My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-6-7_PR Comm Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Parks & Recreation
>
Parks & Recreation Commission
>
Minutes
>
2016
>
2016-6-7_PR Comm Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/31/2017 2:35:48 PM
Creation date
3/31/2017 2:36:35 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
Commission Vice-Chair Gelbach questioned if the ordinance currently addresses only <br />city trees. Also, asks for additional information on a sliding scale for the tree pricing. <br />Collins confirmed that the flat fee is beneficial with the current fee structure utilized by <br />the City of Roseville. Also, it allows developers to easily understand the cost of doing <br />business in Roseville. <br />Paschke confirmed this is a new policy and that it will be reviewed yearly to understand <br />if the fee structure is appropriate. <br />Commissioner Becker-Finn inquired if the hierarchy for approval would go through the <br />Tree Board/Parks and Recreation Commission or the City Council. The current layout of <br />the policy is to have the Community Development Department finalize the plan details <br />and present them for approval to the City Council. Commissioner Becker-Finn stated that <br />she believes the Tree Board/Parks and Recreation Commission should also review the <br />plans prior to implementation. <br />Collins relayed that it may be beneficial to have a presentation to the Tree Board/Parks <br />and Recreation Commission of how the yearly dollars are spent. <br />Commissioner Heikkila asked about the process for residents to petition for a tree. <br />Paschke confirmed that through the hierarchy the surrounding neighbors would be <br />interviewed and their feedback would be utilized in the final recommendation. <br />Commissioner Stoner questioned what type of trees will be planted. Collins noted that all <br />plans need to be approved by the Arborist. <br />Commission Chair Newby requested additional information on how they arrived at the <br />two-year timeline for installation. Paschke confirmed that the goal should be expended in <br />a reasonable timeframe. It was determined that 2-3 years was reasonable in order to <br />create a plan and hire a company to plant the trees. Commission Chair Newby <br />acknowledged that the trees can be planted sooner than 2 years. Also, he agreed the 2- <br />year timeframe is reasonable. <br />Commission Chair Newby inquired when the funds are paid. Paschke verified it is when <br />the final plat is approved and released. <br /> <br /> <br />5.DISCUSS AND PREPARE FOR JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL <br />Brokke outlined the typical process for the joint meeting with the City Council on <br />th <br />Monday, June 13 and provided a brief description of the packet provided in preparation <br />for the meeting: <br /> <br />RCA for Joint City Council <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.