Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment Trees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council delays vote on new tree mitigation fees after lengthy public debate
Summary
Council pulled a proposed amendment to the master fee schedule and tree protections for further revisions after residents raised concerns about private-property impacts, preservation of heritage trees and clarity of plant lists.
City Councilors on March 25 pulled and ultimately tabled a proposed ordinance that would amend the master fee schedule and add new rules and fees for tree mitigation and protected trees on private property.
Planning staff introduced a draft ordinance that would add a private-property tree section to the code and set mitigation fees intended to discourage wholesale clearing of mature trees on development parcels. The Parks and Recreation board and planning staff had recommended protections, a plant list of preferred and invasive species and a fee structure that included higher penalties for unauthorized removal.
The item drew extensive public comment and council discussion. Resident Herb Goldsmith and others described concerns about clarity (plant lists are titled inconsistently across documents), homeowner impacts, and whether large pecan orchards or yards with long-established trees would be unduly burdened. Goldsmith and other residents also raised questions about whether some large pecans and declining trees could realistically be relocated.
Council discussion focused on three decisions in the draft: the protected-tree caliper threshold (a staff-recommended 10 inches was discussed versus a 13-inch threshold used elsewhere in local code), whether residential property owners should be required to replace a removed protected tree with a single 2-inch-caliper replacement, and the size of the fee intended to deter clear-cutting. Council members signaled support for a deterrent fee but also for a relief process for homeowners with diseased or unsafe trees.
After extended discussion and public input, councilmembers moved to table the ordinance for more revision and clearer language; the motion to table passed unanimously. Staff said the item will return to a future council meeting with clarified lists, clearer workflow guidance for residents vs. developers, and edits to align measurement language across sections.
Why it matters: The tree ordinance is intended to protect Bastrop’s mature-tree character and limit large-scale clear-cutting, but residents warned the draft language could unintentionally penalize homeowners and was inconsistent in references to the plant list and measurement methods. Council chose to pause and refine the proposal to reduce confusion and add clearer relief processes for residents.
