|
1
|
|
|
2
|
- Current mitigation ratios encourage preservation of large trees
- Mitigation fees are essential for restoring health of our urban forest
and funding tree planting
- Recommendation: Denial
|
|
3
|
- Only 6% of the land area (black squares) is sampled for heritage trees.
|
|
4
|
- Odds are 16 to 1 against a heritage tree being counted by the random
grid survey. It is likely old heritage trees like this will not beat the
odds.
|
|
5
|
- Heritage tree removal is not sampled; there is no measurement of what is
destroyed
- Method is grossly inaccurate
- Accuracy has never been tested.
- What other cities use it for land development?
|
|
6
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
8
|
- Recommendation: Approval contingent on the following changes:
|
|
9
|
- A “blank check” amendment; there is no written specification for the
“alternative construction” methods
- There is no limit on the use of the “alternative”
- “There is no scientific evidence that these treatments improve
conditions for tree growth”
Trees and Development, A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees
During Land Development, 1998, International Society of Arboriculture
- Recommendation: Denial
|
|
10
|
|
Notes
