My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/9/2002
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2002
>
7/9/2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/17/2019 1:28:34 PM
Creation date
9/25/2015 4:42:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC
Document Type
Migration
Meeting Date
07/09/2002
Archived Roll/Disk#
2558
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
74
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• • <br />Section 927.16. Tree Well Construction and Techniques. <br />Change: This Section has been added, replacing the Critical Root Zone determination. <br />Reason: There was considerable discussion about saving trees in areas where fill <br />needs to be placed. The concern was that a tree could be protected from <br />structural elements, but would still not survive due to fill being placed around <br />the tree. Research indicates that trees can be saved, even on sites with <br />significant fill, when tree wells are used. With substantial fill around a tree, <br />these tree wells can be deep. Due to the potential deepness of some tree <br />wells, safety concerns were mentioned as well as liability issues. Staff <br />researched the matter and was able to find information on tree well <br />construction. Using the construction techniques in the new ordinance <br />section, there will be no area that is open. It is staff's position that, if the <br />only impact to a protected or specimen tree is fill, the tree can be saved and a <br />tree well installed in accordance with this section. <br />Impact of proposed Ordinance revisions on the cost of Affordable Housing <br />County Comprehensive Plan Policy 1.7 of the Housing Element requires that the Board of County <br />Commissioners consider the effect of proposed LDR changes on housing costs. Such an analysis <br />is provided below. <br />There are several areas were the proposed LDR changes could increase costs for projects, <br />including residential projects. These are as follows: <br />1. Tree survey requirements [Section 927.18(1)(d)J. Currently, a tree survey is required for <br />all development where trees are to be removed; however, a slight increase in the cost of <br />the survey will occur as a result of the new requirement to identify certain individual <br />trees in the field [Section 927.18(1)(d)(4)]. In order to save more trees, redesign of a <br />project may be required. This could result in an increase in design costs. <br />2. Impacts that occur within the Critical Root Zone (CRZ) of trees that are to be saved <br />[Section 927.18(4)J. If pavement or certain in -ground impacts are to occur within the <br />CRZ of a saved tree, specific construction and engineering techniques will be required to <br />be used within the CRZ in order to reduce impacts on the tree. In such instances, there <br />could be increased costs for design, engineering, and construction. <br />3. Tree Wells (Section 927.16]. If the only impact to a tree proposed to be saved tree is fill, <br />then tree wells will be required The cost associated with a tree well is dependent on the <br />CRZ of the tree to be saved and the amount of fill necessary. Where tree wells are <br />required, there will likely be an increase in construction costs. <br />4. Certified Arborist or Performance Guarantee. As originally drafted, the proposed <br />Ordinance would have required either a Certified Arborist on-site (to be paid for by the <br />developer/applicant) or a Perfoiinance Guarantee (bond) posted by the developer for each <br />tree to be saved. Either of these two options could result in significant cost increases for <br />housing projects. This requirement has been removed by staff in the proposed ordinance <br />now under consideration. If the ordinance is adopted as proposed, this item will not <br />increase housing costs. <br />It is staffs opinion that, while the proposed revisions to the Ordinance will likely result in some <br />increases in the cost of residential projects, these costs should not be significant and should not <br />result in project density reductions. <br />July 9, 2002 <br />41 <br />i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.