Agenda - Council - 05/23/1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Gorham noted that item IV.B. 1.a., which requires a sketch plan showing location, species, size and condition of all ;tands of significant trees, would be a tremendous burden (cost-wise) on some plats and he questio: ted whether this will be money spent wisely. He believes this will be totally unmanageable. Mr. Bacon stressed ti tat stands of trees are to be identified. Mr. Boos referenced the River Bluffs subdivision's voluntary compliance with tree preservation, and it's plat was reviewex~, as an example displaying tree identification. Mr. Peck commented that one could be dealing with a two-acre lot which is all woods, makihg identification extremely difficult and costly. Councilmember Zirr~rnerman stated that you need to know what trees have to go at the development stage once you have!people out there moving earth, or it gets very costly to the home builder when additional trees have ~to be taken out for utilities, etc. Mr. Gorham commented that the City of Andover requires that the boulevards be clear cut, however he finds this measure exlreme. Councilmember Zim.'merman commented that when Anoka Electric Cooperative comes in and wants more trees down, it s~iows up the process considerably. Mr. Bacon stated he t~eels the policy is designed to provide flexibility. Mr. Gorham comme~ ted that once this becomes an ordinance and present staff members are eventually replaced, there could ibc new interpretations made. He reaffirmed that he thinks marking the trees will be costly, and althot igh a developer tries to preserve trees he also tries to spend money wisely. He added that those de~ elopers not smart enough to realize the significance of trees aren't going to be around long. Mr. Gcrham stated, that as a builder, he can see the merit of having a stricter policy due to all the people visit ng the site in order to build the home. The builder needs to protect the trees from people who don't se~ their worth. However, as a developer, more flexibility is needed so they don't have to put a strict, specific plan in place. The only people setting foot on the property are the grading people--and they respect what the developer wants to protect--and the engineer. A developer doesn't want a huge process ,to change the plan when needed. Mr. Bacon stated it would be more sensible to identify trees at the developer stage when you're dealing with a larger number! since an individual lot wouldn't show the total impact on the region. Mr. Gorham stated that the fencing would be more important at the building stage. Mr. Peck inquired wh. ether the City is going to get involved with telling where on the lot one can build. Mr. Boos declared th.at is certainly not the intent. He viewed such as a taking. Mr. Bacon stated the point is that if you lose more trees than necessary, the City is looking for their partial replacement, i Tony Emmerich, DeVeloper, remarked that if the City makes the ordinance too stringent, the developer is most likely to go i_~ and clear cut the whole place before the preliminary plat stage. He stressed the need to develop an o~dinance that is user friendly. Mr. Gorham confirmbd that if he, as a developer, feels there is going to be a problem, he will err in the negative so he doesn!t have to deal with it later. Tr~e Conservation Policy Workshop/February 21, 1995 i Page 3 of 5