Planning commission backs stronger protections for 'grand trees,' recommends 1:1.5 buffer and arborist exceptions

York County staff presented evidence on Nov. 10 that the existing tree-protection fencing standard (a 1:1 ratio: one inch DBH to one foot of canopy/radial protection) is not adequately protecting older, large-diameter 'grand trees'—particularly white oaks—adjacent to construction. Peter Kacicky, the county’s resident landscape architect, recommended raising the protection ratio to 1:1.5 for grand trees and leaving the 1:1 standard in place for routine tree-save areas and buffers.

Kacicky explained that older trees have more extensive feeder-root systems—sometimes extending three to four times the canopy radius—and that a 1:1 protection radius has not prevented decline in several observed cases, including a recent project near Clover Village where trees fenced at the 1:1 ratio declined over two years. He said a 1:1.5 ratio is supported by arboricultural references and local municipal practice and represents a balance between protection and development feasibility.

Commissioners asked about species differences, mitigation and whether the county arborist should have the authority to make exceptions. Members generally supported a higher default standard and agreed it should be paired with a clear, staff-managed exception process. A motion to recommend the staff amendment (increase grand-tree protection to 1:1.5 and include language allowing the county arborist to grant exceptions) passed by voice vote.

What happens next: Staff will draft precise ordinance language and a documented exception process for the county arborist; future development applications affecting grand trees will be evaluated against the new standard and the arborist’s discretionary framework.