Another issue that I have seen only a couple people mention on this site and few people discuss in general: the impact of the proposed ordinance on our downtown development goals. What impact will this have on reaching our goals that pertain to downtown, including greater commercial options and greater household income diversity?

In my mind this relates back to your your point #2. Higher density commercial/mixed use parcels have no business being required to have a 50% canopy. No developer will build downtown on small commercial properties and include 50% canopy. So then you are just using the canopy requirement to extract more fees (going into the tree bank). In doing that you are either driving up the cost to the end users of the development, thus hampering the ability to provide increased income diversity, or you are scaring away a good portion of developers who will simply go develop elsewhere.

We should have high-functioning sustainable buildings downtown. But you can’t increase densities and achieve all that we want to achieve if you try to plant trees on half of our small commercial lots. And if you say, well, then the developer will have to pay more to the tree bank, that is simply the type of attitude that will not foster the type of development that provides the elements we desire.