Supervisor’s Report: Revised Tree Preservation Law
by Barbara Gerrard
February 23, 2010
Editor’s note: At the February 23 Town Board meeting, Supervisor Barbara Gerrard presented her Supervisor’s Report, which explained the reasons behind the revisions to New Castle’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. The board opened a hearing that night on the proposed revisions, heard comments from several residents, and continued the hearing over until Tuesday, March 9. In the meantime, they hope to hear comments from the Planning Board and Zoning Board. Conservation Board Chairman Alexandre Manz’s outline of changes follows Gerrard’s report.
Supervisor’s Report
The decision to revise our current legislation was made about two years ago in an effort to reduce the indiscriminate removal of healthy trees—trees which provide shade, impede soil erosion, act as natural pollution filters—specifically by having their canopies, trunks, and roots structures filter particulate matter out of the storm water flow thus reducing the amount of pollution that is washed into storm sewers and other drainage areas. In addition, trees utilize nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium—which are by-products of urban and suburban living—and which have caused massive pollution issues in both Long Island Sound and up here in the Watershed.
Because trees lower air temperatures by transpiring water and they shade buildings, they can significantly reduce energy costs of cooling. In winter they act as natural windbreakers to reduce the devastating effects of high winds. And through photosynthesis they both remove CO2 from the atmosphere and increase oxygen levels.
Besides the health and general welfare benefits—there is the intangible psychological and aesthetic comfort in living in and belonging to a community that has respect for beauty and the natural habitat provided by our tree cover.
But in addition to all the reasons above, there is the “pride” issue—pride in the beauty of New Castle—when you look to the communities to the south of us - most of them are much more developed—and that’s fine—and to the north of us there are much bigger lot sizes, less developed. Most of the residents here want to retain the bucolic character as much as we can, recognizing that we are only 10 miles north of White Plains, and 30 miles north of Manhattan. In addition to our prestigious schools and the convenience of the Chappaqua train station, many people move here simply because of its beauty—all four seasons are a rich treasure of natural beauty.
This legislation will try to preserve that beauty by—
* Requiring a permit for the removal of (a) a Specimen Tree—basically a tree at 24 inches or greater diameter measured at breast height - or a native ornamental flowering tree of 12 inches or larger; for removal of any Tree in the Town’s right-of-way; removal of a Tree within the Regulated Landscape Buffer Zone of 4 inches or greater in diameter; and, outside the Regulated Landscape Buffer Zone, for removal of 3 or more Trees with a diameter of 8 inches or more.
* This law does not apply to dead trees, or to trees that create an immediate or ongoing hazard.
* The statute increases the protected Regulated Landscape Buffer Setbacks corresponding to the acreage zoning of the property—e.g., 2 acre zoned property has a 25 foot Regulated Setback, while ¼ acre zoned property only has a 5 foot Regulated Setback. By increasing the size of the Regulated Setbacks, it is anticipated that the privacy provided by natural growth will be enhanced, and that the establishment of undergrowth will perpetuate the natural setting and enhance the value of everyone’s property.
* Where a permit is required, notification must be given to all property owners within 100 feet of the boundaries of the property where the tree(s) is to be removed. This will prevent the instances where neighbors only become aware of the tree removal after the fact—something that cannot be satisfactorily mitigated—once well-established trees are gone, they are gone.
* The statute establishes a Tree Bank—which will be publicly owned lands designated as “receiver sites” for off-site mitigation where Tree Replacement mitigation requirements cannot be met. Only in situations where site constraints render on-site tree replacement impossible or impractical will off-site mitigation be permitted, but when it is allowed, the Tree Bank policy will encourage planting of trees in the hamlets and at the 9/11 Memorial site, among other public places.
* The fines and penalties have been increased as a further deterrent—and they are in incremental amounts, based on the diameter of the illegally removed tree.
The Town Board wishes to acknowledge the dedicated efforts of -
* The Conservation Board, under the Chairmanship of Mr. Alexander Manz. I spoke with his Board almost two years ago about strengthening our Tree Preservation Ordinance, and he and his team tackled each and every provision intending to increase the environmental protection of our statute, and enhancing the quality of life for all who live and work here.
* The Environmental Review Board, chaired by Dr. William Flank. His Board, working directly with the Conservation Board, provided invaluable scientific background and support for tightening our regulations.
* Our counsel—Wormser Kiley, and especially Mr. Lester Steinman, counsel to our Planning Board, and Mr. Clinton Smith, our Town Board counsel, for their multiple reviews and polishing of the proposed statute.
* Our dedicated staff—Environmental Coordinator, Mr. Steven Coleman, and of course Town Administrator Gennero Faiella, and Deputy Town Administrator, Pennelle Paderewski.
This has been a true team effort, and we look forward to enhancing protection of the Town’s natural beauty.
To reach Town Supervisor Barbara Gerrard, email .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Report of Alexandre Manz, Chair of the New Castle Conservation Board
In revising the Tree Preservation Ordinance, we were guided by the following principles:
- We sought to bring what was a pioneering piece of environmental regulation in its time up to modern standards
- We wanted to create a set of rules that was easier for residents to understand
- We attempted to implement the Town Board’s stated goal of improving the town’s carbon footprint and increasing the quality of life for our residents by ensuring a stable level of green space.
The major substantive changes are:
- A reduction in the DBH—“Diameter at Breast Height”— size of trees that would be subject to the ordinance (i.e., require a permit for their removal), to 4 inches for trees located within the regulated setbacks and 8 inches elsewhere;
- An expansion of the regulated setbacks, i.e., the areas along the property lines that are deemed particularly worthy of protection for purposes of screening;
- The introduction of mandatory replacement of removed trees, in order to ensure a stable number of trees within the town;
- The introduction of a “Tree Bank Fund” as well as the possibility of off-site replacement of trees where on-site replacement is not feasible;
- The introduction of a notice requirement for tree removals that would impact neighbors, in order to promote neighborly dialogue regarding tree removals; and
- The introduction of more meaningful fines for violations of the ordinance
The Tree Preservation Ordinance
121-2. Definitions
Definitions Modified:
* Approval Authority clarified
* Regulated Setback/Landscape Buffer Zone
* Specimen Tree
* Timber Harvesting
* Tree
* Wildlife Habitat
* Regulated Setback Zone – changed to Regulated Landscape Buffer Zone
* Regulated Landscape Buffer Setback zones increased in size:
o 2 Acre zone – 25 feet (previously 15 feet)
o 1 Acre zone – 15 feet (previously 10 feet)
o 1/2 Acre zone – 10 feet (previously 5 feet)
o 1/4 Acre zone – 5 feet (previously 3 feet)
* Specimen Tree – expanded to include small native or ornamental flowering trees with a DBH of 12 inches or more.
* Commercial Timber Harvesting changed to Timber Harvesting and expanded to only include selective cutting of timber.
* Tree size has been changed to 4 inches in diameter, (previously 8 inches in diameter). FOR WHICH YOU MUST HAVE A PERMIT
* Wildlife Habitat – minor changes to wording of definition
:
o Arborist
o Caliper
o Critical Root Zone
o Dead Tree
o Hazardous Tree
o Injury
o Off-Site Mitigation
o Regulated Tree
o Removal
o Selective Cutting
o Shrub
o Street Tree
o Tree Bank Fund
o Tree Preservation and/or Replacement Plan
o Tree Replacement
:
* The number of activities regulated is expanded
* Within Regulated Landscape Buffer Zone – tree now defined as 4 inches
* Outside of Regulated Landscape Buffer Zone – any tree that is 8 inches or more
* Removal of any street tree within town right-of-way
* Work to be conducted within critical root zone of any street tree
121-4. Activities Permitted by Right:
o Added any removal of trees to be done on or behalf of the Town
o Added any removal of trees required by public entities that by operation of law are exempt from local regulations
o Removed allowance of 2 trees to be removed within 2 acre zone without a permit
o Removed exemption for cemetery’s within town
:
o B (2) – changed site plan scale from 1” = 50’ to 1” = 30’
o B (2) (b) – changed distance from 250’ to 150’ to roads, wetlands, etc.
o F – changed application submittal from 7 days to 14 days
o I. – Added compliance with Chapter 108A –storm water and sediment and erosion control
:
o A (4) – new section that includes the minimum requirement of Tree Replacement.
* The applicant has met the minimum requirement of Tree Replacement of
o Fifty (50 %) of the total aggregate diameter of Trees removed with new Trees in accordance with the plan for Tree Replacement or, if approved by the Approving Authority, contributed to the Tree Bank Fund. (For example, if a 12-inch Tree were removed, the Applicant would be required to replant Trees to replace a minimum of 6 inches in Caliper).
o D – modified to change that permit decisions by Town’s Environmental Coordinator or designee will be extended to 21 days vs. 7 days to render a decision
:
o B. Changed to have the appeal board be the Planning Board instead of the ERB.
121-16. Penalties for Offenses:
A. Changed that a fine of $ 250 per tree up to 24 inches in diameter. If over 24 inches, the fine is increased to $ 2,500 per tree. (Previous – was $250 per violation). For second offense within one year – fine increased from $1,000 to $10,000 (previously was $1,000 and $5,000). Also specify that fines shall be collected and placed within dedicated Tree Bank Fund.
There are no comments for this article yet.
