Minutes - Environmental Policy Board - 03/20/2023

Home

Senior Planner Anderson referenced the statement that if a privacy fence is installed, the plantings could be reduced by ten percent which is fairly minimal for the expense of a fence. He stated that he would suggest that reduction be increased. Chairperson Moore stated that she would agree with that, noting that a fence also occupies a fair amount of space. Senior Planner Anderson confirmed the consensus of the Board to increase that reduction. He provided an overview of the tree preservation requirements. Board Member Bernard asked if any projects have not moved forward because of the tree preservation requirements. Senior Planner Anderson replied that a project has not been lost directly related to only tree preservation standards, but that could have been one factor, of multiple, for some inquiries that did not move forward to formal application. Chairperson Moore commented that she is comfortable with the definition of significant trees and also does not have a problem with the expense a developer would have to pay in relation because they are removing a forest in order to move forward with development. Board Member Fetterley asked if staff could recall any feedback that would be helpful in this discussion. She stated that she is comfortable with the standard, unless the City is far off from what other communities are requiring. Senior Planner Anderson replied that he has received comments of frustration, but those projects still went forward. He stated that they can expand the search to see what other communities require. He provided an example of a more urban area and noted that perhaps the tree inventory is only needed on more heavily wooded areas. He asked if the intention is to preserve any tree, anywhere, or whether they are intending to look at more heavily treed areas. Board Member Bernard commented that he would believe it should apply to a more natural area. He noted that in the example these trees were planted as a buffer and were not natural to begin with. He noted that a fence would provide the same level of screening. Senior Planner Anderson replied that the base landscaping requirements do apply to reforestation requirements. He stated that staff can explore the requirements of other communities and perhaps draft language that encapsulates the intention of true natural areas versus sporadic trees as shown in the example. Chairperson Moore agreed but noted that she would want some kind of safeguards in place as well. She suggested looking at other Highway 10 communities for tree preservation language. Senior Planner Anderson provided additional input on the requirement for payment into the reforestry fund, noting that in some cases there simply was not enough room on the site to plant the required trees. He identified language within the tree preservation that should be moved and/or eliminated. Environmental Policy Board / March 20, 2023 Page 4 of 6