Mint Hill kills tree ordinance

After nearly two years of discussion, public workshops and tweaking, Mint Hill has nixed its tree ordinance.

Planning Board members, who submitted the application on behalf of the town, unanimously voted Jan. 25 to withdraw the application and start over, Town Planner John Hoard said. The move comes five months after Mint Hill-based developer Stephen Pace told town commissioners at a public hearing that the ordinance was too tough on developers and wasn’t practical.

The ordinance would’ve banned clear-cutting and required the preservation of at least 10 percent of wooded sites and at least 5 percent of partially wooded sites – or the equivalent of one or one-half acre, respectively. Trees of certain sizes and those considered endangered were to be preserved at all times unless an ­exception was granted. Developers who couldn’t meet the preservation standards would’ve been required to plant trees inside the project. The ordinance also would’ve required developments to plant trees every 40 feet along project streets.

Pace, who said he believes the town needs a tree ordinance, said Feb. 1 starting over is a “smart move.” With an office at 6719 Fairview Road, Pace said in August if the proposed ordinance was adopted his company likely would abandon plans to build again in Mint Hill. In 2005, he ­developed the 336-acre Summerwood subdivision off Bartlett Road near the intersection of Interstate 485 and Blair Road. It’s one of Mint Hill’s few conservation subdivisions, a development that allows homes on smaller lots in exchange for tree preservation and open space. Had the proposed ordinance been in place when Summerwood was built, it would’ve required Pace to plant nearly 10,875 additional trees on the property – formerly wooded farmland – and along streets, he said.

“I think they all realize that you can’t Band-Aid this particular (ordinance) and fix it,” Pace said. “They will come up with one they like and everyone else will learn to live with it. We’re not one of the (developers who) say any (tree) ordinance is a bad ordinance. … We’re not always going to be happy but ordinances are going to be required and we understand that.”

Planning Board member Roy Fielding said he’ll push to keep the tree ordinance topic on the board’s agenda.

“I think we need one as soon as possible that’s going to be fair for the environment. I look at it more for the development base than the developer base,” he said, noting town staff have been tasked with searching out other tree ordinances in similar-size towns. “Mint Hill has the last chance in Mecklenburg County to do it right with as much open space as we have and so we need to be very cognizant of doing it right. We’re not stopping (having a tree ordinance) but this one isn’t going to work.”