Laserfiche WebLink
Board Member Hiatt stated that he drove through the development portion to the south and noticed <br />that it is fairly open, although meeting the requirements of the City. <br />Board Member Covart asked and received confirmation that a pond would be created with this <br />development as part of the stormwater management requirements. <br />City Planner Anderson noted that per the City ordinance, the trees needed to be removed for the <br />stormwater pond are not counted towards the total loss of trees. He noted that required trails and <br />major/connector streets are also exempt from the tree removal total. <br />Councilmember LeTourneau referenced the lots that meet up with more rural lots from the <br />development southeast of this parcel and received confirmation that the density transitioning <br />required for those lots would be similar to what is required for this development. <br />Chairperson Stodola asked if there is consideration to making these lots larger. <br />City Planner Anderson replied that the City does not have to approve a zoning or Comprehensive <br />Plan amendment, but noted that there is something to be said that these lots would be consistent <br />with the existing portion of the development. <br />Board Member Hiatt stated that if there is a way to preserve that oak forest, it should be. He noted <br />that if two to three homes were constructed under the current zoning, that would preserve more of <br />the oak forest. <br />Chairperson Stodola stated that there are a lot of trees being removed with this plan and therefore <br />he would not support the Tree Plan and Landscape Plan as proposed. <br />City Planner Anderson stated that the request meets the minimum requirements under City Code. <br />He stated that the application is not deficient in meeting the minimum standards and therefore if <br />this were challenged legally the City would have no legs to stand on. <br />Board Member Hiatt agreed that this is too many oak trees going away from a mature area and the <br />City should fight hard to preserve that. He noted that the zoning would need to be changed to <br />support this plan and therefore he would ask that the zoning amendment not be approved further <br />along in this process. <br />Board Member Trossen asked how many trees would be saved with fewer lots. <br />City Planner Anderson stated that you likely would preserve more trees but you would still need <br />stormwater treatment and septic system drain fields, which would both require tree removal. He <br />stated that he was unsure that the rate of removal would be considerably less than that proposed. <br />He stated that the Board could state that because of the zoning and Comprehensive Plan <br />amendment are required and that the oak forest was identified as moderate value, the Board could <br />recommend denial of the request <br />Motion by Chairperson Stodola and seconded by Board Member Hiatt to recommend denial of the <br />Tree Plan and Landscape Plan because of the impacts to the oak forest and the need for the zoning <br />and Comprehensive Plan amendments. <br />Environmental Policy Board / June 19, 2017 <br />Page 6 of 10 <br />