Laserfiche WebLink
I <br /> I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Motion by Cougcilmember Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Beahen to approve <br />the proposed s!te plan for Trend Scientific contingent upon compliance with City Staff <br />review letter da. ted April 28, 1995, the recommendations of the Lower Rum River Water <br />Management O~'ganization and entering into an agreement with the City. <br /> <br />Motion carriedl Voting Yes: Mayor Hardin, Councilmembers Peterson, Beahen, Beyer <br />and Zimmerm~. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #5: Tree Conservation Policy Process <br /> <br />Parks/Utlifies ISupervisor Boos stated that the purpose of this case is to receive Council <br />aftra'marion an~direction on the interim tree conservation policy process. New subdivision <br />starts are the n~ost prominent cause of tree loss within the City. In addition, the public <br />subdivision proc, ess is the most visible and most enduring medium for the City to ensure <br />that growth do~j.s not detract from the quality of life residents expect. For these reasons, the <br />primary focus !of discussion has been new subdivisions. Mr. Boos reported that the <br />following issues have been negotiated between the developers, Commissions, and City <br />Staff: I) reqqiring the minimum equivalent of one 2" front yard tree for each new lot <br />created; 2) significant individual trees and stands of trees to be identified on the grading <br />plan for protection consideration; 3) common bury for the utilities in the road right-of- <br />way; and 4) e/acouraging builders to protect saved trees on individual lots with fencing. <br />He stated that gtaff and the Park and Recreation Commission are asking for approval of <br />four points for gonsideration within the development agreement. <br /> <br />Mayor Hardin required what the next step is. <br /> <br />Mr. Boos repli~ that the next step would be to see how well these policies work within the <br />development agreement. He added that in many cases, developers have gone over and <br />above the four points mentioned. <br /> <br />Motion by CoU~cilmember Zimmerman and seconded by Councilmember Beahen to ratify <br />the developme~t policies pursuant to the four points stated above. <br /> <br />Motion carried, Voting Yes: Mayor Hardin, Councilmembers Zimmerman, Beahen, Beyer <br />and Peterson. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #6: <br /> <br />Adopt Ordinance Authorizing Vacation of the Drainage and <br />!Utility Easements Dedicated Along the Southerly Lot Line of <br />Lot 2, Block 4, Northfork Links Addition <br /> <br />City Administrator Schroeder stated that at the May 9, 1995 meeting, Council introduced an <br />ordinance auttiorizing vacation of the drainage and utility easements dedicated along the <br />southerly lot l~e of Lot 2, Block 4, Northfork Links Addition. The property owner has <br />received an Administrative Subdivision to move the lot line to facilitate a lot combination. <br />The owners o~ both the affected properties have provided new drainage and utility <br />easements alor~g the newly created lot line. He explained that the ordinance is now before <br />Council for formal adoption. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Beahen to adopt <br />Ordinance ~t95-10 authorizing vacation of the drainage and utility easements dedicated <br />along the southerly lot line of Lot 2, Block 4, Northfork Links Addition. <br /> <br />City Council/May 23, 1995 <br /> Page 9 of 18 <br /> <br /> <br />