Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tree Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tenafly council weighs state model and local protections in tree ordinance rewrite
Summary
Councilmembers debated adopting the state's model tree ordinance as a baseline while preserving local protections (fees, mitigation, landmark-tree rules); staff was asked to produce a redline and research how other towns handle landmark trees.
Council returned to a long-running review of Tenafly's tree ordinance, discussing whether to adopt the state model as a baseline or retain the borough's stricter provisions for historic trees and flood mitigation.
"I would prefer we use the version that we have that's been worked on through a lot of iterations and redline so that we can integrate the model language as well," said Julie, urging a redline that shows additions and preserves local strengths. Lauren argued the state model is "weak for our town," saying Tenafly's 200- to 300-year-old trees and hilly topography require stronger protections for root systems and flood mitigation.
Council members asked staff to prepare: (1) a redline that starts with the state model and adds Tenafly-specific fees and mitigation language; (2) options for a tree fund or trust that can be accessed for plantings; and (3) research into how other municipalities protect landmark or historic trees and handle owner rights when properties are sold. Members also debated whether the administrative burden of waiver requests could be reduced with clearer internal procedures while leaving final waivers with the mayor and council.
No ordinance language was adopted at the meeting; staff was asked to return with draft language and examples from peer towns for the council to review before any introduction.
