Laserfiche WebLink
Community Development Director Frolik stated that in the last case there was a tree preservation <br />plan for Highlands I and II and the development agreement required the develOper to pass the <br />deed restriction onto the owners of the new parcels. <br /> <br />· Councilmember Hendriksen inquired if they were going to do the same thing for this <br /> development. <br /> <br />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 />gl 16, 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 />City Council/November 26, 2002 <br /> Page 11 of 23 <br /> <br /> <br />