits.
NURSERYMAN: A person licensed by the State of Minnesota as a
Nurseryman.
SIGNIFICANT TREE: A healthy tree measuring a minimum of four (4)
inches in diameter for Deciduous Trees measured at
twenty-four (24) inches above the ground, and a
minimum of 6 feet in height for
Coniferous/Evergreen Trees.
SIGNIFICANT WOODLAND
A grouping or cluster of six or more Significant
Trees with a contiguous drip -line in the case of
Deciduous Trees, six or more Significant Coniferous
Trees or a mixture of the two types of trees
occupying at least seven hundred fifty (750) square
feet of property or less if the trees are part of a DNR
designated wildlife corridor.
Section H. Rosemount City Zoning Code Ordinance B Section 8.3.E is amended by adding the
following:
Section 8.3 Landscaping Requirements
E. Woodland Preservation Policy and Credit
3. U12lication and Exem tp ions: The following guidelines shall apply to the
following site activities in the City of Rosemount:
2
a. All new development.
b. Plats which have received preliminary plat approval prior to the
adoption of this Ordinance.
4. Process: Unless otherwise determined by the City Council, the following
process for preserving trees shall be required from the developer:
a. Prepare a tree preservation plan which shall be incorporated on the
grading plan.
b. Implement the tree preservation plan prior to and during site
development.
c. Submit a performance of financial guarantee for compliance with the
approved tree preservation plan.
d. Comply with the City's tree replacement procedure.
The tree preservation plan shall be submitted with preliminary plat plans or as part
of the application for a grading permit. The Tree Preservation Plan must be
certified by a Forester, Landscape Architect, or Nurseryman retained by the
Developer.
5. Tree Preservation Plan: The Developer shall be responsible for implementing
the tree preservation plan prior to and during site grading and plan development.
The tree preservation plan will be reviewed by City Staff to assess the best overall
design for the project taking into account Significant Trees and Significant
Woodlands and ways to enhance the efforts of the Developer to mitigate
corresponding damage. The Developer is encouraged to meet with staff prior to
submission of the preliminary plat application or prior to application for the
grading permit, whichever is sooner, to determine the placement of buildings,
parking, driveways, streets storage and other physical features which result in the
fewest Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands being destroyed or damaged.
The tree preservation plan shall include the following items:
a. The name(s) and address(es) of property owners and Developers.
b. Delineation of the buildings, structures, or impervious surfaces situated
thereon or contemplated to be built thereon.
c. Delineation of all areas to be graded and limits of land disturbance.
d., Size, species, and location of all Significant Trees and Significant
3
Woodlands located within the area to be platted or within the parcel of
record.
e. Identification of all Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands on all
individual lots. (The Developer shall be required to submit a list of all lot
and block numbers identifying those lots).
f. Measures to protect Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands.
g. Identification of all Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands
proposed to be removed within the construction area.
h. Size, species, and location of all replacement trees to be planted on the
property in accordance with the tree replacement schedule.
i. Signature of the person preparing the plan and statement which includes
acknowledgment of the fact the trees to be used as replacements are
appropriate species with respect to survival of the replacement trees.
6. Protective Measures: Measures to protect Significant Trees and Significant
Woodlands shall include:
a. Installation of snow fencing, silt fence, or polyethylene laminate
safety netting placed at the Drip Line of Significant Trees and
Significant Woodlands to be preserved.
b. Identification of any oak trees requiring pruning between April 15 and
July l; any oak trees so pruned shall be required to have any cut areas
sealed with an appropriate tree wound sealant.
7. Additional Measures: Measures to preserve or protect Significant Trees and
Significant Woodlands may include, but are not limited to:
a. Installation of retaining walls or tree wells to preserve trees by
eliminating the filling or cutting of soil within drip zones.
b. Placement of utilities in common trenches outside of the Drip Line of
Significant Trees, or use of tunneled installation.
c. Prevention of change in soil chemistry due to concrete washout and
leakage or spillage of toxic materials, such as fuels or paints.
d. Use of tree root aeration, fertilization, and/or irrigation systems.
4
e. Transplanting of Significant Trees into a protected area for later moving
into permanent sites within the Construction Area.
f. Therapeutic pruning.
8. Significant Tree/Woodland Removal: Significant Tree and Significant
Woodlands removal shall be in accordance with the City -approved tree
preservation plan. This removal rate does not apply to unhealthy trees. The plan
should remove no more than 25% of the total number of Significant Trees and/or
Significant Woodlands which were existing prior to the preliminary plat as a result
of the following construction activities, approved by the City as a part of a
preliminary plat:
a. Site grading
b. Installation of public utilities including sanitary sewer, storm sewer,
water, natural gas, electrical service, and cable TV.
c. Construction of public streets.
d. Construction/grading of drainage ways.
e. Filling of any area.
f. Any other activity within the Construction Area.
Where practical difficulties or practical hardships result from strict compliance
with the provisions of this paragraph, City Staff may permit the removal of up to
an additional 5% of the Significant Trees and/or Significant Woodlands without
requiring a variance approval by the City Council.
9. Financial Guarantee: Refer to Zoning Ordinance B Section 8.3.G.
10. Replacement Procedure: Developers shall be required to replace the
Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands which were indicated on the tree
preservation plan to be saved, but were ultimately destroyed or damaged up to a
year after the development is complete. Significant Trees and Significant
Woodlands that suffered immediate destruction must be replaced prior to a
certificate of occupancy being issued. The developer shall be required to replace
each of the Significant Trees destroyed or damaged with (2) replacement trees. In
the case of a Significant Woodland being damaged or destroyed the amount of
square footage removed must be replaced. Species available to nurseries most
similar to lost tree types must be used. Staff may refuse replacement material.
5
Replacement trees must be trees that consist of nursery stock and be no less than
the following sizes:
a. Deciduous trees - no less than two (2) inches in diameter measured
twenty-four (24) inches from the base top of the root system.
b. Coniferous trees- no less than six (6) feet high.
Replacement trees shall not be placed on easements or street rights -of -ways; the
City, however, reserves the right to plant and care for trees planted in public right=
of -ways. City Staff can assist in the siting of replacement trees. Should placing
the replacement trees on a site, once the site has been developed, prove difficult or
impossible, the trees will be placed on public property at the direction of City Staff.
Replacement trees shall meet the approval of staff. The following list of materials
are acceptable. Other selections may be approved by Staff.
Deciduous Trees:
Small Trees
Lilac
Crabapple
Hawthorne
Plum
Serviceberry
Coniferous Trees: Fir
Medium Trees
Linden (Bass Wood)
Green Ash
Honey Locust
Hackberry
River Birch
Pine
European Larch
age Trees
Maples (No Silver Maple)
Kentucky Coffee Tree
Bur Oak
Spruce
Canadian Hemlock
Cedar
11. Other Replacement Tree Requirements: Choice of replacement trees species
and location of the trees should also be contingent on the following information:
a. Soil Composition: Comparisons should be made between soil conditions
and the ecology of the proposed species to make sure they are compatible.
b. Spatial Requirements: The potential height and crown spread of the
proposed replacement trees should be known. Usually, half of the adult
tree crown diameter is the amount of distance a tree should be planted from
any above ground objects.
c. Diseases and Insect Problems: Appropriate replacement choices shall
also consider insect and disease problems that may be common with
particular species in the part of the State in which the City of Rosemount is
n
located.
Section III. This ordinance will become effective from and after its date of publication.
Adopted this day of -1996.
Cathy Busho, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan M. Walsh, City Clerk
Published this day of , 1996 in the Rosemount Town Pages.
fel
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.B-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY ZONING CODE ORDINANCE B
ENHANCING EXISTING TREES BY PRESERVING SIGNIFICANT
TREES AND WOODLANDS
Section I. Rosemount City Zoning Code Ordinance B Section 3.2 is amended by adding the
following definitions:
BUILDER:
CANOPY OF TREE:
CONIFEROUS/EVERGREEN TREES
CONSTRUCTION AREA:
DECIDUOUS/HARDWOOD TREES
DEVELOPER:
DIAMETER OF DECIDUOUS TREE:
Any person or entity to whom a building permit is
issued.
The horizontal extension of a tree's branches and
foliage in all directions from its trunk and upper -
layer of green crown.
A woody plant bearing seeds and cones often times,
but not always, retaining foliage throughout the
year.
Any area in which movement of earth, alteration in
topography, soil compaction, disruption of
vegetation, change in soil chemistry, or any other
change in the natural character of the land occurs as
a result of site preparation, grading, building
construction or any other construction activity.
A woody plant which has a defined crown, and
which loses leaves annually.
Any person or entity who undertakes to improve a
parcel of land, by platting, grading, and/or installing
utilities. For purposes of the tree preservation
guidelines, a Developer does not include a Builder
as defined herein, or any public agency.
The length of a straight line measured through the
trunk of a tree at twenty-four (24) inches above the
ground.
DRIP LINE OR ROOT ZONE OF A TREE: An imaginary vertical line which extends from the
outermost branches of a tree's canopy to the
ground.
FORESTER:
HEALTHY TREE:
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:
NEW DEVELOPMENT:
NURSERYMAN:
SIGNIFICANT TREE:
SIGNIFICANT WOODLAND
A person holding at least a Bachelor's degree in
forestry from an accredited four-year college of
forestry or any official appointed by the City.
Average or better condition and vigor for area.
A person licensed by the State of Minnesota as a
Landscape Architect.
A piece of property that is being platted or is under
construction for the purpose of establishing urban
residential use with two or more dwelling units. This
definition does not apply to lot splits in the
Agriculture zone or any individual lots.
A person licensed by the State of Minnesota as a
Nurseryman.
A healthy tree measuring a minimum of four (4)
inches in diameter for Deciduous Trees measured at
twenty-four (24) inches above the ground, and a
minimum of 6 feet in height for
Coniferous/Evergreen Trees.
A grouping or cluster of six or more Significant
Trees with a contiguous drip -line in the case of
Deciduous Trees, six or more Significant Coniferous
Trees or a mixture of the two types of trees
occupying at least seven hundred fifty (750) square
feet of property or less if the trees are part of a DNR
designated wildlife corridor.
Section H. Rosemount City Zoning Code Ordinance B Section 8.3.E is amended by adding the
following:
0a
Section 8.3 Landscaping Requirements
E. Woodland Preservation Policy and Credit
3. Annlication and Exemptions: The following guidelines shall apply to the
following site activities in the City of Rosemount:
a. All sites of new development.
b. Existing final plats approved before December 31, 1996 shall be
exempt.
4. Process: Unless otherwise determined by the City Council, the following
process for preserving trees shall be required from the developer:
a. Prepare a tree preservation plan which shall be incorporated on the
grading plan.
b. Implement the tree preservation plan prior to and during site
development.
c. Submit a performance of financial guarantee for compliance with the
approved tree preservation plan.
d. Comply with the City's tree replacement procedure.
The tree preservation plan shall be submitted with preliminary plat plans or as part
of the application for a grading permit. The Tree Preservation Plan must be
certified by a Forester, Landscape Architect, or Nurseryman retained by the
Developer.
5. Tree Preservation Plan: The Developer shall be responsible for implementing
the tree preservation plan prior to and during site grading and plan development.
The tree preservation plan will be reviewed by City Staff to assess the best overall
design for the project taking into account Significant Trees and Significant
Woodlands and ways to enhance the efforts of the Developer to mitigate
corresponding damage. The Developer is encouraged to meet with staff prior to
submission of the preliminary plat application or prior to application for the
grading permit, whichever is sooner, to determine the placement of buildings,
parking, driveways, streets storage and other physical features which result in the
fewest Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands being destroyed or damaged.
The tree preservation plan shall include the following items:
3
a. The name(s) and address(es) of property owners and Developers.
b. Delineation of the buildings, structures, or impervious surfaces situated
thereon or contemplated to be built thereon.
c. Delineation of all areas to be graded and limits of land disturbance.
d. Size, species, and location of all Significant Trees and Significant
Woodlands located within the area to be platted or within the parcel of
record.
e. Identification of all Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands on all
individual lots. (The Developer shall be required to submit a fist of all lot
and block numbers identifying those lots).
f. Measures to protect Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands.
g. Identification of all Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands
proposed to be removed within the construction area.
h. Size, species, and location of all replacement trees to be planted on the
property in accordance with the tree replacement schedule.
i. Signature of the person preparing the plan and statement which includes,
acknowledgment of the fact the trees to be used as replacements are
appropriate species with respect to survival of the replacement trees.
6. Protective Measures: Measures to protect Significant Trees and Significant
Woodlands shall include:
a. Installation of snow fencing, silt fence, or polyethylene laminate
safety netting placed at the Drip Line of Significant Trees and
Significant Woodlands to be preserved.
b. Identification of any oak trees requiring pruning between April 15 and
July l; any oak trees so pruned shall be required to have any cut areas
sealed with an appropriate tree wound sealant.
7. Additional Measures: Measures to preserve or protect Significant Trees and
Significant Woodlands mayinclude, but are not limited to:
a. Installation of retaining walls or tree wells to preserve trees by
eliminating the filling or cutting of soil within drip zones.
4
b. Placement of utilities in common trenches outside of the Drip Line of
Significant Trees, or use of tunneled installation.
c. Prevention of change in soil chemistry due to concrete washout and
leakage or spillage of toxic materials, such as fuels or paints.
d. Use of tree root aeration, fertilization, and/or irrigation systems.
e. Transplanting of Significant Trees into a protected area for later moving
into permanent sites within the Construction Area.
f. Therapeutic pruning.
8. Significant Tree/Woodland Removal: Significant Tree and Significant
Woodlands removal shall be in accordance with the City -approved tree
preservation plan. This removal rate does not apply to unhealthy trees. The plan
should remove no more than 25% of the total number of Significant Trees and/or
Significant Woodlands which were existing prior to the preliminary plat as a result
of the following construction activities, approved by the City as a part of a
preliminary plat:
a. Site grading
b. Installation of public utilities including sanitary sewer, storm sewer,
water, natural gas, electrical service, and cable TV.
c. Construction of public streets.
d. Construction/grading of drainage ways.
e. Filling of any area.
f. Any other activity within the Construction Area.
Where practical difficulties or practical hardships result from strict compliance
with the provisions of this paragraph, City Staff may permit the removal of up to
an additional 5% of the Significant Trees and/or Significant Woodlands without
requiring a variance approval by the City Council.
9. Financial Guarantee: Refer to Zoning Ordinance B Section 8.3.G.
10. Replacement Procedure: Developers shall be required to replace the
Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands which were indicated on the tree
5
preservation plan to be saved, but were ultimately destroyed or damaged up to a
year after the development is complete. Significant Trees and Significant
Woodlands that suffered immediate destruction must be replaced prior to a
certificate of occupancy being issued. The developer shall be required to replace
each of the Significant Trees destroyed or damaged with (2) replacement trees. In
the case of a Significant Woodland being damaged or destroyed the amount of
square footage removed must be replaced. Species available to nurseries most
similar to lost tree types must be used. Staff will reserve the right to refuse
replacement material. Replacement trees must be trees that consist of nursery
stock and be no less than the following sizes:
a. Deciduous trees - no less than two (2) inches in diameter measured
twenty-four (24) inches from the base top of the root system.
b. Coniferous trees - no less than six (6) feet high.
Replacement trees shall not be placed on easements or street rights -of -ways; the
City, however, reserves the right to plant and care for trees planted in public right-
of-ways. City Staff can assist in the siting of replacement trees. Should placing
the replacement trees on a site, once the site has been developed, prove difficult or
impossible, the trees will be placed on public property at the direction of City Staff.
Replacement trees shall meet the approval of staff. The following is not an
exhaustive fist of trees:
Deciduous Trees:
Small Trees
Lilac
Crabapple
Hawthorne
Plum
Serviceberry
Coniferous Trees: Fir
Medium Trees
Linden (Bass Wood)
Green Ash
Honey Locust
Hackberry
River Birch
Pine
European Larch
Large Trees
Maples (No Silver Maple)
Kentucky Coffee Tree
Bur Oak
Spruce
Canadian Hemlock
Cedar
11. Other Replacement Tree Requirements: Choice of replacement trees species
and location of the trees should also be contingent on the following information:
a. Soil Composition: Comparisons should be made between soil conditions
and the ecology of the proposed species to make sure they are compatible.
G
b. Spatial Requirements: The potential height and crown spread of the
proposed replacement trees should be known. Usually, half of the adult
tree crown diameter is the amount of distance a tree should be planted from
any above ground objects.
c. Diseases and Insect Problems: Appropriate replacement choices shall
also consider insect and disease problems that may be common with
particular species in the part of the State in which the City of Rosemount is
located.
Section III. This ordinance will become effective from and after its date of publication.
Adopted this day of .1996.
Cathy Busho, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan M. Walsh, City Clerk
Published this day of , 1996 in the Rosemount Town Paszes.
7
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
Planning Commission Meeting Date: August 13, 1996
AGENDA ITEM: Tree Preservation Ordinance
AGENDA SECTION:
Public Hearing
PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, Assistant Planner
AGENDA NO. 7D.
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Ordinance
APPROVED BY:
The attached tree preservation ordinance draft represents the combined efforts of Dean Lotter's
research and the direction by the Planning Commission. New information and comments
resulting from the public hearing coupled with any additional direction the Planning Commission
may provide will result in a revised draft that will be forwarded to the City Council.
Several principles should be kept in mind when discussing a tree preservation ordinance.
1. The transformation of land from a wooded natural environment to urban residential will
never allow a total one for one tree replacement expectation within the same area of the
original stand of trees. Right-of-way, buildings, driveways, drainage and yards will
displace much of the original environment so that other areas beyond the original
woodland has to absorb the replacement trees.
2. The DNR is working on the wildlife corridor concept. This project is in its infancy and
has yet to achieve the sophistication of other natural systems regulatory methods such
as wetlands and water ways. Staff will be meeting with appropriate DNR personnel in an
attempt to identify corridors and determine whether additional ordinance amendments
are warranted. As above, rural residential uses may provide opportunities to preserve
corridors because of the low density pattern. However, urban residential development at
the normal density of 2.5 to 3 dwelling units per acre will severely inhibit the
preservation of corridors.
3. Oak wilt is so pervasive that it can occur even though the best management practices for
for tree preservation related to construction have been observed. The best opportunity
to ensure the highest rate of survival is during the construction process and observing
the violation of drip zones and root damage. Penalties must be assessed at this time if
the developer is to be held responsible for tree mortality.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to recommend approval of the proposed tree
preservation ordinance to the City Council subject to the
incorporation of modified language resulting from testimony
received at the public hearing and subsequent Planning
Commission direction.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
0
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
E^.;CUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: 07/23/96
AGENDA ITEM:Tree Preservation Ordinance
AGENDA SECTION: Old
Business
PREPARED BY: Dean R. Lotter, Intern
AGENDA NO.
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Ordinance
APPROVED BY:
At the June 25, 1996 Planning Commission meeting, several ideas and suggestions were
offered in an effort to enhance the ordinance. After further consideration and review by staff,
some options have been created. First, some answers will be given in response to questions
asked at the last meeting. Then, the options will be discussed.
• With regards to the allowed 25% removal rate of significant trees and
woodlands, a question was asked as to how that numerical rate
compared with other ordinances.
Answer: Oakdale also uses a rate of 25%, Burnsville allows anywhere
between 40% to 60% depending on the zoning district, Eden Prairie uses
a rate of 35%. Other communities such as Lino Lakes seem to define
what kinds of trees they want saved and the ordinance kicks in if any of
these trees are to be disturbed by development.
• Clarification was needed in the ordinance language with regards to
exactly what kind of developments or grading activities will need a tree
preservation plan.
Answer: All sites of new development. It is recommended that already
developed sites be exempted due to property rights issues and limited
staff resources.
• The idea was mentioned that the age of the tree should be taken into
consideration when requiring replacement trees. It is staff
recommendation that an ordinance be developed that has a replacement
schedule based on size of diameter.
Essentially, three different options exist with regards to the creation of an ordinance.
1) Less Restrictive: An ordinance that limits the applicability of the language
to only specific occasions and circumstances. Defining significant trees
using large diameters. Ours currently defines any tree of 4 inches in
diameter or more a significant tree. Other ordinances define a significant
tree as a tree with a much higher diameter. Allowed removal rates that are
high (Burnsville allows 40% to 60% removal rate, whereas our current
language allows 25% removal rate.). Replacement schedules could be
designed in a way so that replacement trees could be much smaller than the
destroyed significant trees.
2) Very Restrictive: This—dinance, of course, would be the--Yact opposite
of the weak ordinance. , . ie important issue to remember hey a is that the
more restrictive and involved the language in the ordinance, the more staff
time would be required. Eden Prairie has one full-time staff member that
works on the administration and enforcement of its tree preservation
ordinance.
3) Restrictive: The draft ordinance under consideration would probably fit in
to this category. While our current definition of a significant tree and our
25% removal rate is a little more restrictive than other ordinances, our
replacement schedule is more lenient than others. The fact our ordinance
would apply to areas of completely new development and exempt other
currently developed areas is a more lenient approach, but limited staff
resources would probably make this approach the realistic one to take.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to set a public hearing date for AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE CITY ZONING CODE ORDINANCE B ENHANCING EXISTING TREES BY
PRESERVING SIGNIFICANT TREES AND WOODLANDS for August 13, 1996, or Motion to
direct staff to revise the proposed ordinance to make it more or less restrictive.
COUNCIL ACTION:
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EX_.;UTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: 06/25/96
AGENDA ITEM: Tree Preservation Ordinance
AGENDA SECTION: New
Business
PREPARED BY: Dean R. Lotter, Intern
AGENDA NO.
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Tree Preservation Ordinance
APPROVED BY:
As directed by the goal setting session held in early spring of this year, staff has developed a
tree preservation ordinance. This ordinance is intended to be aimed at larger developments of
land on which significant trees and/or significant woodlands exist. Trees and woodlands
benefit the community in a variety of ways such providing noise buffering, having cooling
effects, providing an environment for wildlife to live in harmony with the citizens and
contributing to an aesthetically pleasing community. The destruction or removal of these
community assets has a detrimental effect on the quality of life in the City.
This ordinance was developed with the homeowner in mind. Staff wanted to create a
"homeowner friendly" ordinance that would not place undue burdens on homeowners.
Therefore, the ordinance targets any sites of new development and/or sites in excess of one
thousand (1000) square feet that are undergoing grading for any reason.
Methods of preservation and other required pieces of information are to be highlighted in a tree
preservation plan that would be prepared by a licensed professional for the developer. The
plan would then be submitted to the City as part of the development review process. The
amount of trees or woodlands that could be removed without penalty has been set at twenty-
five (25%) percent. Any significant trees or significant woodlands that were destroyed as a
result of development and/or grading activities would have to be replaced according to a
replacement schedule also included in this ordinance. Should the replacement of trees prove
difficult or impossible after a site has been developed and/or grading has taken place, City Staff
must be consulted and the trees will be planted elsewhere in the City.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: This item is for discussion only. No action requested at this time. I
COUNCIL ACTION:
Regular Planning Commission Meeting Proceedings
June 25, 1996
Page 3
Commissioner Tentinger questioned whether any discussion occurred at the last City Council
meeting in regards to the intended use of the Rosewood Manor outlot the City acquired in the land
swap with Wensmann Homes, Inc. Mayor Busho responded to Commissioner Tentinger's question.
New Business: Tree Preservation Ordinance
Intern Lotter related that at the goal setting session held in early Spring of 1996 Staff was directed to
draft a Tree Preservation Ordinance. Mr. Lotter stated that Staff has drafted a proposed ordinance
and is seeking input from the Commission in regards to this ordinance. He stated that this ordinance
is intended to affect larger developments of land on which significant trees and woodlands exist and
was drafted to be "homeowner friendly." Mr. Lotter then reviewed the proposed ordinance including
the replacement procedure and the 25% removal limit.
A discussion occurred regarding exemptions to the proposed guidelines. Intern Lotter stated that
Staff attempted to put the responsibility on the developer and not burden the homeowner and that is
the purpose of not regulating any grading that affects less than 1,000 square feet of land. Member
Tentinger felt strongly that homeowners should not be affected by this ordinance. He believed that if
a homeowner wanted to remove a few trees on their property to construct a garden, etc., they should
have that right and not have to consult the City.
Member Shoe -Corrigan stated that she has two goals in the adoption of this ordinance: a) to assist in
managing wildlife; and b) to assist in the public care of the landscape. She mentioned several
suggestions to Staff including the following: (1) the tree replacement procedure section should be
more specific. She felt that some trees can not be replicated as certain wildlife resides in those trees
and tighter restrictions are therefore needed; (2) identify "critical tree stands" in the City and include
language in the ordinance to protect these tree stands; (3) minor suggestions to revise some of the
definitions; and (4) creating a Tree Board.
The Commission discussed enforcement of this ordinance, the 25% removal limit and various other
issues in relation to this proposed ordinance.
Intern Lotter reiterated the changes the Commissioners were suggesting and stated that he would
redraft this ordinance pursuant to the direction of the Commission.
MOTION by Droste to adjourn. Seconded by DeBettignies. There being no further business to
come before this Commission and upon unanimous decision, this meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kelli A. Grund
Recording Secretary
Regular Planning Commission Meeting Proceedings
July 23, 1996
Page 2
MOTION by Tentinger to table action regarding the Concept Residential Planned Unit Development
for Geronime Pond. Seconded by Shoe -Corrigan. Ayes: Shoe -Corrigan, Droste, Tentinger,
DeBettignies and McDermott. Nays: 0. Motion passes 5-0.
Old Business: Tree Preservation Ordinance
Intern Dean Lotter mentioned that a draft of the Tree Preservation Ordinance was reviewed by the
Planning Commission at its June 25, 1996, meeting where several suggestions were made to enhance
the ordinance. He stated that since that time he has redrafted the ordinance and is requesting further
input regarding how restrictive the ordinance should be and possibly setting this matter for a public
hearing. Mr. Lotter reviewed the proposed ordinance, discussing the following: 1) application and
exemptions to the ordinance; 2) definition of significant trees; 3) proposed removal rate of 25%
(reviewed other cities removal rates); and 4) tree replacement schedule.
A discussion occurred regarding the replacement rate and whether a higher ratio should be
considered, replacement of trees with similar species, and who would enforce this ordinance as there
is limited resources.
Chairperson Droste commented that of the 3 options Intern Lotter listed in his executive summary,
he felt the Restrictive option was the best. He stated that the proposed ordinance was a basis to work
from and was a good first step.
Member DeBettignies felt that the City Engineer would need to decide if removal of the trees would
effect erosion on the site. He also stated that a disclaimer should be included in the replacement
schedule which would state that other species of trees could be approved by City staff.
Member McDermott requested that language be included in the replacement schedule that would
require a tree to be replaced with a similar species and agreed to by City staff.
Member Shoe -Corrigan inquired as to whether the City reviewed initiating a volunteer committee to
help with enforcement of this ordinance. Intern Lotter responded that at this time it is proposed that
one staff member, with other duties, would enforce this ordinance and if this is inadequate, the City
would reevaluate at that time.
Chairperson Droste closed this item at 7:05 p.m. in order to open the public hearing scheduled at that
time.
Public Hearing: Cleansoils Minnesota, Inc. - Concept Planned Unit Development
Chairman Droste opened the public hearing to hear public testimony regarding the Concept Planned
Unit Development application of Cleansoils Minnesota, Inc. The recording secretary has placed the
Affidavit of Publication and Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of Public Hearing Notice on file with
the City.
Regular Planning Commission Meeting Proceedings
August 13,1996
Page 7 ")?Arr
he does not see why not the applicant will not complete this development. Mr. Uban commented that
if the applicant were to "bail", the Planned Unit Development Agreement would still have to be
followed and any changes would need to be approved by the City.
Member McDermott questioned if the concerns raised in Assistant Pearson's June 5, 1996 letter had
been addressed in regards to snow removal, parking on streets, setbacks, etc. He stated that he
approved of a homeowners association but was worried about deterioration of the site in the future
with such small lots. He stated that it appeared that this development was being "shoehorned" into a
small space when there was plenty of empty land between this site and the Koch Refinery.
Member McDermott's concerns were addressed and discussed. Member McDermott stated that he
had confidence in the applicant, however, he wants them to retain control of this development in
order to retain the character that is proposed.
Chairman Droste recommended that the City contact Arbor Pointe in Inver Grove Heights to see
how the snow removal in that development is handled.
MOTION by Shoe -Corrigan to direct Staff to develop findings and conditions to be reviewed by the
Planning Commission on August 27, 1996, in support of the Concept PUD subject to a letter.
submitted by CMC (by August 19, 1996) to waive the 120 -day deadline. Seconded by Droste. Ayes:
DeBettignies, McDermott, Shoe -Corrigan and Droste. Nays: 0. Motion passes 4-
b/
Public Hearing: Tree Preservation Ordinance ?Arr
Chairman Droste opened the public hearing to hear public testimony regarding the proposed Tree
Preservation Ordinance. The recording secretary has placed the Affidavit of Publication and Affidavit
of Posting of Public Hearing Notice on file with the City.
Senior Planner Mack stated that the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance is the combined efforts of
former Intern Dean Lotter's research and direction by the Planning Commission. Mr. Mack
mentioned that Staff has contacted Minnesota DNR in regards to Member Shoe-Corrigan's concerns
regarding wildlife corridors. Staff was informed that the DNR is currently working on this wildlife
corridor concept. Staff will be meeting with the DNR in an attempt to identify corridors and
determine whether changes to the ordinance are warranted. Mr. Mack reviewed the changes to the
ordinance since the previous meeting. He mentioned that current and potential developers in the area
were informed of the public hearing.
As there were no comments from audience, MOTION by DeBettignies to close the public hearing.
Seconded by Shoe -Corrigan. Ayes: McDermott, Shoe -Corrigan, Droste and DeBettignies. Nays: 0.
Motion passes 4-0.
Member Shoe -Corrigan thanked Staff and Mr. Lotter for all the work that went into this ordinance.
Regular Planning Commission Meeting Proceedings
August 13,1996
Page 8
DRAFT
MOTION by McDermott to recommend approval of the proposed tree preservation ordinance to the
City Council subject to the incorporation of modified language resulting from testimony received at
the public hearing and subsequent Planning Commission direction. Seconded by Shoe -Corrigan.
Ayes: Shoe -Corrigan, Droste, DeBettignies and McDermott. Nays: 0. Motion passes 4-0.
New Business: Rosemount Business Park First Addition- Final Plat
Community Development Director Rogness stated that the Preliminary Plat for the Rosemount
Business Park was approved on October 19, 1993 with the only platted lot being Cannon Equipment.
Mr. Rogness reviewed the site plan and stated that the Final Plat conforms to the approved
Preliminary Plat. He mentioned that the surveyor made an error in regards to the southerly lot line
and commented that this lot line will be moved approximately 15 feet further south.
MOTION by Droste to recommend approval of Rosemount Business Park First Addition. Seconded
by Shoe -Corrigan. Ayes: Droste, DeBettignies, McDermott and Shoe -Corrigan. Nays: 0. Motion
passes 4-0.
MOTION by Droste to adjourn. Seconded by DeBettignies. There being no further business to
come before this Commission and upon unanimous decision, this meeting was adjourned at 10:00
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kelli A. Grund
Recording Secretary
U.S. Home Corporation
Rosemount Development Co.
Suite 300
Chippendale Office Building
8421 Wayzata Blvd.
3480 Upper 149th Street West
Golden Valley, MN 55426
Rosemount, NN 55068
1111 11 Rill III I III IIII III IIIIIIII
Hampton Development Corp.
Meadowood, Inc.
12433 Princeton Avenue
12101 16th Avenue South
Savage, MN 55378
Burnsville, NN 55337-2917
CMC Heartland Partners
International Development III
Suite 206
P.O. Box 6205
3131 Fernbrook Lane
Chicago, IL 60680-6205
Plymouth, MN 55447
Ground Development Corp.
1550 Utica Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Wensmann Homes, Inc.
3312 151st Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068
Basic Builders, Inc.
14450 South Robert Trail
Rosemount, MN 55068