AgdaPkt 2006-09-11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7A Page 26 3. Streef Tree Conflicts: If trees are shown to conffict with any of the locations, please demonstrate by how much with a simple scaled line drawing. The drawing should incfude a site sectian representing the street trees, house and roof, salar panel system, and solar access "window" between the hours of 10:00 AM and 2:00 PM for December 215t (which would be the worst case scenario}. �rom site inspection, we befieve #hat the pruning height suggested by your contractor in order to accommodate the Preferred Location, which was shown to be down to the house plate line, is grossly exaggerated. The sun need to be setting on the horizon for trees of such a low height to cast a shadaw on the panels. Such a conditian does not represent reasonabie soiar collection needs. We dan't befieve that there will be any canflict for the Upper Roof or the Rear Side of Lower Roof options. We expect that there may be same conflict during the winter months for the Preferred Location, but not warranting the removal of the entire canopies. In fact, it should be noted that these trees are deciduous and wilf not be in leaf during those months. 4. Cast Analysis: The Preferred Location has been presented to us as the most cast effective; however, it was not compared to any ather system or location and really shauld be. It has also not been compared to any other solu#ions for increasing energy sfficiency on the property as a whole, which wil! be further discussed belaw. The high cost of the system and return on investment have been presented to us as crifical aspects of the proposal. In that (ight, all of the project costs shauld be considered. For example, if tree removal and repiacement is required for the Preferred Location, then the cost of such actions must be included. The estimated cost is about $1,000 per tree for removal and replacement. Atso, as previously mentioned, if the existing trees do shade the front of the home du�ing peak sun hours as yau state, then #hey are providing a cooling benefit. If they are removed for the sake af the Preferred Alternate, then the cost of that alternafive should be increased #o account for additional use of air conditioning, which equates to a long-term opera#ing cost af this particular scheme. The other alternatives probably wauld nat include these two costs. A complefe submittal related to the four points numbered and specified above shauld fulfill our information request. Upon submittal of this infarmation, we will act as quick}y as possible to bring this issue to a canclusion. Please be aware that of the aptions presented to us, there most likely won't be a definitive "winner;" but rather, we will be able to evaluate a combination of characteristics with you that will hapefully reveal an option that both you and the City can support. I understand that you began this process with the City last fiail when your first appiication for a Tree Remava! Permit was denied in November. i am not fu(ly informed with respect to your subsequenf cantact with the City, but f understand now that you recent{y reapplied far a Tree Removal Permit. From my perspective, this is a new issue for me and I am working hard to provide timely and succinct information to you to move it forward. I was first contacted by you on May 12�' by telephone and I met with you at the City Hall public counter on May 15�'. From aur discussion that day, i learned about your project and we began ta discuss options and the need for more informatian. You provided some additional inforrnation to me that same week and Gordon Mann and I reviewed it. We consulted with John LaTorra and determined that the information was insufficient for a conclusion and sent a summary letter at the end of that same week so that you would have written documentation. in response to our letter you sought a meeting with us and I scheduled it for the same day, on May 22nd. I will cantinue ta work to respond to your questions, comments and concems in such a timely fashion. � We appreciate and empathize with your situation. I believe that we understand the range of challenges that you have presented to us including the fact that you have been injured and require warm water therapy. We also understand that you are incurring very high energy bills as a result of heating yaur therapy pool. We further acknowledge that the City supports the use of alternate energy sources, as can be demonstrated in our use o# hybrid vehicles by our Building lnspection staff. ln fact, with a complete application conforming to the requiremenis of the Uniform Building Code, you wil{ be able to quickly obtain a Building Permit for a solar panel system. The chal(enge