My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-08-21-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2020-2029
>
2021
>
02-08-21-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/9/2021 4:52:47 PM
Creation date
3/9/2021 4:52:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — FEBRUARY 8, 2021 4 <br />after taking a closer look at City Code requirements, he understood the City would require 444 <br />caliper inches of tree replacement or a payment in lieu that totaled $50,958.60. <br />Councilmember Holden asked if any of the Ash trees on his property had been treated for EAB. <br />Ryan Hyllested, Kimley Horn, suspected none of the Ash trees had been treated because they are <br />on private property. <br />Councilmember Holden discussed the City's efforts to address EA-B. She indicated she did not <br />have a problem not counting the Ash trees on this property. <br />Councilmember McClung commented he would like to see the Ash trees replaced with some <br />other type of tree. He explained this was the purpose of the tree preservation Ordinance. He <br />discussed the trail that was being put in as part of their park dedication fees. He indicated he could <br />support waiving a portion of the applicant's fees, but could not give on both park dedication fees <br />and the tree replacement requirements. He recommended that if the City wants to maintain its tree <br />preservation Ordinance going forward, the Council would have to adhere to the requirements for <br />this development. <br />Councilmember Holmes asked if the developer was willing to offer to the City the $50,000 <br />payment for tree mitigation. <br />Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated it was his understanding the <br />applicant has agreed to this amount. <br />Mr. Brewer explained he believed the number was somewhere between $20,000 and $50,000. <br />He commented with PUD's there was typically some level of flexibility, but indicated he would <br />be willing to support the $50,000 number. <br />Todd Novaczyk, representative of the applicant, stated the $50,000 would be a strain on the <br />project and overall feasibility. He requested the City Council consider something else in lieu of <br />the trees. He suggested the trail land be dedicated to the City as partial payment of tree fees. He <br />explained this would provide a benefit to the City while not adversely impacting the developer's <br />budget. <br />Councilmember Holmes commented she believed the $50,000 was an acceptable amount. She <br />indicated the required park dedication was less due to the trail. She explained she saw both sides <br />of the story regarding the Ash trees and understood they had to be removed. She stated a <br />significant number of trees was being removed from this property and for this reason, she <br />recommended the developer be required to pay $50,958.60. <br />Councilmember Holden asked how the City defined "public good". <br />Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated according to City Code, public <br />good was when a project was done for the benefit of the community, such as allowing for LEED <br />certification. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.