7/9/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• personal communication, and infotniation obtained from the Internet, staff concluded that a simple direct calculation would protect the trees as well as the more complex method and would eliminate the subjectivity and complexity. This resulted in the deletion of the CRZ calculation in Section 927.16. The CRZ is now defined in Chapter 901, Definitions, as being one foot of radius from the center of the tree for every one inch of diameter at breast height (dbh). For example: a Protected Tree having a dbh of 22 inches would have a CRZ that would be a circle around the tree with a radius of 22 feet. Using the previous methodology, the CRZ would range from 11 to 41 feet depending on the species, health, age, and tolerance of the tree. The revised method of CRZ determination is commonly used in other ordinances that staff reviewed. To further determine the effect this change may have on tree protection, staff reviewed a number of previously approved development projects and determined the CRZ using the two methodologies. Using the four factors to determine the CRZ (exiting proposed method) generally resulted in a CRZ radius that was 0.75 feet for every inch of dbh; whereas, the proposed new method would result in a CRZ radius that is 1.0 foot for every inch of dbh. It is staffs conclusion that, in most cases, the new method will result in a slightly larger CRZ than the previous method. Section 927.18(3). Tree protection during site development for projects that require tree preservation. Change: This Section has been deleted. Reason: Initially, the Board of County Commissioners indicated that staff should be on- site during land clearing and tree removal activities that occurred in the vicinity of trees that were to be saved. Staff feels that this approach is not feasible for the following reasons: July 9, 2002 ▪ limited staff, • many projects would require several days of on-site supervision, and • there are usually multiple projects going on at any one time. In previous drafts of this ordinance, staff had incorporated the requirement of having a Certified Arborist on-site during these activities. As proposed in those drafts, the Certified Arborist would be paid for by the developer. As an option to the Certified Arborist, the Professional Services Advisory Committee (PSAC) suggested that an applicant be allowed to post a Performance Guarantee. The purpose of these two methods is to reduce or eliminate the intentional, or unintentional, removal or damage of trees that are to be saved. It was felt that the Certified Arborist would achieve this by stopping activity that he/she felt would damage or destroy the saved trees. With respect to the Performance Guarantee, it was thought that this would provide a financial disincentive to the removal of saved trees. There was much discussion about the effectiveness of both of these methods. Generally, the comments were as follows: Certified Arborist: 1. There are a limited number of Certified Arborists in the immediate area. A search of the International Society of Arborists web site produced a list of only 22 Certified Arborists in the area (from Melbourne to Ft. Pierce). It is unlikely that all those on the list will want to perform this activity, and it is unlikely that those who do will want to spend several days on a 39 •