My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
08/02/10
Ramsey
>
Environmental Policy Board
>
Minutes
>
2010's
>
2010
>
08/02/10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/6/2010 3:46:30 PM
Creation date
10/6/2010 3:46:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Max, Board Members Freeburg, Enstrom and Bentz. <br />Voting No: None. Absent: Board Members Hassett, Riley-Daniels and Stodola. <br />POLICY BOARD BUSINESS <br />Case #1: EAB Management Plan <br />Environmental Coordinator Anderson presented the staff report. <br />Discussion ensued about hazard trees and whether government should intervene and require a <br />property owner to remove a hazard tree without compensation. <br />Environmental Coordinator Anderson stated that the draft EAB plan does not require anything <br />beyond what's already in city code, which has provisions for addressing hazard trees. <br />Board Member Enstrom stated that if a tree in someone's backyard was dead, he didn't think the <br />city should step in and require it to be removed. <br />Environmental Coordinator Andersorrstated that to be a hazard tree, there needs to be some sort <br />of defect that poses an imminent safety threat and there must be a target such as a structure or <br />gathering place like a patio, picnic table or something. Just because a tree is dead does not mean <br />that it is a hazard. Also, if there's a hazard tree on private property and the target is also on that <br />same property, that would be incumbent on the property owner to address, this regulation is <br />intended to safe guard adjoining properties from hazard trees. <br />Chairperson Max commended Enviromnental Coordinator Anderson on the EAB plan stating <br />that it is very clear and straight forward and that it took into account the concerns raised last <br />month about only focusing on public trees. <br />Motion by Chairperson Max to move the draft plan forward for consideration by public works <br />staff and seconded by Board Member Freeburg. <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Max, Board Members Freeburg and Bentz. Voting <br />No: Enstrom. Absent: Board Members Hassett, Riley-Daniels and Stodola. <br />Chairperson Max asked Board Member Enstrom if he would elaborate on why he opposes this <br />draft plan. <br />Board Member Enstrom stated he doesn't like the thought of telling property owners what to do <br />with their land. <br />Environmental Coordinator Anderson asked Board Member Enstrom if he would please identify <br />the section or sections of the plan that he believed required action by a private property owner. <br />Board Member Enstrom stated that in the Education section, there was language regarding <br />removal and proper disposal of infested trees/wood. <br />Environmental Policy Board /August 2, 2010 <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.