Back to work on Wimberley tree ordinance

A tree ordinance may be in Wimberley’s future, but after years of work, it is headed back to a committee for additional changes.

The city of Wimberley has been discussing an ordinance to protect larger trees during commercial development since 2016.

The ordinance presented to the council during their last meeting had protections for “legacy” and “heritage” trees that would require commercial developments to replace any of the larger trees that need to be removed during construction.

Multiple councilmembers pointed to the clearcut area behind Brookshire Brothers for an assisted living facility as an impetuous for a tree ordinance.

“The fear is we do something like what happened with the senior development where they say they won’t touch the trees and then they come in and wipe it out,” Councilmember Craig Fore said. “What do we do then?”

While Councilmember Gary Barchfeld agreed that the tree removal for that property was bad, he also said he didn’t think there were many options.

“I sat in the election tent last year and it rained ashes on us because they were burning trees that they said they were going to keep there,” Barchfeld said. “ … But as I look at it now, they couldn’t have saved the trees and done what they are doing.”

The proposed tree ordinance would not keep developers from removing the larger trees in the valley but it would create some obstacles while also requiring substantial replacement for removed trees.

Earlier this month, the Wimberley Planning and Zoning Commission voted against recommending the tree ordinance pass as it is currently written. It appeared many on the council agreed that the ordinances was onerous.

“It was unenforceable. It was unrealistic… It wasn’t appropriate for this area,” Barchfeld said.

Barchfeld decried the 24-page document saying that it had gotten too complicated and too specific as each species of tree had a different diameter requirement to be protected

Overall, every councilmember in attendance expressed their support of a tree ordinance, although how strict the ordinance needs to be was debated.

“Every time a tree ordinance issue has come to council, it was supported unanimously,” Councilmember Allison Davis said.

Davis attempted to negotiate some parameters for the ordinance that could be worked on and brought back to council for a vote. The council elected to have staff work with the direction from council before bringing back a new tree ordinance.