My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2011_0523
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2011
>
CC_Minutes_2011_0523
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/17/2011 1:43:21 PM
Creation date
6/17/2011 1:43:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
5/23/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,May 23,2011 <br /> Page 6 <br /> Roll Call <br /> Ayes: McGehee; Johnson; Willmus; Pust; and Roe. <br /> Nays: None. <br /> 8. Consider Items Removed from Consent <br /> 9. General Ordinances for Adoption <br /> a. Consider Adopting an Ordinance Amending Title 7, Chapter 706, Foresta- <br /> tion Control <br /> Mr. Brokke noted that this ordinance had been vetted by the City's Parks and <br /> Recreation Commission (the City Tree Board), the Public Works, Environment <br /> and Transportation Commission, and all relevant City Departments; all of whom <br /> recommended approval. Mr. Brokke advised that input had been received from <br /> the Minnesota Department of Agriculture and the Department of Natural Re- <br /> sources as well. Mr. Brokke noted that the purpose for the revisions was in part <br /> based on requirements of the Emerald Ash Borer Preparedness Grant received by <br /> the City in 2010. <br /> Mr. Brokke presented several additional language revisions to avoid confusion <br /> and provide additional clarity, and reviewed those items with the City Council, <br /> providing rationale for the recommended revisions. <br /> City Attorney Bartholdi noted several typographical errors for correction as well. <br /> Discussion among staff, City Attorney Bartholdi and Councilmembers included <br /> potential addition of"sewer" lines to page 5, line 211/212; identification and reg- <br /> istration of tree care firms to protect the public while allowing for neighbors help- <br /> ing neighbors at their discretion, and how to apply criteria in those tree care firms <br /> needing to register with the City (page 6, lines 232/233) with the fee already in <br /> the City's existing fee structure; need to define "public nuisance" as referenced <br /> within the ordinance (Section 706.10) for consistency and clarity; and whether <br /> references in the utility section (page 5) should define water and sewer lines that <br /> may restrict areas for vegetation growth on private property and be based on their <br /> potential interference with specific utilities, and at a minimum should be defined <br /> as "sanitary" sewer to avoid confusion with storm sewers. <br /> Further discussion included preservation or restoration of"it" (the plant—page 3, <br /> Section 706, line 119) or to protect the public from damage or injury; striking the <br /> word, "person," (page 6, Section 706.11) to determine and specify those qualified <br /> "for hire"rather than individuals doing tree service for hire in the community who <br /> are not registered and not operating a business, but simply neighbors helping <br /> neighbors; and on what criteria the government was basing their determination or <br /> distinction of who needed or did not need to register to ensure they were licensed <br /> and bonded in order to protect the public. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.