| 1 |
|
8/30/2021 |
Jamie Donaldson |
Applicant Contacted |
Hi Mark,
I have been reviewing the site plan and application, and have a meeting with the Citys Arborist and Urban Forester on Wednesday to discuss several prior site visits and tree evaluations for Wren Heights. However, in the meantime, please provide a written statement elaborating on the conflict with Utilities due to Road and Public Utility Easement Locations, and specifically address how the trees proposed for removal meet the Tree Conservation Plan Adjustment criteria under SRC 808.040(d) along with any supporting documentation. I will also be in touch again with any additional questions or clarification needed after my meeting this Wednesday.
Your application, which is incomplete, will be deemed complete upon receipt of one of the following:
(1) All of the missing information.
(2) Some of the missing information and written notice from you (the applicant) that no other information will be provided.
(3) Written notice from you (the applicant) that none of the missing information will be provided.
You have 180 days from the date the application was first submitted to respond in one of the three ways listed above, or the application will be deemed void.
Thank you, |
| 2 |
|
10/5/2021 |
Jamie Donaldson |
Applicant Contacted |
Mark,
I appreciate you revising the plan to include preservation of tree #20345, but Im confused how this tree is to be saved if you intend to trench there anyway to serve lots 27 & 28? Your written statement indicates that the two alternative options presented by the city engineer are not viable because:
1. The applicant has already installed the sanitary sewer in the identified location for lots 33 & 32; and
2. Routing power through lots 26 & 27 would seriously impact these lots due to the easement width required.
Can you elaborate on the latter please? What would be the easement width required for this location, and why is that not possible here? Do you have something from PGE that you can share with us to explain this further? If so, do you have a plan to go around #20345 or some other assurance that trenching your utilities here is not going to affect the tree designated for preservation?
I understand that you have an anxious client and would like this done quickly, but it seems that tree #20345 would still be impacted by the utility plan and more information is required to ensure its preservation. If there are absolutely no other design alternatives, then we may have no other option then to reconsider removal of the tree, but we need to be sure that all other avenues have been exhausted first.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions. |