►
From YouTube: Urban Forestry Commission – June 6, 2023
Description
Regular meeting of the City of Asheville Urban Forestry Commission.
Access the agenda and other meeting materials at the City of Asheville website: https://www.ashevillenc.gov/department/city-clerk/boards-and-commissions/tree-commission/
Participate before and during the meeting on our public engagement hub: https://publicinput.com/A2758
B
B
B
B
E
B
Thank
you
I'm,
going
to
pause
right
here.
Many
of
you
probably
already
know
this,
but
for
those
who
don't
Ed
was
a
voting
member
and
a
council
appointee
to
the
commission
for
six
years
and
his
term
expired
at
the
end
of
2022
Ed
agreed
to
stay
on
as
a
technical
advisor
to
the
commission
and
especially
to
the
policy
working
group.
B
Last
month,
Don
Chavez,
who
was
a
voting
representative
from
Asheville
Green
Works,
announced
that
she
was
stepping
down
as
executive
director
of
Greenworks
to
take
on
an
exciting
new
position
and
Asheville
GreenWorks,
ultimately
appointed
Ed
Macy
to
take
her
place
as
the
Greenworks
representative
to
the
commission,
according
to
chapter
2,
article
3,
Division
Seven.
B
This
is
a
non-council
appointed
voting
position
and
therefore
no
need
for
Council
action.
So
Ed
welcome
back
to
the
thick
of
The
Fray.
B
Okay,
moving
on
is
Cecil
here.
B
Because
Chardon
is
absent
and
we
have
a
vacancy.
G
Actually,
it
says
Cecil's
looking
for
the
link
to
the
meeting,
so
we
may
need
to
send
that
to
him
again.
B
Well,
I'll
I'll
move
on
Sharon
Hi.
H
B
B
B
No
okay,
then
City
staff,
Nancy.
A
Nancy
Watford
zoning
and
stonewater
supervisor
development
services,
department.
C
B
Thank
you,
Chris
Collins
here.
I
B
Okay,
ganya
Miser.
J
Hi
good
afternoon,
Patrick,
commission
members
I'm
granya
I'm,
with
Planning
and
Zoning
urban
planner.
B
In
a
while
Jennifer
Blevins.
B
Thank
you,
Sam
Starr,
Vaughn,.
B
You
Mark
Foster.
B
Okay,
anyone
here
who
are
going
to
represent
the
applicants
for
alternative
compliance,
we'd
like
to
identify
yourselves.
N
Thank
you,
Jason
Nick,
Bowman
Davis
civil
Solutions.
Thank
you.
B
Anyone
else:
okay,
thanks
everyone,
we'll
move
on
to
the
agenda
and
the
approval
of
the
minutes.
I
hope
everyone
had
a
chance
to
read.
Those
include
all
entertain
a
motion
to
approve.
B
Okay,
Sharon
Sumrall
has
approved
anyone
in
a
second
okay,
Zoe
Hoyle
will
second
I
will
call
the
roll
Ed
Macy.
B
B
Karen
and
on
Patrick
Gilbert
I'm,
the
chair
of
the
urban
forestry
commission
and
I
vote
I
as
well.
Okay,
now
we'll
move
into
the
alternative
compliance
I
believe
that
which
is
first
on
the
agenda.
K
Hello
again,
Jennifer
Blevins
urban
planner
and
this
request
for
alternative
compliance
is
related
to
a
new
development
at
16
Robert
Street,
it's
at
the
corner
of
trade
and
Robert
Street.
K
K
So
in
that
20-foot
property
line
buffer
would
be
required.
Three
Evergreen,
two
large
and
two
small
deciduous
trees,
as
well
as
16,
shrubs,
eight
large
and
eight
small
and
the
the
side
is
tight
and
obviously
got
a
change
in
elevation
there
toward
the
rear.
K
K
That
alternative
was
unavailable
because
of
the
topography,
because
in
order
to
approve
that
a
six
to
eight
foot
wall
has
to
be
planted
with
those
plant
materials
on
the
outside
of
the
wall
and
because
the
site
goes
to
it,
it
slopes
upward
that
wall
would
be.
You
know
the
plant
materials
on
the
outside
of
the
wall
wouldn't
screen
the
wall,
it
and,
of
course,
they're
reducing
the
width
or
proposing
to
reduce
the
width
below
the
10
feet,
so
that
alternative
was
not
available
So
based
on
their
landscape
plan.
K
B
H
Hey
Jennifer
I've
got
a
question:
I
pulled
off
on
the
plans
that
they
needed,
Forever,
Green,
three
large
and
three
small
deciduous
and
eight
large
shrubs
and
ate
small
shrubs.
That's
what
was
listed
on
the
plans
so
doesn't
mean
I
didn't
write
it
down
wrong.
H
What
what
are
they
proposing
again
on
the
Evergreen
to
Evergreen?
Did
you
say.
K
H
So
their
original
plans
on
their
the
Forever
Green
were
required.
The
three
large
were
required
deciduous
and
the
three
small
were
required
in
rad
and
T
for
a
type,
a
buffer
and
but
they're
asking
for
a
reduction
in
the
quantity
of
plants
as
well
as
a
reduction
in
the
size
of
the
width
of
the
buffer.
K
H
H
So,
according
to
your
calculations
for
rad
and
T,
the
only
thing
they're
asking
to
do
is
to
reduce
it
down.
Do
we
know
to
six
feet
or
seven
feet?
Have
they
made
that
determination.
O
Sorry,
I'm
late
I
couldn't
find
the
link
I
found
it
a
month
ago.
The
link
for
the
meeting
anyway.
It
strikes
me
that
a
six
foot,
six
and
a
half
foot
wide
buffer
with
mature,
mature
large
maturing
trees,
is
going
to
blow
out
a
wall.
O
K
I
think
I'd
have
to
let
the
engineer
speak
to
that
I.
Imagine
there
are
you
know,
ways
to
design
a
wall
to
prevent
that
or
certainly
you
could
recommend
replacing
the
proposed
large
featuring
trees
with
small
maturing
trees.
N
This
is
Nick
Bowman
davis,
hill
Solutions,
the
required
large
trees
I
place,
those
to
the
extreme
extents
of
the
property
to
help
alleviate
that.
So
the
the
smaller
trees
are
located
more
toward
the
interior,
where
that
retaining
wall
is
located.
K
O
I
F
Yeah
Cecil
started
heading
in
the
direction
that
I
want
to
go
with.
This
is:
is
the
planting
going
to
occur
on
natural
grade
on
the
top
of
the
wall,
or
is
it
going
to
be
filled
on
the
back
side
of
the
wall
and
then
planted
on
top
of
the
fill?
Now.
N
F
Grade,
okay
and
then
what
kind
of
what
construction
material
are
you
using
for
the
wall
how's?
What
kind
of
wall
is
it.
N
It
would
have
geogrid
potentially,
but
with
this
height,
might
not
be
necessary.
Okay,.
F
F
You
may
consider
using
some
root
barrier
product
to
redirect
Roots
along
the
edge
of
the
wall.
That
may
help
with
the
longevity
a
little
bit
but
Cecil's
right,
probably
30
years
down
the
road
with
a
large
maturing
tree.
You
might
start
busting
it
out.
B
K
I
did
not
evaluate
this
against
the
criteria.
I
evaluated
it
against
the
code
requirement.
The
the
applicant
answered
those
questions
in
his
application.
B
Okay,
Sharon
yeah.
H
They
answered
it
by
they're
increasing
the
parking.
So
that's.
Why
they're
doing
what
they're
doing
so
they're
trying
to
increase
their
parking
and
not
have
to
do
their
parking
in
another
area
in
rad
and
Teaneck,
and
offer
parking
on
site
and
then
in
other
locations
and
they're,
trying
to
consolidate
more
parking
onto
that
location?
And
that's
why
they're
asking
to
do
this
to
meet
their
parking
Criterion
and
increase
their
amount
of
parking.
N
That's
that's
correct
and
I
can
add
to
that
a
little
bit.
She
is
right
that
that
was
the
goal,
but
we
still
don't
meet
the
required
minimum.
So
we
will
be
having
three
off-site
parking
spaces
for
the
project.
N
That's
correct
commercial,
two,
commercial
spaces
on
the
lower
level
and
each
of
the
upper
levels
will
have
four
residential
units.
B
O
Yeah
I'm
a
little
confused
because
I
my
experience
of
this
over
many
many
years
now
is
that
the
exceptions
to
the
rules
cannot
be
created
by
the
the
developer.
In
other
words,
the
developer
can't
create
a
situation
in
which
they
can't
they
can't
comply.
N
Yeah,
it's
a
difficult
question.
You
know
the
site
itself
is
nine
thousand
square
feet,
so
it
we
are
extremely
Limited
in
the
available
space
that
we
can
use
and-
and
we've
we've
used
almost
every
bit
of
it
to
to
it
to
meet
the
requirements
of
the
ordinance.
B
H
Yeah
I,
knowing
that
that
was
yes,
that
it
was
something
on
their
constraint
and
then
knowing
the
location
and
me
immediately
not
wanting
to
prove
this
and
went
through
to
say
well,
they
are
going
to
have
housing
and
what
I'm
what's
happening
with
me
now
is
concessions
for
me
and
alternative
compliance
as
well
as
we're
going
to
see
one
that's
going
to
be
moving
trees
for
solar,
so
I'm,
coming
to
the
point
where
there's
going
to
have
to
be
for
me:
I'm
not
saying
for
anybody
else,
I'm
giving
take
on
what
I'll
approve
and
what
I
won't
approve
and
I
went
first
to
say
no
for
my
own
self
and
then
said
yes
because
of
knowing
the
area,
it's
not
that
impactful
and
to
knowing
that
there's
going
to
be
housing
there.
H
So
I
went
personally
and
said
that
I
will
I
will
vote
to
approve
this,
knowing
that
they
were
creating
a
issue
by
adding
the
parking.
D
Hi
you
had
mentioned
that
there
will
be
some
off-site
parking
for
three
spots
and
I'm
just
wondering
if
there
is
room
for
more
than
three
spots
in
the
off-site
parking
to
create
more
space
in
the
buffer.
N
Well,
we're
we'll
have
that
was
one
of
the
comments
the
city
staff
had
we
have
to
calculate
the
required
parking
for
the
location
that
we
are
using,
which
is
just
down
the
street.
It's
at
the
Hatchery
I,
don't
know
if
you're
familiar
so
we're
gonna
have
to
calculate
what
they've
got,
what
they
required
and
to
make
sure
that
that
it
will
be
in
compliance
with
with
the
regulations
for
parking
so
that
it
could
support
our
three
additional
spaces.
K
Right
so,
and
and
so
as
part
of
the
level
one
review
we
needed
to
in
order
to
to
share
parking,
they
have
to
demonstrate-
or
in
this
case
Nick
has
to
demonstrate
that
the
place
where
they're
going
to
be
using
parking
has
enough
parking
to
spare
has
over
the
minimum.
K
B
Is
there
any
further
discussion.
D
B
Okay,
thanks
thanks
Hunter,
that
if
there's
no
further
discussion,
I
will
entertain
a
motion.
H
I'll
make
a
motion
that
we
prove
this
due
to
the
fact
that
the
planting
that
they're
going
to
be
using
and
how
they're
plant
placing
the
trees
behind
this
retaining
wall
will
support
the
trees
and
support
the
growth
and
not
cause
any
damage
that
we're
aware
of
through
the
comments
that
were
given
to
us
by
the
engineer
and
approve
this
alternative
compliance.
B
B
Seeing
none
I
will
call
the
question:
Cecil
I
Sharon,
hi
Zoe.
H
B
Karen
aye
Ed
all
right
and
I
vote
I,
so
the
alternative
alternative
compliance
request
for
16
Robert
Street
is
approved.
Thank
you.
Everyone.
Thank
you.
So
now
we
will
go
to
144
Biltmore
Avenue
gronya.
J
Thank
you
Patrick
and
nice
to
see
you
again.
I'm
granya
Miser
with
Planning
and
Zoning
I
am
going
to
present
to
you
this
afternoon.
The
alternative
compliance
application
for
144,
Biltmore
Avenue
and
this
property
is
existing
building
and
with
a
zero
setback
that
the
building
comes
right
up
to
the
sidewalk.
J
It's
a
corner
lot.
So
we
are
on
the
corner
of
Market
Street
extension
and
Biltmore
Avenue
under
Section
711
3d3
for
our
street
trees,
based
on
linear
footage
for
Biltmore
Avenue,
we'll
be
looking
at
seven
Street
trees
along
the
frontage
and
four
along
Market
Street
Extension.
J
The
alternative
compliance
application
request
is
to
reduce
the
number
of
Street
trees
from
seven
to
two
along
Biltmore
Avenue
and
to
have
no
straight
trees
at
all
along
Market
Street.
J
All
other
required
Landscaping
will
be
achieved
under
the
level
one
project,
obviously
interesting
to
know
we
are
some
of
our
of
our
site.
So
this
image
on
the
on
the
right
hand
side
is
street.
Is
the
street
view
for
Market
Street
Extension?
You
can
see
it's
an
incredibly
narrow
sidewalk.
J
It
kind
of
dead
ends
into
a
sewer
manhole
cover
and
to
the
back
of
that
image
you
can
see,
there
is
actually
a
bicycle
rack
there,
but
there's
also
a
gas,
some
gas
infrastructure,
a
gas
meter
and
beside
that
gas
meter,
there's
also
suraman
hole
in
the
sidewalk
there,
so
very
restrictive
in
addition
to
the
telegraph
polls.
J
So
that
is
the
extent
of
the
sidewalk
along
the
Market
Street
part
of
the
building,
and
then
this
is
a
view.
Looking
South
along
Biltmore
Avenue
again,
you
can
see,
on
the
left
hand,
side
the
gas
infrastructure
the
manhole
cover,
and
then
we've
got
the
Telegraph
poles
down
Biltmore
Avenue,
in
addition
to
the
the
sidewalk
being
only
about
six
and
a
half
feet
along
that
stretch
of
Biltmore
Avenue
again.
J
So
the
the
restrictions
that
we're
looking
at
with
this
sidewalk
as
far
as
being
able
to
do
the
straight
trees
are,
are
and
the
ability
to
maintain
ADA
compliance
along
this
sidewalk
and
to
be
able
to
maintain
trees
that
are
healthy
and
will
will
adequately
meet
their
their
role
under
our
landscape
standards.
So
all
other
required
Landscaping
will
be
achieved.
In
fact,
I
think
we've
gone
a
little
bit
over
and
above
what
has
been
required
in
the
Vu
area.
You
can
see
along
the
back
of
it.
J
There
are
some
existing
trees
that
we'll
be
able
to
use.
So
on
the
left
hand,
side
of
this
slide
is
where
we're
beside
the
the
sign
is
we're
proposing
to
put
one
of
the
trees
in
this
kind
of
planting
well,
and
the
other
Street
tree
would
be
on
the
the
south
side
of
the
driveway,
which
again
right
now
is
not
is
not
an
existing
I.
Believe
it's
just
a
parking
spot.
We
would
put
it
there
and
then
the
building
takes
up
the
balance
really
of
the
site
from
the
planting
well
North.
J
There
will
also
be
some
Street
buff
buffer
vegetation,
along
that
it's
not
shown
on
that
site
plan,
but
that
will
also
be
achieved
so
in
in
reviewing
this
application.
J
I
think
staff
found
that
that
the
restrictive
width
of
the
sidewalk,
along
with
the
existing
Utilities
in
the
site,
walk
and
certainly
significant
edges,
reduce
the
ability
to
maintain
the
ADA
requirements
and
again,
in
addition
to
the
width
and
that
just
the
physical
limitation
of
it,
then
we
have
the
gas
and
Sewer
utilities
which
sort
of
compound
the
problem
a
little
bit
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
If
you
have
any
the
applicant
is
not
here
today,
I'll
be
be
here.
If
you've
got
any
specific
questions.
H
I'm,
hey
granya,
why
won't
you
aren't
you
acquired
to
widen
the
sidewalks
on
this
development.
J
H
J
Thank
you.
So
that's
what
triggered
the
level
one
Sharon
on
this
is
that
it's
gone
going
from
a
multi-level
or
a
multi-tenant
situation
to
a
single
tenant,
and
so
that's
what
you're
good
the
level
one.
So
the
the
the
requirement
for
the
sidewalks
wasn't
actually
triggered
by
the
scope
of
work
for
the
project.
B
Okay,
seeing
none
then
I
will
entertain
a
motion.
B
Second,
by
Karen,
thank
you,
you've
heard
the
motion
and
there
it
has
been
seconded.
Is
there
any
discussion
on
the
motion.
B
Seeing
none,
then
I
will
call
the
question
Karen.
C
Is
still
one
remaining
person
in
the
in
the
public
input
listening
chat,
they
have
not
raised
their
hand
to
enter
the
queue.
Okay,
caller.
You
can
press
star
three.
If
you
would
like
to
make
a
comment
on
this.
C
I
can
also
oh
they've
exited,
and
there
is
nobody
else
in
the
calling
queue
apologize.
Okay,.
D
H
B
Hi
and
I
vote
I,
so
the
request
for
140
144,
Biltmore
Avenue,
the
alternative
compliant
request,
is
approved.
Thank
you.
Granya
thank.
B
Okay,
we'll
move
on
to
225
Mo
Emma
road
Sam.
L
Yes,
thank
you,
Mr
Gilbert,
members
of
the
commission.
Again
for
the
record,
my
name
is
Sam
Starbomb
planner
2
with
development
services,
I'll,
be
the
planner
handling
this
alternative
compliance
case.
This
is
going
to
go
just
like
any
other
case.
You've
seen
we'll
get
into
the
request
before
the
committee
I'll
discuss
some
of
the
existing
conditions.
What
I
had
seen
on
the
site
visit
as
well
as
some
site
photos
with
some
zoning
maps
and
we
will
get
into
the
TRC
proposals?
L
What
this
is
one
greeniest
way
is
a
major
subdivision
that
has
not
gone
before
the
TRC,
yet
they
are
seeking
alternative
compliance
and
Hunter.
If
you
can
go
two
slides
forward,
so
one
more
and
what
they
are
doing
is
they
are
seeking
to
have
18
homes
on
this
site,
but
instead
of
going
by
the
ordinary
three
requirements
where
there
are
all
other
conditions
that
would
require
one
large
maturing
tree
for
every
40
linear
feed.
L
The
applicants
are
seeking
the
overhead
utilities
present
route,
which
is
one
small
maturing
tree
for
every
30
linear
feet
of
property
of
budding
a
street.
Under
that
condition,
they
would
be
required
to
have
32
trees
and
they
are
actually
proposing
36
trees,
which
is
four
in
excess
of
what
that
standard
would
be
so
next
slide.
L
This
is
the
property
where
there
will
be
18
homes.
This
will
be
a
single
family,
residential
subdivision.
You
can
see
this.
This
is
North
standing
facing
south
towards
French
fraud
and
much
towards
River
Arts
District
area.
It
is
actually
not
that
far
from
the
New
Belgium
brewery,
that's
exactly
the
direction
we're
standing
in
as
if
you're
looking
at
that,
you
can
see
the
slope.
Most
importantly,
you
can
see
that
there's
really
only
one
wire
over
this.
L
It
is
also
not
a
long-worthy
proposed
Street
will
be,
which
we
will
see
in
the
materials
when
we
get
there.
This
is
another
look
at
the
site
which
is
facing
a
little
more
North.
You
see
the
slope,
it
is
also
showing
what
is
existing
and
Hunter
can
go
one
more
slide.
This
is
the
existing
home
that
is
not
addressed
as
225
Emma
road.
This
will
actually
be
what
you
see
as
not
part
of
the
subdivision,
but
this
shows
this
area.
L
Thankfully,
the
applicants
with
Equinox
have
provided
supplemental
photos
which
spares
you
all
from
my
terrible
photography,
we'll
see
that
at
the
end
for
them-
and
they
can
talk
about
this
a
little.
What
I?
What
I
wanted
to
do
is
highlight
with
these
photos,
the
the
presence
of
the
sun
and
the
absence
of
utilities
there.
L
So
if
we
can
go
to
the
next
slide,
this
is
something
that
is
worth
mentioning,
I'm,
not
sure
if
it's
entirely
relevant,
because
there
aren't
any
buffers
being
discussed,
applicants
can
meet
all
other
Landscaping
conditions,
but
this
is
just
a
zoning
Outlook
of
the
area
and
something
I
like
to
provide
the
commission
with
every
case
regardless.
So
you
can
see
right
here.
It
is
smack
in
the
middle
of
our
M8.
L
It
is
the
sort
of
triangular
shape
that
a
budget
large
rs2
and
that
Resort
cup
portion
there
is,
you
can
faintly
see
it
on
the
rs2.
There
is
a
railway
that
follows
the
river.
There
is
a
railroad
easement
that
does
bleed
into
the
property
that
is
subject
today.
That
is,
of
course,
225
Mr
road,
so
next
slide
Hunter
yeah
excellent.
This
is
the
site
plan
that
is
being
proposed,
and
here's
where
you
can
first
see
that
railroad
utility
and
what
this
layout
looks
like
sort
of
towards
the
north.
L
L
So
that's
the
math
used
to
calculate
this,
and
here
you
can
see
the
landscape
plan
where
they're
showing
again
they're
using
the
overhead
utilities
present
to
maximize
solar,
and
this
is
where
you
see
those
36
trees
along
that
road
Frontage,
as
well
as
some
of
the
open
space
and
the
other
proposed
the
landscaping
again.
The
technical
Review
Committee
has
not
weighed
in
on
this.
Yet
the
applicants
have
chosen
to
come
before
you
to
seek
the
alternative
compliance
request
before
moving
forward.
L
So
it
is
entirely
possible
that
there
are
other
elements
that
may
change
throughout
the
neighborhood
meeting
process.
What
we
are
here
today
for
is
the
discussion
of
the
street
tree
requirement
to
go
from
all
other
conditions
to
overhead
utilities
present
to
maximize
solar
on
the
site
and
Hunter.
If
you
want
to
go
to
the
next
one,
yeah
excellent,
thank
you.
So
this
is
showing
more
of
what
the
landscape
plan
looks
like
again,
with
a
caveat
that
this
may
change.
L
This
shows
the
trees,
the
coverage,
the
canopy,
the
open
space
and
areas
that
are
worth
preserving,
because
this
is
a
new
application
before
the
TRC.
This
will
have
to
meet
open
space
under
7-Eleven
for
as
well
as
archery
canopy
preservation.
It's
all
shown
there.
A
lot
of
that
will
be
covered,
I,
think
in
sort
of
the
Northeast
and
sort
of
the
back
half
of
those
lots
as
it
sort
of
swoops
around
to
the
back
portion
of
the
Lots
on
that
Southwestern
side.
L
Next
slide:
excellent,
so
staff
findings
on
this
one
I
really
identify
with
what
Jennifer
said
and
how
she
said
it
as
staff.
What
we
do
is
we
actually
do
not
weigh
these
against
the
standards
that
the
commission
does.
We
weigh
this
against
the
Udo.
With
that
said
ever
it
was
something
that
had
complied
with
the
standard
if
it
were
all
overhead
utilities
present,
but
there
were
no
overhead
utilities
present
and
the
sun
is
not
an
exclusive
utility.
L
It
does
not
it's
just
not
unique
to
225
Emma,
rodent
and
I'm
somewhat
dismayed
that
the
one
day
I
could
get
out
to
take
site
photos
is.
It
was
cloudy
because
in
that
photo
facing
south,
it
was
clear
that
it
would.
It
would,
on
a
sunny
day
in
June,
get
good
light.
So
I
I
think
that
there
may
be
a
merit
to
the
request
before
the
commission,
but
more
information
is
needed
to
weigh
that
from
a
staff
perspective
and
that
there
were
no
photometric
designs
or
anything
like
that.
Now
Equinox
is
with
us.
L
They
have
submitted
other
information
after
the
deadline,
and
maybe
they
can
answer
some
of
those
questions
about
how
this
is
more
necessary
than
staff
may
think
to
make
solar
a
reality
for
the
site,
so
that's
sort
of
the
staff
finding
and
the
recommendation.
Of
course,
this
is
all
seen
in
the
report
you
can
find
on
the
next
Slide
the
same
points
for
discussion,
but
that's
a
lot
of
information
and
not
a
lot
of
time
and
I
would
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
may
have.
Yes,
Mr
Macy.
F
I
I
think
well
I,
I
think
without
that
information
I
can't
make
a
decision
on
this
I
think
this
establishes
a
really
bad
precedent.
F
I'm,
not
convinced
that
planting
Street
trees
will
have
any
impact
in
the
long
run
over
solar
access.
I,
don't
see
any
guarantee
that
every
unit
is
going
to
have
solar
unless
it's
part
of
their
building
plan.
C
F
I
I
think
that
the
trees
provide
far
more
greater
ecosystem
benefits
than
the
single
benefit
of
saving
carbon
output
with
solar
energy.
So
I
know
I'm
I'm
waxing
with
opinion,
but
without
a
solar
access
map.
I
don't
have
enough
information
to
make
any
decision
at
all.
L
H
Sharon,
do
you
Sam,
so
my
concern
is
is
because
it
hasn't
gone
to
TRC.
We
don't
know
what
plants
are
going
to
keep
what
they're
going
to
take
out,
what
trees
are
existing
and
and
even
I'm
inclined
to
agree
with
Ed,
because
I
don't
have
enough
information
that
even
if
we'd
agree
with
this,
how
many
trees
were
they
slating
to
come
out
and
if
they
didn't
meet
the
metrics,
then
that
would
make
this
whole
point.
Loot
anyway,
yeah.
L
Yeah
I
mean
they
so
I
want
to
clarify.
There
are
things
that
may
change
through
the
neighborhood
meeting
process.
There
may
be
things
that
would
be
different
for
the
TRC
submittal.
They
would
still
have
to
meet
one
of
two
standards.
It
would
have
to
be
one
large
maturing
tree
every
40
feet
per
the
all
other
conditions
or
what
they
are
proposing,
which
they
have
met,
which
is
one
small
tree
every
30
feet
along
about
507
feet
of
road
right
of
way,
so
the
street
trees
will
have
to
be
met.
L
H
Yeah
and
to
make
a
comment
for
Cecil
response,
but
we
know
that
changes.
We
know
that
they
can
fee
and
Lou
719
and
they
can
also
have
minimal
amounts
of
needing
on
7-Eleven
3,
not
knowing
what
it
is
we're
looking
at.
So
that's
why
I'm
a
little
hesitant
to
want
to
agree
with
this
without
knowing
exactly
how
the
rest
of
the
site's
going
to
be
impacted
by
x,
amount
of
trees
and
I'm,
not
sure
how
many
are
coming
out
that
equate
x
amount
of
percent
of
canopy
loss.
O
Yeah,
looking
at
the
site
photos,
it
appears
to
me
there
aren't
any
trees
to
come
out
of
there.
It
looks
like
a
pasture,
but
it
may
be
around
the
edges
living
in
a
net:
zero,
solar
home
I'm,
acutely
aware
of
of
the
impact
of
the
shadow
of
large
maturing
trees.
I've
got
black
walnut
that
Shades
my
house
in
the
morning,
so
it
cuts
my
solar
game,
but
it
also
keeps
me
cooler
in
the
morning.
I
mean
it's:
it's
a
complicated
thing
there
and
what
I
guess?
What
I
would
want
to
know
is.
O
O
If,
if
it's
just
you
know
a
notion
that
maybe
some
people
will
want
solar,
that
would
I
I'd
have
to
weigh
that
both
ways.
Yeah.
L
So
I
actually
hear
two
questions
in
that
and
I
will
answer
them.
Jason
I
also
see
your
hand
is
up
you're
going
to
be
coming
next
for
the
applicant
when
that
portion
shows
up.
But
there
are
two
questions
in
this:
are
there
trees
existing
on
225
Emma
road
to
borrow
a
line
from
Star
Trek
I'm
Jim
I'm,
a
planner
I'm,
not
a
photographer.
You
are
correct.
There
are
trees,
sort
of
along
Emma
road.
They
are
there.
There
are
some.
There
are
some
plans
to
keep
that.
L
That
is
part
of
the
negotiation,
but
largely
where
this
is
happening
is
the
password
that
you
had
seen
and
that
I
had
taken
that
photo
facing
south
now.
This
is
a
little
complicated.
They
have
committed
to
providing
solar,
but
the
application
before
the
TRC
will
be
a
major
subdivision,
which
is
a
plotting
matter.
We
can
perhaps,
and
I
would
have
to
check
with
Eric
Edgerton
illegal
about
getting
something
requiring
that,
but
by
and
large
after
this
is
platted,
then
what
happens?
L
Is
you
go
to
Tyler
Kelly,
the
residential
review
specialist
and
you
have
individual
Builders
applying
for
those,
and
there
is
nothing
to
say
that
they
have
to
meet
solar,
so
there
is
well.
While
you
are
correct
in
saying
that
the
applicant
has
committed
to
that
there
is
a
lack
of
regulatory
teeth.
If
you
will
to
ensure
that
will
always
be
the
case
and
in
perpetuity
yeah.
O
L
And
there
is
a
yeah
and
there's
a
benefit
to
doing
it.
There's
an
economies
of
scale
to
be
sure
with
solar.
So
it
does
make
sense
to
do
this
at
the
beginning
stage.
But
again,
that's
not
right,
there's
nothing
to
say
that
is
guaranteed
right
or
or
has
been
seen
so
far.
So
are
there
any
other
questions
for
staff
Jason.
B
Did
you
want
to
speak.
M
Yes,
I
hello,
everybody
Jason
cycle
with
Equinox
environmental
for
those
of
you
who
are
not
familiar
with
Equinox
environmental.
We
are
a
landscape
architecture
and
ecological
Services
firm
and
our
we're
very
Mission
driven
and
our
mission
is
to
develop
spaces
preserve
spaces
on
an
ecological
side.
We
do
a
lot
of
stream
restoration
and
on
the
landscape
architecture
side
we
developed
stasis
at
a
minimum
for
sustainability,
but
for
maximum
for
regenerative
design.
M
L
M
Yeah
we
can
stay
well.
We
can
stay
on
that
yeah
very
steep
slopes
here.
So
our
client,
Nicholson
and
Son.
M
Hired
us
to
make
sure
that
this
site
was
developed
as
sustainably
as
possible,
knowing
that
he
had
a
very
steep
slopes
on
the
edges,
and
so
what
we're
proposing
to
do
is
we're
proposing
Net
Zero
homes
within
an
an
lid
development
here,
and
so
we
have
a
strong
focus
on
storm
water
infiltration
and
we
want
to
do
treatment
and
attenuation
of
storm
water
above
and
beyond
City
standards.
We
want
clean
energy
and
we
want
to
not
only
preserve
canopy,
but
we
want
to
improve
the
existing
canopy.
M
So
if
you
look
at
this
particular
map,
we
are
actually
proposing
to
replace
every
single
tree
or
the
we
did.
M
The
calculations
of
the
can
pee
from
the
ordinance
and
we're
proposing
to
replace
everything
that
we
take
out
not
only
to
replace
it
with
in
in
quantity,
but
we're
actually
improving
it
in
quality,
and
you
can
go
ahead
and
and
go
forward
on
the
slides
and
you
can
see
the
existing
quality
is
very
weedy,
there's
actually
quite
a
bit
of
invasive
species
in
there
and
we're
hoping
in
this
development
to
replace
all
of
the
invasives
that
are
Disturbed
with
the
development,
with
good
quality
canopy
of
tree.
M
Now
going
to
what
Cecil
was
saying
about,
the
solar
is
yes,
there's
there's
good
solar
access
on
the
side,
which
is
why
it's
actually
a
great
candidate
for
a
solar
subdivision
for
Net
Zero
subdivision.
What
happens
is
if
you
put
large
maturing
canopy
trees
as
Street
trees
along
the
the
new
proposed
Road?
Those
will
actually
shade
out
and
if
you
back
up
to
the
elevations
side,
elevations
for
active
and
Solar
Development,
that's
what
these
are
proposing
is
act.
Passive
and
active
solar.
M
The
solar
panels
go
on
that
lower
portion
of
the
of
the
the
homes
right.
That's
the
south
facing
side
and
what
those
clear
story
Windows
do
is
is
act
as
passive
solar
right,
so
they
take.
They
receive
winter
Suns
and
shade
out
summer,
Suns,
so
you're
getting
reduced
amount
of
energy
requirement
and
then
all
the
energy
that
is
required
we're
hoping
to
do
through
active
solar.
M
What
we're
proposing
is
to
follow
the
the
utility
alternative
option
in
The
Code
by
providing
the
understory
trees
so
that
we
get
the
habitat
we
get
the
canopy
and
we
also
get
the
solar
we're
hoping
for
a
win-win
here,
thinking
holistically
and
we're
actually,
because
we
knew
this
was
going
to
be
a
request.
We
squeezed
in
as
many
as
we
could
right.
So
the
32,
so
24,
mature,
canopy
trees
would
have
been
required.
M
36
understory
per
the
alternative
option,
I'm
sorry
32
and
then
sorry
Sam
to
just
correct
that
36
number
on
the
planet.
It's
actually
37
trees
that
we're
proposing
so
five
above
the
alternative
option
and
the
reason
we're
proposing
this
is
because
we
really
want
to
maintain
as
Equinox
and
our
mission.
We
really
want
to
maintain
the
health
of
those
trees
and
talking
with
our
ecologists
on
staff.
M
We
really
believe
that
this
is,
if
not
a
minimum
equivalent
to
the
other
option
better,
because
we
are
still
providing
the
habitat,
we're
still
providing
the
shade
and
we're
also
providing
orders
of
magnitude
more
carbon
sequestration
by
having
the
solar
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
I
I
represented
this
plan
for
what
we're
proposing,
because
we
do
believe
strongly
in
what
we're
doing
and
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
you
guys
heard
it
from
from
the
designer.
O
I
guess
my
question
is:
are
we
being
asked
for
sort
of
a
preliminary
View
at
this
point?
I
mean
we're
not
we
aren't
going
to
vote
on
this
until
after
it
comes
back
from
TRC
right.
L
No
you're
going
to
vote
on
it
now.
This
is
part
of
the
discussion
that
they
are
trying
to
have
prior
to
go
to
TRC.
So
you
are
not
voting
on
anything
else.
There
are
no
homes
proposed.
These
are
only
18
residential
lots.
The
Box
shown
is
not
necessarily
the
final
location.
What
you
are
voting
on
is
whether
or
not
that
there
is
sufficient
from
reason
and
alternative
compliance
to
the
streets.
L
Three
standard
to
go
to
what
is
considered
overhead
utilities
present
again,
which
is
correct,
30,
small,
maturing
trees,
every
or
one
small
maturing
tree
every
30
feet.
B
Okay,
there's
been
a
motion
to
approve.
Is
there
a
second
foreign.
B
The
motion
is
rescinded.
Is
there
another
motion?
F
Move
that
we
reject
this
request
until
we
have
more
information.
H
B
Okay,
before
there's
discussion
on
the
motion,
I
believe
I
would
I'm
correct
and
Nancy
can
correct
me
if
I'm
not,
but
if
we
denied
this,
we
have
to
point
to
one
of
the
six
criteria
to
support
our
denial.
B
We
can
either
postpone
or
continue
this
alternative
compliance
request
recommend
to
the
applicant
what
we
would
like
to
see
in
the
alternative
compliance
request
and
have
it
brought
back
to
us
for
further
consideration.
H
F
B
L
I'm
sorry,
one
last
time
to
interject
again
it
does
appear
that
Karen
has
her
hand
up.
Oh
Karen,
sorry.
L
D
Okay,
well,
since
we're
just
discussing
this
now
and
also
learning
the
process,
yeah
I
think
it
should
go
through
TRC
before
it
comes
back
to
us
is
that
is
that
just
making
this
overly
complicated
and
just
support
the
motion
of
denying
it
or
is
it
worth
having
the
request
for
these
other
steps.
A
A
You
could
continue
it
until
after
and
and
to
another
meeting,
so
that
can
continuous.
The
continuance
could
be
until
after
the
TRC
meeting
it
could
be
until
there's
additional
information.
It
can
continue
for
to
the
next
meeting.
For
you
know,
for
three
months
for
six
months,
whatever.
D
It
is
I,
guess
I
just
want
to
say
there
are
a
lot
of
things
that
I
really
like
about
this
project,
but
what
I
don't
like
is
the
lack
of
regulatory
teeth
so
as
far
as
having
this
project
be
upheld
in
perpetuity.
So
that
being
said,
and
having
mentioned
what
I'd
like
to
see,
it
doesn't
have
to
be
part
of
this
motion.
I
will
go
ahead
and
support
the
motion
to
deny
the
alternative
compliance
whenever
it's
my
turn.
M
Instead
of
going
through
emotion
of
denial,
I
mean
it
sounds
like
you
know,
there
is
desire
for
additional
information.
The
reason
we
sought
this
earlier
is
because
you
know,
instead
of
going
through
all
the
hurdles
of
the
of
the
full
development
we
wanted
to
make
sure
we
could
do
a
sustainable
development
here,
instead
of
blowing
out
the
site
and
taking
out
a
lot
of
trees,
we
were
hoping
to
do
something
that
was
replacing
it
with.
H
We
still
in
discussion
mode
yes,
so
my
issue
is
our
percentage
of
loss
of
canopy,
and
my
issue
is
also
seeing
how
these
are
individual
units
that
can
may
or
may
not
put
solar
on
these
homes
or
Townhomes
whatever
they're
called,
and
that
is
my
issue
because
that's
subjective,
we
can't
make
people
do
something.
You
know,
and
my
concern
is:
what's
our
overall
loss
from
small
trees
or
large
canopy
trees
to
how
many
are
coming
out
to
accommodate
the
requirements
for
the
solar
I
agree
in
conception.
H
M
According
to
the
the
calculations
provided
in
the
code,
the
total
canopy
will
actually
be
this
exact
same,
if
not
more,
due
to
the
50
increase
in
trees
that
we're
proposing
and
to
go
to
the
solar
question
our
client
Donald
Nicholson
is
is:
is
that
an
answer
to
that.
H
Up
to
respond
to
you
on
the
50,
you
don't
know
that
because
you
haven't
gone
through
TRC
yet
and
you
don't
know
that,
because
you
haven't
done
your
719
tree,
save
and
the
loss
of
small
trees
to
large
trees.
So
that's
a
for
me
not
seeing
it
in
black
and
white
on
a
plan
to
count
it.
It's
not
that
I,
don't
believe
you
Jason,
because
I've
run
into
you
before,
and
you
do
a
great
job.
It's
just
that!
We
don't
know.
There's
too
many
things
for
me
out
there
and.
M
F
I
it's
my
motion
and
I
I
kind
of
feel.
Like
I,
don't
know,
I
I'm,
not
sure.
If
we
want
to
continue
this
or
I
mean
if
it
completely
closes
the
door
for
future
requests,
you
know
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
that's
fair,
but
currently
we
we
have
no
basis
to
approve
this.
It
doesn't
meet
any
of
the
criteria.
There's
a
lot
of
information.
We
don't
have
and
there's
a
lot
of
generalizations
made
on
sustainability,
just
based
on
the
presence
or
absence
of
large
maturing
trees.
F
We
don't
know
where,
with
solar
access
mapping
is
we
don't
know
if
the
placement
of
trees
can
reduce
energy
consumption
consumption
because
of
shade
appropriately
placed
in
concert
with
solar?
They
don't
know
what
species
are
being
provided
and
and
what
type
of
habitat
these
species
provide
for
pollinators.
I
mean
we're,
throwing
the
word
sustainability
out
and
and
it
it's
really
in
terms
of
this
discussion,
it's
just
the
buzzword,
yeah
right,
so
you
know
without
information
we
can't
make
a
decision.
F
F
So
you
know,
let's
be
careful
with
our
terminology.
Offline,
would
like
to
hear
how
solar
energy
sequesters
carbon
that
carbon.
That
comment
was
made.
It
reduces
the
use
of
carbon,
it
doesn't
sequester
it
so
I
I
mean
we're
just
not
even
close
to
approving
this,
so
I
I
think
I
see
head
snotting
I'll
withdraw
my
motion
in
in
favor
of
tabling
this
for
future
discussion
with
more
information.
B
Does
the
second
or
agree
with
the
to
withdraw
the
motion?
That's
on
the
table.
H
With
reservations,
I
agree
with
that
all
the
way
around
I
do
with
reservations,
I
would
say
personally,
I,
don't
know
whether
it's
part
of
our
rules
or
not
that
we
should
just
they
should
just
pull
this
whole
thing
and
come
back
and
resubmit
later.
That's
such
a
thing,
you
know
to
to
come
back
to
us
with
more
information
now.
Does
that
mean
that
I
I
withdraw
my
second?
Yes,.
B
So
a
a
procedural
question
to
to
Nancy.
If
we
vote
to
continue
this
alternative
compliance
request,
this
is
the
applicant
have
to
come
back
with
a
new
alternative
compliance
request.
L
Not
necessarily-
and
you
can
also
to
Sharon's
ponderances
out
loud-
you
can
also,
as
a
a
part
of
your
motion,
condition
what
information
you
need
when
they
come
back
so
there
there
is
a
way
in
which
you
can
say
we
need
photo
metrics.
We
need
solar
studies.
We
need
more
information
that
that
this
guarantees
that
there
will
be
active
and
passive
solar
on
this
site
and
that
the
overhead
utility
is
present
is
the
best
alternative
to
maximize
that.
So
that
is
something
you
may
do.
You
can
also
add
any
other
conditions.
L
B
Carolina,
thank
you
Sam
Ed.
Do
you
want
to
make
a
motion
to
continue
this
alternative
compliance
request
and
list
the
specific
recommendations
that
we
would
like
to
see
when
the
request
comes
back
to
the
commission.
F
No
I
I
would
not
I
I
would
prefer
allowing
the
applicant
to
withdraw
their
request
at
this
time.
It's
the
responsibility
applicant
to
provide
us
the
information
to
make
the
decision.
It's
not
our
responsibility
to
ask
them
what
information
we
excuse
me,
which
information
we
need.
B
So
procedurally,
can
the
commission
require
the
applicant
to
withdraw
the
request.
E
L
L
I
I
B
So
then
I
would
ask
the
applicant
if
Equinox
would
be
willing
to
withdraw
the
alternative
compliance
request
at
this
present
time
and
resubmit
after
the
development
goes
through
the
TRC
process.
M
You
Patrick
I
I
just
wanted
to
ask
if
it
was
appropriate
at
all
to
have
our
clients
speak.
I
know
their
hand
has
been
up
for
quite
some
time
if,
if
that
boat
has
sailed
or
if,
if
that
was
appropriate
at
this
time,
sure.
B
Well,
no,
we
have
a
motion.
Well,
the
motion
was
withdrawn.
So
yes,
if
the
applicant
wants
to
speak.
P
I
feel
like
some
of
what
I
was
going
to
say
is
a
little
bit
moot
I'm
happy
to
either
get
a
continuance
or
withdrawal
at
this
point
in
time
and
come
back
after
the
the
other
development
meeting
and
with
some
more
specific
information,
along
with
some
legal
teeth
about
restrictive
covenants
of
Net
Zero
homes
in
perpetuity
that
are
put
in
the
Deeds
themselves
of
the
Lots.
This
is
our
third
phase
of
Net
Zero
homes
that
we've
done
on
Emma
road.
P
So
we've
faced
this
problem
on
a
personal
level
already
and
sort
of
have
a
game
plan
from
a
legal
perspective:
how
to
create
long-term
teeth
that
Force
future
owners
to
have
to
continue
our
goal
towards
a
net
zero
future.
B
Okay,
just
to
make
it
official,
then
Jason
you've
heard
the
sentiment
of
the
commission
members.
Are
you
willing
to
withdraw
the
current
alternative
compliance
request
and
submit
another
one
at
a
later
date.
M
You
know
this
is
my
first
time
going
through
this
commission
I
thought
that
you
know
we
would
try
to
be
efficient
with
our
time
and
try
to
see
if
it
was
a
possibility
to
get
this
approval
before
continuing
with
further
design
of
the
development.
But
I
see
at
this
time
that
the
commission
would
like
to
see
full
TRC
submittal
prior
to
so
we
will
go
ahead
and
withdraw
if
that's
okay
with
everybody
and
resubmit
after
TRC,
so
middle.
O
Yeah
I
would
just
like
to
applaud
what
Nicholson's
trying
to
do.
I
live
in
a
net
zero
home
and
I
have
five
homes
within
a
line
of
sight
from
my
house
that
are
Net
Zero
homes.
This
is
what's
happening
and
this
is
what
what
has
to
happen
and
I
I
get
the
concerns
about
the
big
tree.
You
know
wanting
the
higher
canopy,
but
there
have
to
be
trade-offs,
and
you
know
the
if
we
don't
get
to
Net
Zero
internationally,
we're
all
dead.
B
Thank
you,
CSUN
Cecil,
well,
I
want
to
thank
Sam
Jason
and
the
commission
members
and
the
rest
of
City
staff.
This
was
sort
of
a
new
threshold
for
us
to
deal
with
and
I
think
there
were
a
lot
of
really
good
points
made
during
the
discussion
and
look
forward
to
having
the
request
resubmitted
at
a
later
date.
Thank
you
very
much.
Everyone
thank.
B
E
Hi
there
I
think
I
submitted
what
we're
up
to
lately
to
Hunter.
Is
that
correct?
Yes,
are
there
any
questions
about
any
of
it?
E
No,
okay,
no
questions!
You
anticipate
for
me
going
forward
on
the
agenda.
B
E
September
crime
prevention
through
environmental
design,
oh
yeah,.
H
E
In
terms
of
trees,
it
and
street
lights,
it
means
allowing
the
street
lights
to
actually
reach
the
road
in
the
sidewalk
and
so
forth.
Another
little
dark,
Heidi
hole
places
that
people
lurk
in
sometimes.
B
Bet,
if
you
hold
on
one
second
I,
have
a
question
for
either
Mark
or
Chris
Collins.
If
you
bear
with
me
for
just
a
second.
B
Well,
we'll
just
move
on
and
I'll
follow
up
with
either
Mark
or
Chris,
or
both
of
you.
After
the
meeting
Urban
Forester
update,
Keith.
G
A
lot
of
you
know
that
I've
kind
of
been
kind
of
going
back
between
smla
and
that
sort
of
thing
you
know
taking
care
of
some
some
family
issues,
but
as
far
as
you
know,
where
I've
been
going
and
what
I've
been
doing
and
learning
a
lot
about
three
removable
applications-
replanting,
you
know
both
in
steep
slopes
and
else
around
town
I've,
gotten
that
down
pretty
good
right
now,
I
think
I'm,
pretty
good
up
on
the
ordinance
right
now,
so
I
guess
I'm,
probably
what
three
three
months
in
right
now
so
I
feel
pretty
confident
that
you
know
I
I
can
answer
people's
questions
and,
and
that
sort
of
thing
so
I've
been
taking
a
lot
of
calls.
G
Just
you
know
general
questions
about
trees,
and
you
know
what
can
I
do?
What
can
I
not
do?
My
Neighbor,
Next
Door
is
doing
this
and
that
sort
of
thing,
so
you
know
been
shuffling
a
few
of
those
calls
around
also
have
been
working
with
some
of
the
Community
representatives
for
the
community
grant
program.
That's
coming
up
here
soon,
so
reviewing
some
of
those
those
requests
and
plans.
G
Let's
see
what
else
we
got
had
an
interesting
meeting
with
Duke
power
about
a
week
and
a
half
ago,
I
met
their
new
engineering
tech
for
downtown,
and
that
was
mainly
to
kind
of
get
myself
up
to
speed
on
you
know,
kind
of
what
their
position
is
on
trees,
and
you
know
where
we
can
possibly
partner
on.
You
know
future
initiatives
and
that
sort
of
thing,
though
I
guess
the
one.
G
The
biggest
thing
that
came
out
of
that
meeting
was
that
they
are,
you
know,
as
do
power
moves
forward
and
they
start
putting
in
more
of
the
EV
Chargers.
There
will
be
more
tree
cutting
due
to
that
because
of
the
higher
voltage
on
the
lines
that
they'll
be
putting
in.
G
So
that
was
you
know
something
that
you
know
certainly
want
to
address
with
them
in
the
future
and
talk
more
about
that,
and
but
we
really
set
a
standard
just
to
do
the
just
have
dialogue
between
our
you
know,
organizations
and,
and
so
that
we
can,
you
know,
start
seeing
what
what
they
want.
You
know
I
asked
him
bluntly:
I
was
like
well,
you
know
what
what
would
you
all
prefer,
and
you
know
they
said
you
know
we.
G
We
would
prefer
no
trees
under
under
power
lines
and
no
bamboo
and
and
then
kind
of
went
into.
You
know
what
they
can
do
for
us.
You
know:
I
did
inquire
about
their
volunteer
program,
so
I
knew
I
know
they
have
a
volunteer
program
where
they
can
plant
trees
with
some
other
staff.
G
So
I
was
very
interested
in
that
and
then
also
looking
at
alternative
sites
for
like
Nursery
trees,
and
so
I
did
ask
them
about
you
know
under
the
the
transmission
lines
that
are
are
down
along
the
river.
You
know
if
we
can't,
you
know,
encroach
in
some
of
that
right
away.
G
You
know
to
bring
some
Street
trees
like
a
little
Nursery
down
there
as
well,
since
we're
not
really
using
you
know,
they're,
not
usually
using
that
site
down
there,
so
they're,
those
guys
the
engineering
techs
are
going
to
put
me
in
in
touch
with
some
of
the
other
folks
who
I
I
need
to
ask
those
questions
with.
G
Let's
see
had
another
a
good
conversation
with
Matt
Browning
from
Clemson
University.
They
were
trying
to
they
needed
a
partner
for
their
Ira
Grant
that
we
had
to
do
to
deny,
but
we
also
looked
at
doing
some
partnering
on
in
the
future.
They
they
have
a
a
program
with
Parks
going
right
now,
where
they
are,
they
will
be
identifying
tree
planting
areas
or
places
to
increase
their
the
forest.
Canopy
and
I
did
tell
him
that
we
would,
you
know,
really
love
to.
G
You
know,
look
at
that
data
as
well
as
be
a
part
of
any
kind
of
new
programs
that
they
have
come
coming
up
forward.
So
that's
gonna
on
the
horizon
had
a
reached
out
to
Haywood
Tech
Warren
Wilson
made
in
contact
the
extension
also
looking
into
some
some
like
I,
said
new
Nursery
sites,
different
programs
for
that,
and
then
that
is
really
about
it.
G
G
That's
coming
up.
I
have
social
media
strategies
reached
out
to
Cape
to
see
you
know
if
I
could
start
a
social
media
page
just
on
Instagram
that
sort
of
thing
and
then
also
June
16th
I
have
Southeast
trees
and
law
Symposium
put
on
by
the
North
Carolina
Urban
Forest
Council,
and
that's
that's
really
about
it.
So
far,
as
you
know,
anything
else,
that's
kind
of
coming
away
any
questions.
G
I'm
sorry,
yeah
I'm,
sorry,
I'm,
gonna
I'm,
just
trying
to
nail
it
down
into
a
few.
You
know
things
that
I
can
really
concentrate
on,
but
you
know
there's
a
lot
going
on.
You
know
besides
different
conversations
and
that
sort
of
thing,
but
but.
D
B
Okay,
we'll
move
on
TPO
report.
Nancy.
Do
you
have
anything
additional
to
the
Chart,
that's
included
in
the
in
the
agenda.
B
A
B
All
right,
we'll
move
on
to
Old
business
working
group
updates
budget
records
working
group.
O
In
this
month,
yeah
I
think
the
latest
thing
was
the
letter
to
the
council
requesting.
B
Okay,
the
policy
working
group
tree
protection
exemption
discussion,
the
landscape
pardon
landscape
code
Sharon.
Do
you
want
to.
H
I
H
To
give
a
quick
overview
and
I'd
like
to
ask
Nancy
I'm
gonna
have
feedback
I.
Think
I
like
ask
Nancy
when
this
is
going
to
counsel?
Is
it
got
a
date
for
counselor,
yet.
A
H
H
I
thought
I
did
and
then
I
thought
I
didn't,
but
I
do
know
that
I
requested
time
to
discuss
this,
and
it's
not
today,
because
alternative
compliance
was
large
and
so
I
just
want
to
go
over
that
we
did
form
a
working
group
with
Karen
and
Chardonnay
myself,
which
we
have
not
met
yet
because
this
was
done
at
the
last
meeting.
H
But
I
did
do
a
review
of
the
new
to
the
old
and
I've
got
a
quick
synopsis
and
I'm
not
going
to
go
to
in
depth,
because
it's
an
ordinance
and
it
can
be
real
ordinancy.
If
you
know
what
I
mean
the
good
part
of
this
is
the
soul.
Volume
is
increased
on
trees,
more
space
for
trees
in
a
vehicle
use
area,
it
means
less
trees,
but
it
means
that
we'll
have
trees
that
will
be
able
to
do
their
job
of
what
they're
supposed
to
do,
which
is
create
a
canopy.
H
So
this
is
a
good
thing.
I
want
to
commend.
Ed
was
on
this
committee.
I
was
on
for
a
little
while
and
he
stuck
through
it
through
thick
and
thin.
So
he
has
to
be
commended
for
this.
We've
got
permissible
encroachments
Chris.
You
should
get
me
before
I
get
going
because
yeah.
I
Sure
and
I
was
just
going
to
give
you
anything
on
the
landscape
and
draft
code.
It
does
not
have
a
council
date.
Yet
there's
discussions
going
forth
and
back
about
a
green
roofs
provision,
that's
in
there
and
trying
to
right
size
that
right
now,
working
Padilla
and
I
and
a
few
people
have
been
talking
with
the
architecture
Community
on
that
one.
So
not
at
the
finish
line.
Yet.
Okay.
H
H
We've
got
permissible
encroachments
that
need
to
be
approved
by
the
urban
Forester,
which
is
new.
We've
got
planting
distances
from
tree
to
buildings,
which
is
great
so
we'll
see
no
more
of
those
alternative
compliance
where
you've
got
a
tree
planted
a
foot
and
a
half
away
from
the
building
just
because
it
needs
to
be
a
tree
and
we've
got
a
green
infrastructure
Islands
which
are
used
for
storm
water
catchment
and
the
best
part
of
it
is.
H
We've
got
inspection
criteria
and
ANSI
tree
pruning
standards
that
are
written
in
black
and
white
that
people
have
to
follow.
The
inspection
criteria
is
large
and
it's
complete
and
it's
what's
been
needed
for
a
long
time
so
I'm
in
agreement
with
most
of
our
new
changes
that
are
going
on,
but
typical
for
me.
I've
got
some
things
that
I'm,
not
in
agreement
with.
H
We
have
an
exemption
in
vehicle
use
areas
that
are
elevated
at
least
three
feet
from
the
edge
of
pavement
or
separately,
a
berm
that
is
at
least
three
feet.
High,
shall
not
be
required
to
comply
with
the
street
buffer
requirement,
so
I'll
use
as
an
example.
The
shopping
center
I
manage
on
4
South
Tunnel
Road
I
have
got
a
about
a
five
six
foot
berm.
There
that's
got
trees
planted
on
it
that
were
part
of
the
of
the
of
this
particular
straight
buffer.
H
There
was
no
room
for
Street
trees
because
of
the
problem
on
Tunnel
Road
with
utilities.
So
with
this
exemption,
that
means
that
places
that,
like
Kmart,
the
new,
the
old
Kmart
that
sits
lower
on
on
Patton
and
like
the
shopping
center
I'm,
referring
to
won't
require
a
street
won't
require
a
buffer.
Now
this
street
buffer
is
the
Landscaping
along
Street
rights,
away
between
parking
areas
and
pedestrian
zones,
and
this
can
mean
anything.
This
can
mean
trees
and
shrubs.
H
It
depends
on
the
zoning
and
what's
required,
so
there's
a
little
ambiguity
on
that,
but
that
is
a
new
addition
that
I
don't
quite
understand
that
I
think
once
we
get
some
information,
we'll
know
exactly
what
they're
talking
about,
but
in
the
instances
that
I
see
this
will
reduce
our
tree
canopy.
If
we've
got
the
instance
like
my
shopping
center,
where
you
can't
put
in
Street
trees
due
to
utilities,
but
this
buffer
area
they
put
trees
on.
H
Let's
see
and
I've
got
a
question
of
also
what
constitutes
a
street
buffer
as
far
as
plant
count.
That's
not
really
identified
where
there's
a
lot
of
identified
in
7-Eleven
3
of
how
many
trees,
how
many
shrubs,
but
in
this
instance
it
is
not.
H
What
was
left
out
also
is
Landscaping
required
when
development
exceeds
maximum
parking
standards
placement.
So
if
they
go
over
x
amount
of
parking
right
now
over
I
think
it's
a
thousand
feet.
You
have
to
have
add
more
vua
parking
to
that
right
now.
There
is
not
added
to
that.
H
This
I'll
have
other
Minds
looking
this
other
than
mine
and
they
may
have
different
opinions
and
may
say
Sharon
you're
full
of
it,
and
this
is
what
it
really
says
so
I'm
just
making
this
having
waded
through
ordinances,
that
I
can
read
something
and
think
it
says
something
and
it
does
not
okay
and
they
also
left
out
placement
of
protective
barriers
and
what
they
should
consist
of
around
trees.
Now,
in
719,
we
have
protective
barriers,
but
on
7
11
3
for
some
reason,
I
think
that
was
just
left
out.
H
I,
don't
think
that
was
a
purpose
thing.
We
have
no
protective
barriers
of
trees
in
the
new
code
and
then
my
biggest
concern
is.
We
have
building
impact.
Trees
are
being
removed
now,
I
think
there's
a
compromise
left
in
building
impact
trees
to
be
removed.
It's
left
out
of
the
seven
eleven
three
entirely
so
I'm
thinking
for
a
change
about
compromise
which
I
don't
do
well,
but
I
happen
to
think
that
this
may
be
a
need
now
and
I'm.
Using
an
example
of
one
of
my
TRC
projects.
H
I
looked
at
where,
if
we
didn't
have
any
billing
impact
trees,
they
would
have
been
shy,
72,
trees
and
a
hundred
and
some
shrubs
additionally,
now
this
if
they're-
and
they
are
also
that
the
example
I'm
using
they
also
have
719
trees,
they're
saving
and
also
they're
40
canopied
and
they're
saving
15
percent
they're
required.
But
right
now
the
code
says
that
it's
over
building
impact
trees
are
currently
as
shall
be
required
for
new
or
existing
buildings
in
order
to
soften
views
on
roads
and
adjacent
properties.
H
Provide
shade
to
reduce
the
heat
generated
by
impervious
Services,
reduce
glare
to
help
enhance
the
urban
landscape.
Billing
impact
determination,
all
new
developments
with
an
existing
or
proposed
building
with
the
footprint
greater
than
3
000
square
feet.
Developments
with
more
than
one
building
shall
combine
the
total
footprint
areas
and
calculating
the
requirement
one
tree
and
two
shrubs
for
every
thousand
square
feet
of
building
footprint,
trees
and
shrubs
may
be
planted
anywhere
on
site,
so,
which
is
a
good
thing
now.
H
We
have
some
areas
that
are
more
treed
than
others
that
maybe
the
building
impact
tree
may
be
Overkill,
but
then
we've
got
these
developments,
that'll
come
in
and
they'll
have
fee
and
Lou
they'll
have
no
existing
trees
and
the
only
thing
that
they're
going
to
be
putting
up
is
Street
trees
and
there
are
large
development,
and
that
means
that
they're
not
required
to
put
any
building
impact
trees
in
where,
because
of
the
size
of
the
development.
H
Previously,
on
some
of
this
developments,
that's
the
only
thing
that
they'll
put
in
is
the
building
impact,
trees
and
the
street
trees.
So
there
are
instances
where
this
is
going
to
impact
our
impact,
our
our
canopy
and
in
some
cases
they
may
be
heavily
treed,
and
this
may
be
Overkill
and
in
other
cases
we
may
need
to
put
building
impact
trees
on
to
offer
some
delay
requirement.
My
shopping
center
that
I
manage
on
4
South
Tunnel
Road.
H
If
we
didn't
have
any
building
impact
trees,
I'd
be
minus
11
oak
trees
that
start
from
the
whole
foods
that
go
all
the
way
down
to
the
fifth
Seasons.
Those
are
building
impact
trees,
and
so
then
the
only
requirement
would
be
the
vua
trees
and
the
VOA
trees
were
decreasing,
but
we're
hopefully
getting
better
canopy
and
then
I
have
no
Street
trees
because
of
the
utilities.
H
So
the
only
thing
that
would
this
would
apply
to
at
the
shopping
center
I
manage
is
that
they
would
only
be
required
to
do
vua
trees
if
we
didn't
have
billing
impactories.
So
in
this
instance,
that's
a
lot
of
reduction
in
canopy,
but
not
always
so
I
think
there's
some
room
for
discussion
and
work
around
with
this.
H
How
we
get
there,
because
I
know
that
there
has
been
a
Year's
worth
of
discussion
on
this
already,
but
I
think
there's
some
way
for
compromise
on
this
and
there's
a
lot
of
little
other
things
that
have
changed.
No,
none
of
them
really
that
important,
just
language
changes
and
to
just
ask
for
the
questions
developed
to
vadilla's
staff
members.
B
F
Yeah
I
encourage
Sharon
to
send
those
comments
to
vidilis
to
the
committee.
That's
working
on
this
has
an
opportunity
to
consider
them
and
discuss
it.
I
don't
want
to
get
into
a
discussion
or
build
the
impact
trees
now
but
I
know.
The
committee
went
through
some
pretty
detailed
analysis
and
you
know
what
we
really
wanted
to
avoid
was
over
requiring
trees,
especially
since
we're
moving
in
a
hat,
moving
towards
a
happy
place
with
respect
to
soil
volume
requirements
that
we,
you
know,
we
we
need
to
make
sure
that
there's
adequate
space
to
grow
trees.
F
So
if,
if
Sharon,
if
you
could
forward
all
those
comments
to
Padilla
the
committee,
you
know
for
committee
discussion,
I
think
that
would
be
really
helpful.
Yeah.
H
What
I
want
to
do
is
I
want
to
go
over
with
two
other
people
that
are
looking
at
this
as
well
as
I,
so
that
we
all
agree
with
this
and
the
working
group,
so
that
I'm
not
just
sending
my
interpretation
of
what
I
see
and
if
it's
not
going.
That's
why
I
asked.
When
is
this
going
to
cancel
so
that
I'm
not
sending
over
information
on
this
purely
up
from
my
brain
alone?
H
That
makes
sense,
and
yes,
I
agree
with
you
Ed
the
more
room
for
growing
the
better
we've
got
reductions
in
in
buffer
trees,
by
which
I
am
I
think
is
good
and
by
one
and
several
shrubs
and
some
places
they're
eliminating
shrubs
all
together,
which
I
don't
understand.
Why
eliminate
a
shrub
in
a
buffer
area,
but
that
again,
I'd
like
to
go
over
with
my
working
group.
You
know,
and
if
you'd
like,
to
see
the
notes
and
send
them
to
you
before
we
send
them
on
that'd
be
really
helpful.
H
D
Hi,
this
just
seems
like
a
good
place
to
mention
that,
when
we're
looking
at
the
chapter
20
comparison,
that
I
was
told
that
the
soil
volume
improvements
would
be
in
7-Eleven,
3
and
I.
Would
just
I
want
to
I
would
like
clarification.
I
want
to
be
really
sure
that
that
happens,
because
I
I
don't
see
how
it
makes
sense
to
remove
the
evaluation
of
soil
to
a
depth
of
three
feet
from
chapter
20.
If
we're
not
really
sure
that
we're
going
to
have
something
equal
or
better
somewhere
else.
E
F
Yeah
thanks
for
raising
that
point,
Karen
I
I,
think
you
know
when,
when
there's
a
lot
of
cross-referencing
with
various
code
elements
that
it's
it's
best
to,
rather
than
having
ordinances,
be
educational
and
provide
technical
standards,
it's
best
to
always
reference
back
to
standards
that
shall
be
conformed
with
so
an
answer
to
address
your
concern
in
chapter
20.
We
absolutely
should
say
so.
F
If
I
am
standards
shall
be
met
as
per
specified
in
the
landscape
standard
manual
and
and
then
have
those
standards
in
the
manual
and
that
the
big
the
big
thrust
behind
revising
the
standards
and
specifications
manual
so
started
with
our
insistence
on
improving
soil
volume
standards,
because
we've
seen
over
and
over
again
that
a
lot
of
trees
are
planted
with
substandard
soil
volume
and
the
trees
die.
So
we
are,
we
are
moving
in
that
direction
and
I'm
really
happy
with
how
the
standards
coming
along
with
respect
to
that.
So
thanks
for
raising
that
point.
D
H
Share
yeah,
the
details
are
in
the
new
7-Eleven
three:
they
have
drawings
and
standards
and
they're
showing
it
will
not
be
as
specific
of
three
cubic
feet
Etc,
because
it
also
again
depends
on
what
you're
planting,
but
it's
has
detailed
drawings
in
the
new
7-Eleven
3
to
show
how
to
plant
and
they're
carried
over
into
the
standards
and
specification
design
manual.
So
it
is
there
now.
How
is
it
referenced
in
chapter?
H
20
I
have
no
idea,
but
that
set
a
standard
saying
three
cubic
feet
or
two
cubic
feet
or
one
cubic
foot
does
not
fall
within
the
criteria
of
planting,
because
you
don't
know
what
you're
planting
on
a
tree
and
it
depends,
but
there
is
a
criteria
showing
how
to
plant,
depending
on
the
size
of
the
root
ball
and
if
you're,
still
on
the
working
group
of
7-Eleven.
Three
I
can
show
that
to
you.
D
I
actually
I've
seen
the
pictures
I
just
wanted.
You
know
some
more
clarification
and
confirmation
before
we
remove
something
that
seemed
like
a
good
idea
to
have
in
place
so
I'll
be
following
it.
Thank
you,
foreign.
B
B
We
have
prepared
a
document,
it's
a
three
column
document.
First
Column
is
the
changes
that
the
city
staff
has
proposed
in
chapter.
20..
Second
column
is
what
the
policy
working
group
is
proposing
for
as
changes
in
chapter
20
and
the
third
column
details
the
differences
between
those
two
positions.
B
The
I
would
like
for
the
policy
working
group
to
meet
within
the
next
two
weeks
to
go
over
that
document,
one
more
time
before
I
submit
it
to
City
Staff
Mark
Foster,
so
that
we
can
schedule
a
meeting
and
finally
get
go
through
chapter
20
and
get
an
agreement
and
then
move
that
on
to
legal
for
the
ordinance
language
and
then
get
that
to
the
city
council.
B
.,
seeing
none
we'll
move
on
to
7
19.,
the
policy
working
group
got
the
staff
recommended
amendments
to
719
I,
passed
them
on
to
the
policy
working
group
members,
and
we
need
to
meet
on
that
as
well
to
go
over
that
and
then
meet
with
City
staff
and
get
an
agreement
on
those
Amendment
language
and
get
that
along
with
chapter
20
before
the
city
council.
So
the
Polish
and
working
group
will
be
quite
busy
in
the
next
several
weeks.
Are
there
any
questions,
comments.
B
Okay,
then,
we'll
move
on
to
missing
middle
housing.
The
missing
mineral
housing
advisory
committee
I'm
on
that
committee,
as
a
representative
can
Zoe,
is
on
the
committee.
As
a
representative
from
the
urban
forestry
Commission,
we
have
not
met
again
our
second
meeting
and
we've
got
received
no
research
or
data
from
the
consultant
as
yet
as
I
want
to
remind
you.
The
consultant
is
looking
for
two
at
two
major
areas:
one
is
the
barriers
to
creating
or
building
missing
middle
housing.
B
The
second
is
looking
for
opportunities
to
build
missing
many
housing
on
the
first,
the
barriers
they'll
be
looking
primarily
at
the
Udo
and
requirements
there
and
reiterate.
We
have
got
nothing
from
the
consultant,
but
anticipating
that
there's
a
high
probability
that
719
will
be
identified
as
a
barrier
to
building
missing
middle
housing.
B
I
felt
that
we
as
an
advisory
committee
need,
would
need
more
information
in
order
to
come
up
with
an
informed
decision
should
that
be
identified
as
a
barrier,
so
I
contacted
Chris
Collins
and
asked
him
about
the
feasibility
of
Staff,
conducting
a
GIS
study
on
all
available
vacant
properties
and
residential
zoned
areas
in
the
city
of
Asheville.
B
Taking
that
information
and
do
a
Crete
a
tree,
canopy
mapping,
so
we
could
see
firsthand
the
extent
of
exempting
either
in
part
or
in
full
of
the
tree,
canopy
preservation,
ordinance
from
any
missing
middle
housing
program
and
I'll,
let
Chris
chime
in
and
if
he
has
any
additional
comments.
I
I,
don't
really
have
much
to
add
yet
Patrick
the
gis
work
is
ongoing.
We've
made
some
progress
and
hope
to
have
results
soon.
Patrick
and
I
talked
about
this.
We
anticipated
this
needing
and
being
analysis
that
would
likely
be
needed
at
some
point
through
the
missing
middle
housing
study.
So
really
it's
just
getting
ahead
of
that
step
a
little
bit,
but
hopefully
that
will
be
results.
I'll
be
able
to
get
back
to
you
Patrick,
and
then
you
can
introduce
it
probably
through
one
of
your
committees.
At
that
point,.
E
B
G
Lot
of
that
GIS
data,
you
you
talk
about
wanting
that
that's
kind
of
what
Clemson
is
working
on
and
I
think
they've
already
identified
a
lot
of
that
stuff
through
the
the
park
system
and
they
were
also
working
on.
You
know
areas
within
marginal
neighborhoods
as
well.
G
So
you
know
their
whole
goal
is
to
you
know,
increase
the
canopy,
and
then
you
know
also
use
that
as
a
a
social
worker
as
well
to
to
how
trees
affect
the
I
guess,
the
psychology
of
of
people,
so
they
do
have
some
of
that
that
data
and
that's
kind
of
what
they're
hoping
to
partner
with
us
in
the
future
is
to
you
know,
take
that
kind
of
data.
G
So
just
to
kind
of
let
you
know
if
you
know
as
time
goes
on
and
and
we
we
figure
out
a
better
way
to
or
maybe
engage
Clemson
that
we
might
be
able
to
get
some
of
that
data
out
of
them
as
well.
So.
G
They're
going
into
like
a
beta
version,
where
they're
going
to
test
out
the
Q
with
the
some
of
the
communities
that
they've
been
working
with
so
like
down
at
Southside
that
sort
of
thing,
so
you
know
it
would
be
interesting
to
you-
know,
follow
up
with
them
and
see
what
kind
of
data
we
can
get
out
of
them.
B
Thank
you.
Moving
on
legislative
update,
just
very
quickly,
I
mentioned
before
that,
there's
a
bill
in
the
state
general
assembly,
Senate,
Bill
317
that
would
create
Workforce,
Housing,
Development
projects
of
10
acres
or
more
and
residential
communities,
and
one
of
the
provisions
of
that
bill
as
it
currently
is
written,
would
exempt
ordinances
like
719
from
being
applied
to
those
development
projects.
B
B
Obviously
we
don't
want
to
have
any
more
exemptions
or
any
exemptions,
if
possible,
to
section
719
because
of
all
the
hard
work
that's
been
put
into
by
both
the
commission
and
also
by
City
staff
and
developing
that
ordinance,
and
in
fact,
if
anything,
we
want
to
increase
kind
of
protection
and
preservation
of
trees
that
the
ordinance
now
provides.
So,
yes,
Sharon.
B
B
Anyone
else,
okay,
thank
you.
We'll
move
on
to
update
from
Chris
Coyle
is
Chris
here.
B
Okay,
well,
then,
we'll
move
on
new
business,
so,
as
I
mentioned,
Don
Chavez
has
stepped
off
the
urban
forestry
commission
by
virtue
of
resigning
as
executive
director
from
Asheville
GreenWorks
don
was
the
vice
chair
of
the
urban
forestry
Commission.
B
B
Okay,
Ed
has
nominated
Zoe
Hoyle
to
be
the
vice
chair
of
the
urban
forestry
commission.
Are
there
any
other
nominations?
I.
B
All
right
so
there's
a
motion
on
the
floor
to
a
point:
Zoe
Hoyle
as
Vice
chair
of
the
urban
forestry
commission
and
there
the
motion
has
been
seconded.
Is
it
any
discussion
on
the
motion
seeing
none,
then
I
will
call
the
question
Ed
all
right:
Sharon,
hi,
Karen,
hi,
Cecil,
Hi
and
I'm,
not
gonna
call
on
Zoe
Zoe,
so
I
vote
I,
so
the
appointment
of
Zoe
Hoyle
is
vice.
Chair
of
the
urban
forestry
Commission
has
been
approved.
Thank
you
so
much
Zoe
for
agreeing
to
take
this
position.
F
A
B
B
B
H
I
wanted
to
ask
Karen.
Are
you
on
the
the
subcommittee
to
read?
Go
over
7
11
3.
I
know
chardan
said
he
would
I
didn't
know
if
you'd
committed
to
doing
that
or
not
I.
D
B
D
So
for
appropriate
species
list
group
we
are
trying
to
push
this
forward
and
Keith
if
you're
here.
Can
you
just
comment
on
if
you'd
like
to
like
your
level
of
involvement
in
this
group,
if
you'd
like
to
come
to
the
meetings,
if
you
want
to
just
be
included
in
emails
or
what
your
thoughts
are
on,
that.
G
Yeah,
yes,
I
would
love
to
be
involved
in
all
that.
Actually
so
I
I
do
have
a
a
list
that
I've
been
kind
of.
You
know
pinning
myself
so
I
I
have
yet
to
you,
know
kind
of
compare
it
up
to
what
you
have
sent
me
already
so,
but
that
is
in
the
works.
B
H
B
H
D
That
yeah,
we
can
I,
guess
decide
by
email
or
now
shirt
On's
out
of
town,
but
we'll
see
what
works
best
for
everyone
Zoomer
in
person.
Okay,.
B
Thank
you.
So
the
last
item
on
new
business,
each
board
and
commission
chair
has
been
requested
to
give
an
update
to
the
specific
city
council
committee
that
they
report
to
and
so
I
will
be,
giving
an
update
on
the
activities
of
the
urban
forestry
commission
to
the
environment
and
Safety
Committee
I.
B
Think
it's
July,
25th
I
will
primarily
use
the
report
that
Amy
Smith
developed
for
the
full
Council
and
sent
to
them
in
January
and
then
update
it
with
anything
that
has
occurred
between
January
and
July,
and
I
will
circulate
that
to
the
commission
members
to
make
sure
that
I
haven't
left
anything
out
of
of
importance.
So
just
a
heads
up
on
that
any
questions
or
comments
on
that
foreign,
okay.
Well,
we
finally
come
to
the
end
of
the
agenda.
B
Unless
anybody
has
a
serious
objection
to
which
they
will
be
submitted
to
a
firing
squad
and
we
can
go
ahead
and
officially
in
the
meeting.
Yes
move.
A
B
You,
for
all
of
you,
I
mean
you
know
nobody
can
do
this
job
without
the
the
great
cooperation,
collaboration
and
expertise
of
all
the.