Minutes - Environmental Policy Board - 02/06/2006

Home

Acting Chairperson Max asked if the EPB members would want to put in a requirement of a minimum 25% requirement for coniferous trees. He asked whether the EPB members wanted it to remain or to put something different in code. Board member Olds stated he liked the 25% requirement, but also to specify that no more than 20% of that 25% can be of one particular genus. Acting Chairperson Max asked if code could be modified to state that 25% of the required canopy must be coniferous, and no more than 20% of the planting which would include everything of any one genus. He stated that would not require 25% of the entire planting, but would only be 25% of the required plantings must be that way. Acting Chairperson Max noted that the second example studied almost doubled the required amount of trees that were required. Board member Sibilski asked if the examples of the required canopy cover were recalculated with the new formula or with what was on the existing plan. Acting Chairperson Max stated the required formula doesn't change. He explained that what was being changed was how much of each species was applied to the formula. Board member Sibilski noted that in the second example the required canopy was approximately 80,000. He asked for clarification whether 25% of that had to be coniferous making it 20,000, but the total planting were to be 160,000, noting that the 20% would require 40,000. He stated that the developer would have to plant only one genus of coniferous. He noted that there would be no diversity there. He asked if that would be what the committee wanted. He stated the developer could only plant spruce under this scenario. Board member Olds stated his interpretation would be to defer back to the Zoning Coordinator to make the determination whether it was acceptable. Board member Sibilski stated that if it was laid out, the developer could say he met the requirement and refuse to plant anything else. Board member Hustvedt concurred with Board member Sibilski adding that there should be some sort of a kill clause in the code. Board member Olds stated the requirement could be reworded it so it read, 20% of the required planting. Board member Sibilski concurred. He added that the more planted, the smaller number of species with less diversity would be required. He stated that the diversity amount of 20% should be required and after that they could plant whatever they wanted. He noted the larger the planting, the less diversity. Environmental Policy Board/February 6, 2006 Page 5 of 10