Laserfiche WebLink
<br />document. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated she was comfortable with the agreement but said <br />she would need to check on the storm water fees. <br /> <br />Mr. Brian Rawlings of 7069 Dupre Road read an excelpt from the November 6, 2001 <br />Planning and Zoning Commission minutes that was a motion to approve the preliminary <br />plat with the association's requested issues as to trees, trailway through the outlot, <br />concerns with screening and a written agreement for Ojibway Drive. <br /> <br />Mr. Rawlings indicated that the homeowners were told by the Planning and Zoning <br />Commission that their requests would be addressed in the developer's agreement and <br />now they are being told that the items cannot be addressed in the developer's agreement. <br />He then questioned how they are supposed to protect themselves. <br /> <br />Mr. Rawlings indicated he had requested silt fences for the back of his property and Mr. <br />Palzer had said he would look at it. He commented that no silt fences were brought out <br />and they were necessary to keep the soil from filling the drains. He then indicated that <br />the answer was that the developer would have to clean out the drains but by then the <br />damage is already done. He also asked how the homeowners could protect themselves <br />from that type of issue. <br /> <br />Mr. Rawlings indicated the homeowners association felt it had a commitment concerning <br />trees and today the site was cleared except around the perimeter. He then commented <br />that he understood from the Council meetings and the Planning and Zoning meeting that <br />some trees would be harvested but some would be transplanted. <br /> <br />Mr. Quigley explained that all the trees removed were scotch pines and noted that the <br />property was a tree farm and, by definition, the trees are to be harvested every three to <br />four years. He also noted that scotch pines are classified by any forester as a weed tree <br />and noted they tried to save any spruce or Norway pines on the site. <br /> <br />Mr. Rawlings indicated he was looking for Council to protect or inform him of this kind <br />ofthing because a tree is a tree. He also noted there are other issues that are not <br />addressed and he had been given information that the developer's agreement would <br />contain this information and the trees were plowed down on the day the agreement is <br />being considered by Council. <br /> <br />Ms. Moore-Sykes explained that the Planning Commission is an advisory group to <br />Council and not the final decision making body. She then explained that the property is <br />privately owned and the trees were cleared to build some buildings. <br /> <br />Mr. Rawlings asked if a grading permit was obtained. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that a <br />grading permit is not required for cutting trees and noted that, unless the homeowner's <br />association wishes to purchase the property, there is nothing that can be done to stop the <br />tree removal. <br /> <br />Page 17 of28 <br />