Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Trees And Landscaping topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission tables proposed shade-tree code changes for further review
Summary
On May 7 the Athens City Planning Commission tabled Case 25-03, proposed amendments to multiple city code titles affecting street trees and landscaping, and asked staff and the Shade Tree Commission to conduct a broader review of municipal tree-commission practices across Ohio before resuming consideration.
The Athens City Planning Commission on May 7 tabled Case 25-03, proposed amendments to city code Titles 9, 21, 303, 307 and 404 that would change how street trees and landscaping are regulated in development projects, Mayor Patterson and staff said.
The commission voted to delay consideration so members and the Shade Tree Commission could research how other Ohio municipalities structure and delegate authority for tree commissions. "I would like to request that we table this case, until later notice, so that I and the commission can do a thorough review of statewide, shade tree commissions," Mayor Patterson said during the meeting.
Why it matters: the revisions being considered would alter who reviews and enforces planting and landscape plans and could shift some authority between advisory and decision-making roles. Commissioners and public commenters urged clearer language on specific planting requirements and the review process so developers and the Shade Tree Commission know their roles.
Discussion details and points raised
- Staff summary: A staff member described the draft as a combination of Shade Tree Commission suggestions and staff recommendations that would change language across several code titles to govern plantings and landscaping in development areas.
- Public comment: Glenn Matlak of Ohio University urged an independent, rule‑based tree commission to provide long-term management, saying, "The alternative, which has been proposed, I believe, is to shift this authority to the executive branch. And that doesn't seem to me to be a good idea." Matlak tied tree planning to local responses to climate impacts such as heat and flooding.
- Specific code questions: Commissioners and staff discussed several discrete edits that prompted questions: the deletion of paragraph b in section 330105 (which references comprehensive plan recommendations for tree canopy), removal of fixed spacing language in 3107.09(b) that previously required "2 deciduous trees for each 30 feet" resulting in a concern that the draft could allow minimal plantings unless minimum counts or spacing are restated, and proposed removal or change of registration fees for the pollinator program without a replacement registration mechanism.
- Role of Shade Tree Commission: Staff clarified that the Shade Tree Commission currently has approving/denying authority for Title 21 subdivision reviews but serves in a recommending role for Title 41 matters. Commissioners discussed whether the draft increases the commission's decisionmaking authority or simply formalizes a review role.
Outcome and next steps
- The commission approved a motion to table Case 25-03. Mayor Patterson moved to table; David Riggs seconded. Commissioners indicated their approval by voice and the chair declared the case tabled to allow further review and research by staff and the Shade Tree Commission.
- The commission asked staff to return with revised language and comparisons to other Ohio municipalities' tree-commission structures before taking further action.
Ending
The commission did not set a firm follow-up date; staff and the Shade Tree Commission will prepare additional information for a future meeting so commissioners can review proposed language changes in greater detail.
