The Monday April 8 RTM meeting was anticipated for a proposed amendment to the town tree ordinance intended to prevent clear cutting of trees on private property and to prevent the unintended and unnecessary loss of trees through negligence during construction.
An example given was the clear cutting at 5 Brookridge at the corner of East Putnam Ave.
The authors of the proposed amendment noted that while Planning & Zoning reviews how developers will treat trees as part of their approval process, recently developers have circumvented P&Z review by clear cutting properties prior to submission, avoiding review.
Some of the language in the proposed amendment said it would not restrict anyone from cutting trees on private property. Rather, “If a tree is a danger or will die in the next 2 years, the owner could cut it without penalty.”
Further, the proposal allowed for residents to cut up to 1 healthy tree per acre per year on their property (but in no case less than 1 or more than 4) without commission review and without obligation to replace them.
For anyone choosing to cut trees beyond the annual limit and which are not a danger or in the process of dying, owners could either replace the tree with a similar tree elsewhere on their property or pay the value of the tree so the Town can plant such a tree on public land.
As of Tuesday, the amendment, item 9 on the April 8 RTM call, was withdrawn because it was ruled out of legal order by the legal department.
Item 10
But another item promises to be engaging: Resolution 10 (see page 22) regarding Net Zero Energy standards for new construction, replacement or extension building projects for the Town of Greenwich and Greenwich Public Schools to reduce capital and operating costs and lower energy consumption.
Specifically the resolution urges the town to endorse geothermal HVAC systems in municipal projects when it can be credibly demonstrated that geothermal HVAC provides lower capital first costs (including
taking into account the value of federal, state and utility incentives) and lower operating costs over the expected 50-year life cycle of the energy system.
Net-zero energy refers to a public building design that maximizes such building’s energy efficiency and on-site renewable energy production in an effort to produce as much energy as the building uses.
The petitioners say that in order to realize 20-40% energy savings that the Board of Selectmen has mandated, the Town must seize current opportunities to design and build new buildings to higher standards for energy efficiency: net zero.
They also note that Connecticut is statutorily required to lower emissions to 45% below 2001 levels by 2030.
Further the petitioners say energy efficiency and low energy use choices need to be integrated up front in all of the Town’s large new building and renovation projects. And though smaller energy efficiency and renewables projects are also important, they cannot deliver the steep change necessary to provide significant budget relief to the Town that net- zero energy buildings provide.
James J O‘Brien, a 12-year past member of the RTM in both District 8 and 1, wrote the RTM to support Resolution 10, saying its adoption by the Town would save the taxpayers millions of dollars and help the environment.
He wrote to the entire RTM suggesting they watch a PBS Nova show – Polar Extremes of the Planet, noting it explains the Climate Change cycles over the past 500 million years elucidated by several scientific disciplines with easy-to-understand graphics and computer designs. O’Brien noted the program also explains how the present situation in the climate was caused by added carbon.
The April 8 meeting will be in person at Central Middle School, but also viewable via Zoom.