Agenda - Environmental Policy Board - 10/06/2014

Home

He clarified that there are existing standards for vegetation management and if a property owner were to violate those standards staff would try and work with them to restore vegetation but was unsure that the City would be successful in mandating that action because of the language that is lacking. He believed that the intention was good but was unsure that it would be necessary to require a property owner to obtain a permit to complete some of that work, noting that additional staff time would be required. Chairperson Stodola stated that he viewed that issue similar to the wetland buffer issue and an encroachment of property rights. He did not feel that property owners would support the requirement for a permit. Board Member Hiatt voiced the concern that if the additional permitting requirement is added there should also be funding provided because of the burden that would be placed on staff. Councilmember Kuzma confirmed that the consensus of the Board is that the permitting process seems to be a bit too much. Motion by Board Member Valentine and seconded by Board Member Bentz to recommend acceptance of the official City response to the draft rules proposed by the DNR for the MRCCA. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Stodola, Board Members Valentine, Bentz, Bernard, Hiatt, and Lewis. Voting No: None. Absent: Board Member Prendergast. 5.03: Discuss Format for Upcoming Joint Work Session with the City Council City Planner Anderson presented the staff report. He reported that the Work Plan has been adopted with the caveat that an item be added to the Plan that a joint meeting be held between the City Council and EPB. Community Development Director Gladhill explained that this meeting was intended in order to have collaborative efforts between the two groups to ensure that the two groups are on the same page. Councilmember Kuzma believed that the intention of the Council is simply to collaborate and determine areas of focus to ensure that time is not wasted and that everyone is working together. Board Member Lewis stated that he views this meeting as an opportunity for the Board to clarify the intent and purpose of the Board, specifically whether there is value to this group and how additional value can be gained as a whole for the Board and Board Members. He noted that there are events, such as the Environmental Expo and tree sale, that could be absorbed by other Boards and Commissions. Community Development Director Gladhill confirmed that the consensus of the Board is to determine the purpose of the Board and how the Board can achieve that purpose. 5.04: Staff Update • September Meeting Date Environmental Policy Board / August 4, 2014 Page 5 of 7