CC_Minutes_2014_0707 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,July 7, 2014 Page 31 Technician would be willing to work with the Community Development Depart- ment in "fixing" this ordinance, Councilmember Etten advised that she was more than willing to do so. Councilmember Etten referenced several examples listed in the RCA that were not in the current ordinance, including trees deemed to be less than desirable. Councilmember Etten advised that the suggestion by the Technician was to use the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) list of twelve trees causing them concern, which would simply the City's system and simply reference the DNR list. Councilmember Etten expressed his concern that many developments ended up clear-cutting existing trees with little requirement by the City for replacement values and rights-of-way in front of those properties given little consideration, even though they may be very important to the development. While some of the undesirable trees (e.g. Cottonwood trees)were deemed unnecessary to replace due to their species, Councilmember Etten noted that they provided a significant and huge canopy and value to the neighborhood and for them not to count at all was of grave concern to him. Councilmember Etten suggested that, if the Cottonwoods were clear-cut, the developer should still be required to replace a percentage of their significant level, even though they may not count as a heritage tree, but still providing tremendous value to the neighborhood. Councilmember Etten noted common trees that were important to a community and a development, and the need for them to count somehow. Councilmember Etten noted that the Arborist had provided comment when the ordinance was updated in 2010, but noted there were many questions about ver- sions of species, disease resistant varieties, and ways to reference changes in those areas by simply referencing the DNR materials to keep up-to-date continuously versus changing City ordinance. Councilmember McGehee spoke in strong support of that suggestion; opining that the current ordinance was too specific, but still provided no teeth to enforce iden- tified or heritage trees to be preserved and protect drip lines. Councilmember McGehee opined that there needed to be a clear way to take care of trees during construction and spell out consequences of violations and a process to monitor and enforce the regulation. Councilmember Etten opined that this provided further rationale for increasing the hours of the Forester Technician. Councilmember Willmus agreed with much of the outline provided by Coun- cilmember Etten; opining that one thing that hit home was the replacement ration of existing trees. Opining that the City needed to look at the ordinance to account for some trees labeled as "garbage trees," with some method of formula in place to determine their replacement value and accountability to retain that ratio.