New Search
. <br /> case of PDDs west side development they are removing 30+ <br /> trees from the interior of the site (including 3 heritage <br /> class trees) and in that case we are not requiring internal <br /> mitigation. Using this logic in PDDs case would up the cost <br /> at least another $150,000 - $200,000 for additional <br /> mitigation. <br /> With LTD and PDD both paying for street tree mitigation and <br /> with our not dealing with what trees previously existed on the <br /> private parcels (being outside our jurisdiction), our <br /> administration of the code in dealing with the LTD and PDD <br /> sites hasn't been compromised and is easily defendable. If we <br /> allowed on site mitigation, I would hate to have someone look <br /> at these two sites in conjunction and make comparisons. What <br /> would be economic for one (LTD) would be very costly for the <br /> other (PDD). <br /> As a possibility perhaps (although a costly one) what would <br /> you think of requiring the tree to be placed on an easement <br /> permanently dedicated to the public for that purpose in order <br /> to qualify for on site planting credit for the mitigation of <br /> street trees? This would be a requirement most private <br /> parties would decline to take advantage of and public agencies <br /> might choose to use. <br /> For the program continuity I would recommend we hold LTD to <br /> the mitigation. Otherwise, I think my recommendation would be <br /> to waive mitigation costs as in the best interests of the <br /> public as the least difficult option. Perhaps we could even <br /> figure a way to show it as a road fund commitment toward the <br /> project. The code says the City Manager MAY require <br /> mitigation, it doesn't say the City Manager has to. <br /> We will be awaiting your direction. <br /> Hope your holidays are happy ones!!! <br /> Johnny <br /> From: ANDERSEN Chris F <br /> To: MEDLIN Johnny R; PLAMONDON Scott F <br /> Subject: LTD trees <br /> Date: Monday, December 23, 1996 1:15PM <br /> LBob and I talked about this again last week. Are you guys ok <br /> with the notion of having an agreement with LTD that they will <br /> maintain to ISA standards and will not remove trees on their <br /> property without reimbursement to the city for credit? (That <br /> assumes we would credit them for trees on their property in <br /> the same manner that we would if they were replanting on city <br /> property.) Let me know what you think - -I haven't talked to <br /> anyone at LTD about this yet. Chris <br /> Page 3 <br />