Laserfiche WebLink
P42 <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec commented there will be another building right next to this site' that will likely <br />come up to the lot line. At that point they would have to cut the trees down. It would likely be <br />better to put in bushes. <br /> <br />Councilmember Pearson asked how far it is from the lot line to the curb. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Geisler replied the distance is ten feet. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cook commented shrubs would also go onto the neighboring property. <br /> <br />Councilmember Strmrnnen stated she would hate to lose all the height of the trees and the site <br />would look bare with shrubs. Staff'has looked at this and feels there is adequate room for trees. <br />There may be another happy medium with smaller species that do not sap, and the rest of the <br />landscaping could include sln'ubs. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Cook, seconded by Councilmember Zimmerman, to. grant approval <br />of staff's recommendation that seven additional trees be placed on the northern property line of <br />Precision Metalcraft. <br /> <br />Motion camed. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Cook, Zimmerman, Kurak, and <br />Strommen. Voting No: Councilmembers Elvig and Pearson. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec indicated these types of situations should be looked at. They may want to require <br />a green area, rather than trees, which could cause a real problem between buildings. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated the reason he was opposed to this is that he questions if the City <br />will make the person on the adjoining lot plant as many trees. They would not require them to <br />change the building to allow for plantings, and it may come up with the same condition of a ten <br />foot strip. <br /> <br />Councilmernber Strormnen suggested the EPTF review the appropriate planting and species for <br />industrial sites. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon indicated later tonight, there will be a <br />discussion about the revised standards that were used for this case. <br /> <br />Case//7: <br /> <br />Request tbr Comprehensive Plan Amendment; Case of Oakwood Land <br />Development <br /> <br />Associate Planner Geisler reviewed that Oakwood Land Development is proposing to redevelop <br />six existing rural single-family lots into 27 urban single family lots as a part of the Alpine Woods <br />subdivision. The 2001 Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as Rural <br />Developing. To proceed with the Alpine Woods subdivision, a Comprehensive Plan <br />Amendment is necessary to change the subject property's land use desig'nation from Rural <br />Developing to Low Density Residential. The property located to the west, north, and south is <br />currently desigmated as Rural Developing, while the property to the east is designated as Low- <br />and Medium-Density Residential. The property is surrounded by a variety of lot sizes, varying <br /> <br />City Council/April 27, 2004 <br /> Page 20 of 33 <br /> <br /> <br />