Laserfiche WebLink
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JUNE 27 2001 <br />Trehus explained that Target would not be affected, only new submittals. <br />Kukonen mentioned that a moratorium would inhibit arguments with developers. <br />Donlin reviewed that several years ago the City enacted two back to back six -month <br />moratoriums. Trehus added that with 450 units already in process, a moratorium was a <br />needed step for the City. <br />The motion carried unanimously. <br />Trehus inquired of Grochala to review the Preservation Zoning District. O'Connell <br />suggested the letter be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Board. <br />Asleson indicated the Board could meet July 18, however it would be too early for <br />comment on projects and applications. Chair Lanyon explained in order to comment on <br />the Environmental Audit Worksheet, the Board should meet before July 23, 2001 with <br />either a special meeting or an additional meeting. Since the Board was not having an <br />impact on projects, the meeting could be moved to July 1 , 2001. <br />Grochala stated the Board could move the meeting 18, 2001 for comments on the <br />Environmental Audit Worksheet, with the folio � _ mee the second week in August <br />because the Watershed. District is meeting on ,, y 5, 2001. " e Council meets on the <br />13th and the 23`d for the Environmental Audi r ._ eet. <br />Chair Lanyon noted the Board would on both 18, 2001 and July 25, 2001. <br />B. Environmental Board Goals 2001 — Titem `` as discussed as part of Environmental <br />Board Business A. <br />C. Environmental Asses <br />discussed as part of <br />D. Shade Tree Ordina <br />with models used in th <br />document included a tre <br />t Comments/Target /Ryan — This item was <br />oard Business A. <br />reservation/Discussion — Asleson wrote the document <br />ecause there was no working model in the State. The <br />reservation policy that was bound by the Council. It required <br />the developer to replace the trees in public areas and developments. The City attorney <br />advised against banks, and opposed the tree replacement. The issue of policy versus <br />ordinance could be revisited. <br />Grundhofer indicated that the definition of wood lot was a tree area of one acre and Was <br />under the tree preservation policy, with 25% of the area having large trees. She asked <br />staff if the policy could apply to the oaks in Highland Meadows. - Asleson answered it <br />was included as a part of the zoning code in policy form and the developer had not <br />complied. The policies were guidelines, but there was no means for enforcement. <br />9 <br />