New Search
MEDLIN Johnny R <br /> From: OSBORN Keli M <br /> To: MEDLIN Johnny R <br /> Cc: PLAMONDON Scott F; MILLER Marsha A <br /> Subject: Friday, October 06, 1995 <br /> Date: PIC <br /> 4:57PM <br /> Date: <br /> When meeting earlier this week to discuss the effectiveness of the Tree Preservation Ordinance, meeting <br /> participants identified some gaps that could possibly be addressed with a stronger presence by Public <br /> Works Maintenance at the Permit & Information Center. <br /> As I understand it: Occupied lots under 20,000 sq ft are exempt from the tree permit requirement. <br /> Because an occupied lot is defined as having a dwelling or a building permit issued for construction of a <br /> dwelling, commercial properties under 20,000 sq ft need a tree permit. Additionally, all properties over <br /> 20,000 sq ft need a permit for removal of more than 5 trees. We can do a better job of catching eligible <br /> properties during the building permit /plans review process, especially on commercial development. One <br /> way to achieve consistency would be to have someone from your shop in on the plans review process on a <br /> regular basis. <br /> Another area to strengthen review would be in the land use application process. Scott has indicated that <br /> he is getting an increasing number of referrals from Planning, giving him an opportunity to suggest tree <br /> preservation conditions for conditional use permits, site reviews, et al. This role could expand to cover all <br /> land use applications on a consistent basis, and the referral /review might even be made more effective with <br /> resource here at the PIC. <br /> We also discussed the need for more proactive monitoring and enforcement of tree preservation conditions. <br /> This could be accomplished more easily with someone at the PIC, as part of the existing review and <br /> inspection route. <br /> (The alternative to a strong Maintenance presence here would be to delegate these responsibilities to <br /> someone else, likely Land Use Management, who'd continue to use the Urban Forester as a consultant. <br /> Under this scenario, there still are coordination and resource issues to consider.) <br /> You'd asked about financial implications. We do have a sub -fund, 012, dedicated to building permit /plan <br /> check. It supports loaned staff in terms of rent, materials and supplies. However, home departments pay <br /> salaries and benefits. Home departments also pay for computers and monthly computer charges. <br /> We are squeezed for space at the PIC, but are hoping to close on a lease agreement that will open up more <br /> space on the 2nd and 3rd floors. If you are considering assigning a person to the PIC for tree and other <br /> Maintenance issues that we now must refer off -site, now is probably the ideal time to weigh the costs and <br /> benefits. <br /> Let me know if we can supply more info. Please feel free to share this information with Bob Hammitt and <br /> Christine Andersen. <br /> Page 1 <br />