Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tree Ordinance Post Oak topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Flower Mound environmental commission reviews data on lowering post‑oak specimen size
Summary
The Environmental Conservation Commission reviewed data showing a sharp drop in post‑oak counts between the current 22‑inch specimen threshold and proposed sizes (20–19 inches) and discussed next steps for revisions that would require multiple work sessions, Planning & Zoning review and Town Council approval.
Flower Mound’s Environmental Conservation Commission reviewed survey data May 6 as part of a multi‑session review of the town’s tree ordinance, focusing on whether to lower the post‑oak specimen threshold from the current 22 inches to 20 or 19 inches.
The commission staff presentation summarized historical changes to the town’s ordinance and new data from several development surveys. Staff described the town’s specimen rules: protected species can be designated a protected tree at 6 inches and greater, and post oaks are currently treated as “large” with a specimen threshold of 22 inches. Presenters said the ECC previously recommended lowering specimen size to 19 inches but town council set the post‑oak threshold at 22 inches in 2017 after review and consideration of incentives aimed at encouraging preservation rather than penalties.
Commission staff compiled counts from multiple projects. Examples cited: Creekside Phase 2 had nine specimen post oaks under the 22‑inch threshold, seven of which were preserved and two removed; lowering the threshold to 21 or 20 inches would have brought additional trees under commission review. A larger sample of 604 post‑oak measurements showed a steep drop in counts between 19 and 22 inches, meaning a lower threshold would substantially increase the number of specimen trees evaluated on development projects. Staff also ran a smaller sample for blackjack oak, an additional species noted as difficult to replace in nurseries.
The presentation compared development types. For conservation developments (lower density with at least 45% open space on the Crosstimbers Conservation Development District), staff reported higher preservation rates for specimen post oaks (one example showed about 84% preserved) than for conventional developments. Staff also reviewed upland habitat rules used in environmentally sensitive area surveys and noted that once upland impacts exceed 50% the developer mitigation figure referenced in the presentation was $15,000 (as presented by staff).
Commissioners discussed the dataset and options. Several members said the most likely near‑term compromise would be to study lowering the threshold to 20 inches rather than a deeper cut; others urged more data collection and cross‑jurisdictional comparison specifically within the Cross Timbers/post‑oak region rather than using cities outside that ecological zone. Staff said additional work sessions and expanded sample sizes would be required; after ECC work sessions a proposed ordinance change would go to Planning & Zoning and then to Town Council for final action.
The commission did not take a formal vote on an ordinance change at the May 6 meeting. Staff said they would return with expanded datasets (including counts of trees removed between 20 and 22 inches), a clearer credit schedule impact analysis, and additional comparisons with neighboring jurisdictions in the Cross Timbers region for a future work session.
