Laserfiche WebLink
-,, <br /> Conservation Design Ordinance . <br /> November 12,2009 <br /> Page 2 <br /> categorization is that, for instance, we may look at a (D) Poor condition wetland that <br /> could be restored, so it would be categorized for management purposes as a level (1) <br /> "off-limits" or as a level (2) ecological "opportunity". Trying to put the two concepts <br /> together would be like comparing apples and oranges. Also, to distinguish between the <br /> two systems, the Management Categories have been changed to 1-2-3 rather than A-B-C. <br /> 3) A definition of"significant tree stand" has been added to provide clarity as to what that <br /> term might mean. See also the attachment with saxnple definitions from other codes. The <br /> defuution proposed contains some numerical parameters that should make it easier to <br /> discern what is or is not a significant tree stand. <br /> 4) In Sec. 78-1635 Basic Conservation Design Master Plan Requirements and Evaluation <br /> Criteria, item 6 has been revised to require justification and mitigation of, rather than <br /> prohibition of, negative impacts to ecological communities based on the four M-34X <br /> categories, with negative impact being defined as a reduction in M-34X category level. <br /> 5) In the same section, item 8 has been revised to require protection of osp itive views and <br /> mitigation of existing or potential negative views. <br /> At the suggestion of Michelle Winer, Section 78-1635 was also revised to require that the Master <br /> Plan specifically include proposed methods of stormwater phosphorus reduction. <br /> Staff Recommendation <br /> Planning Commission should re-open the Public Hearing, accept any forthcoming public <br /> comments, make additional changes if necessary, and adopt a motion recommending that Draft <br /> #5 of the Conservation Design Ordinance be forwarded to the City Council for consideration and <br /> adoption. <br />