Subject
title
Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 10.5 of the Rockville City Code, entitled “Forest and Tree Preservation,” to Bring the Chapter into Conformance with Current State Law and Make Various Modifications to Improve the Administration of the Chapter end
Department
CPDS - Development Review
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Mayor and Council adopt the proposed amendments to Chapter 10.5 of the City Code.
Change in Law or Policy
The proposed ordinance would amend the City’s Forest and Tree Preservation Ordinance, codified as Chapter 10.5 of the City Code.
Discussion
Attached Ordinance
Three versions of the proposed legislation are attached. Attachment 1 is the last version of the ordinance proposed for adoption; Attachment 2 shows the proposed legislation in redline, compared to the current Forest and Tree Preservation Ordinance; and Attachment 3 is a redlined comparison of the current proposed legislation and the version of the legislation from September 30, 2024, using the legal blackline function in Microsoft Word.
Recent Events
On September 30, 2024, Mayor and Council discussed proposed amendments to Chapter 10.5 of the City Code-known as the Forest and Tree Preservation Ordinance (FTPO)- and provided instructions to staff. Following the meeting, staff revised the FTPO to address the Mayor and Council’s recommendations, which included input from the public comments (Attachment 4). These recommendations and their associated revisions are itemized and summarized in the sub-section below entitled “Latest Updates to Chapter 10.5.”
Following these revisions, staff was required to submit the updated FTPO to the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) to ensure its compliance with state law. To support state-wide programs in reaching compliance prior to submission, MDNR developed a draft model ordinance as well as a revised State Technical Manual, both of which reflected changes in the state’s Forest Conservation Act resulting from the passage of Senate Bill 526 (Attachment 5) and House Bill 1511 (Attachment 6). MDNR therefore recommended that state-wide programs not submit their updated ordinance for review until after the draft model ordinance and the revised State Technical Manual were released. MDNR released the updated State Technical Manual in January 2025 and the draft model ordinance in May 2025.
Following the release of the draft model ordinance, city staff reviewed and made necessary edits to the FTPO to ensure compliance. Staff submitted the updated FTPO to MDNR on June 20, 2025. MDNR provided comments to staff on the updated FTPO on September 30, 2025. Staff addressed these comments (outlined below) and returned them to MDNR on October 20, 2025. On October 24, 2025, MDNR deemed the City of Rockville’s updated FTPO compliant with state law. Staff is now returning to Mayor and Council for adoption of the amended FTPO.
Latest Updates to Chapter 10.5
Updates Based on MDNR Comments
The following are the comments provided by MDNR to staff in September 2025 as well as staff’s responses submitted on October 20, 2025:
• Sec. 10.5-12.d - The use of “substantially” regarding compliance with this chapter may be in conflict with the regulations stated in COMAR 08.19.04.02. Removal of the word “substantially” is recommended.
o Staff removed “substantially.”
• Sec. 10.5-13.d.3.e - Requiring adherence to items in the Forest Conservation Manual may be in conflict with state law. It is recommended that legal counsel be sought regarding this requirement.
o Staff discussed this issue with the City Attorney’s Office and have decided to maintain the existing language regarding adherence to the Forest Conservation Manual. Staff will work with the City Attorney’s Office to ensure that any future updates to the Forest Conservation Manual are consistent with state law.
• Sec. 10.5-21.b.7 - The use of “certain” regarding specimen trees implies that some specimen trees would not be protected by this ordinance. It is recommended that the word “certain” be removed.
o Staff removed the term “certain” from this section.
• Sec. 10.5-21.d - Given that the term “priority trees” is not defined in the state statute, it is recommended that it be defined within the “Definitions” section under this chapter.
o Staff removed the term “priority trees” from the FTPO.
• Sec. 10.5-22.c - Reforestation requirements at the state level no longer incorporate language of “thresholds.” State statute requires a 1:1 ratio for reforestation anywhere forest is cleared, as detailed in HB1511. It is recommended that changes to this ordinance be made such that they meet or surpass state requirements, as required in COMAR 08.19.02.02. Further reference to this section can be seen throughout the chapter in question and should be updated accordingly to comply with state law.
o Staff finds that Rockville’s use of thresholds ensures compliance with state law at a minimum, and more rigorous standards in certain cases. Specifically, Rockville matches Maryland’s reforestation requirements for clearing above the conservation threshold in priority and non-priority retention areas and is more restrictive than state law for clearing below the conservation threshold.
• Sec. 10.5-24.a - The stated prioritization sequence does not align with Natural Resource Article §5-1607. It is recommended that NRA §5-1607 be consulted and that this and all other relevant sections be revised to comply.
o Staff incorporated a provision for off-site planting to comply with NRA §5-1607.
• Sec. 10.5-24.c - It is recommended that this section specify that the use of funds gained through Fee-In-Lieu payments may only be used for “Park Maintenance” items after all mitigation requirements have been met, as per COMAR 08.19.04.09.
o Staff confirmed that the mitigation requirements are met through the Forest Conservation Fund. The Park Maintenance Fund is in excess of funds required to meet the mitigation requirements.
Updates Based on Mayor and Council Discussion
The Mayor and Council discussed and provided instructions to staff on the proposed amendments to the FTPO on September 30, 2024. Staff also received public comments and testimony in association with the public hearing. A summary of Mayor and Council’s discussion and instructions as well as public testimony is provided below, along with staff responses.
1. Recommendation: Codify a minimum percentage of native species required for plantings made under Forest Conservation Plans.
Response: Public comments and Mayor and Council expressed an interest in codifying a minimum percentage of native species required for trees planted under Forest Conservation Plans. Based on this feedback, staff revised the draft to require that at least 80% of trees planted to meet forest conservation must be native. This provides substantial ecological and environmental benefits to the city while providing flexibility that addresses the concerns raised by staff in the attached memo (Attachment 7).
2. Recommendation: Incorporate a native species definition.
Response: A native species definition is necessary to direct what species will be planted under the newly proposed native species requirement. Staff determined that a native trees list would be bound to the “Mid-Atlantic” region and that the list would be drawn from trusted scientific sources.
3. Recommendation: Address the benefits of bolstering biodiversity in the city.
Response: Mayor and Council noted that, in the context of the proposed native tree species requirements, biodiversity is an important consideration that adds value to the city landscape. To that end, staff incorporated language requiring plantings to be met using a diversity of tree species to the extent possible. This will ensure that plantings provide for biodiversity to promote resilience and ecological integrity.
4. Recommendation: Replace “Code Administrator” with a term that reflects the expertise we expect of those who administer the FTPO.
Response: Staff determined that “Forestry Official” is an appropriate designation and has defined the term in the FTPO to mandate a qualified professional. Under the Forest Conservation Act, a qualified professional is one of three designations permitted to prepare Forest Stand Delineations and Forest Conservation Plans. Certification as a qualified professional requires certain educational and work-experience criteria in addition to completing a DNR approved forest conservation course.
5. Recommendation: Extend the required number of days for staff to post a public notice prior to the removal of a priority retention forest or portion thereof.
Response: Staff extended the public notice requirement from 20 to 30 days.
6. Recommendation: Investigate providing an FTPO exemption for cemeteries.
Response: Staff discussed this recommendation with MDNR and the City Attorney’s Office. While it was determined that the state forest conservation law does not permit cemeteries to be exempt from forest conservation requirements altogether, the new option for offsite planting included in the current draft ordinance provides an option for cemeteries with limited space to comply with the FTPO.
Forest Conservation Manual
Staff anticipate amending the City’s Forest Conservation Manual shortly after the adoption of the FTPO to ensure compliance with the amended ordinance. All content within the Forest Conservation Manual must follow from and act in accordance with the requirements of the FTPO. Staff have included language within the amended ordinance delegating the authority to approve the Forest Conservation Manual to the City Manager. Staff finds that changes to this type of technical manual is most appropriately assessed and approved by the City Manager.
Abridged Summary of the August 5, 2024, Staff Report
Background
The original impetus for amending the FTPO was to comply with recent changes to state law. In 2023, the State Legislature passed Senate Bill 526, also known as the Forest Preservation and Retention Act, to amend parts of the State Natural Resource Articles 5-1601 through 5-1613, also known as the Maryland Forest Conservation Act (FCA), enacted in 1991. SB 526 was passed in an ongoing effort to reduce the gradual loss of forest and tree canopy observed in the State since the original passage of the FCA in 1991. SB 526 instituted a variety of changes that are intended to increase forest and tree canopy at a statewide level (and are to be measured every four years).
SB 526 provides flexibility for certain types of development and priority funding areas (PFA’s), per the State Finance and Procurement Article S-5-7B-08. According to the Maryland Department of Planning, “PFA’s are existing communities and places designated by local governments indicating where they want state investment to support future growth.” The entire corporate limits of the City of Rockville are located within a PFA.
Chapter 10.5 of the City Code, the Forest and Tree Preservation Ordinance (FTPO), is the city’s locally adopted (1992) forestry ordinance that facilitates compliance with the FCA. Local programs are authorized to be stricter than the FCA, but they cannot be less stringent; the FTPO is stricter than FCA in several respects. Most relevant to the section at hand, SB 526 altered or made additions to the FCA that required the city to amend its FTPO. They are discussed below.
Proposed FTPO Amendments Related to Senate Bill 526
Staff has outlined the five principal changes to the FCA, enacted through SB 526, via condensed bulleted points below. Each principal change is followed by staff’s corresponding amendment to the FTPO.
• Exemptions. SB 526 introduced new exemptions for some or all requirements of the FCA (e.g., transit-oriented development, solar photovoltaic facilities, etc.)
o Staff has proposed to adopt the new FCA exemptions.
• Reforestation. SB 526 made more stringent requirements for reforestation within PFA’s (½:1 reforestation rate for all forests cleared and 1:1 for all priority retention areas).
o Staff has proposed to adopt the new FCA reforestation rates.
• Priority Retention Areas. SB 526 has expanded the criteria that qualify certain areas as priorities for retention (e.g., forests in urban areas, intermittent streams and their buffers, etc.)
o Staff has proposed to adopt the expanded criteria for priority retention areas.
• Public Notice. SB 526 now requires public notice no less than 20 days prior to the approval of a forest conservation plan that authorizes the clearing of priority retention areas.
o Staff has proposed a 30-day public notice requirement for the FTPO.
• Judicial Review. SB 526 outlines the ability to petition for a judicial review of an approved forest conservation plan approved within the last 30 days.
o Staff proposes clarifying the process for judicial review of an approved forest conservation plan in the FTPO.
Other Proposed FTPO Amendments
In the process of amending the FTPO to comply with SB 526, staff recommended changes to improve the administration of the FTPO. These amendments were designed to increase tree canopy and are consistent with the city’s historical prioritization of tree preservation and environmental stewardship. Staff’s proposed amendments also further the action items outlined in the FAST (Faster, Accountable, Smarter, Transparent) initiative (Attachment 8), which was endorsed by the Mayor and Council in 2018. The following amendments improve the administration of the FTPO, which improves outcomes for the city, applicants, and residents, as well as supports appropriate development in the city. For a complete review of the proposed amendments to the FTPO, see Attachment 2.
• Defined Terms. Staff has proposed changes to certain defined terms in the FTPO.
o “Covered approval” is proposed to functionally replace and incorporate both “covered permit” and “covered activity”.
o The definition of “street tree” will be expanded to include trees planted within private roads. This is intended to close a loophole that unintentionally incentivized the creation of private streets by allowing increased onsite planting credit.
o “Single dwelling unit residential lot” is proposed to be replaced with “single dwelling unit.” The definition will encompass vacant lots. This will allow the improvement of a vacant lot with a dwelling unit via a simplified tree save plan in lieu of a Forest Stand Delineation, Forest Conservation Plan, and associated legal documents.
• FCA Exemptions. Staff is proposing to add exemptions that existed within the FCA prior to updates from SB 526 (e.g., routine maintenance in public utility rights-of-way, stream restoration projects, etc).
• New Exemption. Staff is proposing an exemption from Natural Resource Inventory and Forest Stand Delineation (NRI/FSD) for applications of the site plan, project plan, or amendments thereto that do not require a sediment control permit or impact the critical root zones of any significant trees. This is intended to eliminate the need for an NRI/FSD in the event of an application that proposes no significant disturbance and does not impact any significant trees.
• Significant Tree Replacement. Current replacement requirements allow trees below 12” in diameter at breast height (DBH) to be removed without replacement. This results in the removal of valuable trees without replacement. Staff is proposing to amend this standard to require replacement plantings for trees removed at 6” DBH or greater with one new tree required per each tree removed.
• Fee-in-lieu Funds. Staff is proposing to expand the language regarding the use of funds in the Park Maintenance Fund to include the planting of trees within the public right-of-way. This will allow the city greater flexibility with the use of fee-in-lieu funds while continuing to ensure that the funds are used to plant trees.
• FAST Initiative. Staff finds the following additional amendments to the FTPO are consistent with the FAST charter (Attachment 8) that was endorsed by the Mayor and Council in 2018.
o Continue to encourage the protection of trees on lots and replace the Natural Resource Inventory and Forest Stand Delineation requirements with a simplified Single-Family Home Tree Save Plan if confirmed as needed by city staff.
o While encouraging the retention of existing trees, require a minimum of three trees per lot for all new detached single-family homes, both on vacant lots and teardown/rebuilds.
o For minor alterations, a Natural Resource Inventory and Forest Stand Delineation shall not be required.
o For Site Plans and Site Plan Amendments, establish independent requirements for when an NRI/FSD is required.
o Deduct the area of right-of-way dedicated to the city from the total tract area to adjust Minimum Tree Cover requirements.
Equity
This ordinance will increase forest conservation and individual tree replacement requirements throughout the City of Rockville. Increased forest cover and tree canopy will improve equity by ensuring ecosystem services and other societal benefits derived from forests and trees are readily available to everyone.
Environment
This ordinance will increase forest conservation, tree replacement, as well as provide additional protection for priority retention areas. These elements will yield a positive outcome for the environment by ensuring forests, tree canopy, and environmentally sensitive resources remain protected and intact.
Economy
This ordinance will increase forest conservation, tree replacement, as well as provide additional protection for priority retention areas. Forests, tree canopy, and sensitive environmental features such as wetlands and stream buffers are associated with positive economic outcomes. Forests and trees provide direct and indirect benefits such as reducing heating and cooling costs, improved air quality, mitigate stormwater runoff, prevent erosion, and much more. These benefits have considerable economic value.
Mayor and Council History
Amendments to Chapter 10.5 of the City Code were last adopted on July 16th, 2007.
May 6, 2024 - Staff briefed the Mayor and Council on the proposed amendments to the FTPO. The Mayor and Council introduced the ordinance on that evening. The Mayor and Council instructed staff to return for a public hearing to garner public input.
At the briefing, the Mayor and Council inquired about the use of native and non-native tree species throughout the City. In response to that inquiry, Community Planning and Development Services (CPDS) worked with Recreation and Parks (RPD) to author a memo that summarizes the topic as it relates to various forestry requirements in the City.
August 5, 2024 - Mayor and Council held the requested public hearing, and public feedback was received both at the meeting and in writing as previously discussed.
September 30, 2024 - Mayor and Council held a public meeting to provide discussion and instructions to staff on proposed revisions (summarized at the beginning of the report). Following this meeting, staff addressed these proposed revisions in anticipation of submitting the amended FTPO to MDNR for review.
Public Notification and Engagement
In addition to posting this item on the Mayor and Council’s agenda, staff has performed public outreach via the following:
• City of Rockville’s Development Watch Newsletter
• Rockville Reports
• Briefing to the Mayor and Council
• Public Hearing at the Mayor and Council
• Briefing to the Environment Commission
• Briefing to the Park Advisory Board
• E-mail notification to Homeowners Associations
o Including an opportunity for feedback and discussion
• Virtual community forum sessions
o Staff conducted two virtual community forum sessions including a staff presentation and a Q&A session. The first session was held on the evening of May 2, 2024, at 7:00 PM. The second session was held on the evening of May 29, 2024, at 7:00 PM. All interested parties were welcome to attend either (or both) sessions. A total of seven (7) people attended the virtual sessions.
• Written Notice
o At the briefing to the Mayor and Council on May 6, 2024, staff were instructed to provide written notice to property owners that may be particularly affected by the proposed amendments. Staff provided written notice of the public hearing to large, forested (partially and totally) properties within the city. Notices were sent more than 2-weeks in advance of the public hearing.
• Newspaper notice
o Newspaper notice was provided in advance of the public hearing in accordance with city standards.
• Reforest Rockville provided written comments to the city. Staff have responded to the comments (reference August 5, 2024 staff report), including a memo authored by CPDS and RPD that discusses and evaluates the topic of the master street tree plan and its treatment of native and “near-native” trees.
Boards and Commissions Review
Planning Commission
While not required by the City Code, staff briefed the Planning Commission on the proposed amendments to the FTPO on March 27, 2024. Commissioners discussed the proposed amendments, with interest and questions on the following topics:
• Why is the definition of street tree being revised?
o By expanding the current definition of street trees to include trees planted within private roads, developers would be subject to the same limitations on forest conservation credit for private street tree plantings that currently exist for street trees planted in the public right of way. Staff find this solution will close an unintentional loophole that encouraged the development of private roads, contrary to best practice.
• Why expand significant trees down to 6” DBH?
o By expanding the definition of significant trees to include trees within the limits of disturbance down to 6” DBH, developers will be required to replace such trees at a 1:1 ratio, resulting in a more sustainable practice.
• How will the revised reforestation requirements be implemented?
o Staff further articulated the new reforestation requirements within SB 526 and how they will impact the FTPO. As a PFA, the city will be subject to a ½:1 reforestation ratio (1/2 acres planted for every 1 acre removed).
o Staff is proposing to maintain the current reforestation rate in the FTPO for clearing below the forest conservation threshold, which is 3:1 (3 acres planted for every 1 acre removed).
o Reforestation within the city occurs on the subject property/s under development. In the event reforestation cannot be achieved on-site, the applicant may submit justification for a fee-in-lieu payment, subject to staff review, per the criteria in Chapter 10.5-24.
• Is detailed mapping depicting properties affected by stream buffers available to applicants?
o While priority retention areas are expanded to include stream buffers, it has long been the practice of the city, consistent with the Environmental Guidelines, to place a priority on the preservation of such environmentally sensitive areas.
o Staff is unaware of any mapping that specifically outlines potential stream buffers. Staff will consider this need in the development of future resources for applicants.
o Staff notes that a combination of various maps available on the city’s webpage could assist applicants in determining if their property may contain stream buffers.
• Will the minimum lot tree requirement consider smaller lots?
o The proposed lot tree requirement will subject new single dwelling units as well as single dwelling units undergoing a major renovation that disturbs more than 50% of the floor area to a minimum lot tree requirement, which will be further articulated in the Forest Conservation Manual.
o Similar to the lot tree requirement in Chapter 25.21.21 of the Zoning Ordinance, staff anticipates taking the size of the subject lot into account when applying a minimum requirement.
• Does staff anticipate an increase in requests for waivers due to proposed amendments?
o Staff does not anticipate any increase in requests for waivers from the provisions of the FTPO. Traditional waivers are not available to the requirements of the FTPO.
• Has staff considered creating a single fund for fee-in-lieu payments?
o Staff is currently proposing to maintain two funds (the forest conservation fund and the park maintenance fund) for fee-in-lieu payments. While a single combined fund may be an option, staff seeks to amend this process as little as possible, with the underlying intent being to increase flexibility between funds to increase the resources available for street tree plantings in the city.
Environment Commission
Staff attended the city’s Environment Commission meeting on March 7, 2024. Staff provided a presentation outlining SB 526 as well as the anticipated amendments to the FTPO.
The presentation resulted in a productive discussion on a variety of topics that will be taken under advisement as staff finalizes a draft amendment of the FTPO. Such topics included but were not limited to the following:
• Backstory to SB 526
o Staff articulated that a gradual loss of forest observed at the State level was the primary focus for SB 526.
• Solar and Trees
o The commission inquired how the proposed amendments to the FTPO consider the balance between solar technology and the need for trees.
§ Staff explained that SB 526 has an exemption for solar photovoltaic facilities, which have yet to be defined by the State. Staff expect a definition to focus primarily on energy-generating facilities of farms.
• Maintain a simple, transparent process for the removal of dead, dying, and hazardous trees.
o Staff explained that nothing within the proposed amendments would complicate the process for individual tree removal based on qualifying criteria.
• The city’s status as a Tree City USA
o Staff recognize the importance the city has placed on tree canopy within the city over the years. Staff find the proposed amendments will continue that tradition of environmental stewardship.
• Current reforestation practices
o Staff articulated the current reforestation practices under the presently adopted FTPO.
• Proposed reforestation practices
o Staff articulated the proposed reforestation practices under SB 526 and how they will be implemented through the FTPO (as outlined in the report).
• Priority Funding Areas
o Staff discussed the basis for a priority funding area, as designated by the State Finance and Procurement Articles.
Park Advisory Board
Staff briefed the Park Advisory Board on the proposed amendments to Chapter 10.5 at their meeting on May 22, 2024. The members of the Board had general inquiries about the nature of the amendments, as well as SB 526.
The Board inquired about the need to amend the fee-in-lieu funds (forest conservation fund and park maintenance fund) to ensure the Recreation and Parks Department has sufficient funding allocated towards planting and maintaining the city’s street trees. Staff articulated the purpose of each of the funds, and the authorized uses of monies within each fund, per the current language in Chapter 10.5, below:
The current language (above) limits the use of resources in the park maintenance fund. After collaboration with RPD, staff are recommending new language that will permit the use of park maintenance funds for the planting of public street trees. This will provide RPD flexibility within the fund, resulting in the effective management of those funds to meet the city’s needs.
Next Steps
Following adoption of the proposed ordinance, it will become effective immediately. Staff will notify the community of the FTPO adoption through various means such as the city website, Rockville Reports, and the Development Watch Newsletter. Staff will immediately begin the process of updating the Forest Conservation Manual to reflect the updated ordinance.