Raleigh may revisit tree protections

During last night's public hearing on Raleigh's tree ordinance, some property owners and land developers criticized the policy as unwieldy, while other residents and environmental advocates called for it to be made even tougher. In response, Mayor Charles Meeker asked the city council to consider reconstituting the task force that crafted the ordinance and asking it to revisit the policy.

While acknowledging a consensus that trees are important, Meeker said it's also important that the ordinance work efficiently. Tree preservation has been a key part of his agenda since he was first elected mayor in 2001.

The 7 p.m. hearing drew a crowd of interested citizens and a long queue of speakers. Over the next two hours, more than 20 people shared their thoughts on the policy, which the city adopted in 2005 after three years of contentious debate between conservationists and some developers.

Critics of the ordinance voiced numerous complaints: It focuses too much on saving low-quality trees. It's unnecessarily complex and hard to understand. City staff are slow in issuing permits. The review process lacks consistency. The conservation requirements sometimes conflict with sound engineering practices.

"I beseech you to review the process," said Billy Sutton of Wakefield Development Co., the Triangle's largest community developer.

There were also many who spoke in support of the ordinance. They included Dean Naujoks, the Upper Neuse Riverkeeper with the Neuse River Foundation and a member of the task force that developed the ordinance. The reason the ordinance is so complex was because the task force "tried to give the most flexibility to the development community that we possibly could," he said. "This ordinance has been watered down from the beginning."

Among those who called for toughening the policy were longtime Wade Citizens' Advisory Council Chair Bill Padgett. Because the ordinance applies only to properties of 2 acres or more, it fails to protect trees in many neighborhoods in the city's core. Padgett reported that the ordinance applies to no residential properties at all in the South Central, North Central, Mordecai and Hillsborough CACs, and to only seven in Five Points and four in Wade.

"We see a lot of tear downs," Padgett said, referring to the growing trend of demolishing older homes in the city's center and replacing them with bigger ones. "A lot of those come with properties being cleared."

Padgett brought up the possibility of changing the ordinance's associated penalties -- up to $1,000 per improperly cut tree -- to rewards. For example, he said, the city could establish an impact fee on developers and exempt those who engage in tree-protection efforts.

The council will consider whether to reconstitute the 18-member task force at its Jan. 23 meeting.