Laserfiche WebLink
Coordinator Anderson stated that as City Code currently stands, as long as there is enough area <br />to actually build a home, the rest of the lot technically could be wetland that is unbuildable. He <br />stated that is something some of the planners have brought up recently, whether the City should <br />not only have a minimum lot size but also a minimum buildable area. He stated that currently, if <br />there is just enough high ground to build a home, it's considered buildable. <br /> <br />Board Member Olds asked where the trees would be planted. <br /> <br />Coordinator Anderson stated that a single family home lot requires two trees. He stated that if <br />there's a wetland area, not a lot of activity can be done outside of the high ground. He stated <br />there may be credit for existing trees that are on the fringe of wetland areas. He stated that it is a <br />case by case decision. <br /> <br />Board Member Freeberg asked who determines if there is enough tree coverage. <br /> <br />Coordinator Anderson stated there is a difference in single family homes and townhouse <br />development. He stated that single family homes are required to plant two trees per lot. He <br />stated that townhouse developments are subject to this canopy cover formula. Coordinator <br />Anderson stated that he would be the person on Staff who looks at landscaping. <br /> <br />Board Member Max stated that in a single family home, it's almost impossible to have all of the <br />high ground taken up by house. <br /> <br />Coordinator Anderson provided the EPB members with a site plan for visual reference. He stated <br />the plan showed that plantings were well over what was required by City code. He stated this <br />developer was required to have 242,000 square feet of canopy cover. He stated they came in at <br />261,000 square feet. <br /> <br />Board Member Olds asked about a time frame for the life of the 261,000 square fl. planting <br /> <br />Coordinator Anderson stated that the canopy cover formula is based on the size of a tree at 20 <br />years. <br /> <br />Board Member Bentz asked if the formula, with such a large value, was pushed up by one small <br />bush. <br /> <br />Coordinator Anderson explained the difference in requirements by tree species. He stated there <br />are some requirements specifying that only up to 25% of the required square footage can be <br />accomplished through shrubbery and ornamentals. <br /> <br />Board Member Max stated that one dilemma is if they really are under story, they're great. He <br />stated, however, that shrubs can be pruned back to the point where they never reach more than <br />about three square feet. <br /> <br />Coordinator Anderson stated that because of the limiting factor of only 25% of what's required, <br />once the minimum requirements are met, the landscape can be overloaded with whatever they <br />want. He stated that a lot of the builders are going above and beyond what's required. <br /> <br />Environmental Policy Board / January 9, 2006 <br /> Page 3 of 16 <br /> <br /> <br />