My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2015-10-07_PC_Agenda_Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
2015 Agendas
>
2015-10-07_PC_Agenda_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/27/2016 12:44:20 PM
Creation date
4/27/2016 12:44:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
148
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 B <br />EMCCMRT <br />XTRACT FROM INUTES OF THE ITYOUNCIL EETINGELATED TO REE <br />P,A24,2015 <br />RESERVATIONUGUST <br />a.Consultant Check-Back Regarding Draft Tree Preservation Ordinance Amendments <br />Tree consultants Ben Gozola from Sambatek, and Mark Rehder from S & S Tree Service <br />were present for this update of a DRAFT Tree Preservation Ordinance dated August 24, <br />2015. <br />Mr. Gozola summarized work done since last meeting with and direction provided by the <br />City Council, resulting in this latest draft and seeking additional direction based on this <br />update, clarifying that it remained a work-in-progress. <br /> Mr. Gozola went over each section as Councilmembers provided their feedback as <br />applicable. <br /> Section G. Tree Preservation Plan Set Requested - Matrix, (Page 5), Subd. D.i.1 <br />At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Gozola confirmed that the difference in determining final <br />diameter and caliper inches was addressed in definitions. <br />Section H. Tree Preservation Simplified Plan Set (Page 7) <br />Mayor Roe suggested that the simplified plan set show setbacks and landmarks to quantify <br />where they were located, or include a simple drawing to the effect. <br />Mr. Gozola responded that specifications were intended as part of the policy to handout; and <br />enforcement would include someone on staff verifying tree protection fencing was in the <br />proper location. <br />Mayor Roe suggested as part of the "trees in lieu of" portion, that it be addressed via policy <br />rather than in the ordinance to determine that direction. <br />Mr. Gozola noted some things yet to be addressed included, but were not limited to, rate <br />replacement numbers allowed, removals allowed, and equivalencies. <br />For the benefit of staff and his Council colleagues, Councilmember Willmus requested <br />review of the triggers or development of a special set of regulations pertaining to minor lot <br />subdivisions in an attempt to avoid larger lot splits for smaller lots to minimize <br />impacts. Councilmember Willmus noted that, while it may be initially expensive to put <br />together, he had seen it done successfully in other communities. <br />Mayor Roe suggested that may be part of minor subdivision platting discussions. <br />City Planner Paschke advised that it was actually part of the Building Permit process, <br />allowing property owners to split a lot for a minor subdivision of up to three lots at a time, at <br />which time the Building Permit required the builder to provide that survey and tree protection <br />documentation. <br />Councilmember Willmus opined that his concern was that a developer or property owner <br />could impact the valuation of a lot by going that route. <br />As it now stated in existing policy and as proposed, Mr. Paschke advised that the builder was <br />required one way or another to provide a tree restoration or preservation plan. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.