Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission backs sweeping tree ordinance update, narrows some exemptions
Summary
The commission recommended that City Council adopt a comprehensive update to the Tree Preservation Ordinance (IZO Chapter 17), directing staff to remove an arborist-report requirement for imminent-hazard exemptions, add a definition of "imminent," revisit replacement ratios for development projects and eliminate or lower the single-family exemption threshold so more residential trees are covered.
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that City Council adopt a comprehensive update to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance (TPO), with a set of commissioner-directed edits to how exemptions and replacement requirements will be implemented.
Staff presented the draft ordinance as a comprehensive rewrite that would broaden coverage to most trees greater than 6 inches diameter at breast height (DBH), create a single tree-removal permit process (covering private and public trees), establish replacement requirements and an in-lieu fee option, and clarify review authority and enforcement. Staff said the draft was informed by the Tree Advisory Committee, a Cal Fire grant, and public outreach; it also proposes resources such as a consulting arborist desk review and paid site-visit consults to reduce burdens on single-family property owners.
Commissioners spent considerable time on specific provisions. They agreed on several changes to carry to City Council:
- Imminent-hazard exemptions: the commission removed a strict requirement that a certified-arborist report be filed ahead of an imminent-hazard removal; instead, they directed staff to add a clear definition of "imminent" and strongly recommend documentation while allowing owners to act where immediate safety concerns exist. Commissioners emphasized outreach to local tree companies and guidance for property owners to document urgent situations.
- Single-family exemptions and DBH threshold: the commission agreed to remove or reduce the single-family exemption so that more residential trees fall under the permit process; commissioners discussed lowering the exempt threshold to 6 inches DBH (some members supported 6 inches as a reasonable safety/enforcement balance), with additional public input at council.
- Replacement ratios and incentives: commissioners asked staff to revisit replacement-ratio calculations used for developments to ensure the ordinance does not undercount large-tree losses (staff noted the existing ordinance includes larger replacement credits; commissioners asked staff to align the draft with those values and to craft incentives for developers to plant larger numbers of smaller stock—e.g., 15-gallon trees—or to preserve large specimens on-site). Staff described potential in-lieu fee approaches for use in city planting programs.
- Process and documentation: commissioners recommended requiring tree protection zones to be shown on all site, grading and utility plans for development projects; they also asked staff to look at fee credits so a tree permit does not duplicate encroachment-permit charges for street trees.
Public commenters from Petaluma Relief and neighborhood advocates urged robust protections and pointed to peer city practices; commissioners and staff noted those jurisdictions' ordinances during deliberations.
The commission's motion to recommend the ordinance, including the specified edits (remove arborist requirement for imminent exemptions; add a definition of imminent; revisit replacement ratios and incentives; remove the single-family exemption/adjust the threshold; require tree protection zones on grading and utility plans), passed on roll call. Staff will prepare the final ordinance, a fee schedule and implementation materials (including public outreach and a web resource) for City Council consideration.
