My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RE: Tree Felling & Preservation in Rest Haven CUP Masterplan (CU 95-2)
>
OnTrack
>
CU
>
2002
>
CU 02-4
>
RE: Tree Felling & Preservation in Rest Haven CUP Masterplan (CU 95-2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/2/2013 4:08:53 PM
Creation date
5/1/2013 1:19:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
CU
File Year
2
File Sequence Number
4
Application Name
Cathedral Park
Document Type
Archive
Document_Date
5/1/2013
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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).
View images
View plain text
File Memorandum: References to Tree Felling and Preservation in Rest-Haven CUP (CU 95-2) <br />August 28, 2002 <br />Page 3 of 17 <br />throughout that area. The site plan submitted shows remaining a number of <br />significant trees and a buffer of existing vegetation, ranging from 40 feet to 180 <br />feet in width around the periphery of the site." Rec. 182. - <br />That is the only reference to trees and vegetation contained in the findings of fact. Note <br />the focus on the "buffer" of vegetation and retaining "significant trees." Arguably, the emphasis <br />on significant trees reflects the understanding that many other trees will be removed, and <br />removed from areas that do not constitute buffer areas - i.e. substantial tree removal will occur <br />within the interior of the property. <br />A side note is in order at this point. As explained in the Hearings Official's July 1996, <br />memorandum interpreting the Rest-Haven CUP Decision, Rec. 175, explains, the use of the term <br />"southern portion" of the site is not entirely consistent throughout the decision. Sometimes it is <br />intended to include the entire southern portion of the site, an area that includes areas both to the <br />north and to the south of the proposed roads. Other times that term is intended to include only <br />undeveloped areas that lie to the north of the proposed roads where cemetery development is <br />allowed under the CUP. One should make sure which of those areas the decision addresses <br />when one encounters that term or similar terms in any particular instance. <br />2. CUP Evaluation Section <br />a. Characteristics of Proposed Development on Livibility of Surrounding Area: EC 9.702(a) <br />The Hearings Official addressed the preservation of trees when he evaluated the proposed <br />development for compliance with EC 9.702(a). The Hearings Official explained: <br />"This proposal involves developing the wooded southern area of the site <br />into cemetery lawns with relatively few trees. A finding can be made at this <br />point, conceptually that can be accomplished and be in a manner that is <br />compatible with the existing surrounding residential uses. The existing vegetative <br />buffer on the north and west sides of the site are to be retained in their present <br />dimensions. The area requiring further study is the southwest corner of the site <br />and along the entire southern periphery of the site. The applicant proposes a <br />vegetative buffer of varying widths and preservation of certain trees. Also <br />proposed, however, is a fence and the location of tombs within this buffer area. <br />Additionally, there is the complication of the wetlands area in the southwest <br />corner of this site. One approach might be to require as a condition of approval <br />the retention of a 100 foot buffer area along the entire southern boundary but this <br />may not be necessary with more detail made available concerning the vegetation <br />that exists and will be retained in the buffer area and proposed location of the <br />tombs and fence. Without that information, if the buffer is to be less than 100 feet <br />in depth, it is impossible to determine whether the proposed use will be <br />compatible with the adjacent residences. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.