Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-02-18 Work Session Meeting Packet Meeting location: Edina City Hall Community Room 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN City Council Work Session Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2025 5:30 PM Accessibility Support: The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Meeting Topics 3.1. Tree Protection Ordinance 4. Adjournment Page 1 of 36 d ITEM REPORT Date: February 18, 2025 Item Activity: Discussion Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 3.1 Prepared By: Scott Neal, City Manager Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Administration Item Title: Tree Protection Ordinance Action Requested: Information only. Information/Background: Mayor Hovland has drafted a number of amendments that he would like the Council to consider making to our current Tree Protection Ordinance. The Mayor will present the proposed amendments to the Council at the Feb. 18 Work Session. The Mayor provided staff with an advance copy of the proposed amendments, which has allowed us sufficient time to gather feedback on the proposed amendments from City staff, City Attorney and the Energy & Environment Commission. This feedback will be shared with Council Members prior to the Feb. 18 Work Session. Please note that the City Attorney’s feedback will be provided to you via separate email from the packet because it contains privileged and confidential information at this time. If there is consensus around some or all of the Mayor’s proposed amendments at the Work Session, staff will draft the necessary ordinance language for a future City Council meeting. Supporting Documentation: 1. Draft of Tree Replacement Ordinance from Mayor 2. Draft of Tree Replacement Ordinance with Notes from Residents 3. Larkin Hoffman letter 10-2024 4. Tree Ordinance Staff Comments 5. EEC Advisory Communication: Tree Protection Ordinance Proposed Changes Page 2 of 36 Existing Stricken text — Added text — XXXX ORDINANCE NO. 2024-04 AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING TREE PROTECTION The City Council Of Edina Ordains: Section I . Chapter 10, Article Ill of the Edina City Code is amended as follows: DIVISION Ill. TREE PROTECTION Sec. 1 0-82. Preservation, protection and replacement of Protected Trees. This division applies to the following permits and land use applications on properties that are zoned R- I and R-2: grading permits, demolition permits, subdivisions applications, building permit applications for principal and accessory structures including a garage, deck or a pool; and additions to principal and accessory structures. This division does not apply to city parkland, which follows tree protection guidelines outlined in Edina's Comprehensive Plan and City Park Master Plan. Purpose. Edina is fortunate to have a robust inventory of mature trees that form an integral part of the unique character and history of the city, and that contribute to the long-term aesthetic, environmental, and economic well- being of the city. The goal of this section is to preserve Edina's high valued trees, while allowing reasonable development to take place and not interfere with how existing property owners use their property. The purpose of the ordinance is to: a. Preserve and grow Edina's tree canopy cover by protecting mature trees throughout the city. b. Protect and enhance property values by conserving and adding to the distinctive and unique aesthetic character of Edina's tree population. c. Protect and enhance the distinctive character of Edina's neighborhoods. d. Improve the quality of life for all stakeholders, including city residents, visitors and wildlife. e. Protect the environment by the filtering of air and soil pollutants, increasing oxygen levels and reducing C02; preventing and reducing erosion and stormwater by stabilizing soils; reducing heat convection; decreasing wind speeds; reducing noise pollution and decreasing the urban heat island effect. f. Protect and maintain healthy trees in the development and building permit processes as set forth herein; and prevent tree loss by eliminating or reducing compacted fill and excavation near tree roots. (2) Definitions: Page 3 of 36 Stricken text Added text a. Protected tree: Any tree that is structurally sound and healthy, and that meets one of the following: — XXXX XXX-X i.A deciduous tree that is at least six inches dbh, except box elders, poplar, willow, silver maple, black locust, fruit tree species, ash, and mulberry. ii.A coniferous tree that is at least 15 feet in height. b.Removable tree. Any tree not defined as a protected tree, and as defined as an invasive species by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. c.Critical root zone. The minimum area around a tree that is left undisturbed. The critical root radius is calculated by measuring the tree's diameter at breast height. For each inch of tree diameter, one and one-half feet of root zone radius must be protected. For example, if a tree's dbh is ten inches, then its critical root zone radius is 15 feet (10 x 1 .5 = 1 5). If the critical root zone of a tree on site or an adjacent property must be disturbed for construction or construction activity, a plan for the disturbance shall be submitted as part of the tree protection plan subject to review and approval of the city forester to minimize the damage. d.Diameter at breast height (dbh). The dbh shall be measured at a height of four and six-tenths feet. e.Transplanted tree. A protected tree which is removed from a lot and replanted to another private lot or a public space in Edina. f.Heritage tree. A protected deciduous tree above 30 inches dbh and a protected coniferous tree taller than 30 feet. g.Unbuilt Lot: An existing or newly created lot, with a unique address that has not had a primary residential structure. (3)Applications for all permit types identified in section 10-82 must include a tree protection plan indicating where protected and heritage trees are located and, their species, caliper, and health. The plan must show how protected and heritage trees are preserved and protected during construction. The plan must also show if any protected or heritage trees are proposed to be removed and the location, species and size of all replacement tree(s). The tree protection plan should be coordinated with the stormwater management plan; proposed and protected trees should be shown on the stormwater management plan to ensure no conflicts. (4)If a protected tree is removed, it must be replaced with trees equal to at least 75 percent of the deciduous dbh and 75 percent of the coniferous height in feet, as applicable, subject to the following conditions: Page 4 of 36 Stricken text Added text — XXXX a. Protected trees must be replaced with species of a similar type (deciduous or coniferous) according to Part ( l l ) that are normally found growing in similar conditions. Exceptions can be made for sites where the soils have been engineered or corrected for required stormwater infrastructure features, such as pulverized clay soils used to create earthworks for stormwater direction and retention purposes, or when well-drained soils for improved stormwater percolation and infiltration requirements. Tree species that are best adaptable to new soil conditions can be used that are included on Hennepin County's "Recommended Tree List." b. Replacement trees must not be subject to known epidemic diseases or infestations. Disease or infestation resistant species and cultivars are allowed. c. Replacement trees must be at least two inches in caliper for deciduous trees and a minimum of six feet tall for coniferous trees, with considerations made for tree spacing and stabilization of soils in using single-stem (SS) or clump-form (CF) trees to be planted in colonies to replicate natural groves of trees. This allows a wide range of native species, their clump forms, and their disease or infestation resistant cultivars to be incorporated in reforestation. d. Replacement tree plans are subject to approval by the city forester before implementation, considering the narrative provided by the landscape architect, engineer, MNLA certified contractor, and/or INF certified arborist to address the heritage and protected tree species being removed. The narrative would evaluate the accessibility of the site in the sequence of tree removal, excavation and construction of all built structures, retaining walls and/or stormwater infrastructure in the civil site plans. e. The tree protection plan shall be verified at the time of final inspection for the building permit. f. Failure to replace protected trees within two years on site results in a payment fee of $300.00 per dbh below 75 percent of the dbh removed, or $300.00 per coniferous foot below 75 percent of the foot removed. (5)If a heritage tree is removed, it must be replaced with protected trees at least 1 00 percent of the dbh or coniferous feet, subject to the following conditions: a. Heritage trees must be replaced with species of a similar type (deciduous or coniferous) that are normally found growing in similar conditions and that are included in Hennepin County's “Recommended Tree List”. Exceptions can be made for sites where the soils have been engineered or corrected for required stormwater infrastructure features, such as pulverized clay soils used to create earthworks for stormwater direction Page 5 of 36 Stricken text Added text and retention purposes, or when well-drained soils for improved stormwater percolation and infiltration requirements. Tree species that are best adaptable to new soil conditions can be used that are included on Hennepin County's "Recommended Tree List." b. Replacement trees must not be subject to known epidemic diseases or infestations. Disease or infestation resistant species and cultivars are allowed. c. Replacement trees must be at three inches in caliper for deciduous trees and a minimum of 8 feet tall for coniferous trees. d. Replacement tree plans are subject to approval by the city forester before implementation, considering the narrative provided by the landscape architect, engineer, MNLA certified contractor, and/or INF certified arborist to address the heritage and protected tree species being removed. The narrative would evaluate the accessibility of the site in the sequence of tree removal, excavation and construction of all built structures, retaining walls and/or stormwater infrastructure in the civil site plans. e. The tree protection plan shall be verified at the time of final inspection for the building permit. If the protection plan is not in compliance, the inspection may not be approved. f.Failure to replace heritage trees within two years results in a payment fee of $500.00 per deciduous dbh below 100 percent of the dbh removed, and as applicable, $500.00 per coniferous foot below 100 percent of the coniferous feet removed. (6)Protected and Heritage Trees may be removed without mitigation on unbuilt lots as defined above, in the following areas: a. Including, and within a fifteen-foot (15') radius of, the building pad, deck or patio. b. Including, and within a five-foot (5') radius of driveways. c. Including, and within ten-foot (10') radius of installation of infrastructure improvements including public roadways, stormwater retention areas and utilities. d. A special allowance shall be given on unbuilt lots with significant slopes that limit the new property owners to replant trees. Should the narrative provided by a landscape architect, MNLA-certified contractor, and/or ISA certified arborist determine the viability of Protected and Heritage trees to be replanted are critically affected by existing slopes and/or new earthworks or topographical features required for engineered stormwater management and infiltration, the city will accept recommendations in the narrative provided with the Tree Replacement Plan in good faith. The narrative will describe where the hardship exists for new trees to be viable. Should such a professional determine the hardship creates a limited number of trees being able to be replanted, the city should evaluate the Page 6 of 36 Stricken text Added text — XXXX narrative of these arguments by experts and homeowners in similar good faith. Where site conditions do not support planting viable new trees for establishment, considerations for native prairie grasses and forbs will be made, to support a healthy ecosystem, as these also provide soil stabilization, stormwater infiltration, and biodiversity to the area, and are appropriate in the context of accounting for wetland or other watershed protections. These provisions can be considered in the good faith where tree cover and topography have been dramatically altered, with a priority to capture and infiltrate a significant volume of runoff within the property. e. Should city infrastructure be contained within a lot, no remediation is required within 20' of a cement pad containing sewer infrastructure. f. Areas with substantial slopes should not require replanting if accessing a resultant land patch after retraining walls are in place, with equipment accessing the site is not possible. Homeowners can meet these exemption requirements with documentation provided in the narrative from a landscape architect, MNLA-certified contractor, an IFA-certified arborist, or in documentation of refusal from two or more tree spade companies due to these conditions. (7)The Tree Survey for any new home construction permit above $500,000 and any project valuation over $100,000 in estimated value is required to be completed. by an ISA (International Society of Arboriculture) Certified Arborist. An allowance shall be given to the applicant up to $2,500 for the costs of the Arborist and that amount would be deducted from the applicant's escrow. Should an arborist determine appropriate tree planting based on available data while accounting for the land reshaping, lack of accessibility and other site- specific features, the city should cap the total escrow at the maximal allowable trees per the arborist. Page 7 of 36 Stricken text Added text (8)Before construction, grading or land clearing begins; city-approved tree protection fencing, or other method must be installed and maintained at the critical root zones of the trees to be protected. The location of the fencing must be in conformance with the approved tree protection plan. The fencing must be inspected by city staff before site work begins. The fencing must remain in place until all demolition and construction is complete. (9)No construction, compaction, construction access, stock piling of earth, storage of equipment or building materials, or grading may occur within the critical root zone areas of trees to be protected, unless there are no other onsite alternatives. If there are no other alternatives, a plan for this activity would need to be reviewed and approved by the city forester and included in the tree protection plan. A reasonable effort must be made when trenching utility lines to avoid the critical root zone. (10)When construction is complete all trees to remain must have the soil out to their drip line aerated and de-compacted. Aerating must include multiple concentric circles of one-inch holes, two inches deep, or as recommended by an arborist. (11)If protected trees and/or heritage trees were removed within one year prior to the date the development, subdivision application, demolition, grading and building permit applications were submitted, these protected trees and/or heritage trees are also subject to the replacement policy set forth in paragraphs (4) and (5) above. (12)Any tree transplanted on-site shall not be counted as a protected tree or heritage tree under this section and therefore does not require replacement under this section, provided it is viable at 12 months after the permit's final inspection per Part (12). Deciduous (dbh)Coniferous (height in feet) Lot size < 1 acre Lot size > 1 acre 2” caliper or greater, 10’ clump or greater 6’ or greater 2.5’ caliper or greater, 12’ clump or greater 7’ or greater Page 8 of 36 Stricken text Added text — XXXX Page 9 of 36 Stricken text Added text (13)Financial Guarantee. a.The city shall, at its option, require cash escrow or a letter of credit satisfactory to the city in the amount of 1 10 percent of the value of the tree replacement identified in the tree protection plan, securing the full performance of tree protection plan. The amount of such security shall be calculated by the fees described in Parts (4)f and (5)f. b.Release of financial guarantee. The financial security shall be released based on the following schedule: i. Upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy and approval by city forester that the tree protection plan has been met: forester will inspect the site and calculate actual fee owed based on how much dbh preserved or replaced on site. The original escrow or line of credit, minus this fee, is 50 percent released at this time. The forester shall provide feedback to the property owner and promote strategies to preserve current trees and increase their health and replacement value. The property owner shall be provided the opportunity to amend the original Tree Replacement Plan based on size and local availability of replacement tree varieties that are included on the Hennepin County “Recommended Tree List”, and their adaptability to the site conditions for long-term success. The property owner shall then decide to replace, replant, or potentially add trees onto the site to help exceed the replacement value on the property before the second inspection is to occur. Should the property owner decide to replace or add trees to the property after the first inspection and increase their replacement value, the amended Tree Replacement Plan showing the updates and improvements shall be submitted prior to the second inspection. ii. Twenty-four months after issuance of certificate of occupancy, an applicant must submit a landscape review by a certified arborist with their amended Tree Replacement Plan (if applicable), indicating planted and preserved trees are still healthy, and/or have been sufficiently replaced if were found to be unhealthy, and/or have been added to in order to increase the replacement value from the initial inspection. The certified arborist can recommend to add or replace trees onsite that meet the minimum size requirement, and give the property owner one final opportunity to increase their replacement value within 24 months. The balance of the financial guarantee (50 percent of financial guarantee net of fees in Part a) are released at this time. If the property owner does not opt to replace or add trees on site and increase the replacement value, these fees are considered owed to the city and retained permanently. Page 10 of 36 Stricken text Added text — XXXX Section 2. This ordinance is effective immediately and will apply to existing permits. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: ATTEST: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on: Send two affidavits of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK l, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of June 4, 2024, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 2024. City Clerk Page 11 of 36 Existing text Stricken text — Added text — XXXX ORDINANCE NO. 2024-04 AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING TREE PROTECTION The City Council Of Edina Ordains: Section I . Chapter 10, Article Ill of the Edina City Code is amended as follows: DIVISION Ill. TREE PROTECTION Sec. 1 0-82. Preservation, protection and replacement of Protected Trees. This division applies to the following permits and land use applications on properties that are zoned R- I and R-2: grading permits, demolition permits, subdivisions applications, building permit applications for principal and accessory structures including a garage, deck or a pool; and additions to principal and accessory structures. This division does not apply to city parkland, which follows tree protection guidelines outlined in Edina's Comprehensive Plan and City Park Master Plan. Purpose. Edina is fortunate to have a robust inventory of mature trees that form an integral part of the unique character and history of the city, and that contribute to the long-term aesthetic, environmental, and economic well- being of the city. The goal of this section is to preserve Edina's high valued trees, while allowing reasonable development to take place and not interfere with how existing property owners use their property. The purpose of the ordinance is to: a. Preserve and grow Edina's tree canopy cover by protecting mature trees throughout the city. b. Protect and enhance property values by conserving and adding to the distinctive and unique aesthetic character of Edina's tree population. c. Protect and enhance the distinctive character of Edina's neighborhoods. d. Improve the quality of life for all stakeholders, including city residents, visitors and wildlife. e. Protect the environment by the filtering of air and soil pollutants, increasing oxygen levels and reducing C02; preventing and reducing erosion and stormwater by stabilizing soils; reducing heat convection; decreasing wind speeds; reducing noise pollution and decreasing the urban heat island effect. f. Protect and maintain healthy trees in the development and building permit processes as set forth herein; and prevent tree loss by eliminating or reducing compacted fill and excavation near tree roots. (2) Definitions: a. Protected tree: Any tree that is structurally sound and healthy, and that meets one of the following: Page 12 of 36 Existing text Stricken text — Added text — XXXX — XXXX XXX-X i.A deciduous tree that is at least five inches dbh, except box elders, poplar, willow, silver maple, black locust, fruit tree species, ash, and mulberry. ii.A coniferous tree that is at least 15 feet in height. b.Removable tree. Any tree not defined as a protected tree, and as defined as an invasive species by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. c.Critical root zone. The minimum area around a tree that is left undisturbed. The critical root radius is calculated by measuring the tree's diameter at breast height. For each inch of tree diameter, one and one-half feet of root zone radius must be protected. For example, if a tree's dbh is ten inches, then its critical root zone radius is 15 feet (10 x 1 .5 = 1 5). If the critical root zone of a tree on site or an adjacent property must be disturbed for construction or construction activity, a plan for the disturbance shall be submitted as part of the tree protection plan subject to review and approval of the city forester to minimize the damage. d.Diameter at breast height (dbh). The dbh shall be measured at a height of four and six-tenths feet. e.Transplanted tree. A protected tree which is removed from a lot and replanted to another private lot or a public space in Edina. f.Heritage tree. A protected deciduous tree above 30 inches dbh and a protected coniferous tree taller than 30 feet. g.Unbuilt Lot: An existing or newly created lot, with a unique address that has not had a primary residential structure. (3)Applications for all permit types identified in section 10-82 must include a tree protection plan indicating where protected and heritage trees are located and, their species, caliper, and health. The plan must show how protected and heritage trees are preserved and protected during construction. The plan must also show if any protected or heritage trees are proposed to be removed and the location, species and size of all replacement tree(s). The tree protection plan should be coordinated with the stormwater management plan; proposed and protected trees should be shown on the stormwater management plan to ensure no conflicts. (4)If a protected tree is removed, it must be replaced with trees equal to at least 75 percent of the deciduous dbh and 75 percent of the coniferous height in feet, as applicable, subject to the following conditions: a. Protected trees must be replaced with species of a similar type (deciduous or coniferous) according to Part ( l l ) that are normally found growing in similar conditions. Page 13 of 36 Existing text Stricken text — Added text — XXXX Exceptions can be made on sites where the soils have been engineered or corrected for required stormwater infrastructure features, such as pulverized clay soils used to create earthworks for stormwater retention, or well- drained soils required for improved stormwater infiltration. Trees species that are best adaptable to the new soil conditions can be used, that are included on Hennepin County's "Recommended Tree List." b. Replacement trees must not be subject to known epidemic diseases or infestations. Disease or infestation resistant species and cultivars are allowed. c. Replacement trees must be at least three and one-half inches in caliper for deciduous trees and a minimum of eight feet tall for coniferous trees. Rewrite: Replacement trees must be at least two inches in caliper for deciduous trees and a minimum of six feet tall for coniferous trees. *Reason: There are many native trees that are not available as a 3.5” or greater as deciduous tree, nor as an 8’ tall or greater conifer tree for purchase as balled and burlapped nor to be transplanted via a tree spade truck. The same scenario exists with many native cultivars grown for their disease or infestation resistance and hardiness, along with their enhanced form and aesthetic features and/or to reduce thorns, seeds, or fruit that make them less hazardous, messy, or invasive. 2” caliper deciduous or 6’ tall conifer trees are more widely available. Furthermore, smaller trees can more easily be moved into place on challenging sites conditions due to terrain and/or lack of equipment access. Root balls of trees that are 3.5” as deciduous, and 8’ tall or greater as conifers will always require machine assistance to off-load and move directly into place as their root balls will weigh 1,200-3,000 pounds, or more when wet. The large container-grown trees and smaller-size balled and burlapped trees are off-loaded by ramp or lift gate and do not require heavy equipment to plant. Page 14 of 36 Existing text Stricken text — Added text — XXXX Additionally, smaller native or native cultivar trees are far more easily and successfully established as they require less water and acclimation time, and mortality rates have proven to be far lower. There are many parallel reports that describe how smaller trees, whether container-grown or B&B, have a better chance for vitality and survival. It has been studied many times using clones of the same tree, revealing that slightly smaller tree sizes are more successful to establish than larger tree sizes. Far less root structure is severed in their transplant. They can root in and acclimate with greater success. They require far less supplemental watering. Here is the South Carolina Forestry Commission study for reference. (https://www.scfc.gov/management/urban-forestry/urban-tree-care- resources/newly-planted-trees-survival-guide/) In the placement of trees, there can be better accommodations made if the trees need to be planted closer together when planted as large container- grown or small to mid-size balled and burlapped trees. They can replicate a natural growth habit and grove of trees that help support each other upon establishment, such as quaking aspen or native paperbark birch trees that are sold commonly in those sizes, and never at sizes that would qualify for replacement credits in the current code. Please abolish the requirement to have trees be of such large sizes be installed at the start of the project in order to be counted. That is unfair on many levels, including how the physical size and root structure of clump trees relates and compares to single-stem trees. The mid-large clump form trees need to be properly and fairly credited, and everything starting at 2” caliper should be credited. (For example, the root structure of 10-12’ clump Page 15 of 36 Existing text Stricken text — Added text — XXXX birches planted near the edge of a stormwater infiltration basin will stabilize the soil and grow rapidly as it thrives, versus a 3.5” red maple with a similar physical presence and root ball size when planted. Yet the birch trees do not even qualify for credit at any of the sizes that are available in balled and burlapped form. All balled and burlapped clump birches are excluded from being used in the current size requirement of the code and especially in how they are unfairly measured. This is going to be an expensive fine systematically built into the code. * d. Replacement tree plans are subject to approval by the city forester before implementation, considering the narrative about the site conditions, accessibility, the tree species removed, and the presence of retaining walls and stormwater infrastructure in the approved site and building construction plans. (Reason: Sites like 6620-6630 Dakota Trail have been heavily altered and physically overtaken by the retaining walls and stormwater infrastructure requirements of these lots, with all of the soils in and adjacent to those areas being replaced with engineered soils. These new conditions with the altered hydrology and soil composition of the site can only support certain species and sizes of trees that are included on Hennepin County's "Recommended Tree List”. — XXXX 2 XXXX e. The tree protection plan shall be verified at the time of final inspection for the building permit. f. Failure to replace protected trees on site results in a payment fee of $300.00 per dbh below 75 percent of the dbh removed, or $300.00 per coniferous foot below 75 percent of the foot removed. (5)If a heritage tree is removed, it must be replaced with protected trees at least 1 00 percent of the dbh or coniferous feet, subject to the following conditions: a. Heritage trees must be replaced with species of a similar type (deciduous or coniferous) that are normally found growing in similar conditions and that are included in Hennepin County's recommended tree list (xlsx). *See comment in section 4d. about the significant alterations to the site for stormwater management features, structures and retaining walls. That changes the conditions of the site away from the trees that had been previously growing there. b. Replacement trees must not be subject to known epidemic diseases or infestations. Disease or infestation resistant species and cultivars are allowed. c. Replacement trees must be at least four and one-half inches in caliper for deciduous trees and a minimum of ten feet tall for coniferous trees. *Not possible. Plus a 4.5” caliper deciduous or a 10’ conifer will be an immense Page 16 of 36 Existing text Stricken text — Added text — XXXX amount of work for a homeowner to establish with a higher mortality rate, and will be impossible to remove and replace in the event that it dies. I understand that there should be proof of the largest physical tree being obtained and moved into each location. But this requirement for heritage trees requires a tree spade and/or a crane to set into place. But only certain species of trees that are native or native cultivars will ever be found at those sizes. And that will only be a small fraction of the trees included on Hennepin Counties “Recommended Tree List”. This is physically and financially not possible in most cases. d. Replacement tree plans are subject to approval by the city forester before implementation. e. The tree protection plan shall be verified at the time of final inspection for the building permit. If the protection plan is not in compliance, the inspection may not be approved. f. Failure to replace heritage trees results in a payment fee of $500.00 per deciduous dbh below 1 00 percent of the dbh removed, and as applicable, $500.00 per coniferous foot below 100 percent of the coniferous feet removed. Again, this code is currently designed to be impossible to meet. Especially at 6620-6630 Dakota Trail and in how clump form trees are unfairly measured. This is going to be an expensive fine systematically built into the code. * . (6)Protected and Heritage Trees may be removed without mitigation on unbuilt lots as defined above, in the following areas: a. Including, and within a ten-foot (10') radius of, the building pad, deck or patio. Holly suggested that she wishes to have this requirement be 15’. There is one tree in particular that is likely going to decline and die near there garage within 15’. It will be a burden and potentially but the house and driveway at risk when it has to later be removed. Page 17 of 36 Existing text Stricken text — Added text — XXXX b. Including, and within a five-foot (5') radius of driveways. c. Including, and within ten-foot (10') radius of installation of infrastructure improvements including public roadways, stormwater retention areas and utilities. 6d. Holly suggested adding: A special allowance should be given to unbuilt lots with significant slopes that limit new property owners to replant trees. Should a landscape architect, MNLA-certified contractor, and/or ISA Certified arborist determine that a slope is so steep that tree survivorship cannot be ensured, the city will accept a letter of good faith from such professional with narrative, photographs, and mapping of where such hardship exists. Should such a professional determine that a limited number of trees be replanted, the city should evaluate good faith arguments by homeowners and experts with similar good faith. Homeowners would have the opportunity to plant native wildflower, prairie grasses and forbs as these also are vital ecosystem and provide biodiversity to the area particularly in the setting of accounting for wetland or other watershed protections. I agree. In challenging sites where trees have been removed and the terrain has been dramatically reshaped for a very large stormwater retention and infiltration feature such as these sites at 6620-6630 Dakota Trail, there should be an incentive to incorporate a native prairie or oak savannah grass to establish a robust groundcover of native grasses and forbs, for their extensive root system and ecological benefit. Especially on two lots like these, where the tree cover and landforms have been so dramatically altered, and with a high importance made to capture and infiltrate all of the stormwater runoff on the site. Page 18 of 36 Existing text Stricken text — Added text — XXXX https://www.waukeshacounty.gov/globalassets/parks--land-use/land-conservation/infiltrationbasins- final.pdf 6e. Should city infrastructure be contained within a lot, no remediation is required within 20' of a cement pad containing sewer infrastructure. 6f. Areas with substantial slopes should not require replanting if accessing a resultant land patch after retraining walls are in place with equipment accessing Page 19 of 36 Existing text Stricken text — Added text — XXXX impossible. Homeowners can meet this exceptions requirements with documentation from either a letter from a landscape architect or documentation of refusal from two or more tree spade companies. (7)The Tree Survey for any new home construction permit above $500,000 and any project valuation over $100,000 in estimated value is required to be completed by an ISA (International Society of Arboriculture) Certified Arborist. An allowance shall be given to the applicant up to $2,500 for the costs of the Arborist and that amount would be deducted from the applicant's escrow. Holly suggested adding: Should an arborist determine appropriate tree planting based on available data while accounting for the land reshaping, lack of accessibility and other site specific features the city should cap the total escrow at the maximal allowable trees per the arborist. Dave’s notes for the new narrative: An allowance shall be given to the applicant up to $2,500 for the costs of the Arborist and that amount would be deducted from the applicant's escrow. Should an arborist determine appropriate tree planting based on available data while accounting for the land reshaping, lack of accessibility and other site-specific features, the city should cap the total escrow at the maximal allowable trees per the arborist. {6) (8) Before construction, grading or land clearing begins; city-approved tree protection fencing, or other method must be installed and maintained at the critical root zones of the trees to be protected. The location of the fencing must be in conformance with the approved tree protection plan. The fencing XXXX 3 X-XXX Page 20 of 36 Existing Stricken text — Added text — XXXX must be inspected by city staff before site work begins. The fencing must remain in place until all demolition and construction is complete. {7) (9) No construction, compaction, construction access, stock piling of earth, storage of equipment or building materials, or grading may occur within the critical root zone areas of trees to be protected, unless there are no other onsite alternatives. If there are no other alternatives, a plan for this activity would need to be reviewed and approved by the city forester and included in the tree protection plan. A reasonable effort must be made when trenching utility lines to avoid the critical root zone. (8) (1 0) When construction is complete all trees to remain must have the soil out to their drip line aerated and de-compacted. Aerating must include multiple concentric circles of one-inch holes, two inches deep, or as recommended by an arborist. J) If protected trees and/or heritage trees were removed within one year prior to the date the development, subdivision application, demolition, grading and building permit applications were submitted, these protected trees and/or heritage trees are also subject to the replacement policy set forth in paragraphs (4) and (5) above. 1 2) Any tree transplanted on-site shall not be counted as a protected tree or heritage tree under this section and therefore does not require replacement under this section, provided it is viable at 36-mofi-ehs 1 2 months after the permit's final inspection per Part (12). Deciduous (dbh) Conifer ous (in feet) Lot size <l acr e Lot size> /=l acre 3 h" or greater 8' or greater Page 21 of 36 Stricken text Added text — XXXX 4 1/2" or greater 1 0' or greater 25 % Page 22 of 36 Stricken text Added text 1 3) Amount of required replacement trees in (4) and (5) above shall be a variety of types and sizes as demonstrated below. Species shall comply with Hennepin County's "Recommended Tree List”. Holly Suggested (and I agree): 13. Planted trees measuring 2" and greater can count as payback toward the tree escrow. The stated primary concern of this tree ordinance is to maintain the tree canopy of Edina (1a). The city will make measurement differences between single and multi-stemed trees. Clump or multi-stem individual trees may have smaller trunks than single stemmed trees, their overall canopy contribution is equivalent, as is their root structure to stabilize the spoils and gain vitality as they establish. These trees cannot account for more than 70% of replanted trees to maintain diversity in the city's canopy. Clump or multi-stem trees should be measured per the UDSA Forest Survey Forest Survey Method where the arborist measures all the stems and adds the total diameter of the largest stem to half the diameter of all of the additional stems to derive the single stem equivalent. This translates to an equal measurement of a single stem containing the same root structure and a similar physical presence at the time of planting. ( 14) Tree replacement may be fulfilled by planting trees at a different site from their home. The different site can be private or public land, at the choice of the City staff. City staff controls where and when the planting will happen and the species of the trees that will be planted. Page 23 of 36 Stricken text Added text — XXXX 5 1/2" or greater 1 2' or greater 1 5) Financial Guarantee. a.The city shall, at its option, require cash escrow or a letter of credit satisfactory to the city in the amount of 1 10 percent of the value of the tree replacement identified in the tree protection plan, securing the full performance of tree protection plan. The amount of such security shall be calculated by the fees described in Parts (4)f and (5)f. b.Release of financial guarantee. The financial security shall be released based on the following schedule: i.Upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy and approval by city forester that the tree protection plan has been met: forester will inspect the site and calculate actual fee owed based on how much dbh preserved or replaced on site. The original escrow or line of credit, minus this fee, is 50 percent released at this time. *Property owners need a chance to do improvements if they can, as the site conditions might have improved somewhat from all of the construction that limited space and availability for some trees to be installed at that time. The forester shall provide feedback to the property owner and promote strategies to preserve current trees and increase their health and replacement value. The property owner shall be provided the opportunity to amend the original Tree Replacement Plan based on size and local availability of replacement tree varieties that are included on the Hennepin County “Recommended Tree List”, and their adaptability to the site conditions for long-term success. The property owner shall then decide to replace, replant, or potentially add trees onto the site to help exceed the replacement value on the property before the second inspection is to occur. Should the property owner decide to replace or add trees to the property after the first inspection and increase their replacement value, the amended Tree ten. X.XX.X Page 24 of 36 Stricken text Added text Replacement Plan showing the updates and improvements shall be submitted prior to the second inspection. ii.Thirty-six months after issuance of certificate of occupancy, an applicant must submit a landscape review by a certified arborist, indicating planted and preserved trees are still healthy. If any trees are found to be unhealthy, the certified arborist can replace these trees onsite and the balance of the financial guarantee (50 percent of financial guarantee net of fees in Part a) are released at this time. If the applicant does not opt to replace trees onsite, these fees are considered owed to the city and retained permanently. * Twenty-four months is a better timeline. There might be a chance to replace trees that did not fare well in the first winter or the new soil conditions and circumstances with drought or a harsh winter. The property owner should have a chance to replace trees and maybe select more adaptable or better varieties on the Hennepin County “Recommended Tree List” since so many trees are not found in a very large caliper size or height from any of the local vendors. The conditions might allow more trees to be added or better tree selections to be made if the initial trees did not survive. 24 months or two growing seasons after issuance of certificate of occupancy is good duration of time. . . . Looking to update to say “an applicant must submit a landscape review by a certified arborist with their amended Tree Replacement Plan (if applicable), indicating planted and preserved trees are still healthy, and/or have been sufficiently replaced if were found to be unhealthy, and/or have been added to in order to increase the replacement value from the initial inspection. The certified arborist can recommend to add or replace trees onsite that meet the minimum size requirement, and give the property owner one final opportunity to increase their replacement value within 24 months. The balance of the financial guarantee (50 percent of financial guarantee net of fees in Part a) are released at this time. If the property owner does not opt to replace or add trees on site and increase the replacement value, these fees are considered owed to the city and retained permanently. Section 2. This ordinance is effective immediately and will apply to existing permits. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Page 25 of 36 Stricken text Added text — XXXX ATTEST: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on: Send two affidavits of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK Existing text — XXXX 5 — l, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of June 4, 2024, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 2024. City Clerk Page 26 of 36 Stricken text Added text Existing text — XXXX 6 — X-XA —xxxX Page 27 of 36 Larkin Hoffman 8300 Norman Center Drive Suite 1000 Minneapolis, MN 55437-1060 General: 952-835-3800 Fax: 952-896-3333 www.larkinhoffman.com October 23, 2024 Mayor James Hovland City Manager Scott Neal City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Via U.S. Mail and Email jhovland@EdinaMN.gov sneal@EdinaMN.gov Re: Housing First Minnesota—Tree Removal Ordinances Dear Mayor Hovland and Mr. Neal: We represent Housing First Minnesota ("Housing First") in opposing municipal actions that unlawfully increase the cost of housing. Housing First has reviewed the City of Edina's (the "City's") tree removal ordinances, including City Code Section 10-82, which was recently amended by Ordinance No. 2024-04 (the "Building Code Tree Ordinance"), as well as Section 30 of the City Code (the "Vegetation Ordinance").' The Ordinances impose fee and escrow requirements on development in excess of the City's statutory authority. As a statutory City, Edina may exercise only those powers conferred by statute. The Ordinances adversely impact housing affordability and therefore are of concern to Housing First. Housing First has sought to work with cities to address and resolve permit fee issues and avoid legal action. Housing First is prepared, however, to challenge the Ordinances as ultra vires. By way of illustration, the Building Code Tree Ordinance provides that the City may demand an applicant proposing to remove and replace trees to pay into escrow 110% of the value the City places upon the trees. City Code § 10-82(15). The City may then keep up to half of that escrow for over a year. § 10-82(15)(b)(ii). If the applicant never replaces trees onsite, the City may keep the entire escrow amount permanently without ever having replacement trees planted.2 Id. The Building Code Tree Ordinance is without statutory authorization and is, among other things, in direct conflict with Minnesota Statute § 462.358, Subd. 2a, which requires release of security 30 days after work is completed and demand made for return of security. That the City claims the option to retain the entire escrow if trees are not replaced shows the escrow could not be considered a bona fide "financial security" 1 The Building Code Tree Ordinance and the Vegetation Ordinance are collectively referred to herein as the "Ordinances." 2 According to the City, in 2023, the City collected $490,801 in escrow. The average escrow exceeded $20,000.00. See https: / / www.bettertogetheredina.org/ tree-protection- ordinance-review?tool=survey_tool. Page 28 of 36 Mayor James Hovland City Manager Scott Neal October 23, 2024 Page 2 under Minnesota Statute § 462.358, Subd. 2a3 The city has no statutory authority to impose these requirements. Similarly, the Vegetation Ordinance is without statutory authorization and the valuation- based fee imposed by City Code Sections 30-28 and 2-724 are clearly not a financial security. The fee imposed by the Vegetation Ordinance determined by the total value of the work being performed (see § 2-724)—is unconnected to the type or condition of any tree(s) being removed and is never returned to the landowner. The fact this is not a financial security is confirmed by the authority given to the building official to require security "to ensure that all work is undertaken in accordance with the permit and approved plans[.]" City Code § 30-66. The City has no statutory authority to impose these requirements. Housing First demands that the City immediately modify the Ordinances to comply with state law. If the City refuses to reform its ordinances, Housing First will be forced to initiate formal legal action. We ask that you contact Mr. Nick Erickson with Housing First at (612) 210-8332 to confirm the City's intended modifications to the Ordinances. If Housing First does not hear from you by noon on November 15, 2024, it will initiate a challenge to the Ordinances. This letter is written on behalf of Housing First and not on behalf of any individual homebuilder; accordingly, any concerns that you have with this letter or our specific objections should be raised with Mr. Erickson or the undersigned. Housing First will not tolerate any retaliation against its members and other licensed builders including acts of intimidation, delays in project review, inspection or approvals or any similar behavior from local officials. We look forward to hearing from the City concerning this matter. Sincerely, /s/ Bryan J. Huntington Bryan J. Huntington, for Larkin Hoffman Direct Dial: 952-896-3370 Direct Fax: 952-842-1747 Email: bhuntington@larkinhoffman.corn cc: James Vagle (james@housingfirstmn.org) Nick Erickson (nick@housingfirstmn.org) Sharon Allison, City Clerk (SAllison@EdinaMN.gov) 4868-7945-0349, v. 1 3 See Harstad u. City of Woodbury, 916 N.W.2d 540, 546-547 (Minn. 2018). Page 29 of 36 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Overview Parks and Recreation staff were requested to review the Tree Ordinance changes submitted by Mayor Hovland. City staff reviewed the following files: •DRAFT OF TREE REPLACEMENT ORDINANCE 11-22-2024 WITH DAVE AND HOLLY INPUT 11-14- 2024.docx •DRAFT OF TREE REPLACEMENT ORDINANCE 11-22-2024 WITH NOTES FROM DAVE AND HOLLY 11-24.docx The provided documents did not utilize traditional markup techniques which would use underlining for added text and strikeout for deleted text. Staff did spend time comparing the versions submitted with the existing language for the current Tree Ordinance as part of Ordinance XX-XX. The submission version showed light blue highlights for what appears to be additions to the existing ordinance. There is no apparent way to have certainty of what has been deleted. For consistency city staff did attempt to highlight language that we believe was deleted by the authors by reading that text and highlighting it in red. However, there could be portions of the ordinance that were amended by the authors that we did not reconcile through this process. Staff Comments (2) a. i. The city recognizes deciduous trees as a protected tree at 5 inches as that is the size at which trees begin to provide environmental benefits to the community. This measurement is also consistent with the commercial landscaping ordinance which designates those 5 inches or greater is the largest required tree for planting, same can be said with this current ordinance as 5.5 inches or greater is the largest required tree required for sites with removed trees. (note: the existing measurement was deleted from the provided documentation) Parks & Recreation EdinaMN.gov Date:Feb. 6, 2025 To:Scott Neal, City Manager and David Kendall, City Attorney cc:Chad Milner, Cary Teague, Marisa Bayer, Tom Swenson, Luther Overholt From:Perry Vetter, Parks & Recreation Director Subject:Requested comments on Tree Ordinance changes submitted by Mayor Hovland Page 30 of 36 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 (2) f. The industry standard for measuring the size of coniferous trees is to measure the height of the tree in feet. Coniferous trees at 30 feet follow the same metrics as a 30-inch dbh deciduous tree. In the City of Edina these are designated as Heritage trees. The removal of coniferous trees from a heritage designation would lead to the removal of multiple coniferous trees which will greatly decrease the city’s tree biodiversity. (4) a. The city allows for a variety of species to be planted under this ordinance, the similar type requirement is meant for any removed deciduous tree to be replaced with a deciduous tree, the same for coniferous trees are to be replaced with coniferous trees. The intent is to maintain the neighborhood character by having applicants plant like for like trees but also have a variety of different species, that are best equipped for any environmental change. This is to address changes to individual site conditions as well as climate changes, like the hardiness zones. In cases where the soil is changed on site the use of a Certified Arborist would greatly increase the survival rate of the selected trees best suited for those sites. (note: the existing reference was deleted from the provided documentation) (4) c. The current requirement for deciduous tree replacement of 3.5 inches is in place, because this was the largest complaint from the community about the 2015 ordinance. Specifically, those tree replacements were not equitable and too small for what was removed. This is the same for coniferous trees at 8 feet, these increased sizes account more acutely for the removed trees. Clump trees are allowed as replacement trees so long they meet the 3.5 in size requirement. City staff continue to advocate that applicants hire an ISA certified arborist to properly measure tree sizes for replanting. The city uses the American Standard for Nursery Stock (ANSI Z60. 1-2014) to measure the newly planted trees. The standard technique for single stem trees is to take the dbh caliper at 6 inches above the root flare of the tree. The standard for clump trees is the average caliper of the three largest stems measured at 6 inches above the root flare no matter how many stems the clump has. (note: the existing measurement was deleted from the provided documentation) (4) d. The use of a certified landscaper could be a consideration for some applicants; however, it may not be applicable for all sites. This ordinance addresses tree concerns and not the overall landscaping of the site. An ISA Certified Arborist is equipped to show the best outcome for the planting of trees on any site, this is why the city is requiring the certified arborist over a landscape professional. Consideration for accepting a certified landscaper should be evaluated using an outside city planning consultant to use language appropriate for all properties not just a single property. Page 31 of 36 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 (4) f. Under the current ordinance the fees in escrow are to be collected upfront with the issuance of the Tree Protection Permit, this is in line with the same process all building permits must go through, all fees are to be paid before the permit(s) is issued. Experience has shown that a certain number of applicants have delayed the payment and have not followed the guidelines of the ordinance. The applicant may replant trees at any time during the building process, they will not receive the initial 50% escrow refund until they submit for a tree final. (5) a. The replanting for removed heritage trees follows the same guidelines as the protected tree replacement requirements. Deciduous trees must be replanted with deciduous and coniferous trees must be replaced with coniferous. Having these requirements helps to prevent a decline in biodiversity, while also improving sites and the community with more climate adaptable trees. (5) c. The larger caliper tree replacement requirement is to account for these larger more historic trees that are removed. There are many local options for sourcing larger caliper trees. Due to the larger size of these trees, utilizing tree farms over nurseries or garden centers are the better option. This also ensures these trees are hardy to the local environment. (note: the existing measurement was deleted from the provided documentation) (5) d. ISA Certified Arborists have the knowledge and experience to source larger trees while choosing the correct trees for each site. The consideration for accepting certified landscapers should be reviewed by a city planning consultant to best represent an equitable answer for all sites. (5) f. Under the current ordinance the fees in escrow are to be collected upfront with the issuance of the Tree Protection Permit, this is in line with the same process all building permits must go through, all fees are to be paid before the permit(s) is issued. Experience has shown that a certain number of applicants have not followed the guidelines of the ordinance. The applicant may replant trees at any time during the building process, they will not receive the initial 50% escrow refund until they submit for a tree final. (6) a. Page 32 of 36 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 The 2015 ordinance was written with the 10-foot radius for building pads, decks and patios. By increasing this to 15 feet, the ordinance would return to the 2015 version where less trees were protected. (note: the existing measurement was deleted from the provided documentation) (6) d. These suggested changes are not in detail to administer and increase ambiguity. City staff recognize that steep slopes impact overall development and tree planting, therefore it should be reviewed by an outside consultant, as this issue may impact additional properties than just unbuilt lots. In certain circumstances this exemption would apply to properties that undergo review from the City Council for a lot split prior to permitting. (6) e. In sites with limited space the city has accounted for this by allowing the planting of their required trees offsite so long as it is approved by the city forester. Adding this exemption does not account for every lot and is only specific to a small portion of new developments. An allowance exemption is currently listed in the ordinance under (6) c. (6) f. This is where landscape planning should be considered at all stages of the building process. This issue can be solved through the proper process of planting trees when it makes the most sense. From city experience most landscaping is complete after the homes are built. If planned for properly the planting can occur at any point in coordination with the building process. (7) Certified arborists are required to provide their unbiased professional knowledge for the trees on independent sites. On sites with limited space the city allows for the planting of trees off site with the permission of the city forester. Another alternative is to plant larger size trees to accommodate the size requirements. (13) & (14) The current size requirements are in place to help keep the tree canopy loss as low as possible. These larger size trees have a greater environmental impact. They provide instant shade to sites as opposed to these smaller suggested trees and maintain the neighborhood character. (note: the existing table and notes were deleted from the provided documentation) (15) b. i. Page 33 of 36 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 This is all done during the review process for each permit, since a certified arborist is required, they can give the applicant initial feedback on what is best for their site. The city forester can also provide feedback to each applicant to help decrease the amount of removed trees and how to replace them. If all replacements are met the city will refund 50% of the fees in escrow. (15) b. ii. At the initial inception of the 2023 ordinance the city held the escrow for 36 months after the initial tree final during the permit final. Due to concerns from builders, this was reduced to 12 months; this ensures that any existing trees did not have lasting impacts from development and the newly planted trees were properly able to establish in their new sites. If all replacement requirements are met at time of 1st inspection and are maintained by the 12 months date, the remaining escrow is refunded. If the replacement requirements are not met by the 12 months, the applicant may wish to meet these requirements and plant new trees or forfeit the remaining escrow. The ISA Certified Arborist requirement at this stage is to evaluate the trees 1 year post development to ensure their health and any recommendations to the applicant. (note: the existing timeframe was deleted from the documentation provided) Summary The inception of a formal Tree Protection Ordinance in the City of Edina was adopted in 2015. That ordinance was aimed at preserving trees during development and requires the replacement of removed trees at a one-to-one ratio. As this ordinance was applied, residents voiced for greater protection to offset the removal of trees throughout the city, many claiming that the 1-for-1 replanting was not enough. With the introduction of the Climate Action Plan in 2021, an update to the Tree Protection Ordinance was undertaken. As of 2023 (with amendments made June 2024) the City of Edina had a new tree ordinance, that better reflects the value of removed trees during development and increases standards to preserve trees instead of just replanting. Staff acknowledge that the suggested changes brought forward with input from a single homeowner and contracted landscaper represent their personal experience building in Edina and view of how the ordinance should change based on that experience. However, these changes do not seem equitable across the city, at times overly vague that may result in greater confusion, and trend back to the prior ordinance that preserved and protected less trees. The current ordinance is intended to be a leader in protection and preservation to ensure neighborhood tree canopy remains and encourages developers and homeowners to critically plan for redevelopment. Page 34 of 36 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 The current Tree Protection Ordinance has been in effect since January 1st, 2023. Over two years city staff have reviewed 258 Tree Protection Permits. From these permits over 3600 trees were preserved, and 750 trees were removed. Of the 750 trees removed, only 213 of the removed trees required mitigation in the terms of replacement and escrow. Over the two years, 65 permits have been finalized for at least the twelve-month escrow holding period with the first round of 50% refunds. Page 35 of 36 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Date: February 13, 2025 To: Mayor & City Council From: Energy and Environment Commission Subject: Tree Protection Ordinance Approved Work Plan Item: x Yes, 2022 WP No Council Charge: 1: Study & Report 2: Review & Comment 3: Review & Recommend 4: Review & Decide x Action Requested: EEC supports the existing tree protection ordinance and urges Council to not advance the proposed ordinance changes in the Mayor’s draft. Do not let this version of proposed changes circumvent proper ordinance-making process. Instead: Council should direct staff to prepare revisions, if needed, to the ordinance based on three inputs: 1) the staff comments document, 2) and the comments from your working session, 3) the Mayor’s proposed revisions. EEC does not oppose making selective modifications to the ordinance that factor in feedback from the above. EEC looks forward to being included in future discussions if revisions are proposed via the standard process. Situation: The Mayor drafted proposed revisions to the tree protection ordinance by wholesale accepting and pasting in the majority of the comments from a private citizen and that citizen’s contractor. Staff wrote comments on this and object to many of the proposed changes. The Mayor’s proposed revisions represent, at best, a narrow view of how to shape this ordinance. This is not an acceptable process for such a significant ordinance. Changes to the ordinance should be reviewed by our experts on staff and thoroughly vetted, not simply accepted based on the opinions of one homeowner and their contractor. Assessment: EEC finds that the staff comments document does an excellent job summarizing the importance of each in- question clause in the ordinance. Council should refer to their comments for detailed review of each point. Page 36 of 36