My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2015_1116_CCpacket
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2015
>
2015_1116_CCpacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2015 3:07:16 PM
Creation date
11/12/2015 4:19:40 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
300
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
Attachment C <br />87 development and replacing those trees that may be found lacking from some <br />88 perspectives. Councilmember Willmus clarified that he was not interested in an ordinance governing <br />89 or requiring a private resident to cut down an old tree or having to approach City Hall to get a <br />90 replacement tree permit, but was more concerned with an ordinance addressing subdivisions or <br />91 redevelopment and consistent and fair questions to ask as part of that process. <br />92 While recognizing that the Planning Commission as a body didn't have authority over what the City <br />93 Council ultimately adopted as an ordinance, Chair Boguszewski noted the individual comments of <br />94 commissioners, and their willingness to serve on a task force or advisory board to assist the City <br />95 Council in their efforts. <br />96 Mayor Roe noted that got back to the balance question and what triggered enforcement; and his <br />97 tendency to agree with Councilmember Willmus' interest in a reasonable approach to promote adding <br />98 trees, but recognizing while there may not be much old growth from a technical sense, the community <br />99 still had some significant trees. <br />100 Councilmember Etten agreed that it was necessary to decide the City's purpose in having such an <br />101 ordinance, with an eXcellent list available in the annual Arbor Day Resolution addressing the City's <br />102 regulatory function and benefits for the community and its overall health and public <br />103 good. Councilmember Etten noted the involvement of the Tree Board as part of the Emerald Ash <br />104 Borer (EAB) infestation; and encouraged Mr. Gozola and Reeder to review the staff RCA prepared for <br />105 the November 17, 2014 and past discussions. While perhaps not being a desirable species, <br />106 Councilmember Etten noted there was value in a 70' tall Cottonwood tree as a significant tree, even <br />107 though not considered a specimen tree, a common sight in Roseville. Councilmember Etten expressed <br />108 his interest in incentives to preserve such trees; and noted his frustrations in not tying together a tree <br />109 preservation plan drawing with the grading plan drawing during review of land use cases during the <br />110 Planning Commission and City Council review, opining that they needed to go together to understand <br />111 the overall impact of building in a readable format. Under current code, Councilmember E�ten noted <br />112 the negative potential to clear all trees in the right-of-way, such as evidenced near Lady Slipper Park <br />113 on West Owasso Boulevard, but recognizing the positive impact with the replacement berm <br />114 embankment and appreciation of it as a justification to clear the area, and not just because it happened <br />115 to be on the right-of-way. Councilmember Etten noted the big impacts to neighborhoods, and solar <br />116 considerations to address and how to balance those interests as part of the process. <br />117 In referencing the previously-noted Pulte Development, Councilmember McGehee noted the need to <br />118 address tree protection during the construction process, and her concern in the impacts of the Oaks <br />119 with compaction of their root mass during that construction process, without any guidelines in place to <br />120 address that. <br />121 Councilmember Etten also addressed the Pizza Luce development as an example and the lack of staff <br />122 resources to continually monitor every development without professional assistance to maintain quality <br />123 trees. <br />124 Councilmember Laliberte expressed her appreciation of this presentation and examples from other <br />125 communities. Councilmember Laliberte stated her biggest concern was with the Pulte Project serving <br />126 as a wake-up call for her in the potential for clear-cutting trees and starting from <br />127 scratch. Councilmember Laliberte agreed that she was not interested in the city assessing or approving <br />128 a private property owner's need to remove a tree for insurance andlor structure issues, nor in their being <br />129 required to jump through hoops to accomplish that work, given the expensive nature of such a venture <br />130 to remove a tree already. Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of coordinating with various <br />131 departments and commissions as an integrated part of the decision-making process for the City Council <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.