‘Clean air for our kids’ or ‘growth at all costs’? Kansas City tries to save its trees
The Kansas City Council approved new rules to protect the city’s trees and place new restrictions on developers who clear forest for new construction.
After weeks of negotiations between city staff and developers, the Kansas City Council’s Neighborhood Planning and Development committee approved a new tree protection ordinance Wednesday, before the measure sailed through the full City Council on Thursday.
About 75% of the city’s tree canopy is located on private property, according to the Kansas City Urban Forest Master Plan. And currently, developers face few restrictions when clear cutting forested areas for new subdivisions, apartments or businesses.
City leaders say more trees can help with storm water management, public health improvement, energy use reduction and an overall improved quality of life.
“For me, it’s just a core issue of equity in the broadest sense,” Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas said in an interview.
The mayor recalled how he lived on the city’s East Side for years before moving to a tree-lined neighborhood in Midtown.
“I thought why does that have to be something that’s only in nicer neighborhoods?” he said. “Why can’t we make that part of every part of the city?”
Lucas said the new rules will help protect the tree canopy across the entire city.
While developers have pushed back on the new regulation, Lucas said he doesn’t see “anything in this ordinance that harms development.”
“Do you want clean air for our kids or do you want growth at all costs?” he said. “I think there is a fair balance you can have there.”
Even so, City Hall has received reports and photo evidence of clear cutting happening ahead of the ordinance’s approval. Those calls are mainly coming from the Northland, where developers continue to build new housing subdivisions.
“We have seen pre-cutting around the city,” Lucas said. “I think it’s unfortunate.”
The ordinance requires developers to protect a certain portion of wooded areas or pay into a city tree replacement fund. The legislation approved by the council was a major compromise from the original proposal.
It would not impact most single-family homes or small developments — only developments clearing an acre or more of wooded land would be subject to the new rules.
The compromise legislation effectively lowers the fee charged to developers who clear trees, meaning the city tree fund would collect less money and be able to replace fewer trees than are actually removed by new construction.
“Whatever you get out of today is more than you have right now,” Councilman Dan Fowler, who represents the city’s 2nd District in the Northland, said Wednesday. “Right now we don’t have a tree ordinance, period... So whatever we do is an improvement from that standpoint.”
Fowler lamented acres of undeveloped land within city limits that do not produce substantial tax revenue. Development on those parcels could bring more tax revenue to fund affordable housing, road repairs and new tree planting, he said.
“If the land’s sitting there producing nothing for taxes we don’t get anything,” he said.
Fowler proposed a third version of the ordinance on Wednesday that was more favorable to developers. That proposal followed a meeting with the mayor and an official with MD Management, which has developed several projects north of the river, including Twin Creeks Village and Fountain Hills.
The committee heard testimony from several advocates pushing for approval of the ordinance.
Adam Rossi, a sustainability coordinator with AmeriCorps, said the committee had already agreed to a “very generous compromise,” and asked council members to approve the measure.
“There has been so much effort on behalf of the city to reach out and work with the development community already,” he said.
“We have conceded and conceded and conceded,” he said. “At what point are you, like, we might as well not have an ordinance anymore?”
Ultimately, Councilman Lee Barnes, who represents the 5th District at large, pushed the committee to slightly increase the tree fee from Fowler’s proposal. That measure was passed out of committee unanimously.
On Thursday, the measure easily won approval by the City Council, which voted 11-1 in favor. Only Councilwoman Katheryn Shields, who represents the 4th District at large, voted no. Councilman Kevin McManus, who represents the 6th District, was absent.
This story was originally published March 16, 2023 at 6:30 AM.
