Laserfiche WebLink
Environmental Specialist Bacon recalled the discussion of a tree bank or buy back plan. He <br />stated that one of the tradeoffs for grading is the sponsorship or retention of canopy cover in the <br />greenways. He stated the grading was going to go on because of the thrust of western <br />civilization. He expressed concern that it might be a challenge to find an effective balance for <br />where the grading can be preserved by some institutional mechanisms. <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda recommended that the EPB go back and look at maximum coverage for <br />mature trees, and forming a smaller group to take a look at that for recommendation. He <br />expressed his concern about the big values for total canopy coverage. He stated that the current <br />formula requires a lot of trees. <br /> <br />Councilmember Strommen stated she felt it was more the diversity issue. She noted that on the <br />Town Center plan, they could have satisfied the formula with ten trees and then there wouldn't <br />have been very many trees. She stated that if a diversity requirement was put in, that prohibits <br />satisfying the entire thing with a few trees. <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda stated that comes down to average lot size and what determines pervious <br />and impervious. He stated less pervious area would be available, depending on the lot size and <br />building size. He stated some plans allow for a lot of building and parking lot. <br /> <br />Environmental Specialist Bacon concurred adding the greenway. <br /> <br />Board Member Olds stated the canopy cover is based on a 20-year growth period. He asked <br />what was to say that five years from now when some of these trees are dead, someone could <br />decide to put in a less than adequate replacement. <br /> <br />Coordinator Anderson stated there would be no recourse after they have been in the ground for <br />two years. <br /> <br />Board Member Bentz asked if many of these developments were associations that have an <br />association book to work with. <br /> <br />Coordinator Anderson stated after the landscaping guarantee assurity has been issued, the City <br />has no recourse. He stated the only instances where the City could have recourse would be areas <br />that were specifically planted to satisfy density transition requirements, in which those are acting <br />as a buffer between existing homes and new, higher density development. <br /> <br />Board Member Max stated that while not much may be done with code, an association could <br />have a lot more influence over people that are managing the association. He stated that may be <br />where the leverage comes from people with an interest in the real estate. <br /> <br />Councilmember Strommen stated that normally a developer will help develop the first <br />homeowner covenant or documents that cover things like tree replacement. She stated that the <br />City could encourage them to have something initially in their covenants. <br /> <br />Board Member Olds stated some diversity should allow for longevity in the planting guidelines. <br /> <br />Environmental Policy Board / January 9, 2006 <br /> Page 7 of 16 <br /> <br /> <br />