Minnesota Shade Tree Advisory Committee

Monthly Meeting Minutes

Minnesota Department of Agriculture

90 West Plato Blvd., St. Paul, MN

January 20, 2005, 9:30-11:30 a.m.

ATTENDANCE:

Bacon, Bruce	City of Ramsey
Barbeau, Emily
Burks, James	City of Crystal / Robbinsdale
Cervenka, Val	MDA
Condon, Robert	Tree Care Advisor
Cordes, Jeff	City of Eden Prairie
Edwardson, Paul	City of Bloomington
Goebel, Nathan
Hanson, Dave	University of Minnesota
Hermann, James	Minneapolis Parks & Recreation
Himanga, Katie	Heartwood Forestry
Holman, Ken	MN DNR Metro Forestry
Hove, Gregg	City of Eagan
Markeson, Tina	MnDOT
Max, Michael	EnvionMentor Systems
McCartney, Sandy	Private Consultant
Mueller, Don	MN DNR Metro Forestry
Najmaie, Pouya	U of M Fisheries & Wildlife
Newberger, Lara	City of Plymouth
Nicholson, Stephen	Kunde Company Inc.
Schnobrich, Mark	City of Hutchinson
Shimek, Steven	MN Department of Agriculture
Simons, Ken	Heritage Tree
Sinclair, Jill	City of Chanhassen
Smith, Kevin	City of Hastings
Spears, Barb	Tree Trust
Weicherding, Pat	Anoka County Extension
Widin, Katharine	Plant Health Associates, Inc.

BUSINESS SECTION:

Call to Order

President Simons called the meeting to order at 9:37 a.m.

Introductions and Nomination of New Members

Dave Hanson nominated and Pouya Najmaie seconded the nomination of Nathan Goebel for membership. Motion carried.

Review and Motion to Approve Previous Meeting Minutes.

Jeff Cordes made the motion to approve the December 2004 minutes and Val Cervenka seconded the motion. Val Cervenka noted that the meeting was held at the Nokomis Recreation Center in Minneapolis. Minutes will be updated to reflect this. Motion carried.

Committee and Partner Reports

Web Committee

Dave Hanson reported on the activities of the Web Committee. The Web Committee will be meeting with consulting firm CEL /Atropolis to help develop ideas for the MN Trees website. Ken Holman and Dave Hanson will report on the outcome of this meeting at the February MnSTAC meeting. The MN Trees website represents all interests within the U&CF community and will serve as a “clearing house” or “gateway” for related information. The MnSTAC website will be updated through this process as well.

Minnesota Department of Agriculture

Val Cervenka discussed the 25-minute DVD “Invasives at Our Doorstep: Exotic Forest Pests of the Midwest” that had aired on TPT in the fall. Featured pests include the gypsy moth, emerald ash borer and Asian longhorned beetle. Partners involved in creating this program include Minnesota Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, University of Michigan, Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection (DATCP), and USDA- APHIS.

Steve Shimek reported that the pine shoot beetle had been found in Minnesota in December. He is unsure how extensive the current quarantine will be. This finding could affect shipment of pine stock and Christmas trees out of the infected counties: Anoka, Dakota, and Ramsey.

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources

Don Mueller reported on the oak wilt and MnReLeaf meeting. Refinements will be made to MnReleaf. The meeting provided a forum to share changes with 35-40 community representatives. Ken Holman added that the review process by MnSTAC’s Forest Health Committee will provide input on changing the guidelines in light of the upsurge of DED. The Statewide MnReleaf Steering Committee will meet in February. The RFP should be available in May with a late-June/early-July deadline. Interested parties are asked to complete a one-page “Request for Application” form to indicate their interest in receiving the MnReleaf RFP materials. Assistance will be provided to applicants prior to the application process to make applications more competitive.

Ken Holman shared copies of the following publications: Beyond the Suburbs; Land Protection Options: A Handbook for Minnesota Landowners; A Quick Guide to Using Natural Resource Information (including CD); and, Conservation Design Portfolio: Preserving Minnesota Landscapes Through Creative Development. Also, Ken has a supply of about 500 CD’s of the Urban Tree Risk Management Training to be shared with communities. This is the same CD that was included in the workshop materials in September 2003.

Publicity and Awards Committee

Lara Newberger presented a Growth Award to Lloyd Burkholder for his time and talents provided to MnSTAC over the years. Lloyd served over 40 years in forestry and on the Minneapolis Park Board. Deadline for submitting nominations for the MnSTAC Awards is February 11.

General Business

Ken Simons reported that the Board of Directors has adopted a Forum Formula to identify and schedule the monthly presentations. The Formula lists the different topic areas by month for the upcoming year. May is Arbor Month Case Studies. Barb Spears is developing the schedule and is asking for ideas from MnSTAC for a presenter on that topic. Please contact Barb Spears at 651-644-5800 with ideas for May.

Ken Simons circulated a copy of the draft of the 2005 MnSTAC Legislative Report to be finalized January 21. Two thousand copies of the report will be printed by January 28. Mike Max commended the Legislative Committee for the quick turn-around. MnSTAC members and others can use the report throughout the year as an educational tool. The Legislative Committee will be looking for ideas for the Legislative Report for 2006.

Ken Holman and other DNR staff met about the Bonding Bill and discussed the implications of the bill introduced to re-fund the old shade tree program and to shift the dollars from MDA to DNR. Part of that discussion included changing the State statute to broaden the definition of what a “shade tree” is -- previously considered to be only elm and oak. With all the real and potential pests, there is a need to broaden and strengthen the program for a comprehensive approach to addressing pest problems.

Ken Simons encouraged members to bring samples and questions to MnSTAC meetings to show and share issues. MnSTAC will attempt to ensure that experts are available to identify the samples and answer questions.

Bruce Bacon suggested that MnSTAC schedule presenters that can bring a bigger/broader perspective to MnSTAC members. We need to get beyond the “every day” topics and bring in leading-edge concepts. Provide a context for our particular applied skills in broader social and biological context.

FORUM:

Speaker: Katie Himanga, Chair of the MnSTAC Urban Interface Taskforce. Katie is also the Chair of the MnSTAC Tree Emergency Response Committee, Consulting Forester of Heartwood Forestry, and recently elected Mayor of Lake City.

Presentation: "Is it time to throw out your tree preservation ordinance?"

Katie provided an update on the activities of the Urban Interface Taskforce composed of 9 members. The Taskforce has met twice. The first meeting was to brainstorm all issues related to the urban interface under four topic areas (tree preservation and protection during development; Firewise; social impacts of trees; and, environmental impacts of trees). The second meeting pared down the issues identified to four issue areas (trees and water; the role of natural resource experts; engaging local citizens in decision making and interface woodland management; and, forest policy and comprehensive plans). Katie shared the first draft of a position statement on each of those issues for review.

Katie shared information from the “Building With Trees” conference held at the National Arbor Day Foundation (NADF). Building with Trees Awards were presented in 7 categories – including residential development. Katie discussed the innovative projects. For detailed information on the recipients and their projects, visit http://www.arborday.org/programs/Buildingwithtrees/BWTawards.cfm

Katie showed an NADF-produced video titled “Building With Trees” for planners and engineers that included language for tree protection. The video featured Skip Kincaid of Skip Kincaid and Associates, urban forestry consultant. Skip Kincaid will be at the Shade Tree Short Course where the video will be played.

Katie also facilitated a discussion on tree ordinances. She asked for examples of “effective” tree ordinances. Sandy McCartney indicated that St. Louis Park’s tree ordinance plan seems to be effective. There are 51 parks in St. Louis Park, 12,500 trees inventoried on boulevards; tree age is going down while tree numbers are going up. St. Louis Park historically had no trees, now residents have notion that the current trees had always been there.

Good story. Kathy Widin said that Oak Park Heights puts money in the tree planting budget for trees removed over and above set formula for replacement requirement. Successful and recognized in the community! Oak Park Heights has an active boulevard tree program, is a Tree City USA, and has a long history of caring for its trees. Kathy was hired by the City as an arborist to ensure compliance with Developer’s Agreements.

Communities don’t necessarily need an ordinance to preserve trees, what is needed is the Developer’s Agreement, where the specifications are laid out. With these agreements, money is on the line in an escrow.

Steve Nicholson discussed Monticello’s Developer’s Agreement. The Developer’s Agreement allows the city to work on a site-by-site basis -- site specific. An ordinance tends to be a “one-size-fits-all” scenario. Kunde Company works with about 45 ordinances with little variation between them, thus not reflecting the diversity in the communities. Developer’s Agreement allows flexibility.

Mark Schnobrich offered a word of caution. In Hutchinson, the ordinances are being recodified – they are redoing them. The tree ordinance is being reduced from a 6-page ordinance to a 1-page ordinance, without input from the Tree Board or city foresters. Be sure to read everything before the City Council approves, to ensure nothing is removed. Developer’s Agreements – escrowing dollars for tree planting -- is very powerful. City forester/arborist verifies agreement is followed. However, in Hutchinson the forester/arborist makes recommendations, but it is not necessarily enforced. Recommendations are taken after the fact.

Katie has seen situations where foresters consult on a project but their comments are not always taken under advisement. Developers can indicate that they “talked” to foresters, but there is no paper trail or assurance that the recommendations are followed. However, when working with the engineer, recommendations get included in the plans.

Jeff Cordes said that Eden Prairie requires that a tree inventory be included as a detailed sheet included in the plans. Can be reviewed and tracked throughout the process.

Steve Nicholson offered that forestry, planning, and permitting are so separate that the city forester doesn’t even know there is a development in process. City foresters must get to know the planning and permitting staff to be kept in the loop. Developers work with the planning and permitting staff and bypass the forester. Jeff Cordes attends the weekly development committee review meeting where he reviews the concept plans.

Mike Max indicated that in the City of Ramsey there is a grading policy put in place that makes it nearly impossible to preserve trees. Need to approach this comprehensively from a percent of tree coverage versus tree numbers. He also suggested that we continue to tell homeowners of the value of trees preserved.

Jill Sinclair said that in Chanhassen, preliminary plats come into the city and the city forester provides comments and recommendations that become conditions of approval. Based on canopy coverage.

Katie passed out example copies of ordinances. One ordinance did not work because it was too strict. For every tree that came down, the developer had to replace the equivalent caliper. The planning department interpreted this as for every 3 significant trees lost (regardless of size), replant one 2.5 caliper tree.

Wayzata Seneca Woods – Degrading over time, but still in reasonably good shape. Citizens bought the land. Engineers meet the tree ordinance requirements by putting in rain gardens, flood sugar maple, but clear small openings. This is a situation where the ordinance is applied too strictly by valuing individual trees, not the forest.

Jim Hermann addressed redevelopment on existing space in Minneapolis. Developers go through a myriad of agencies and permitting processes, so getting clarity and expectations in the early stages of the pre-approval of the plan is critical. The forester attends the weekly design meetings. There is a stamp on the plan requiring the forester’s input. Cannot get City Council approval unless the forester approves.

Providing a packet of information to developer/builder including a dollar value per tree is a key!

Value of trees is a critical message for builders/developers to help them understand that there are benefits for them to cooperate.

Tina Markeson offered that Developer’s Agreements are good, but it is really important to keep ordinances strong – they can help MnDoT preserve trees. MnDoT was able to save trees along Hwy 169 because of the Eden Prairie tree ordinance.

Ken Holman discussed development in greater Minnesota. It is important to talk to the communities around the developing city, in addition to the city. BMPs provide guidelines to address the needs of trees. Reference the BMPs when addressing tree preservation.

Katie commented that we all know how to do this, but the challenge is to move this into mainstream engineering and planning.

Katie read the Problem Statement from the draft Urban Interface Issue Statement #2: Involving natural resource professionals in projects and enforcing ordinances, policies and agreements are key to realizing the benefits of tree protection. City decision-makers, staff and engineers may not know when or how to get natural resources experts involved in plan development, site plan reviews, or project oversight. The lack of funding for enforcement of ordinances and policies and developers agreements is a problem. The lack of funding for enforcement means that even good regulations don’t always get adequately enforced. To compound the problem, decision-makers and the public sometimes get conflicting messages from experts representing different programs and agencies as to how best to protect homes and natural resources (example: Firewise vs. fragmentation).

SHOW AND SHARE:

Steve Nicholson announced that the SAF Joint Winter meeting will be held in Mankato on Feb 15-16 and will focus on insect and disease problems.

ADJOURNMENT:

Katie Himanga moved to adjourn the meeting and Mike Max seconded. Motion carried at 11:35.