Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Trees Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission considers whether trees can be local landmarks; city forester unaware of candidates
Summary
Members discussed the idea of recognizing notable trees as landmarks, learned the city forester has no known list of culturally significant trees, and agreed to consider soliciting nominations from residents if the commission wants to pursue tree preservation.
At its Feb. 18 meeting, the Monona Landmarks Commission discussed whether large or culturally significant trees can be designated as landmarks and what that designation would mean in practice.
The commission asked the city forester whether any trees in Monona met criteria for cultural, historical, or ecological significance; staff reported the forester was not aware of any such trees offhand. Commissioners discussed examples — including a locally noted tree with a bifurcated or "W"-shaped form that some had described as a wayfinding tree — but acknowledged they had no documentary evidence tying the tree to Indigenous wayfinding practices or other cultural designations.
Commissioners noted that, where other municipalities have ordinances to protect large trees, the effect can be to require commission approval before removal. Members agreed they could solicit nominations from residents and partner with the sustainability committee or the city forester to identify candidates, but they did not create a preservation ordinance or approve any specific nominations at the Feb. 18 meeting.
Staff will consider how to solicit nominations and whether the landmarks commission should coordinate with the sustainability committee or city forester on an outreach or inventory process.
