Laserfiche WebLink
2. Subd. 8 i. (Vision Clearance) should reference Section 9.11.01 (General <br />Requirements) Subd. 7 which has been established by Public Works to maintain safe <br />and unobstructed views at intersections. Consensus of the Board was to simply <br />reference the Vision Clearance Triangle in 9.11.01 Subd. 7. <br />3. Subd. 9 (Replacement of Trees) states that a developer shall be required to maintain <br />trees for one (1) year after the trees are planted. However, for multi -family <br />developments, developers are responsible for trees for a two (2) year period from the <br />time of planting and in single family developments, the planting requirement is many <br />times satisfied by an individual home owner, not the developer. After some <br />discussion, the Board determined that this stipulation should be removed. <br />• In 9.24.05 (Hazardous and/or Nuisance Trees) Subd. 2 b. specifies that no uncovered <br />green pine or elm wood should be accumulated within the City between April 15th and <br />October 15`h. Staff had inquired as to whether oak wood should also be included, which <br />led to a discussion about Subd. 2 c. It was determined that this paragraph contained <br />incorrect information and should be revised to conform with subsection 5.14 (Tree <br />Diseases and Firewood Storage) or removed altogether. <br />In addition, several other issues were discussed without a consensus or no clear Staff direction. <br />The following issues were left unresolved: <br />1. 9.24.04 (Private Trees in New Development Areas) Subd. 3 b. states that an ISA <br />certified arborist shall conduct a tree inventory for any subdivision that involves the <br />construction of roads or drainage conveyances. Staff had inquired as to whether other <br />qualified persons should be able to perform this work. It does not appear, at least <br />looking back at the minutes from that meeting, that there was a definitive <br />recommendation from the Board on this matter. <br />2. 9.24.04 Subd. 8 k. (Tree Preservation Tree Density Standard Calculation) states that if <br />removals exceed this standard (more than 60% of the inches of tree DBH), than <br />replacement shall be consistent with the tree cover requirements in the R-2 or R-3 <br />zoning districts. Chairperson McDilda requested that Board Member Max and Staff <br />discuss this matter in more detail. After conferring with Board Member Max, it seems <br />that this paragraph should be eliminated altogether as it implies that if at least forty <br />percent (40%) of the DBH inches are retained, than no additional plantings would be <br />required. <br />3. Currently, all trees, even those within wetlands and other areas that would be clearly <br />outside the limits of any grading activity, are required to be inventoried. In Staff's <br />opinion, trees outside the limits of any grading activity (trees in areas that will not be <br />disturbed) do not need to be individually identified. While the Board did discuss this <br />matter, there was no specific direction provided for Staff. This is a subject that is <br />raised on almost all proposed subdivisions and should be addressed in the ordinance. <br />4. Staff recommended that the Board consider a minimum planting distance from <br />residential driveways, such as ten (10) or fifteen (15) feet, for trees installed within <br />boulevard area. The Board did not have a definitive recommendation on this matter. <br />