01/15/2003 Environmental Board Minutes

Home Search

ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 15, 2003 O'Connell inquired if the area behind the school was included in the definition. Mr. Brixius answered that it did apply to vegetation including trees. Donlin identified a possible typographical error and asked if the word "strands" should be "stands" applying to trees in #10. Mr. Brixius agreed it was an error. Chair Kukonen asked for any additional comments for the section. Donlin inquired about the necessity of mentioning the section addressing adult use regulations. She noted that the critical area had not received as much discussion. Mr. Brixius responded that the adult use section was modeled after one that the courts upheld. The reason for defining the behavior was so that there would not be behaviors that were inappropriate. He noted that it could not be an outright prohibition. Chair Kukonen asked for the definition of buildable land on page 1-14. Mr. Brixius stated that Council did not see steep slopes as included in buildable land. Donlin questioned if hydric soils were included in the wetland definition. Mr. Brixius responded that there was a specific delineation for it. There were several criteria that defined a wetland. Asleson indicated that hydric soils were possible without being considered a wetland such as the example of ditching. Mr. Brixius stated that Section 2 discussed how the application would occur. There was a change in the Zoning application that included 10 -day notice then a public hearing, with a notice published in the newspaper. He indicated the Comprehensive Plan had policies that addressed the proposed action in Section E. Following the public hearing there would be 60 days, with a possible extension of 120 days, for the City to approve or deny. In Section H, Council actions would require a simple majority vote, except in the case of changing a zoning from residential to commercial or industrial. That would still require a 4/5 majority vote. Donlin inquired about the 4/5 majority requirement, if there were other options. Mr. Brixius explained that a State statute required it. Mr. Brixius directed the Board to the section on the Conditional Use Permit (2-4). He noted that once the review process had been completed, it could expire within a year if no construction had occurred. Donlin questioned the reason for the change that property owners would receive notice within a 350 -foot radius, rather than the 600 -foot radius on 2-4, #3. Mr. Brixius indicated that Conditional Use had various applications in zoning. 2 APPROVED MINUTES