Laserfiche WebLink
CLEAR & OBJECTIVE HOUSING: APPROVAL C RITERIA UPDATE <br /> <br /> <br />November 13, 2018 DRAFT Preferred Concepts Report: Significant Issues Page 42 of 59 <br /> <br />COS -11 (TREE P RESERVATION C ONSIDERATION ) <br />Description : Under the clear and objective track for all application types, the written report required from a <br />certified arborist or licensed landscape architect must only show that “consideration" has been given to <br />preservation of significant trees (defined term). <br />Applies To : Conditional Use, Partition, Planned Unit Development, Site Review, Subdivision <br />Existing Code Section(s): EC 9.6885(2)(a) <br />Existing Code Language : <br />(2) Tree Preservation and Removal Standards . No permit for a development activity subject to this section <br />shall be approved until the applicant submits plans or information, including a written report by a certified <br />arborist or licensed landscape architect, that demonstrates compliance with the following standards: <br />(a) The materials submitted shall reflect that consideration has been given to preservation in <br />accordance with the following priority: <br />1. Significant trees located adjacent to or within waterways or wetlands designated by <br />the city for protection, and areas having slopes greater than 25%; <br />2. Significant trees within a stand of trees; and <br />3. Individual significant trees. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Recommendation : Revise criterion to require tree preservation or mitigation and implement a rating scale <br />that takes into account tree type, health, size, and location. (Option D) <br />A. No Change o – + – – o– <br />B. Require preservation of 30% of significant healthy <br />trees on a development site. Define healthy <br />(significant is already defined as a living, standing <br />tree having a trunk with a minimum cumulative <br />diameter at breast height of 8 inches). <br />+++o+ o– <br />C. Require preservation of 30% of significant healthy <br />trees on a development site, or allow for payment <br />into a tree planting & preservation fund to provide <br />mitigation option when preservation is not <br />feasible <br />+++++ +– <br />D. Revise to address tree preservation by <br />implementing a rating scale based on tree type, <br />health and size. +++o+ o+ <br />+ promotes o neutral – inhibits <br />Possible Concepts <br />January 23, 2019, Work Session – Item 1