Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tree Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Olivette commission advances tree‑preservation work, asks staff to draft ordinance language
Summary
Commissioners discussed tightening tree‑report requirements for site plans, possible replacement or surety mechanisms, and using canopy datasets (US National Land Cover Database) with 2018 as a potential baseline; members asked staff to prepare draft language and return for further discussion and possible Council review.
The Planning & Community Design Commission used its Nov. 7 meeting to advance work on tree preservation tied to the 2024 comprehensive plan update, focusing on how to measure canopy baseline, whether to require arborist reports, and what enforcement or replacement mechanisms to adopt.
Staff said the commission now asks petitioners to submit an arborist/tree report with species, size and canopy data and to identify which trees would be removed. Senior planner Don Doty reported he clipped a rasterized canopy dataset (US National Land Cover Database, most recent update 2021) to single‑family parcels and found most parcels are roughly 25–50% canopy. "We are mostly 25 to 50% canopy," he said, describing the dataset and noting a newer data drop may come in the fall.
Commissioners debated practical enforcement and equity questions. Some recommended a tiered approach that the commission could demand through site‑plan review while reserving citywide ordinance adoption for City Council. Options discussed included using species lists and surety deposits (to guarantee replacement plantings), a point‑based system that allows a mix of plantings and stormwater features to meet canopy targets, and limits on allowing developers to "buy out" canopy requirements.
Commissioner comments underscored the difficulty of replacing mature trees with small caliper stock and the possibility of requiring off‑site replacement or contributions to a city fund for replanting. Commissioners also cited examples from Chesterfield and Clayton that include species lists, sureties and canopy calculations as potential models the commission could adapt.
The commission asked staff to review datasets (including FEMA lidar and other sources), refine methods for assigning canopy value to new plantings, and draft language that the commission could refine prior to recommending action to City Council. Members suggested distributing model ordinances to other council members and inviting Parks or Council staff to future discussions. No ordinance was adopted at the meeting; commissioners directed staff to return with draft language and additional analysis.
