New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
1994 Tree Ordinance
COE
>
PW
>
POS_PWM
>
Parks
>
Street Trees.Urban Forestry
>
1994 Tree Ordinance
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/9/2014 10:00:52 AM
Creation date
7/9/2014 10:00:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PW_Operating
PW_Document_Type_ Operating
Correspondence
PW_Division
Parks and Open Space
External_View
No
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
该页面上没有批注。
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
269
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Date: 07/07/93 <br /> From: Johnny Medlin CEWMJRM - RIS1 <br /> To: Doug Eveleth CEWBDAE - RIS1 <br /> Marsha Miller CEWBMAM - RIS1 <br /> cc: Bob Hammitt CEWMJRH - RIS1 <br /> Les Lyle CEWELAL - RIS1 <br /> John Etter CERMJFE - RIS1 <br /> Jan Staszewski CEWMJXS - RIS1 <br /> John Weber CEWBJJW - RIS1 <br /> Subject: Tree Ordinance <br /> Reference: Note from Bob Hammitt (CEWMJRH - RIS1) attached below <br /> Doug, Bob Hammitt passed me the below note from you. With Ruth vetoing <br /> the ordinance we're not sure at this time what it will end up looking <br /> like. However, I'm afraid that that Building will definately be impacted <br /> in several ways. <br /> Just looking at the veto'd ordinance and assuming what will end up will <br /> have some of its features I'd say we have the following questions at least <br /> to answer: <br /> 1. Under what situations are we currently not administering the code? <br /> a) a permit is required on all non - residential tree removal from parcel <br /> less than 20,000 square feet. I not sure this is being done. <br /> b) others? <br /> 2. I'm not sure how we are looking at subdivisions, minor and major part - <br /> ions regarding trees when we approve these actions. The more we can <br /> do at these front end stages the less we will find ourselves faced with <br /> for individual building lots. I see a meeting needed to discuss this <br /> involving Building /Planning, Engineering and Maintenance. <br /> 3. It needs discussion but I'm not sure the ordinance will allow removal <br /> of trees in preparation for building a residence unless the person has <br /> at least a quick -start permit in hand. <br /> 4. With a building permit in hand for a residence, the less than 20,000 sf <br /> parcel is completely exempt from this ordinance. I'm not sure if the <br /> council is aware that Building doesn't look at trees on the lot in the <br /> review for a building permit. I hope this doesn't become an issue as <br /> it was last year while doing the UFMP. <br /> With everything going on at Council I don't know what step to take <br /> first. I suggest we await Monday's Council meeting and see how the <br /> Council deals with Ruth's veto. <br /> Thanks Johnny <br /> ATTACHED NOTE <br /> Date: 07/02/93 <br /> From: Bob Hammitt CEWMJRH - RIS1 <br /> To: Johnny Medlin CEWMJRM - RIS1 <br /> Subject: <br /> Reference: Note from Doug Eveleth (CEWBDAE - RIS1) attached below <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.