New Search
TREES- EN.RFT Page 2 <br /> Policy 10.0 <br /> "Amend the Eugene Code to provide suitable space for trees to grow in new or reconstructed street rights -of -way to the <br /> maximum extent practical." Discussion: Jan has worked with Jim West of Transportation Division on the right -of -way <br /> widths being proposed in the new Trans. Rule Implementation Project (TRIP). The planting strips proposed are 5'-6" on <br /> Locals and 7'-6" on Collectors and Arterials. These widths are felt to be sufficient and will meet the intent of this UFMP <br /> policy. TRIP has made it through the Planning Commission and is on its way to Council in the next few months. <br /> Engineering will need to acquire similar right -of -way on reconstruction projects or perform an analysis which would prove <br /> it "not practical ". Policv 13.0 "The City will require an approved street tree plan in developments involving the creation <br /> of streets. Assure that the party obtaining the approval provides for planting the street trees, according to the approved <br /> plan, as each lot or area is developed." Discussion: This will require changes in Chapter 9 involving subdivisions, minor, <br /> and major partitions and'perhaps site reviews. PUDs already allow for the requirement but enforcement may be an <br /> issue. This issue will need to be worked out with Jan Childs as the Chapter 9 rewrite project proceeds with involvement <br /> at least from Joe Ferguson, Jan Staszewski, and Building Division. Policv 14.0 "The City will structure tree plan review <br /> and approval to work within existing development processing time frames for subdivision, planned unit development, and <br /> development permit approval. Criteria and information for approval will be available with all other permit information." <br /> Discussion: The various public bodies who reviewed the UFMP all were concemed that the review processes for <br /> development activities were already too long. They wished to insure that any additional steps we added would not <br /> lengthen the total processing time. That's our goal, it remains to be seen how "doable" this will be. The second part <br /> referred to maximizing coordination with the PIC so the private individual was not shuttled around the city to various <br /> offices. We are working with Greta Utecht to explore the possibilities of the PIC handling the acceptance of the permit <br /> application from the customer and then forwarding the application to Maintenance as is currently being done for <br /> right -of -way cut permits. Policy 15.0 "The City will retain heritage trees on street right -of -way, in parks, and on other City <br /> property, except when otherwise necessary for the public health, safety, or welfare." Discussion: We need to go to great <br /> lengths to avoid causing the removal of a heritage class tree. Whoever so desires to remove one should do an analysis <br /> which would show justification for its removal based on the health, safety, or welfare criteria. This is very open ended <br /> and one should expect a large amount of criticism and examination of their analysis. Jan will be available for <br /> consultation and review of analysis which are prepared but he will not perform the analysis unless the removal is due to <br /> disease or immediate hazard. SUMMARY The above takes a first stab at addressing 10 of the 19 policies contained in <br /> the UFMP. We will be working on these as well as the other nine as time allows or specific need requires. <br /> cc: Joe Ferguson <br /> Louie Kroeck <br /> Jan Childs <br /> Doug Eveleth <br /> Brant Williams <br /> John Etter <br /> Jan Stazewski <br />