5B - Recommendation to City Council on Phase I ordinance amending Titles 8 and 9 pertaining to tree protection
CI'T'Y OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM
MF.F_.TINC DATE: December 3, 2009
AGENDA TITLE: Public hearing and consideration of a recommcndation to City Council
on a Phase I ordinance amending Titles 8 and 9 of the Boulder Revised Code pertaining to
tree protection through impact analysis and maintenance requirements; and, additional
discussion on proposed Phase 2 tree protection code changes including potential expansion of
the landmarks program, a tree removal permit requirement and/or other incentives or
mitigation requirements for removal of trees on private property.
REQUESTING DEPARTMENT:
David Driskell, Executive Director of Community Planning and Sustainability
Charles Ferro, Acting Land Use Review Manager
Kathleen Alexander, City Forester
Elizabeth Lokocz, Landscape Architect
OBJECTIVE:
Define the steps for Planning Board consideration of this request:
1. Hear staff presentation
2. Hold public hearing
3. Planning Board discussion and recommendation to City Council of code amendinents.
4. Planning Board discussion and comment on potential Phase 2 code amendments.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On November 19, 2009 the Planning Board heard public input, a staff presentation, voted
on and passed changes to Titles 4 and 6 and discussed changes to Titles 8 and 9.
Planning Board raised several concerns regarding the proposed code language in Titles 8
and 9. Staff offers the following information to aid in further discussion and a
recommendation to City Council.
CONCERNS RAISED BY PLANNING BOARD:
The following concerns were raised by Planning Board during discussion:
1. Does removing the current five year limit on landscaping maintenance (section
9-9-12(d)(2) B.R.C. 1981) create a situation in which dying or declining trees
cannot be removed, updated best management practices may not be applied and
changing aesthetics may not be incorporated into the plan?
AGENDA ITEM tt 5t Pap_e 1
Staff Response: Removal of the five year limit on landscape maintenance is
proposed to resolve the following issues:
Consistency with Site Review Development Agreements which require
maintenance in perpetuity, ,
• Clarify ongoing annual maintenance responsibilities including irrigation
and a sod-free base (mowing damage accounts for the death of a significant
number of trees),
• Clarify that a change in ownership or potential redevelopment of a property
does not remove maintenance responsibilities until a new landscape plan is
approved.
• Clarify maintenance responsibilities for street trees that are not in the
public right-of-way_ Many street trees in single family zone districts are
not located within public right-of-way due to space limits, but on private
property within the front yard landscape setback. Under current
regulations, after five years these trees do not require any maintenance and
may be removed by the property owner.
Maintaining the landscape is an ongoing and evolving process. The approval of a
landscape plan either through by-right development or Site Review assumes the
landscape will mature and change over time. The ongoing care and replacement of
plants and non-living landscape materials (paving, fencing, furniture, tree grates etc.)
and other qualitative elements is a significant factor to the success and longevity of a
project and to the maintenance of neighborhood character;. The proposed code
change does not prevent removal and replacement of declining trees, but encourages
long term planned management of the landscape. Incorporating new best
management practices such as more efficient irrigation or disease resistant plants is
allowed as part of ongoing maintenance. If significant redesign of an approved
landscape plan is needed due to aesthetic changes, age of overall development or
incompatibility with current use patterns, this can be achieved by submitting a Minor
Modification to an approved discretionary review or by a building permit if'
completed as a by-right project. Minor Modifications have only one criteria relevant
to landscape plans (see section 9-2-14(k)(8) B.R.C. 1981) which states that, "no
change may alter the basic intent of the site plan approval." This provides staff a high
level of discretion to approve updated plans. It is important to recognize that trees are
long lived and that large (and longer lived) maturing trees provide the greatest
benefits to an individual property owner and the city overall- Through review, staff
tries to ensure the best tree species are planted to allow them to reach maturity. If a
landscape is outdated, replacing existing mature and healthy trees may not meet the
original approval intent or provide the greatest benefits.
Options: The following options have been identified by staff:
a. Approve the proposed language.
b. Make no change to the current language.
c. Modify the proposed language with a different time limit such as 10 or 20
years.
AGENDA I'T'EM # 5~ Page 2
d. Modify the existing language to address by-right and discretionary review
maintenance separately.
2. Does the proposed language of section 8-2-25 B.R.C. 1981 change any of the
ongoing tree planting or maintenance programs managed by the Forestry
Division?
Staff Response: Staff refers Planning Board to chapter 6-6 R.R.C. 1981 (see
Attachment A) for details on what the Forestry Division and public responsibilities
are regarding tree care. Removal and replacement of an existing tree within the right-
of-way is required to obtain a right-of-way permit, but no specific requirements on
maintenance after planting are in place. Staff proposes to clarify the specific duties of
the property owner to promote long term health of the urban canopy. The
maintenance language of section 9-9-12 B.R.C. 1981 (existing and proposed)
includes public and private trees. Street trees as described above may be in public
right-of-way or within the front yard landscape setback. "frees in the right-of=way are
protected and maintained by the Forestry Division as described in chapter 6-6 R.R.C.
1981 which generally covers long-term maintenance such as pruning, tree safety
inspections and removal due to unsafe conditions; it does not specify ongoing
seasonal maintenance. The proposed language clarifies that the property owner is
responsible for irrigation and maintaining a sod-free base to reduce mower damage.
All other maintenance responsibilities including rotational pruning and removal of
declining mature trees shall continue to be managed by the Forestry Division.
This change and the proposed change of section 9-9-12 R.R.C. 1981 are mutually
supporting. Due to the high number of street trees planted through by-right
development, the proposed changes to Title 8 and 9 clarify the property owner's
responsibility to not only plant, but to share in maintaining required street trees.
Options: The following options have been identified by staff
a. Approve the proposed language.
b. Make no change to the current language.
c. Modify the proposed language to further clarify the property owner's
maintenance responsibilities.
3. Are there any associated liability issues with adjacent property owners
maintaining street trees (sce the new language of section 8-2-25 B.R.C. 1981)?
Staff Response: Under Colorado law, the City of Boulder has the authority to
impose a duty upon property owners to maintain public rights-of-way, such as
sidewalks. Property owners will be civilly liable for violating such a duty, however,
only if the ordinance or provision expressly provides for such a cause of action. If the
statute or ordinance does not expressly provide for a civil remedy, the adjacent
property owner will not be exposed to any civil liability (Kittle v. Brunetti, 750 P.2d
49 (1988)). The proposed language in section 8-2-25 does not provide for any civil
AGENDA ITEM # 51& Pape 3
remedies, therefore it would not impose additional civil liabilities on adjacent
property owners.
4. Trees in containers (pots) should be excluded from a long term maintenance
requirement and any additional protection provided as part of Phase 2.
Staff Response: Although staff is not supportive of container trees, they are required
to be maintained as part of any approved landscape plan and would often require
more extensive maintenance due to limitations of'soil volume, aeration and water
than trees in the ground. That maintenance is the ongoing responsibility of the
property owner per the development agreement. The proposed code language
changes of Phase 1 support the owner's responsibility to maintain these trees.
Although specific criteria for Landmarking of trees or another recognition method has
yet to be developed, it is doubtful a tree in a container could meet any of the potential
criteria identified to date (sec a brief discussion regarding criteria on page 5 of this
memo).
5. Tree inventories which include trees crossing property lines could be
problematic in the future if the information leads to additional removal
regulations.
Staff Response: Staff is not proposing any future regulations effecting trees crossing
property lines (trees adjacent to development sites) at this time or as part of Phase 2.
Any future changes to regulate trees crossing property lines would return to Planning
Board for comment and recommendation to City Council. Note that potential Phase 2
changes could; however, require such information be added to landscaping and site
plans to document trees having Landmarked or some other special status.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that Planning Board pass the following motion:
The Planning Board recommends that the City Council adopt the following:
1. An ordinance amending Title 8, R.R.C. 1981 creating an affirmative obligation of
adjacent property owners to maintain street trees and Title 9, B.R.C. 1981 tree
protection in the site review, subdivision, and landscaping standards.
PRASE 2 DISCUSSION & DIREC'T'ION:
Staff offers the following information to facilitate discussion of Phase 2 code changes.
1. Mitigation Requirements for Discretionary Review Projects
Staff requires feedback on specific types and levels ofmitigation for removal of
private trees in Site Review. Mitigation could be accomplished through the following
methods separately or in combination.
Transplanting a tree on or off site if feasible,
Planting a tree of similar size and species to the one being removed on site,
AGF.,NDA ITEM 5 9 Pape 4
Planting one or more approved trees where the combined value equals or
exceeds the value of the tree being removed in species, condition and size; this
could be completed on the development site or on another site as approved by
the City Manager,
Reimbursement (cash in lieu) of the city for the value of the tree damaged or
removed tree. Maintenance and tree replacement is typically completed with
mitigation money.
2. Tree Removal Permits
One option identified during the research phase of this project was a tree removal
permit- Criteria for review has not been developed, but may be developed to include
or exclude many of Boulder's trees as directed through Planning Board input and
additional public process. Discussion might address the following:
Set size, species and condition thresholds to capture or exclude desired trees.
Exclude invasive species.
Exclude defective trees that pose a risk to the adjacent property.
Limit requirement to trees in specific locations (front, side, rear yards).
❖ Limit requirement to trees on sites w/ previous reviews.
❖ Exclude single family lots under a specified size-
❖ Evaluation of enforcement options. Options include withholding issuing
building permits, Certificate of Occupancy or other required approvals.
3. Landmark Trees
Landmark tree ordinances typically address the following questions:
❖ Who may nominate a tree for landmark recognition? Choices include the City
Council; Landmark Review Advisory Board and property owner.
What are the criteria for nomination and approval'?
• Criteria might include historic places, people events or periods. Individual
or groups of trees may also be nominated due to their significant size,
prominence and/or example of a species.
• Nomination typically includes condition assessment and potential future
survival of the tree. Trees showing significant decline or structural
problems would not be eligible for nomination.
• Invasive species or trees in situations where lifespan is greatly shortened
due to physical site conditions would not typically be eligible for
nomination.
• Specific size requirements are appropriate in many cases and may be based
on species, size at maturity or another threshold.
Nomination would not remove the standards of section 6-6-2 B.R.C. 1982
removing the city's ability to assess and remove any tree determined to be
a hazard to public safety.
A process for documenting reasonable impact, similar to reviewing and
issuing a Landmark Alteration Certificate (LAC), would be developed-
A process and criteria to remove landmark status in the event of storm
damage, age or other environmental change would be developed.
AGENDA ITEM # 5,8 Page 5
Any existing tree whose preservation would remove all future development
potential from a site would be carefully evaluated, but would likely not be
eligible for nomination.
Staff recommends a survey be completed in 2010 to identify potential
Landmark 'T'rees, but anticipates that a relatively small number of trees exist in
the landscape that could meet any set of criteria suggested or discussed to
date.
NEXT STEPS:
After receiving Planning Board's recommendation on the proposed Phase 1 code changes
and discussion on Phase 2 issues, staff will proceed with the following steps:
Phase l:
City Council public hearing and consideration of adoption.
Phase 2:
1. Tree Inventory to determine the potential number of Landmark Trees.
2. Complete analysis including, but not limited to, staffing time, budget implications,
effectiveness and conflicts of potential Phase 2 code amendments as identified by
staff, Planning Board and City Council.
3. Draft code amendments in response to Planning Board and City Council direction.
4. Planning Board public hearing and recommendation of Phase 2 changes.
5. City Council public hearing and consideration of adoption of Phase 2 changes.
Anticipated completion for Phase 2 code changes is the third quarter of 2010
Approved Fay:
David Driskell, Executive Director
Department of Community Planning and Sustainability
ATTACHMENTS:
A: Chapter 6-6 Protection of Trees and Plants
13: Proposed Code Language Titles S and 9
AGENDA ITEM # 5$ Page 6
Attachment A
Chapler 6
Prolcctian of "frees and Planls'
6-6-I. I.egislalive lnlenl.
(a) The purpose of this chapler is 10 protect the public health, safely and welfare by prescribing requirements for
the proleclion of bees anti plains within the city, including, without limilation, trees, shrubs, lawns and all other landscap-
ing.
(b) '['lie city council finds That all trees, plants and other landscaping, located, slanting or growing within or upon
city property, including, Without Immanon, any city-owned or controlled street, alley, rights-ol=way or other public Place
Adupred by Ordmanee ton, 47}1 Amended by Ordinance No '996 braved Irum Ordinance Nus. 3511, 4335, 19?1 Cade
fi ~I 1
or city or mountain park, recreation area or open space, belong to the city and are a corrununity asset comprising a part of
the public infrastructure.
(c) The city councils finds that the requirements of this chapter are necessary to ensure the continued protection,
maintenance, replacement and management of city-owned trees, plants and other landscaping.
6-6-2. Removal of Dead, Diseased or Dangerous 'frees.
(a) The city manager may enter upon any premises without a warrant to inspect all trees and plants in the city.
(b) If the city manager finds that there exist on any private property in the city dead trees or overhanging limbs
that pose a danger to persons or property, the manager will notify the owner, lessee, agent, occupant or other person in
possession or control of the property upon which the condition exists of the duty to remedy the condition within fifteen
days from the date of the notice or such shorter time as the manager finds appropriate in view of the nature and extent of
the condition.
(c) If the city manager detenines that any tree growing on private property within the city is afflicted with any
dangerous or infectious insect infestation or disease, the manager will notify the owner, lessee, agent, occupant or other
person in possession and control of the property of the condition and order such person to take specific prescribed
measures that the manager determines are reasonably necessary to cure the infestation or disease and to prevent its spread,
within fifteen days from the date of the notice or such time as the manager finds appropriate in view of the nature and
extent of the condition.
(d) If the person notified pursuant to subsection (b) or (e) of this section fails to correct the condition as required
by the notice prescribed in such subsection, except in cases of extreme emergency, the city manager may enter the
property, pursuant to an administrative warrant issued by the municipal court, and correct the condition and charge the
costs of such correction, plus an additional amount of $25.00 for administrative costs, to the owner and to the lessee,
agent, occupant or other person in possession and control of the property. If any property owner fails or refuses to pay
when due any charge imposed under this section, the city manager may certify due and unpaid charges, including interest,
to the Boulder County Treasurer for collection, as provided in section 2-2-12, "City Manager May Certify Taxes, Charges
and Assessments to County Treasurer for Collection," B.R.C. 1981.
(e) Notice under this section is sufficient if-it is deposited in the mail first class to the address of the last known
owner of" property on the records of the Boulder County Assessor or to the last known address of the lessee, agent,
occupant or other person in possession or control of the property.
(f) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prohibit the city manager from taking such steps to correct an im-
mediate threat to the public health, safety or welfare that the manager determines is posed by such diseased, dead or
dangerous trees.
(g) The city manager may prune, spray or remove any diseased or infested tree on private property upon the writ-
ten request of the property owner or a lessee, agent, occupant or other person in possession or control of the property if
such person agrees in writing to pay for the costs of such service.
6-6-3. City Manager Will Supervise Planting.
The city manager will supervise reforestation; regulate the preservation, culture and planting of plants on city prop-
erty; prune, spray, cultivate and otherwise maintain such plants; prune or direct the time and method of pruning such
plants; and take such measures as the manager deems necessary to prevent, control and exterminate weeds, insects and
other pests and plant diseases.
6-6-4. Planting in Public Areas.
(a) No person shall plant in or remove from any city property any plant or tree without first obtaining written per-
mission from the city manager to do so.
u> Pam
(b) No person shall plant in or remove from any public right-of-way or public easement any plant or tree without
complying with the requirements set forth in chapter 8-5, "Work in the Public Right-of-Way and Public Easements,"
B.R.C. 1981.
(c) The planting, maintaining, relocating or removing of any tree or plant located within any public right-of-way
or public easement shall conform with the standards in the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards.
(d) A property owner may plant trees along the streets of the city, fronting on such person's property, if the person
plants the trees of the species, in the places, and in the manner set forth in the City of Boulder Design and Construction
Standards or as designated by the city manager, between the gutter line and the property line.
6-6-5. Spraying and Pruning.
(a) No person except the city manager shall spray, mulch, fertilize or otherwise treat, remove, destroy, break, cut
or prune any living plant or any part thereof growing on city property without first having obtained permission from the
manager.
(b) No person authorized by the city manager to cut or prune a plant on city property shall do so except in the
manner prescribed by the manager.
6-6-6. Protection of Trees and Plants.
(a) No person shall remove, damage or destroy any tree or plant growing within or upon any city-owned or con-
trolled property, except for public rights-of-way, without first having obtained written permission from the city manager.
(b) No person shall remove, damage or destroy any tree or plant growing within or upon any public right-of-way
without first having obtained a permit pursuant to chapter 8-5, "Work in the Public Right-of-Way and Public Easements,"
B.R.C. 1981.
(c) No person shall attach to or install on any tree or plant growing within or upon any city-owned or controlled
property, including public rigbLs-of-way, without first having obtained approval from the city manager, any metal materi-
al; sign, cable, wire, nail, swing or other material foreign to the natural structure of the tree, except materials used for
standard tree care or maintenance, such as bracing and cabling, installed by tree professionals.
(d) No person shall attach any electric insulator or any device for holding electric wires to any tree or plant grow-
ing or planted upon any city property. No person owning any wire charged with electricity running through public
property shall fail to fasten such wire securely to a post or other structure so that it will not contact any plant. If the city
manager determines it is necessary to prune or cut down any plant growing on city property in the city across which
electric wires run, no person owning such wires shall fail to remove any such wire or to discontinue electric service within
twenty-four hours after being notified by the manager of the scheduled pruning or cutting of the trees.
(e) No person owning or operating a gas pipe or main within a radius of forty feet of any tree or plant shall fail to
repair the same immediately if a leak occurs and stop such leak in order to protect the plant and the public health, safety
and welfare.
(f) No person shall perform any work or construction within or upon any city-owned property, public right-of-way
or public casement without providing tree protection in conformance with the City of Boulder Design and Construction
Standards.
6-6-7. Mitigation of Trees or Plants Removed or Destroyed.
No person shall remove or destroy any tree or plant in the public right-of-way without first having a plan approved
by the city manager for the mitigation of the loss of such tree or plant. The removed or destroyed tree or plant shall be
replaced in an amount equivalent to the value, as determined by the city manager, of the tree, shrub or plant that existed
prior to loss, by:
(a) Planting or transplanting an approved tree or plant of the same species and size as previously existed in a loca-
tion approved by the city manager;
ti~5
(b) Planting one or more approved trees or plants where the combined value equals or exceeds Owl which pre-
viously existed in terms ofspecies, condrlran and site, in a location approved by the city manager-, or
(c) Reimbursement of the city for the value of"tlrc tree or plant removed or destroyed subject iu a determination by
the city manager Iliat the trees or plants lost could not be adequately replaced al or near the location where the-
loss occurred.
f
*
6-46
ATTACHMENT B
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING ADDITIONTAL TREE
PROTECTION STANDARDS, AMENDING CHAPTER 8-2, B.R.C.
1981 CREATING AN AFFIRMATIVE OBLIGATION OF ADJACENT
PROPERTY OWNERS TO MAINTAIN S'T'REET TREES; AMENDING
ITTLE 9, LAND USE CODE r3_R_C. 1981 RELATED TO THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR TREES FOR SI"I'l' REVIEW AND THE
LANDSCAPING STANDARDS, AND SET'T'ING FORTH RELATED
DETAILS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROUI,DER,
COLORADO:
Section 1. Chapter 8-2, B.R.C. 1981 is amended by the addition of a new section
8-2--25, to read:
8-2-25 Adjacent Owners' Duty to Maintain Street Trees.
N"roperty owner shall fail to maintain required street trees on or ac1,jaQent to the owner's
prosy in the public right of way, including landseam'g 0r_a Mulched sod-free base
around the tree and sufficient irrigati_on_to_sustain the life of the tree.
Section 2. Subsections 9-2-14(d) and (h), S.R.C. 1981, are amended to read:
9-2-14_ Site Review.
(d) Application Rcquirerrnents: An application for approval of a site plan may be filed by
any person having a demonstrable property interest in land to be included in a site
review on a form provided by the city manager that includes, without limitation:
(13) A general landscaping plan at the time of initial submission to be followed by a
detailed landscaping plan prior to or as a condition of approval showing the
spacing, sizes and-specific types of landscaping materials., qua - ntities of all
lp ants and whether the plant is coniferous or deciduous.-All trees 6 inches and
over measured-f ltX-four 3-si c-inches af3ovc the vround on the property or in
the. landsctipe setback of an-adjacent to the develonment shall be
- - o
shown on tllc landsca _in _ Ian with as statement of whether The applicant
prop ses_to preserve the tree
A DA TEM P 59 Pam 11
(18) A tree inv~ntc _ andmcl nrcrteetiur Ian that_inc_lucics the location, Size, snecies arld
geirgral_health of all trees 6 inches an([ over measured fiity-161.11- inches ab)ve
(lie ground on tile _l7ral?ert o n1.1h landlsc ri)c setback cif an I aci~ac.ent
to tllc deveI ment. The inventoTya1_I= indicate which trees shall be Uriserved
gr_rernoved. The lrec inventor shall be_?I ►cpared by a certilied arborist ilia( has
a valrcl~eantr_actrn license J)Ursuant to chapter 4 "Certified /lrborist
Contractor License," B.R.C. 1981
(h) Criteria for Review: No site review application shall be approved unless the
approving agency finds that:
(2) Site Design: Projects should preserve and enhance the community's unique sense
of place through creative design that respects historic character, relationship to
the natural environment and its physical setting. Projects should utilize site
design techniques which enhance the quality of the project. In determining
whether this subsection is met, the approving agency will consider the following
factors:
(C) Landscaping:
(ii) Landscape design attempts to avoid, minimize or mitigate impacts on
and off site to important native species, healthy- long-lived trees, Plant
communities of special concern, threatened and endangered species and
habitat by integrating the existing natural environment into the project;
Section 3. Subsection 9-9-12(d), B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
9-9-12. Landscaping and Screening Standards.
(d) General Landscaping and Screening Requirements:
(])-Landscaping Plan: A landscaping plan designed in accordance with this section
and sections 9-9-13, "Streetscape Design Standards," and 9-9-14, "Parking Lot
Landscaping Standards," B.R.C. 1981, shall be provided for all developments
except detached dwelling units. The site plan shall include the following:
AGENDA ITEM # 5 4 Page la
(K) The location, size and-,]iecies of all existing trees oil 111C -ty and
within thG landscape s~thacks trf a11_F~tuper-tics adjacent to the dcyelc~pr»cnt site,
(2) Landscape and Screening Maintenance and Replacement: The property owner
shall maintain the landscaping plan as originally approved, and provide for
replacement of plant materials that have died or have otherwise been damaged
or removed, and maintenance of all non-live landscaping materials including,
but not limited to, fencing, paving, and retaining walls;-Ior,+pei-iod of five years,
from the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or certificate of completion.
Section 4. Section 9-9-13, B.R.C. 1981 is amended by the addition of a new
subsection (h), to read:
9-9-13. Strectscape Design Standards.
X11 The street and alley tree insta lations shall be considered coin~lete ifthe required
trees survive for one year from the issuance of a certi ficate ofoccunanev or certificate
of_completion. The city man.•i ),er k authorized to require an applicant orovide_ the
financial guarantee cQtjsistenl with the recliftentents of section 9-2-20. " Required
fnrprovein ents an(] Financial Guarantec.", B.R.C'_198_I The tinalici,a~?uarant~c will
be rclcasec_I after one_year, _afler_ in nnhcctiori Orai-cunfirms the trees is in ~ecxI health.
Section 5. Subsections 9-12-6(a), R.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
9-12-6. Application Requirements for a Preliminary Plat.
(a) Application Requirements: Any preliminary plat submitted for subdivision approval
shall be drawn to a scale of no less than one inch equals one hundred feet, and of a
scale sufficient to be clearly legible, including streets and lots adjacent to the
subdivision. The preliminary plat may be an application under section 9-2-14, "Site
Review," 13_R.C. 1981, ]fit meets both the requirements of this section and those of
chapter 9-2, "Review Processes," B.R.C. 198). The applicant shall include on the
preliminary plat or in accompanying documents:
(6) The location of structures and trees of' 4vesix-inch caliper or more on the
property and approximate location of structures off the property within ten
feet of the proposed plat boundary;
AGENDA ITEM _#_SJ8. I"age 13
Section 6. A section 9-16-1, B.R_C_ 1981, is amended by the addition of the
following definition, to read:
9-16-1 Definitions
"Healthy, long lived tree' means a tree that is:
(l~ Iieal_tl and classified ccl as bcill in_.liiir i ~ctter C011(fition typically
caning more than sixly_~erc-ent of the_r_oot and canoe stnic_(urc a_r_c
intact as determined by an expec-t in trcellandscape sipjyiaisal
_(2)---- Not listed on the state of Colorado noxious weed list;
Q
} .Nut l stedhy-thc city! many eras a noxipus_weed or undesirablc_trce- or
_ Npt in a location that noses a threat t.(I public health, s~fet .and welfare,
Section 7. This ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and
welfare of the residents of the city, and covers matters of local concern.
Section 8. The city council deems it appropriate that this ordinance be published
by title only and orders that copies of this ordinance be made available in the office of the
city clerk for public inspection and acquisition.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
BY TITLE ONLY this da} of -)20- .
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk on behalf of the
Director of Finance and Record
AGENDA I'T'EM # S,`_ Page 1
RFAD ON SECOND READING, PASSFI), A0011THI), AND ORI)I'.R D
PUBLISHED BY TITI.F. ONLY this clay of , 20
Mayor
Attcst:
City Clerk on hehalf'of"lhc
Director of Finance and Record
AGENDA ITEM 56. Pajg ~