Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-06-10 96-270 ORDINANCEDate June 24. 1996 Item No. /b p /D Item/Subject: Amending Land Development Code - Chapter VIII, Axticle 17, Sections 4.7A,(3) and 6.7,E - C.O. # 96-270 Responsible Departmentz Planning Division The Planning Board, at its regularly scheduled meeting of June 18, 1996, held a public hearing on the above -noted zoning amendment. No one spoke in opposition. The Planning Board voted five In favor and none opposed to recommend to the City Council that the zoning amendment contained in C.O. # 96-278 be approved. partgfiAnt Bea y , d 4 ° d� �cv O ,�h City Manager Associated Information:. c; ., tt J T City Solicitor X Passage First Reading Page I of I Referral Budget Approvals Finance Director City Solicitor X Passage First Reading Page I of I Referral 96-2)0 Auigned W Cowedw Popper June 10, 1996 CITY OF BANGOR (TITLE.) MrbhtntrBt... Lnending.LaM..navelopment..Code ._-.,Chapter._VILI.y_ Article 17, Section 4.7A,(3), and Article 17, Section 6.], E. -..I ..... .._........- Be U oedaiud bF the (tits Coaaeu Of alrafBasm, ae Ibu m ., THAT Chapter VIII, Article 17, Sec. 4.7A,(3), j. of the Laws and Ordinances of the City of Sanger be amended as follows: J. existing trees 6 inches or more in caliper at a height of 12 Inches above ground (alae know as specimen trgDW . ka existing height within he lot ant street Men ArtTrees" before removing any trees in the t ri ht -of -w AND THAT Chapter VIII, Article 17, Section 6.7, H. be amended as follows: H. the Plannina Board shall mrsider ureservation of existina tree crueeth as identified by the site develomment plan, particularly. in the required Uffervari areas and the presservatign of specimen trees throughout. "stificatlon for removal f t=ma ahmld be limited to of asive arads charegns and Qf the trees, Tn no case are spocinen trees in the buffervards and street r without mritten authorization of the City En STATEMENT OF FACT: Additions are underlined. 96-270 IN CITY COU996 NCIL ORDINANCE9NCIL Five I0, First ding to P ed o Planning ed ( TITLE.) Amending Land Development Code - board Hoatd VIII, Article17, Section A. and Article L], Section 6.7,g and ti s� IN CITY COUNCIL Atp{g::ell t0 Fuse 26. 1996Pass p Voteed9 yes t-r "^^-'4a4Lpd Councilors voting yea: - - «N Haldacti, Blanchette, Pxankel, Popper, Lean, Soucy, Sullivan, 'Tyler. N sonden l g CITY CLE Item No. ]t Amending Land Development Code - Chapter VIII, Article 17, Sections 5.9,A,(3) and 6.7, B - City of Bangor - C.O. # 96-270 a. Recently, the City Council ameMed the provisions of Article 2 of the Land Development Code to require that "shade trees' within the public right-of-way be maintained when developers are carrying out construction activity on adjacent property. Concern has been expressed about the removal of "specimen trees' from buffer yard areas of site developments, as it takes many years for replacement trees to achieve the stature and maturity of some of these existing trees. b. This amendment would require that the so-called 'specimen trees" (those with a six inch diameter trunk) be maintained in the bufferyard areas of site developments, if at all Possible. Also, the amendment includes a provision in Article 17 (site development plan review) for the Planning Board to review the practicality of preserving specimen trees throughout a development site. The only absolute prohibition an tree removal Is in the bufferyard and street right-of-way areas, however. Also, the City Engineer may authorise the removal where it is not practical to maintain them (such as when an access drive has to go across such areae or there is an extreme change in grade). C. All too often high value existing trees have been removed from the right-of-way and from the perimeter of development sites only to be replaced with insignificant and less attractive plant life. In addition to the trees within the right-of-way (which are under the jurisdiction of the City) it would appear sensible to include those immediately adjacent to the right -of -may so as to maximise survival of existing shade trees. Staff would recommend that the Planning Board recommend this amendment to the City Council. _