Preserving trees: Will Town Board go out on a limb?
Construction on W Catawba and Nantz / Photo by Jason Benavides
June 12. By Dave Yochum. Question: Is there a tree preservation ordinance? Anything that actually prevents clear-cutting?
Susan Johnson, town commissioner, responds: “Unfortunately not at this time. We can make conditions to specific projects such as limiting the amount of trees removed based on a site plan that could address clear-cutting. I personally am not on board with clear cutting a site as there are all kinds of impacts on the ecosystem including wildlife displacement. We have started discussions with town staff on creating a sustainability committee for the town which may address how we handle clear-cutting for future projects.”
Johnson
Background
Clear-cutting and random tree removal without consideration for the tree canopy has been the norm in Cornelius for years. Witness the clear-cutting of two different sites on West Catawba—the Junker projec and a new mixed-use project at the foot of Nantz Road—not to mention the once-verdant Alexander Farm at Westmoreland.
Preservation efforts right now consist of turning a landmark tree felled on Catawba into lumber for a commemorative bench.
“Trees are valuable resources and provide so many benefits regarding shade and beauty in our natural environment. That is important to me,” said Mayor Woody Washam.
Background
It may be important to many people, but the preservation of the tree canopy runs up against private property rights.
Developers maximize their profits by getting as many units out of their land, which helps keep a lid on the price of new homes. Then, too, the “highest and best use” of land likely maximizes the potential of any given property, helping keep a lid on everyone’s property tax burden.
Chances are, the property under and around your home was clear cut by a developer.
Washam said Cornelius tree cover is about 44 percent, 4 points over the minimum established by the American Forests Association, but that’s going down with new development.
Cornelius adopted a new Land Use Plan in 2023 that limits types of uses, types of growth, specifically density minimization that will reduce tree clearing, with replacement standards noted. The Code also dictates required buffers and types of green space required in new developments.
Trees cleared from the Junker property
Development and tree removal are only permitted along existing road and street corridors. This is to limit the development and destruction of open space and forested areas off the corridors.
“Unfortunately, people only see what they drive by, and they assume jurisdictions allow mass removal of the tree canopy, when very often, that is not the case,” Washam said.
Then why is virtually every tree gone from large construction sites?
These projects were approved by previous boards with different priorities, including the generation of more tax revenue for the town.
Propert owners’ rights
New members of the Town Board might take tree protection a step further.
Wolfe
But it becomes challenging when anyone, including governments, try to say how a land owner should develop their property.
“This current board has rejected projects that would remove significant tree canopy. The most productive strategy is for the board to ensure that zoning and land use overlap, allowing the town to grow while preserving the unique aspects that make Cornelius such a special town,” said Commissioner Todd Sansbury.
Preservation
Paula Wolfe is a member of the town’s historic preservation committee. Trees could be part of local historic preservation efforts, she said, but it’s still early and just an idea. Building a coalition of tree lovers could help inspire some new tree regulations in Cornelius.
“There is absolutely a lot of interest in tree preservation now that we are losing them so rapidly. Animal habitats are also being impacted,” Wolfe said, calling the situation in Cornelius “a mess.”
Higgins
Agreeing that current rules and regulations around trees are vague, Mayor Pro Tem Scott Higgins said he is in favor of a “reasonably crafted ordinance that helps provide guidance for decision-making, likewise, a majority of the members of the Town Board.
It’s happening in other high-growth, suburban districts—Vienna, Va., for example, where a new ordinance will require anyone building on properties of at least 2,500 square feet to cover 10 percent to 25 percent of the property with tree shade. Developers who don’t meet this requirement can contribute to a newly established Tree Preservation and Planting Fund.
“This is exactly the type of measure we should study,” said Cornelius Commissioner Robby Carney.
No Comments
Leave A Comment
Our Partners
With global warming, a tree canopy is important. There is no reason for a developer not to have a green strip dotting a new development – either running across the back of adjoining lots or by creating a Greenway throughout the development. To put it simply, green leaves not only are cooling but breathe in carbon dioxide and breathe out Oxygen!
AFTER the fact that almost every tree has been decimate.
Then, a few years later, we may see some bogus “climate change” tax due to town officials kissing the arse of developers.
Developers should be held accountable for environmental destruction. For every so many acres cut down, that same amount of acreage should be developer’s responsibility and cost to preserve that amount of trees.
But unfortunately, under the table money passes from developers to some town officials to get deals pusehd through.
It is a shame that the officials do not care about our town and the impact of this.
Totally agree with your comments and wish you were part of those who would make wiser decisions for our town!
“Then why is virtually every tree gone from large construction sites?
These projects were approved by previous boards with different priorities, including the generation of more tax revenue for the town.”
Enough said.
I second that – ENOUGH SAID!
I caution against rushing into new governmental regulations regarding trees on private property. It seems once elected; the knee-jerk reaction is that government is the solution – viewing every issue as a nail to be struck with the bureaucratic hammer.
From my perspective as a resident and property owner, we take immense pride in caring for our homes, yards, and landscaping – trees included. The ability to make our own decisions about planting, pruning, or removing trees is a fundamental part of exercising property rights. Imposing new rules and restrictions would trample those rights.
I understand the desire to preserve our community’s lush tree canopy and green spaces. However, heavy-handed ordinances are not the answer. Such top-down, one-size-fits-all regulations often lack flexibility and fail to account for the unique situations of individual properties.
Before exploring bureaucratic solutions, I urge you to carefully consider the property owners’ perspective. We are thoughtful stewards who can maintain our tree-lined neighborhoods through education, incentives and community efforts – not by surrendering control to more regulations.
I asked the “terminator” (chat-GPT) to make me a poem to fit my thoughts:
A Poetic Plea for Tree Freedom – in the Cornilus!
Dear Town Officials,
Roses are red, violets are blue,
I love my trees, and so should you!
But not through rules that bind and tie,
Let freedom for our trees be nigh!
You speak of canopies and shade,
Of wildlife homes that must be made.
Regulations are a woodsman’s bane,
Letting trees flourish is our gain!
So let us be a tree-loving folk,
Without the chains that rules invoke.
No need for laws to guide our hand,
When love for nature rules this land.
Once again there is Joe A Vagnone to the rescue. I believe he also defended Jake Palillo when everyone was against him. There isn’t some nepotism there is there? Like his nephew or cousin? That is the type of property owner he is talking about, one that has acres of land that becomes totally denuded so they can make more money per inch.
Very cute.. but I believe that requirements for NEW developments should be in place.. reasonable ones that will give us green while allowing projects. That is another sore and trying subject.. do we need more traffic congestion and more strain on our public utilities. I think it is time to step back from any more development than is already approved [by the previous board]. Thought and more thought should go into these decisions.. not just who knows who and who has clout!
I’ve previously said that Cornelius won ‘t be happy until every last tree is gone. The problem is our existing code encourages this.
As an immediate neighbor to the Alexander Farm project, the entire fence line was cleared of hundreds of mature (15-30″ caliper) trees. The developer only has to provide what is in the code as a “Type A-3 10’ Perimeter” (Land Dev. Code section 9.42 calls for replacement of a few 2.5″ caliper trees). The code also provides for “Negotiation” with the adjoining property owners. Unfortunately, our HOA owns the strip directly adjacent so we had no say, and the HOA board at that time did not negotiate. I HIGHLY ENCOURAGE a change that would force the buffer to more closely mimic the existing tree cover, and to allow negotiations with any property owner that is impacted by such developments.
Growth is inevitable. Albeit little late….co ordinating that growth between property rights with established community standards….ie common good etc does require co operative careful, fair thoughtful balance.
It is not unreasonable to have clear requirements before any blatant clear cutting…..not uncommon “ back in the day”. Along long time ago. Our Town missed that in OUR VISION..PLANNING PROCESS. ( citizens too, perhaps? ). Lesson learned…guide town growth..actual site…actual build footprint…actual pre approved tree canopy removal….specific Non touchable trees..pink ribbon before A PROJECT BEGINS.
Not uncommon..unfair..unreasonable….sadly WE MISSED THIS FOR OUR TOWN….at this point…recover best possible with NEW TREES! Sadly Ouch for now.
Make Catawba pleasingly PRETTY
Why not require developers, as a condition of their approval to proceed, to plant a new acre of trees for every acre they clear for their development, or require them to make a commensurate monetary donation to the town for other tree care, tree replacement, or tree preservation efforts in other areas of the town? Similarly, developers should be required to re-pave a mile of existing town road surface for every mile of new road they add, or make the same type of commensurate donation mentioned above.
Agree with this plan 100%.
OK. So…Big Deal! Most of the trees are already gone. Sure, protect what’s left. Geez🙄 I’m just going to move to the mountains someplace where there are ACTUAL trees and little traffic. In Cornelius, the TRAIN has left the station. Most every square inch of Cornelius is planned or being developed now. The time to worry about trees was 20 years ago.
I’ve often said that Cornelius must hate trees, with as many that have been felled in recent years. And I’d be willing to say that someone with a hatchet, axe or saw has their eyes on the ones that remain! But . . . I guess we are powerless to stop “progress.”
If only there was a thriving city adjacent to Cornelius that leaves (joke) very substantial green space when most land is developed. Cornelius government could learn from this city and make changes. Maybe one day.