Olivette planning commission debates new tree-protection submittal rules, defers action

The Olivette City Planning & Community Design Commission on Dec. 5 reviewed staff-proposed amendments to the city’s development submittal and review rules that would require a tree-preservation/protection and replacement plan and a landscape plan for certain residential projects.

Planning Director Carlos Trejo told the commission the changes would require those plans for all new single-family homes, permit applications for demolition tied to new-home construction, additions and accessory structures exceeding 1,200 square feet, and subdivisions. Staff also proposed lengthening the administrative completeness review from 10 to 15 days and clarifying that complete applications would be scheduled for a commission meeting within a 30-day window.

The draft language would be placed in a new section of the zoning regulations (identified in staff materials as a new Article XXII). Staff said the proposal aims to reduce the removal of significant trees (generally 20 inches in diameter or greater), to maintain an estimated 30% canopy outside buildable areas where feasible, and to set replacement standards (species, size, ratios) plus an escrow to ensure plantings remain in place for an agreed period.

Commissioners pressed staff on verification and enforceability. Vice Chairman Brian Lewis and others asked how canopy would be measured; staff said the city can use county aerial imagery, recent orthophotos or arborist reports and noted seasonal and resolution limits for imagery. Don Doty, senior planner, said an arborist report could help quantify canopy and species condition for sites where imagery is ambiguous.

Several commissioners favored keeping requirements simple for homeowners and contractors. The commission discussed triggers for the submittal requirement (staff proposed a 1,200-square-foot threshold for additions and accessory structures) and debated whether to use a straight 1:1 replacement rule or a diameter-based ratio that accounts for the size and condition of removed trees.

Public commenters backed the measures but urged scientific rigor and practical enforcement. Kate Pishon Hellman, a resident of 800 N. Price Road, asked that certified arborists — not landscape architects — prepare health assessments, warned that root pruning can harm trees and recommended protection buffers of roughly 1 foot of drip-line per inch of trunk diameter. "Root pruning is really a terrible — that's a good way to kill a tree," she said. Susan Kolaghan of 27 Forsythia Lane urged planting be completed at or before occupancy and suggested escrows and follow-up checks (one to two years) to ensure survival.

Staff framed the proposal as an incremental, three-phase approach: short-term changes that staff can implement, mid-term items (a prioritized tree list and enforcement requirements), and longer-term policy the City Council would consider (for example, a more comprehensive tree ordinance or a city-funded arborist). Several commissioners cautioned that broader private-property tree permitting would be a council-level policy decision, not a planning-commission administrative item.

No formal motion or vote was taken; staff asked that the item remain for further discussion and that formal action be deferred until additional commissioners with relevant expertise can participate. The commission asked staff to return with comparative tables from peer cities, a simpler replacement/ration proposal and clearer language about timing and enforcement.

The commission will consider revised language in a future meeting after staff incorporates commissioner feedback and additional data.