Atlanta is known for its trees. How far will it go to save them?

But in recent days, new questions have emerged about what the final version will include — and whether it will be enough to preserve the city’s remaining canopy — even as most parties agree Atlanta is losing trees rapidly.

Atlanta’s current tree ordinance, which details the city’s rules for removing and replacing trees, was originally enacted in 2001. In nearly a quarter century, it’s been tweaked a few times, most recently in 2022.

But a wholesale rewrite has proven elusive, scuttled by competing interests of environmentalists and developers and even disagreement among tree advocates.

Critics, meanwhile, have argued the rules do little to protect existing trees.

Depending on the number and size of trees on a lot, developers can pay a fee of a few hundred to a few thousand dollars to take out any in their way, provided the city’s arborists approve.

Chet Tisdale, an environmental lawyer who serves on Atlanta’s tree commission, says the current law “might as well be called the clear-cutting ordinance.”

“It allows a developer or a homeowner to clear cut a lot, cut out all the trees, and just build what they want to build,” Tisdale said.

Since 2000, Atlanta has gained about 94,000 new residents, according to the Brookings Institution and U.S. Census Bureau data. The growth across the 11-county metro region has been even more explosive.

The city’s trademark tree canopy has suffered.

Atlanta has adopted a goal of 50% canopy coverage, but surveys have found its been short of that mark for years. In 2018, Georgia Tech researchers found the city’s canopy coverage stood at 46.5%, down 1.5 percentage points from 2008. Many tree advocates say they expect the next assessment will show coverage is now below 45%.

At the same time, Atlanta is seeing more frequent and intense heat waves because of human-caused climate change. Several studies — including one commissioned by the City Council members — have shown Atlanta’s most forested neighborhoods are dramatically cooler on hot days than those with little tree cover.

For years, the city’s environmental community has pushed the council to revamp the ordinance.

Credit: HYOSUB SHIN / AJC

Credit: HYOSUB SHIN / AJC

Among their top demands is increasing recompense — the fee paid to remove a tree — to cover the actual cost of replacing and caring for a sapling. Other priorities include limits on the amount of land that can be disturbed to grade a property, plus a tree protection standard to require builders preserve the most valuable trees.

Higher fees, preservation standards

After the most recent rewrite attempt fizzled in 2021, the city enlisted a mediator last year. After months of talks, a draft of the recast ordinance emerged earlier this year.

The draft includes higher recompense fees and tree replacement requirements, especially for “priority” species “that provide the highest level of ecosystem services,” along with other new provisions. It also creates a tree preservation standard for single-family residential lots, which is where most of Atlanta’s canopy resides. The proposal does not include preservation standards for multifamily, industrial or most commercial developments.

The measure was on the agenda for the City Council’s March 25 Community Development and Human Services committee and looked like it could receive a vote. But when it came up for discussion, it was clear the city was not ready to take the plunge.

Credit: HYOSUB SHIN / AJC

Credit: HYOSUB SHIN / AJC

City Planning Commissioner Jahnee Prince said her staff was still gathering community feedback on the ordinance, along with a piece of the city’s new zoning rules involving setbacks. She indicated the two measures are traveling together and in tandem, would “make it easier to save trees.”

But Prince acknowledged the draft could change based on input they receive. Asked what tweaks they’re considering, the department said in a statement it “may make changes based on technical analysis of how well the Tree Protection Ordinance works together with the newly proposed draft Zoning Ordinance.”

‘Let’s just get this done’

After years of delays, the move to hold the ordinance was met with frustration.

Trish Treadwell, who previously led the board of the nonprofit Trees Atlanta, said she was “stunned” that in the five years since she stepped down from her role “this has not moved and gotten completed.”

“Please, let’s just get this done,” Treadwell said.

Some council members also seemed miffed.

Councilman Jason Dozier, who led the committee in charge of the last revamp effort, admitted he was “personally, a little embarrassed” at the delay.

“I just hate that it’s taken so long,” he said.

Councilman Michael Julian Bond said he wants to move the ordinance forward quickly without major revisions, and other members expressed willingness to use the upcoming recess to hammer out a final version.

‘It’s not perfect’

If developers involved in the negotiations get their way, there could be more delays to come.

In a March 18 letter addressed to Mayor Andre Dickens, the council members and city staff, the Council for Quality Growth — a nonprofit representing Atlanta’s “growth and development” industry — proposed breaking the rewrite into two phases.

In the letter, which was shared with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the organization said it supports increasing recompense now, but wants to keep the current $5,000 per acre limit on tree removal fees. Tree advocates say that cap is too low to discourage clear-cutting, or to cover the cost of tree replacement.

The Council for Quality Growth said there are “positives” in the draft, but suggests punting on most other portions of the rewrite until after the city’s new zoning rules, dubbed Zoning 2.0, take effect.

The letter was also signed by leaders from the Atlanta Commercial Board of Realtors, the Greater Atlanta Home Builders Association and the Atlanta Land Trust.

Michael Paris, the Council for Quality Growth’s CEO, said his organization supports protecting Atlanta’s tree canopy, but argued the new zoning rules need to be tested before meatier portions of the tree ordinance are addressed. Passing the full ordinance could create “significant conflicts” and impede development of more affordable housing, Paris said.

Tisdale, the environmental lawyer, says calls for more “beta” testing are simply a delay tactic. He argued the draft is a compromise, with neither tree advocates nor developers getting everything they want.

“It’s not perfect,” Tisdale said. “But it is a good, balanced preservation standard that will save Atlanta’s trees.”

A note of disclosure

This coverage is supported by a partnership with Green South Foundation and Journalism Funding Partners. You can learn more and support our climate reporting by donating at ajc.com/donate/climate.