PCP 10-04-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, , The site plan review process will focus only on the proposed landscaping. Although the applicant has included plans for the proposed dwelling, the dwelling is not included in this . review. Ncvertheless, it is important to note that the dwelling does meet all requircments of the underlying R-2 Zone, including setbacks, impervious coverage limits (25%), and height. Additional Information Background: During the last part of July 2006, the property owner of 3433 Lakc Johanna Blvd hired a tree cutting service to remove the trees from his property to prepare the site for construction of a new home. Prior to the clearing, the propcrty was vacant. The property owner claims that he contacted the City to find out if a permit was needed to remove trees. The City does not require a permit for removing trees; thereforc, it is quite possible that the property owner was told he did not need a permit. Unfortunately, it was not made clear that this is a property within the shoreland overlay zone. In addition to clearing the lot, the tree cutting servicc removed the trees in the Ramsey County right-of-way for Lake Johanna Blvd and may have removed trees in the Fairview Avenue right-of-way, which is dedicated to the City. Ramsey County: Ramsey County determined that since there was no damage to the road and erosion was under control, they did not have any legal recourse. Ramsey County did indicate that they would be supportive of the City's efforts to have the property re-Iandscaped. Rice Creek Watershed District: The Rice Creek Watershcd District (RCWD) invcstigated the scene after the clearing and found the erosion control measures in place to be suf1icient and, . therefore, they did not have any cause for action. RCWD does not have any restrictions on vegetation removal. RCWD is reviewing the property owner's building plans. Shoreland Ordinance Violation: The technical violation of City Ordinances is clear-cutting in the Shoreland Overlay Zone, which is prohibited in Ordinance 334 Subd. 7.A.J. C1ear- cutting includes completely removing a stand of trees and other vegetation. City Options: The City has does not have a violation like this on record, and there is not a defined process in place for resolving this type of violation. Since the vegetation is alrcady gone, the City must look for the option that provides the best outcome for the City and the neighborhood. While the City could issue a citation or file a civil lawsuit, the City tries to work with property owner's before resorting to legal action. Even if the property owner enters a guilty plea, the court process can be long and expensive with potentially minimal results. It is quite possible that the City's legal costs would be more than a fine, and the court may simply order the property owner to work with the City to re-Iandscapc the lot. Furthermorc, taking the issue to court may actually delay implementing a landscaping plan. In this case, the property owner has bcen cooperative and open to Staff ideas. Should the property owner decide to not City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 4, 2006 lIMetro-iner.uslardenhills'IP/wlIlingiPlanning Cases12006106-028 Nga Site Plan Review (PENDING) 1091306 - PC report Ngo Site Plan . Review.doc Page 2 of7 .. .