Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #2071 <br />September 11, 1995 <br />Page 2 <br />In preparation for this activity applicants removed a 36" elm adjacent to the tunnel and in the <br />0-75' zone. Apparently it was at this point that staff became aware that the additional <br />waterproofing work and grading in the 0-75' zone was intended. <br />The current request is for approval to complete the excavation, waterproofing and re- <br />establishment of existing grade. Further, this is an opportunity for the City to have the <br />applicants mitigate the loss of a 36" elm by requiring replacement plantings, perhaps in more <br />strategic locations where they will not have a future impact on existing structures. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1. Given applicants' comment that the removed elm was in poor condition, what degree of <br />replanting does Planning Commission feel is appropriate? <br />2. Does Planning Commission have any other concerns regarding the proposed work? <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Any recommendation for approval should reference this as an amendment to the approval <br />granted in Resolution #3539 on March 13, 1995, should require that the areas disturbed during <br />waterproofing should be sodded as soon as practical after grades are restored, and should define <br />the number and placement of trees to be replanted in mitigation for loss of the 36" elm. <br />Options for Action <br />1. Approve variances and conditional use permit with conditions as noted above. <br />2. Table for further information (specify). <br />3. Deny ( state reasons). <br />4. Other. <br />ch