« Year of the Blog? | Main | Bee Mah Balentine »
February 03, 2005
Tree Cult Ordinance
In response to a Fayetteville property owner bulldozing some trees *gasp* on his own property, the city has designated a task force to review a more restrictive property ordinance.
The group is reviewing a draft ordinance created by a previous incarnation of the task force, which was made up of three commissioners. The draft ordinance includes the following regulations:
• No more than 40 percent of the area of a lot may be covered with impervious materials, such as driveway or building.
• A minimum of 40 percent of a lot must be left undisturbed.
• A maximum building height of three stories, or 45 feet.
• The preservation of a mini- mum of 50 percent of the tree canopy, which would also be required of the construction of a single home, which is currently exempt from the tree preservation ordinance.
In other words, let's make most of the undeveloped property in the city unusable so we can Save The TreesTM. That'll spur economic growth!
Not that I think we should allow unregulated development. But Good Lord. Could we at least use some common sense about dealing with the problem?
Unfortunately common sense ain't too common in our city government these days.
Posted by Rita at February 3, 2005 07:23 AM
Comments
Are they going to grandfather in existing lots? If so, doesn't that seem rather unfair? Shouldn't they have to knock down part of city hall so that "No more than 40 percent of the area of [the] lot" is covered by "impervious materials?" If the residents would have to follow this inane rule, why should the city be exempt?
You know, some days I really miss the People's Republic of Fayetteville. This isn't one of them.
Posted by: Bob at February 3, 2005 08:44 AM
Like I told my daughter yesterday, I can't wait until we can move out of here. It's not even fun to go down on Dickson St. anymore.
The hippies/tree huggers have just gone hog wild & pig crazy since they got into power. Be glad you left when you did.
Posted by: rita at February 3, 2005 09:06 AM
I can understand having green throughout the city. BUT that should be designated outside of private property with the setting aside of parks.
Telling people that they can't clear their land is idiotic.
Posted by: Keith at February 3, 2005 09:07 AM
The property ordinances here are so restrictive that the Council and Police Department only enforce them when it involves someone they don't personally like. If they like you and your pigs, goats or fighting roosters are found wandering around town, they just call and remind you, or not.
Posted by: Kenneth at February 3, 2005 09:23 AM
We live on a nice lot with plenty of trees, but it's sure not 50% covered with trees. How could you even have a lawn with that many trees? Erosion is a big problem on the mountain in question. We live at the foot of it, so we get all the runoff every time it rains. But trees aren't the entire answer to control erosion. We've had to terrace the upper part of our property, keep the grass longer, and I've even gotten clover and other non-grass plants going on the parts of the lawn on which grass just wouldn't grow.
Kenneth, I've heard rumors that there's some of that going on here as well.
Posted by: rita at February 3, 2005 09:47 AM