Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />• <br />• <br />Planning & Zoning Board <br />November 8, 2000 <br />Page 4 <br />Rick Carlson, 935 130th Avenue, Ham Lake, noted he owns approximately 100 acres of <br />wooded property within the City. He stated the tree ordinance as proposed concerns him <br />as a property owner. Mr. Carlson indicated the analysis done by staff was adequate but <br />stated it may be unrealistic due to the heavy grading required within the City. He noted <br />approximately 75 % -90% of each lot is graded with new developments, which does not <br />allow for great tree preservation. <br />Mr. Carlson indicated the tree ordinance would bring about additional work on the part of <br />the residents and City Staff. He stated the figures suggested by the planning specialist <br />may be too low, as he sees it could cost up to $20,000 per acre. Mr. Carlson suggested <br />that the City reduce the replacement requirements before approving this tree preservation <br />ordinance. He indicated this would be the most cost effective method for staff, <br />developers, and the public. <br />Mr. Carlson noted the City of Blaine and the City of Fridley e ordinances that <br />could be reviewed by staff. He indicated these ordinances . of tringent but set a <br />maximum number of trees per zoning district. Mr. Car n•' >>' problem he has with <br />this ordinance is passing the cost of the assessment f•� e t•� is clientele. <br />Mr. Rafferty asked for the defining point on w <br />developed. Mr. Carlson stated for those pr <br />in place. He noted the City must rememb <br />Steve Schmitt, 222 Monroe Street <br />ordinance for tree protection an <br />Commission at this time. H <br />Brooklyn Park and noted t <br />City of Brooklyn Park <br />Mr. Schmitt note <br />conjunction with a <br />while continuing to <br />ert `' °''` could and could not be <br />stion that PUD and PDO be put <br />perty owner does have rights. <br />he would agree on some form of <br />but not the ordinance before the Planning <br />andscaping escrow is required by the City of <br />oven to be an effective system. Mr. Schmitt noted the <br />trees per lot with a fully sodded lot. <br />dscape ordinance may be more effective for the City in <br />cement ordinance. He indicated this assists the developer <br />et the tree preservation needs of the City. <br />Mr. Rafferty indicated he feels the developers are not trying to wipe out the entire tree <br />population. He stated he doesn't feel it is up to the Commission to stick it to the <br />developers either. Mr. Rafferty asked that the Commission members be notified of future <br />meetings held with developers on this issue. He suggested Staff review neighboring <br />communities' tree preservation ordinances and report back to the Commission. <br />Tom Wallrich, Attorney Representative for TSM Development, noted he is familiar with <br />the City of Blaine's tree preservation ordinance. He suggested the City review this in part <br />with a landscaping plan for future developments within Lino Lakes. <br />Chair Schaps stated he felt an ordinance was needed for future development but stated <br />additional information should be gained before a recommendation was made to the <br />Council. <br />