M E M O R A N D U M REVIEW COMMENTS YASGUR SUBDIVISION (12 MAPLE LANE) PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLANS DATED REVISED

Transcription

1 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Kennett Township Officials Yasgur Team; Jacob Yasgur, Property Owner FROM: Daniel B. Mallach, RLA, AICP, ASLA Thomas J. Comitta, AICP, CNU-A, RLA DATE: SUBJECT: Please note the enclosed Review Comments pertaining to the following documents that we received on April 27, 2016, prepared by John Smirga, P.E., dated revised , and to site visits on February 12, 2016, March 3, 2016, and March 25, 2016: Natural & Cultural Resources; Subdivision of Lands; Engineering Analysis Plan; Erosion & Sediment Control Plan; and Details. Please call or if there are any questions. 18 West Chestnut Street West Chester, PA PHONE: FAX:

2 Please note the Review Comments below pertaining to the documents listed in the Cover Memorandum. Items from our previous review dated February 12, 2016 that have been addressed are so noted. New and updated text is in bold type. 1. Overview The Plan depicts three (3) Residential Lots in the V-1 Village District, including the retention of the existing dwelling at 12 Maple Lane as the new Lot 3. Only the new dwelling proposed for Lot 2 is indicated on this Plan Set. No construction is proposed for Lot 1 on this Plan Set. According to the Woodland Classification and Forest Interior Map of July 2005, most of proposed Lot 1 and Lot 2 is Class 2 Woodland. The Review Comments herein pertain primarily to Ordinance provisions pertaining to Tree Removal and Replacement, and the protection of trees to be preserved. These Review Comments also memorialize the substantial Lot 2 tree removal undertaken in March 2016, and recommend "next steps". 2. Woodland Disturbance The portion of the subject property proposed for development includes Class 2 Woodlands, as indicated by the spotted green area in the below excerpt from the Woodland Classification and Forest Interior Map of July 2005, which is included in Appendix E to the Zoning Ordinance (ZO). Per A (ZO), no more than 40% of the Class 2 Woodlands on properties located in the V-1 Village District may be removed. 2

3 Based on the current proposal, it appears that more than 40%of the Class 2 Woodlands on the subject property may require removal, or were removed in March There appears to be a difference of interpretation in how to evaluate this requirement relative to the basic tree removal and replacement requirement. Fundamentally, the provision that limits tree removal in Class 2 Woodlands is restrictive. Therefore, it only pertains to what cannot be done, and applies to all trees of any size in Class 2 Woodlands, and does not only apply to those trees that are of 12 inches DBH or greater. Since the Limit of Disturbance indicates that more than 40% of all trees on the proposed Lot 2 are proposed to be removed, and a greater amount probably have since been removed, the Plan is in violation of A (ZO), regardless of any separate provisions governing tree replacement. 3. Tree Removal Work - TCA Site Inspection of March 25, A Introduction Although Mr. Yasgur has not yet received approval to subdivide the tract into three (3) lots, most of the trees on what is being proposed as Lot 2 were removed on March 23 rd through March 25 th. On March 25, 2016, Thomas Comitta and Erin Gross of TCA visited the property and met with Mr. Tom Arthur of Bellafiore Landscape, Inc. Mr. Arthur is the Foreman of Bellafiore Landscape, Inc. TCA had been asked by Lisa M. Moore, Township Manager to inspect the property, and to report on our observations relative to Tree Removal. When TCA arrived at the site, all of the trees on proposed Lot 2 within the proposed Building Envelope and Limit of Disturbance had already been removed. The tree removal process began on Wednesday, March 23 rd, according to Mr. Arthur. 3.B Findings TCA observed the conditions described below and shown in the photographs that follow in comment 3.E. 3

4 3.B.1 All trees 12 inches Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) and above were removed, pertaining to the proposed development of Lot 2, and the stumps of these trees were marked with red spray paint. 3.B.2 All trees less than 12 inches DBH were removed, pertaining to the proposed development of Lot 2, and the stumps of these trees were marked with a white spray paint. 3.B.3 No silt fence was installed at the Limit of Disturbance (even though the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, Sheet 4 of 5, dated revised February 22, 2016, shows a proposed 30 inch silt fence). 3.B.4 No Rock Entrance was installed as a tire scrubber close to Maple Lane. 3.C Context Discussion / Additional Information 3.C.1 While at the property on March 25 th, Mr. Arthur called Mr. Jacob Yasgur to explain the situation. When we spoke to Mr. Yasgur he indicated that he had stopped at the Kennett Township Offices and spoke to a person on the Staff. As a result, Mr. Yasgur indicated the he thought it was acceptable to remove the trees mentioned above. Further, based on the input of another person who has advised Mr. Yasgur, he thought that he had a deadline of March 31 st to remove the trees. Someone told him that the only times of the year when trees could be removed was between November 1 st and March 31 st. This is why Bellafiore Landscape claimed that they had a March 31 st deadline. 3.C.2 It is our understanding that Mr. Arthur and Mr. Yasgur were planning to return to the site on Saturday, March 26 th, to create an inventory of all trees removed. We were told that the inventory would indicate the sizes and types of the trees that were removed. TCA has not yet received additional inventory information. 3.C.3 Mr. Yasgur contacted Lisa Moore on March 26 th, and indicated that he understands he is not permitted to do any further work. He felt that the March 31 st deadline was required under a Pennsylvania PNDI and US Fish & Wildlife Service Project Environmental Review. 3.C.4 Although Mr. Yasgur led the Township to believe that he was only removing a couple of trees that needed to come down, he obviously decided to clear cut the area of proposed Lot 2. 4

5 3.D Next Steps As per Lisa Moore, Township Manager, the next steps are outlined below. 3.D.1 The Applicant shall submit revised Subdivision Plans that depicts the current conditions, without the trees that were removed. The Plan Dated Revised still indicates all trees. 3.D.2 A Landscape Plan was not submitted with the Plan Set. The Applicant shall submit a Landscape Plan showing replacement tree plantings, in accordance with the General Notes on Sheet 3 of 5 of the Subdivision Plans, dated revised February 22, E Photographs from March 25, 2016 Depicting Removed Trees Photo at Proposed Lot 2 (Looking Northeast) Trees Removed within Proposed Building Envelope Photo at Proposed Lot 2 (Looking South) Stockpiled Trees, and Trees Removed with Proposed Flag Lot Driveway 5

6 4. Tree Removal and Replacement Per B.1.b of the Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance (SLDO), for each tree greater than 12 inches DBH to be removed, Replacement Trees shall be planted. Trees that are of invasive species, are unhealthy or may pose a hazard due to severe structural defects need not be subject to this requirement. The Plan includes a tally of 19 trees of 12 inches DBH or greater proposed for removal. However, as described in comment 3, it appears that since the area within the Limit of Disturbance was essentially clear cut between March 23 rd and March 25 th, 2016, that some number greater than 19 trees of 12 inches DBH have already been removed. Further, as described in comment 2, compliance with the Tree Replacement requirement is separate from the prohibition against removing more than 40% of the Class 2 Woodland on a given property. The tree removal that was undertaken in March 2016 is in violation of the prohibition against removing 40% of the Class 2 Woodland on the proposed Lot 2. Moving forward, a subsequent Land Development Plan should include a Table that shows an inventory of all trees of 12 inches DBH and greater that have been removed and may be still proposed for removal. The Table shall include a tally of required Replacement Trees per the metrics of B (SLDO). 5. Landscape Plan Replacement trees shall be indicated on a Landscape Plan that is included with the Land Development Plans. The Landscape Plan shall be approved as a component of the Land Development Plans. Provision of a Landscape Plan shall not be deferred to the time of Building Permit. Submission of the Landscape Plan as part of the Land Development Plans is critical given the relationship between tree planting and the proper functioning of other on site elements such as stormwater management. Submission of the Landscape Plan is also important so that Township Officials may evaluate, during the Plan Review and Approval process, the manner in which the Applicant proposes to rectify the violation of Township Ordinances represented by premature tree removal. Per G.6 (SLDO), the Landscape Plan shall be prepared by a Registered Landscape Architect licensed to practice in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 6

7 6. Tree Protection Tree Protection Fencing should still be established at the Limit of Disturbance prior to any further site work. A suitable Tree Protection Detail has been included on Sheet 5, Details. We still recommend that the Applicant hire a Certified Arborist to participate in the installation of the Tree Protection Fencing for the remaining trees, and to be available during construction to help maintain the fencing and mitigate damage to the critical root zones of trees near the Limit of Disturbance. For example, roots of trees that are outside of the Limit of Disturbance may nonetheless be damaged during grading activity. A Certified Arborist is trained to correctly treat exposed and severed roots to minimize long-term damage to the tree. 7. Perimeter Buffering New single-family detached dwellings are not a specified Use subject to the Screening Standards set forth in (ZO). However, the Township may, at its discretion, require suitable screening between uses that are deemed to require additional buffering and screening due to potential disruption or negative impact on the adjoining use. In this context, while the Plan indicates the intent to preserve a significant number of mature deciduous trees adjacent to the proposed Lot 2 dwelling, additional trees have been removed. Therefore, the Township may wish to require additional screening accordingly to help mitigate the loss of deciduous trees. 8. Street Trees The planting of Street Trees is governed by C (SLDO): within any subdivision and land development fronting on an existing street or streets where there are no existing trees, street trees shall be provided along the frontage of the area proposed for development. There are existing trees along Maple Lane that we still recommend be considered sufficient to satisfy the Street Tree requirements. 7

8 9. Conclusion We recommend that the Preliminary Plan be revised or enhanced as described herein: 9.A The Applicant shall prepare a new "Existing Conditions" Plan that indicates the current condition, without the trees that were removed in March; 9.B A full tally of all trees of 12 inches DBH and greater that have been, and are proposed to be, removed, shall be included with a subsequent Land Development Plan submission. Required Replacement Trees calculated per the requirements of B (SLDO); and 9.C A Landscape Plan shall be submitted with the Land Development Plan that shows the location of all Replacement Trees and any additional Buffer Planting as may be required by Township Officials. Please call or if there are any questions. 8