New Search
- <br /> � GENE' Public Works <br /> Maintenance <br /> 1820 Roosevelt Boulevard <br /> Eugene, Oregon 97402 <br /> (503) 687 -5220 <br /> DATE: January 14, 1994 <br /> TO: Mayor and City Council <br /> FROM: Johnny R. Medlin, Maintenance Support Manager <br /> REFERENCE: Update On The New Tree Preservation Code <br /> During the January 11, .1993 Council Officers meeting staff presented a verbal update of <br /> tree permit statistics, citizen comments received, and the Home Builders Association's position <br /> on the new Tree Preservation Ordinance. The opinion expressed in the Home Builders <br /> Association letter (attached) was that too little time for comment has passed since the <br /> ordinance's adoption. Staff share this opinion and recommended that review of this ordinance <br /> be scheduled for this fall after the 1994 construction season is completed. <br /> The Council Officers recommended the February 14, 1994 public hearing be postponed to this <br /> fall and asked staff to prepare this memo to Council presenting the material discussed. <br /> fACKGROUND <br /> The Tree Preservation Ordinance was modified and approved by City Council in July 1993. <br /> Though the new code has not been in effect a full year, the language of this ordinance has <br /> provided better tools' to preserve the forested hillside. While tree removal is still permitted to <br /> accommodate approved development under separate zoning and building codes, the new Tree <br /> Preservation Ordinance greatly restricts predevelopment removals. The code still allows some <br /> common forestry practices, such as removing trees with infestation of insects and disease. <br /> While it also allows the removal of trees that are hazardous to buildings or streets, the new <br /> code prevents the large scale clearing of land that was permitted under the old code. <br /> In the first six months, a total of nine permits have been applied for and all been granted. <br /> Six of the permits were minor in impact with only one to eight trees removed from each site. <br /> The remaining three permits requested to remove eleven or more trees. These major permits <br /> required a public notice and comment period. Among the three permits 58 notices were sent <br /> out to owners, residents, and interested parties. Two of the applications received a total of <br /> twenty responses, while one application receive no responses. <br /> Applicants for two of the three major permits tried to include comments that referenced future <br /> development without an accompanying development proposal. The applicants generally said <br /> that most of the trees that they wished to remove could be considered hazardous to any future <br /> development. All the written comments received requested the city to deny these permits or <br /> greatly limit the number of trees allowed to be removed. The predominate theme has been <br /> 1 <br />