Policy Committee adopts landscape‑standards ordinance as amended, adds 15% minimum and enforcement language

The Policy Committee advanced a revised landscape‑standards ordinance on Sept. 28 after a multi‑topic discussion and a series of amendments to the draft presented by Max Zakian, vice chair of the Sustainability Commission.

Zakian summarized the ordinance’s goals as aligning planting requirements with the city’s climate-action objectives and setting minimum planting and maintenance standards for new and rebuilt development. He said thresholds were written to apply to projects requiring site-plan or planning-board review so routine single‑family home projects would not be unduly burdened.

Councilor Pearson moved to amend the ordinance’s section f chart so that all five listed use categories would require a 15% minimum of total landscaped area; Pearson argued uniformity would avoid reclassification games and show the city’s seriousness about canopy and green space. After deliberation on whether industrial and mixed‑use lots merited lower minima, the amendment passed 3–2.

The committee also voted to remove a sentence tying required species lists to the "preferred planting list maintained by the University of Maine Cooperative Extension," citing concern that an external list could become outdated and inadvertently require invasive or unsuitable plants. Zakian and other members supported the deletion.

Another amendment added the phrase "new or existing" to the replacement requirement so that existing trees or plantings that die or are removed in connection with development must be restored or replaced per the approved landscape plan. Members discussed the difference between replacing a mature tree and replacing smaller plantings and asked staff to refine language before council review.

On enforcement, Zakian explained a performance escrow provision: an amount equal to 125% of landscaping cost would be held for three years as leverage to ensure installation and early maintenance; after three years, the ordinance requires ongoing maintenance in perpetuity and standard code-enforcement remedies would apply. Committee members asked whether 125% might be prohibitive for large projects; Zakian compared it to Kittery’s practice of performance bonds around 110% for total site work.

The committee adopted the ordinance as amended and forwarded it to counsel; the Chair called the final vote and recorded unanimous assent to advance the amended ordinance.