New Search
• <br /> Eugene Code Section 6.305 (3) No person shall remove a street tree without first <br /> obtaining a permit from the city manager specifically authorizing the removal of a street <br /> tree. Permit approval may be conditioned upon replacement of the street tree with <br /> another tree pre- approved by the city, or a requirement to pay to the city an amount <br /> sufficient to fund the planting and establishment by the city of a tree of similar value. <br /> The value of the existing street trees to be removed shall be calculated using the methods <br /> set forth in the edition then in effect of the Guide for Plant Appraisal published by the <br /> International Society of Arboriculture Council of Tree Landscape Appraisers. <br /> We do not feel this should of been a surprise to LTD. LTD's design consultant was given more <br /> than five months advance notice that this requirement was being considered for adoption by <br /> Council. Scott Plamondon stated that he had a series of contacts beginning as early as last <br /> February with Kim Isaacson of Murase Associates (a design consultant for the LTD project) <br /> regarding street tree removal and design. Scott stated that he told Kim of these pending <br /> requirements which would affect the LTD project if the trees were to be removed after the <br /> Council had completed the Local Street Plan adoption. <br /> This new code provision was established to resolve what has often been a conflict between <br /> environmental and development goals within the community. Mature large trees have a much <br /> higher value to the environment and community than do the small trees they are replaced with. <br /> Developers often do not consider the value of a mature tree in their decisions of where to design <br /> facilities. Staff have not had good "tools" to use in the negotiation with a developer to encourage <br /> minimal impact on street trees. With this provision the appraised value of the street tree is <br /> established based on a nationally recognized methodology and presents the developer with the <br /> "cost" of a removal or their possible liability if they damage a tree identified to be preserved. We <br /> believe this "tool" will make the design professional and contractors much more thoughtful in <br /> their designs and construction techniques when they evaluate which alternative really is the most <br /> cost efficient. <br /> Funds generated through tree removal permits and mitigation will be taken in as revenue to the <br /> road fund. It is our intent to monitor these revenues and to make future appropriation requests <br /> for these amounts to be used to fund the planting of street trees. We feel this might be a good <br /> (only ?) way to keep our planting programs alive in the face of declining road fund revenues. <br /> In closing I recommend no exception to these provisions for public agencies. That precedent <br /> would be very difficult to explain in our future conversations on this issue with private <br /> developers. I hope this information has been helpful, please let me know if you need additional. <br /> cc: Scott Plamondon <br /> Attachment: 10/30/96 Letter from Scott Plamondon to Bob Hibschman re: removal of public <br /> trees <br /> 2 <br />