2014-07-09_PC_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning CommissionMeeting Minutes –Wednesday, June 4, 2014 Page 4 Noting that Mr. Mueller had already removed a considerable number of trees on his 145 property almost immediately after meeting with the Planning Commission in 2007, Ms. 146 Ramalingamquestioned the tree preservation aspect in that context and what kind of tree 147 restoration was intended. 148 Chair Gisselquist reminded residents that, even if there was no proposal or development 149 underway, a private property owner could clear-cut their lot if they so chose to do so; 150 however, as part of a redevelopment proposal, the City could recommend tree 151 preservation and replanting accordingly. 152 Mr. Paschke concurred, noting that with the City’s current tree preservation and/or 153 replacement ordinance, there was an allowance for certain trees to be removed off the 154 top, based on a certain percentage regardless of their species and typically located in 155 soon-to-b public rights-of-way or easement areas, or within areas where home sites will 156 be located.Mr. Paschke clarified that the City’s tree ordinance dictated trees by inches 157 for removal,preservation and/or replacement; and if more existing trees were removed 158 than allowable under the ordinance, the property owner/developer would be required to 159 replace those trees.While there may have been some trees already removed, Mr. 160 Paschke advised that, as part of the permitting, inspection and final plat process, staff 161 would specifically review the site and the developer’s proposed tree plan and inventory 162 appropriately; and upon its completion, will be required to replace the inches of trees and 163 replant accordingly. 164 In context, Mr. Lloyd noted that a few of the trees around the site were dead, as noted in 165 the applicant’s tree preservation plan as presented, and some removals involved those; 166 however, he concurred that staff would be verifying the actual tree inventory on site 167 during the process. 168 At the request of Member Boguszewski, Mr. Paschke confirmed that if a property owner 169 chose to remove all the trees on his single-family residential lot, he could do so; and that 170 the tree preservation ordinance would only be triggered by improvements (e.g. major 171 home addition orinstallation of a new driveway) and the need to understand what if any 172 impact there would be on existing trees, and if necessary provide fencing to protect those 173 existing trees or developa modified tree preservation plan for redevelopment, with a full- 174 fledged plan provided. 175 At the request of Member Cunningham, Mr. Paschke clarified that staff would assess 176 trees, including those recently cut down as much as possible. 177 Off microphone from the audience, Mr. Mueller advised that other trees were replanted to 178 replace those already removed. 179 George LeTendre, 2121 County Road B West 180 Mr. LeTendre opined that, according to the preliminary plat the cul-de-sac was shown as 181 60’, yet on the sewer drawings, it showed as 40’. 182 Mr. Paschke advised that there were two drawings: one for the right-of-way and one for 183 the street itself, both requirements of the applicant. 184 Mr. LeTendre questioned the radius of the paved surface; with Mr. Mueller responding off 185 microphone from the audience that it was 80’ across. 186 Mr. Paschke advised that, as previously indicated by Mr. Lloyd, City Code required a 187 greater radius for street width, but it also gave the Public Works Director flexibility to 188 approve something less than that, which had already been done on a number of 189 occasions (e.g. Millwood Plat in 2013 among others); and what was shown in the 190 drawings –and approved in 2007 for this particular plat as well –is the radius and right- 191 of-way substandard to typical requirements spelled out in code, but met within the 192 exception clause approved by the Public Works Director. 193 Mr. LeTendre asked if it was 60’ per code; with Mr. Lloyd displaying Section 1003.02 or 194 City Code related to street width, and minimums approved by the Public Works Director 195