New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
General Trees
COE
>
PW
>
POS_PWM
>
Parks
>
Street Trees.Urban Forestry
>
General Trees
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/9/2014 1:41:58 PM
Creation date
7/9/2014 1:41:30 PM
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 >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
246
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
From: MEDLIN Johnny R <br /> To: MILLER Marsha A <br /> Cc: BELLMORE Mike; FOERSTLER Kevin J; HAMMITT Bob; PLAMONDON Scott F; LYLE Les A; <br /> CHILDS Jan W; MCKERROW Mike J <br /> Subject: RE: Hunter's Glen <br /> Date: Monday, July 22, 1996 12:21 PM <br /> Hi Marsha, <br /> I don't see us as being the proper agency to take enforcement action. <br /> PWM has two enforcement strategies we have used when it is a <br /> violation of Chapter 6. (I think in this instance the possible <br /> violation is in Chapter 9 which historically we haven't been <br /> involved.) <br /> 1. We have been using the Administrative civil penalty <br /> (2.018) which is the same one I believe you use. I think we <br /> interpret the fine to be on a per tree basis and not on a <br /> total occurrence basis. Usually up to a couple hundred per <br /> tree. <br /> 2. Municipal court action under Chapter 6 allows up to $4,000 <br /> a tree when proved in a court case. However, it specifically <br /> references violation of Chapter 6.300 -330. <br /> PUD's are specifically listed as exempt from the Chapter <br /> 6.300 -330 language. You may want to ask Glen Klein for an <br /> opinion on options. <br /> I suspect what might be the best strategy is to try to use <br /> your administrative rules, apply them to a per tree basis for <br /> a one day occurrance and go from there. I don't know if that <br /> would be possible or not. <br /> I'll be happy to have my staff assist, but feel Planning and <br /> your staff are lead on enforcement of tree issues in a PUD. <br /> (until or if we make other agreements for the future.) <br /> Thanks <br /> Johnny <br /> From: MILLER Marsha A <br /> To: MEDLIN Johnny R <br /> Cc: MCKERROW Mike J <br /> Subject: FW: Hunter's Glen <br /> Date: Monday, July 22, 1996 9:12AM <br /> If it turns out that they have in fact cut much more than they <br /> were allowed in the PUD plan or the tree cutting plan (future) <br /> will your shop be taking enforcement action based on the <br /> number of trees cut? Our enforcement powers are limited to a <br /> daily civil penalty. Not very effective for this type of <br /> violation! Dick is out all this week. thanks mm <br /> From: GASSMAN Dick L <br /> To: MILLER Marsha A; MCKERROW Mike J <br /> Subject: FW: Hunter's Glen <br /> Date: Sunday, July 21, 1996 1:38PM <br /> Here is the latest on the Hunter's Glen situation. This has <br /> the possibility of mushrooming into a gigantic controversy <br /> within the City given that PWM, Planning, and us all have a <br /> hand in the pie, the relative responsibilities are not clear, <br /> Page 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.