Laserfiche WebLink
language could be pulled out and referred to in the Tree Book to get away from having it <br />removed every time the formula gets changed because it isn't working. <br /> <br />Zoning & Recycling Coordinator Anderson clarified that either way, a public hearing will still be <br />necessary. <br /> <br />Board Member Bentz asked whether the Environmental Policy Board could come up with any <br />values for the fast growing median and where that would be put into the formula. <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda wondered if the formula should be taken out of the City Code. <br />Coordinator Anderson stated that everything is called out for in City code--including the <br />formula, so that's where this sits. It's not in the Tree Preservation ordinance. It is in the City's <br />R-2 and R-3 zoning district regulations, and thus, to amend will require a public hearing no <br />matter what the EPB decides. <br /> <br />Zoning & Recycling Coordinator Anderson made a staff recommendation to the Environmental <br />Policy Board to allow him to check with Community Development Director Patrick Trudgeon <br />and Asst. Com. Dev. Dir. Sylvia Frolik to see if removing the formula is even possible, and then <br />reconvene on this case in January. Chairperson McDilda concurred with Zoning & Recycling <br />Coordinator Anderson's recommendation. <br /> <br />Board Member Sibilski asked if the formula requirements were way out of the ordinary. Zoning <br />& Recycling Coordinator Anderson stated he didn't feel that they were too far off, but he felt it <br />was relatively easy to achieve. <br /> <br />Board Member Max stated that project managers seem to volunteer to do more than they need to <br />do pretty regularly. He stated the other problem the City encountered was with people planting <br />fast growing trees so they don't last a long time. He noted the City should make sure that <br />whenever possible, trees were going to be put in that will be there for a while. <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda stated this issue was first taken on because of clear cutting. Now, he <br />wondered if the City has gone too far. He stated that there have not been a lot of complaints. He <br />noted the real question is, is it enough when you meet the canopy cover? He stated that the <br />average canopy coverage is minimal on a residential lot. <br /> <br />Zoning & Recycling Coordinator Anderson stated there have been studies on that question. He <br />stated that average canopy coverage was somewhere in the neighborhood of 30% preferred. <br /> <br />Board Member Max stated that 20-25% is what studies say is the preferred amount of canopy <br />coverage. He noted that is what people are happy with. He stated that citizens want trees but <br />they don't want it to be too crowded. <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda asked for some examples of some of the plats that have come through the <br />City to help the Environmental Policy Board visualize for planning purposes. <br /> <br />Board Member Max stated that the new formula presented an entirely different story from the <br />first time it was looked at by the Board. <br /> <br />Environmental Policy Board / December 5, 2005 <br /> Page 5 of 8 <br /> <br /> <br />