Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />• • <br />• Need for a defined area for the tree survey, especially on projects where only <br />infrastructure is proposed. <br />During the preapplication process, Environmental Planning will be responsible for <br />deter mining the need for a tree survey as well as the area where the tree survey is to be <br />done. <br />For projects not requiring a preapplication conference, the applicant will have to perforin <br />a survey as specified in Sections 927.18(])(d)(3) — (7). <br />1 his issue has been addressed, as noted above, in the current draft. <br />• Provide, up front, information on the number of trees required on the site after <br />development. <br />A minimum tree density requirement was established at 20 units/acre. Units are <br />converted to dbh using the table in the Appendix of the ordinance. lhis allows for a <br />variety of tree sizes (dbh) to be used to achieve the required density. This density <br />represents the tree density at completion of project. Existing saved trees count towards <br />density. <br />Ihis reauirernent is not part of the current draft. Planning staff's opinion is that <br />provisions of the landscape ordinance adeauatety address tree replanting issues. <br />• Provide options to the requirement of a Certified Arborist on site. <br />An option was offered to the requirement that a Certified Arborist be on site during <br />construction activities. This was an option of a compliance bond for the trees that are to <br />remain. Originally, this was a straightforward calculation After review by the <br />subcommittee, it became a two tiered approach based on the size of the property, the <br />property value (indirectly), and the financial burden to the applicant. A maximum bond <br />amount was also developed. The per tree bond ranges from S500 to S10,000. <br />Attachment 4 is a list of Certified Arborists from the Melbourne, Palm Bay, Vero Beach, <br />and Ft. Pierce area. <br />This issue has been addressed, as noted above, in the current draft. <br />• Requiring no impacts within CRZs may result in more trees being removed. <br />A section was added which details acceptable impacts that can occur within the CRZ, to <br />within one foot of the trunk of the tree. Generally, these are restricted to pavement <br />impacts. Other methods can be used; however, they must be proposed by a Certified <br />Arborist <br />Thus issue has been addressed, as noted above, in the current draft. <br />Applicants will now have a clearer picture of which areas must be surveyed for trees. In cases <br />where only infrastructure is to be placed, only those areas of development will be required to be <br />surveyed; however, all specimen trees still need to be surveyed. <br />Posting a bond for trees that are to remain was added as an option to having a Certified Arborist <br />onsite. This will increase compliance with an approved Tree Protection Plan. Impacts within the <br />CRZ have been expanded to within one (1) foot of the tree, provided certain engineering and/or <br />construction techniques are used. This will encourage the saving of trees that before could not <br />have been saved. <br />Summary of issues raised at December 20. 2001, PSAC meeting <br />The following are the two issues raised at the December 20, 2001, PSAC meeting that resulted in <br />the two recommended changes to the Ordinance (bold items are issues raised at PSAC meeting; <br />the infoiniation following the issue is staffs response). <br />JANUARY 22, 2002 <br />-31- <br />EEE( <br />