2015_1116_CCpacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

�� � Sambatek � o,47F• 11-16-15 To: Roseville City Council FROM� Ben Gozola, AICP sua�Ecr.• Tree Preservation Ordinance Final Draft Overview Attachment A Engineering I �u;��e�y�r��g I Plann�ng I trrvi�oi��i��i7ia1 Memorandum Utilizing direction from the Planning Commission and City Council in July, Sambatek and S&S Tree have completed work on an updated tree preservation ordinance for commission consideration. The language before you was pre-reviewed by Council in September, and considered at a public hearing in October. All feedback from both Council and the Planning Commission has been addressed in this final draft. To review, the general goals we were asked to achieve with this new language included: ■ Needing to identify a solid purpose for the regulations. ■ Categorize by tree type in some manner (i.e. High Quality Trees, Common Trees, Less Desirable Trees, Remove/Prohibited), but be more generalized in what we're protecting (recognizing the public wants a 24" Coitonwood protected just as much as a 24" Oak). ■ Provide incentives to preserving trees. ■ Require an easy-to-read and understand "tree loss" plan with development applications (i.e. the tree inventory + grading plan impacts = tree preservation plan). ■ Consider limiting allowed removals (i.e. don't a/low al/ trees in planned ROW to be removed outright). • Require tree protection fencing during development ■ Don't make individual property owners jump through permitting hoops to remove trees • Ensure proper City review both before and after development. ■ Consider implementing a cash-in-lieu of trees program that could fund trees for public grounds, open space, boulevards, or even a subsidized program for private plantings.