My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 12/16/2003
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2003
>
Agenda - Council - 12/16/2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/24/2025 3:58:39 PM
Creation date
12/12/2003 3:34:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
12/16/2003
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
239
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
City Attorney Goodrich inquired if the City currently had anything in City Code to restrict tree <br />removal on any individual lot. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon replied no. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the higher density development has the control over the <br />buffering, which is a loophole they should be looking at. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik replied that they could state in the development <br />agreement that the trees are not allowed to be removed and identify which trees those would be. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stated that he thinks that is something they will have to look at for the future. <br /> <br />Councilmember Anderson noted that the Environmental Task Force is already working on the <br />issue. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec inquired if there were restricted covenants within the development. <br /> <br />Mr. Packer replied yes. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec inquired if a property owner would want to install a pool would they have to go <br />before a board. <br /> <br />Mr. Packer explained that the restricted covenants primarily apply to the building of the new <br />homes. He stated that none of the neighbors have voiced any objection to what is being proposed <br />and most of the vegetation is on the existing lots. They could place easements over the <br />vegetation or covenants but in the end it just becomes more work for City staff to enforce. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman stated that people may not wish to appear at a public hearing, but <br />that should not negate the City's transitioning ordinance. <br /> <br />Director of Public Works/Fire Chief Kapler noted that about four or five years ago, along C.R. <br />#116, some of the property owners removed the berm that was installed as part of the <br />development and there was nothing the City could do about it because it was located on their <br />property. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman requested that the Environmental Policy Task Force look at the <br />issue. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak inquired if they were recommending the Environmental Policy Task <br />Force review this case or look at the overall issue. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec recommended that they look at the issue for the future. <br /> <br />City Council/November 26, 2002 <br /> Page 11 of 23 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.