Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />Planning & Zoning Board <br />June 14, 2000 <br />Page 11 <br />Ms. Lane stated the Board does not look favorably on variances without proven <br />hardships. She suggested, perhaps, the term "modification" is more appropriate than the <br />term "variance." <br />Mr. Johnson noted there would not be any variance requests from individual home <br />owners and the issues with developers should be addressed during their development <br />process. <br />Mr. Smyser stated it is correct that the single family property would not be brought into <br />this process. However, the single family property owner would be asked what their plans <br />are so the City Forester can advise them what will occur. He stated if the language is not <br />clear, staff can modify it. <br />Chair Schaps asked if there is also concern about barren lands with no trees. Ms. <br />Farnham stated that issue will be addressed with the Landscape Ordinance. <br />Mr. Rafferty reviewed a comment made in Mr. Carlson's letter addressing open acres that <br />have been stripped of trees by property owners for f j'ng and other reasons prior to <br />development and the option of requiring a minim .aber of trees to be planted on <br />each residential lot. <br />Chair Schaps declared the public hearing ..ene• '% 45 p.m. <br />John Johnson, engineer and planning <br />encouraged by the City undertakin <br />needed. He stated their support to <br />and submittal of written co <br />a wooded area and wetland <br />begin with and adding a tree p <br />representing Mr. Uhde, stated they are <br />t topic but believe more flexibility is <br />co deration so they have time for further study <br />ohnson stated they are developing a parcel with <br />ing the options on what can be done are limited to <br />ion requirement may reach a point that the property <br />is no longer feasible for developm'"nt. He noted if the developer does not clear a building <br />pad and it is done by the builder, tree replacement is not required. <br />Mr. Smyser stated that is correct. <br />Mr. Corson stated this is a good point to consider and asked how issues of drainage and <br />balancing the project elevations will be addressed. Mr. Powell explained that a grading <br />plan would still be part of the process and the house pads are required to be identified on <br />the site plan <br />Chair Schaps asked for further public input. There being none, he entertained a motion to <br />continue the public hearing. <br />Mr. Corson made a MOTION to continue the public hearing to July 12, 2000, and was <br />supported by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried 6 -0. <br />