168 Zhang et al.: Tree Ordinances as Public Policy and Participation Tools 5) dead or deceased tree removal on private property, and 6) definition of street trees. Except for Mobile and Huntsville, all other cities have developed their tree ordinances after 1985. Table 1: Major issues addressed by tree ordinances in Ala- bama cities. Issues Addressed Amended at least once Having tree commission (board) Tree planting, removal and replacement on public land Public trees protection and care Tree species selection recommended to be planted Dead or deceased tree removal on private property Definition of street trees Nuisance trees Private trees protection Spatial requirement (e.g., distance from curb, sidewalk, street corners and fireplugs, distance between trees) Penalty for violation Arborists licensed and bonded Tree topping, pruning and corner clearance Tree removal and protection on development sites Tree preservation and planting credit Heritage trees Tree protection close to or under utilities line # of cities 13 73 70 68 57 51 34 32 32 31 27 20 19 12 9 5 1 Data sources: Authors’ compilation from surveys conducted in 1996 and 2006. The data set included 81 cities. TREE ORDINANCES AS PUBLIC POLICY AND PARTICIPATION TOOLS Almost all Alabama cities regulating trees have city tree com- missions (or tree boards) that take the responsibilities of initiat- ing and amending the tree ordinances (Table 1). In Alabama, tree ordinances have most often started following the establishment of a city tree commission (board). Tree commissions play an impor- tant role in engaging public participation technically and politi- cally. For example, the first tree ordinance in Montgomery (the capital of Alabama) was passed in 1984. Montgomery formed a five-member tree commission filled exclusively by city personnel to allow the city to meet one of the Tree City USA standards. In 2001, local citizens formed the Montgomery Tree Committee (MTC). The group’s intent was to create an informally structured urban tree advocacy group that would promote a municipal ur- ban forestry program. The MTC wrote a project proposal for the City of Montgomery to develop a comprehensive urban forestry plan. The proposal was approved by the U.S. Forest Service and awarded funds to implement the plan in 2002. With the commit- tee’s efforts, the City of Montgomery hired its first urban forester in 2004. In September 2005, Montgomery passed an ordinance providing minimum landscape requirements for off-street park- ing. The MTC, incorporated as a nonprofit membership orga- nization and in 2006, was recognized as a nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation by the Internal Revenue Service. The MTC began working with the City of Montgomery to merge ordinances and tree regulations to create a comprehensive and functional tree ordinance in November 2007. The revised ordinance gave the urban forester and the municipal government policies, guide- lines, and authority needed to manage trees on public property. Tree ordinance development involves various stakeholders, particularly builders, utility companies, and new home own- ers. For example, Huntsville, the fourth largest city in Alabama, ©2009 International Society of Arboriculture adopted its tree ordinance in August 1981. Huntsville’s tree ordinance primarily addressed right-of-way trees and respon- sibility for their care, causing some conflicts among the utility companies, the owners of right-of-way trees, and the City. At the time, the development of the tree ordinance proved to be a complicated process. According to former City Forester Chuck Weber (1982), Huntsville passed another landscape ordinance “Zoning Ordinance of the City of Huntsville, Alabama” in 1989 which included Article 71, “Off-Street Parking and Vehicle Use Area (PVA) Landscaping Requirements.” The essential pur- pose of this ordinance was to improve the visual appearance of PVA while preserving trees and other landscape elements so as to protect streams and watercourses from excessive runoff. In February of 2004, Huntsville’s City Council adopted a complete revision of the city’s standards for tree work, paying more attention to forest management and education than regula- tion. Negotiations took place for over two years before the Tree Commission arrived at wording which all parties could agree. The more challenging issue was related with power-line clearances. Huntsville has a long growing season and tremendous species di- versity, but these assets mean either severe line-clearance pruning or frequent re-pruning of fast-growing trees. The compromise that broke the logjam was to increase the clearance distance around distribution lines to 4.57 m (15 ft) for nine fast-growing species (hackberry/sugarberry, box elder, silver maple, tree-of-heaven, cottonwood, princess tree, Siberian elm, black cherry, and loblolly pine), while leaving the clearance for other species at 3 m (10 ft). The new tree ordinance in Huntsville reflects compromise and collaboration between utility companies, city government, and individuals. While the utility companies had an obligation to pro- vide safe and reliable utility service to its customers, some trees were topped and became unsightly. The city and utility company worked out a solution to completely remove old, poorly trimmed trees, and replant them with new ones on private property. The new tree ordinance required utility companies to cut and remove trees at their expense, the city to take responsibility for planting new trees, with private households responsible for tree maintenance. In the City of Auburn, the tree commission, develop- ers, and builders worked together in an attempt to keep ma- ture trees on private property. For every large tree retained, the developer or builder receives credit for two to three trees. The Auburn landscape ordinance is targeted at develop- ers and is designed to encourage the planting and retention of larger growing, long-lived tree species and to discourage problem species such as “Bradford” pears and crapemyrtles. Tree ordinances are also an important tool in planning and coordinating within governmental agencies and being consistent with other codes and regulation. For example, Mobile’s tree or- dinances are included in several places such as the Zoning Ordi- nance of the City of Mobile, Subdivision Regulations for the City of Mobile, and The Land Use Administration Section of Urban Development. The Mobile Planning Commission requires a buffer planting strip or a wooden privacy fence of 1.83 m (6 ft) in height. In Auburn, the city’s tree and green ordinances are mostly defined in the Auburn Landscape Regulations and the Auburn Zoning Ordinance of 2006. Proposals made by the Auburn Tree Commission go to the City Planning Committee which refines and adapts them prior to referral to the Auburn City Council for approval. The City appointed an urban forester in charge of city trees and provides “Best Practices” to developers and pri-
May 2009
| Title Name |
Pages |
Delete |
Url |
| Empty |
Search Text Block
Page #page_num
#doc_title
Hi $receivername|$receiveremail,
$sendername|$senderemail wrote these comments for you:
$message
$sendername|$senderemail would like for you to view the following digital edition.
Please click on the page below to be directed to the digital edition:
$thumbnail$pagenum
$link$pagenum
Your form submission was a success. You will be contacted by Washington Gas with follow-up information regarding your request.
This process might take longer please wait
