Agenda - Council - 04/25/1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I TREE CONSERVATION POLICY WORKSHOP CITY OF RAMSEY ANOKA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA The City of Ramse~conducted a workshop on Tuesday, February 21, 1995 at the Ramsey Municipal Center, 15153 Nowihen Boulevard N.W., Ramsey, Minnesota, in order to review the proposed tree conservation policy.; . Present: Gera~' Zimmerman, Councilmember Jdl J{~hns, Park &Recreatton Comrmss~oner Mar~ Boos, Parks/Utilities Supervisor Bruc~ Bacon, Environmental Specialist Dennis Peck, Developer GarylG~orham, Developer Tony!Emmerieh, Developer Janet~e Monear, Resident, 8513 164th Lane NW The workshop commenced at 6:03 p.m. Mark Boos, Parks/U~lities Supervisor, stated that the City is considering a tree conservation policy for two reasons: (1) to~nsure quality subdivisions, and (2) to set uniform standards for developers. He explained that residltnts purchasing lots need reason to trust that the City has looked out for trees and have also taken car~ of trees that should not have been protected. He stated the proposed policy is designed to consider~preservation first and then restoration when feasible. Dennis Peck, DevelOper, viewed the proposed policy as creating lots of development problems and lots of unnecessary ~ureaucracy. He referenced item II, "Applicability," and inquired as to who is being protected. : Mr. Boos stated that[the policy is intended to apply to the subdivision process. The City does not have the right to tell a homeowner what he/she Can do to their trees. Mr. Peck responded~ that the language "any person or entity" should then be clarified as it is over- reaching and overb~oad. He then inquired what criteria would be utilized if he were developing a parcel and chose to go through the middle of the woods. Mr. Boos stated that[was addressed in item IV.A.5. (Procedures). Mr. Peck was concer~ed about development decisions affecting the amount of trees to be taken. Mr. Boos replied th~ it might equal out to the required yard space which would be needed anyway. Mr. Peck inquired iff the intent was to protect the buyer. He commented that things happen once the buyer gets involved, hnd he felt it MI1 be difficult to set up criteria. Mr. Boos explained ihe process of monitoring. Mr. Peck was conceded about the length of the review process in order to get to the site plan, whether it would be 24 hours!or 3 months. Mr. Boos agreed that there should be a turn-around time limit with automatic acceptance of the plan if the limit is not met. Tree Conservation Policy Workshop/February 21, 1995 Page 1 of 5