Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.a. Tree Preservation OrdinanceP City of Rosemount Executive Summary for Action City Council Meeting Date: August 20, 1996 Agenda Item: Tree Preservation Ordinance Agenda Section: New Business Prepared By: Andrew Mack Senior Planner Agenda Em # 64 A Attachments: Ordinance; 8/13,7/23,6/25 Planning Approved By: Commission Executive Summaries, PC Minutes; Developer Mailing List Please refer to the attached Planning Commission summaries and information regarding the proposed tree preservation regulations and various issues addressed by the Planning Commission. These factors, including a series of revisions, have combined into the proposed ordinance now before the City Council for adoption. At it's meeting held on August 13, 1996, the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing regarding this ordinance. In advance of the hearing, and in addition to the required pubic notice, Staff notified representatives of the development community regarding the meeting to consider adoption of the regulations. A copy of the mailing list for the notice has also been enclosed for Council review. As of this date, no comments or input from the public or development community have been received. After their final review of the proposed tree regulations, the Planning Commission has unanimously recommended approval to the City Council. Recommended Action: MOTION to approve an ordinance amending the City Zoning Code Ordinance B enhancing existing trees by preserving significant trees and woodlands City Council Action: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. B- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY ZONING CODE ORDINANCE B ENHANCING EXISTING TREES BY PRESERVING SIGNIFICANT TREES AND WOODLANDS Section I. Rosemount City Zoning Code Ordinance B Section 3.2 is amended by adding the following definitions: CANOPY OF TREE: The horizontal extension of a tree's branches and foliage in all directions from its trunk and upper - layer of green crown. CONIFEROUS/EVERGREEN TREES: A woody plant bearing seeds and cones often times, but not always, retaining foliage throughout the year. CONSTRUCTION AREA: Any area in which movement of earth, alteration in topography, soil compaction, disruption of vegetation, change in soil chemistry, or any other change in the natural character of the land occurs as a result of site preparation, grading, building construction or any other construction activity. DECIDUOUS/HARDWOOD TREES: A woody plant which has a defined crown, and which loses leaves annually. DEVELOPER: Any person or entity who undertakes to improve a parcel of land, by platting for the purposes of establishing 2 or more dwelling units, or grading which requires a grading permit. A Developer does not include any public agency. DIAMETER OF DECIDUOUS TREE: The length of a straight line measured through the trunk of a tree at twenty-four (24) inches above the ground. DRIP LINE OR ROOT ZONE OF A TREE: An imaginary vertical line which extends from the outermost branches of a tree's canopy to the ground. 1 FORESTER: A person holding at least a Bachelor's degree in forestry from an accredited four-year college of forestry or any official appointed by the City. HEALTHY TREE: Average or better condition and vigor for area. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: A person licensed by the State of Minnesota as a Landscape Architect. NEW DEVELOPMENT: A piece of property that is being platted for the purpose of establishing urban residential use with two or more dwelling units or is being improved by grading which requires a grading permit. This definition does not apply to Agricultural lot splits. NURSERYMAN: A person licensed by the State of Minnesota as a Nurseryman. SIGNIFICANT TREE: A healthy tree measuring a minimum of four (4) inches in diameter for Deciduous Trees measured at twenty-four (24) inches above the ground, and a minimum of 6 feet in height for Coniferous/Evergreen Trees. SIGNIFICANT WOODLAND A grouping or cluster of six or more Significant Trees with a contiguous drip -line in the case of Deciduous Trees, six or more Significant Coniferous Trees or a mixture of the two types of trees occupying at least seven hundred fifty (750) square feet of property or less if the trees are part of a DNR designated wildlife corridor. Section H. Rosemount City Zoning Code Ordinance B Section 8.3.E is amended by adding the following: Section 8.3 Landscaping Requirements E. Woodland Preservation Policy and Credit 3. U12lication and Exem tp ions: The following guidelines shall apply to the following site activities in the City of Rosemount: 2 a. All new development. b. Plats which have received preliminary plat approval prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. 4. Process: Unless otherwise determined by the City Council, the following process for preserving trees shall be required from the developer: a. Prepare a tree preservation plan which shall be incorporated on the grading plan. b. Implement the tree preservation plan prior to and during site development. c. Submit a performance of financial guarantee for compliance with the approved tree preservation plan. d. Comply with the City's tree replacement procedure. The tree preservation plan shall be submitted with preliminary plat plans or as part of the application for a grading permit. The Tree Preservation Plan must be certified by a Forester, Landscape Architect, or Nurseryman retained by the Developer. 5. Tree Preservation Plan: The Developer shall be responsible for implementing the tree preservation plan prior to and during site grading and plan development. The tree preservation plan will be reviewed by City Staff to assess the best overall design for the project taking into account Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands and ways to enhance the efforts of the Developer to mitigate corresponding damage. The Developer is encouraged to meet with staff prior to submission of the preliminary plat application or prior to application for the grading permit, whichever is sooner, to determine the placement of buildings, parking, driveways, streets storage and other physical features which result in the fewest Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands being destroyed or damaged. The tree preservation plan shall include the following items: a. The name(s) and address(es) of property owners and Developers. b. Delineation of the buildings, structures, or impervious surfaces situated thereon or contemplated to be built thereon. c. Delineation of all areas to be graded and limits of land disturbance. d., Size, species, and location of all Significant Trees and Significant 3 Woodlands located within the area to be platted or within the parcel of record. e. Identification of all Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands on all individual lots. (The Developer shall be required to submit a list of all lot and block numbers identifying those lots). f. Measures to protect Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands. g. Identification of all Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands proposed to be removed within the construction area. h. Size, species, and location of all replacement trees to be planted on the property in accordance with the tree replacement schedule. i. Signature of the person preparing the plan and statement which includes acknowledgment of the fact the trees to be used as replacements are appropriate species with respect to survival of the replacement trees. 6. Protective Measures: Measures to protect Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands shall include: a. Installation of snow fencing, silt fence, or polyethylene laminate safety netting placed at the Drip Line of Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands to be preserved. b. Identification of any oak trees requiring pruning between April 15 and July l; any oak trees so pruned shall be required to have any cut areas sealed with an appropriate tree wound sealant. 7. Additional Measures: Measures to preserve or protect Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands may include, but are not limited to: a. Installation of retaining walls or tree wells to preserve trees by eliminating the filling or cutting of soil within drip zones. b. Placement of utilities in common trenches outside of the Drip Line of Significant Trees, or use of tunneled installation. c. Prevention of change in soil chemistry due to concrete washout and leakage or spillage of toxic materials, such as fuels or paints. d. Use of tree root aeration, fertilization, and/or irrigation systems. 4 e. Transplanting of Significant Trees into a protected area for later moving into permanent sites within the Construction Area. f. Therapeutic pruning. 8. Significant Tree/Woodland Removal: Significant Tree and Significant Woodlands removal shall be in accordance with the City -approved tree preservation plan. This removal rate does not apply to unhealthy trees. The plan should remove no more than 25% of the total number of Significant Trees and/or Significant Woodlands which were existing prior to the preliminary plat as a result of the following construction activities, approved by the City as a part of a preliminary plat: a. Site grading b. Installation of public utilities including sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water, natural gas, electrical service, and cable TV. c. Construction of public streets. d. Construction/grading of drainage ways. e. Filling of any area. f. Any other activity within the Construction Area. Where practical difficulties or practical hardships result from strict compliance with the provisions of this paragraph, City Staff may permit the removal of up to an additional 5% of the Significant Trees and/or Significant Woodlands without requiring a variance approval by the City Council. 9. Financial Guarantee: Refer to Zoning Ordinance B Section 8.3.G. 10. Replacement Procedure: Developers shall be required to replace the Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands which were indicated on the tree preservation plan to be saved, but were ultimately destroyed or damaged up to a year after the development is complete. Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands that suffered immediate destruction must be replaced prior to a certificate of occupancy being issued. The developer shall be required to replace each of the Significant Trees destroyed or damaged with (2) replacement trees. In the case of a Significant Woodland being damaged or destroyed the amount of square footage removed must be replaced. Species available to nurseries most similar to lost tree types must be used. Staff may refuse replacement material. 5 Replacement trees must be trees that consist of nursery stock and be no less than the following sizes: a. Deciduous trees - no less than two (2) inches in diameter measured twenty-four (24) inches from the base top of the root system. b. Coniferous trees- no less than six (6) feet high. Replacement trees shall not be placed on easements or street rights -of -ways; the City, however, reserves the right to plant and care for trees planted in public right= of -ways. City Staff can assist in the siting of replacement trees. Should placing the replacement trees on a site, once the site has been developed, prove difficult or impossible, the trees will be placed on public property at the direction of City Staff. Replacement trees shall meet the approval of staff. The following list of materials are acceptable. Other selections may be approved by Staff. Deciduous Trees: Small Trees Lilac Crabapple Hawthorne Plum Serviceberry Coniferous Trees: Fir Medium Trees Linden (Bass Wood) Green Ash Honey Locust Hackberry River Birch Pine European Larch age Trees Maples (No Silver Maple) Kentucky Coffee Tree Bur Oak Spruce Canadian Hemlock Cedar 11. Other Replacement Tree Requirements: Choice of replacement trees species and location of the trees should also be contingent on the following information: a. Soil Composition: Comparisons should be made between soil conditions and the ecology of the proposed species to make sure they are compatible. b. Spatial Requirements: The potential height and crown spread of the proposed replacement trees should be known. Usually, half of the adult tree crown diameter is the amount of distance a tree should be planted from any above ground objects. c. Diseases and Insect Problems: Appropriate replacement choices shall also consider insect and disease problems that may be common with particular species in the part of the State in which the City of Rosemount is n located. Section III. This ordinance will become effective from and after its date of publication. Adopted this day of -1996. Cathy Busho, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Walsh, City Clerk Published this day of , 1996 in the Rosemount Town Pages. fel CITY OF ROSEMOUNT STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO.B- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY ZONING CODE ORDINANCE B ENHANCING EXISTING TREES BY PRESERVING SIGNIFICANT TREES AND WOODLANDS Section I. Rosemount City Zoning Code Ordinance B Section 3.2 is amended by adding the following definitions: BUILDER: CANOPY OF TREE: CONIFEROUS/EVERGREEN TREES CONSTRUCTION AREA: DECIDUOUS/HARDWOOD TREES DEVELOPER: DIAMETER OF DECIDUOUS TREE: Any person or entity to whom a building permit is issued. The horizontal extension of a tree's branches and foliage in all directions from its trunk and upper - layer of green crown. A woody plant bearing seeds and cones often times, but not always, retaining foliage throughout the year. Any area in which movement of earth, alteration in topography, soil compaction, disruption of vegetation, change in soil chemistry, or any other change in the natural character of the land occurs as a result of site preparation, grading, building construction or any other construction activity. A woody plant which has a defined crown, and which loses leaves annually. Any person or entity who undertakes to improve a parcel of land, by platting, grading, and/or installing utilities. For purposes of the tree preservation guidelines, a Developer does not include a Builder as defined herein, or any public agency. The length of a straight line measured through the trunk of a tree at twenty-four (24) inches above the ground. DRIP LINE OR ROOT ZONE OF A TREE: An imaginary vertical line which extends from the outermost branches of a tree's canopy to the ground. FORESTER: HEALTHY TREE: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: NEW DEVELOPMENT: NURSERYMAN: SIGNIFICANT TREE: SIGNIFICANT WOODLAND A person holding at least a Bachelor's degree in forestry from an accredited four-year college of forestry or any official appointed by the City. Average or better condition and vigor for area. A person licensed by the State of Minnesota as a Landscape Architect. A piece of property that is being platted or is under construction for the purpose of establishing urban residential use with two or more dwelling units. This definition does not apply to lot splits in the Agriculture zone or any individual lots. A person licensed by the State of Minnesota as a Nurseryman. A healthy tree measuring a minimum of four (4) inches in diameter for Deciduous Trees measured at twenty-four (24) inches above the ground, and a minimum of 6 feet in height for Coniferous/Evergreen Trees. A grouping or cluster of six or more Significant Trees with a contiguous drip -line in the case of Deciduous Trees, six or more Significant Coniferous Trees or a mixture of the two types of trees occupying at least seven hundred fifty (750) square feet of property or less if the trees are part of a DNR designated wildlife corridor. Section H. Rosemount City Zoning Code Ordinance B Section 8.3.E is amended by adding the following: 0a Section 8.3 Landscaping Requirements E. Woodland Preservation Policy and Credit 3. Annlication and Exemptions: The following guidelines shall apply to the following site activities in the City of Rosemount: a. All sites of new development. b. Existing final plats approved before December 31, 1996 shall be exempt. 4. Process: Unless otherwise determined by the City Council, the following process for preserving trees shall be required from the developer: a. Prepare a tree preservation plan which shall be incorporated on the grading plan. b. Implement the tree preservation plan prior to and during site development. c. Submit a performance of financial guarantee for compliance with the approved tree preservation plan. d. Comply with the City's tree replacement procedure. The tree preservation plan shall be submitted with preliminary plat plans or as part of the application for a grading permit. The Tree Preservation Plan must be certified by a Forester, Landscape Architect, or Nurseryman retained by the Developer. 5. Tree Preservation Plan: The Developer shall be responsible for implementing the tree preservation plan prior to and during site grading and plan development. The tree preservation plan will be reviewed by City Staff to assess the best overall design for the project taking into account Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands and ways to enhance the efforts of the Developer to mitigate corresponding damage. The Developer is encouraged to meet with staff prior to submission of the preliminary plat application or prior to application for the grading permit, whichever is sooner, to determine the placement of buildings, parking, driveways, streets storage and other physical features which result in the fewest Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands being destroyed or damaged. The tree preservation plan shall include the following items: 3 a. The name(s) and address(es) of property owners and Developers. b. Delineation of the buildings, structures, or impervious surfaces situated thereon or contemplated to be built thereon. c. Delineation of all areas to be graded and limits of land disturbance. d. Size, species, and location of all Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands located within the area to be platted or within the parcel of record. e. Identification of all Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands on all individual lots. (The Developer shall be required to submit a fist of all lot and block numbers identifying those lots). f. Measures to protect Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands. g. Identification of all Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands proposed to be removed within the construction area. h. Size, species, and location of all replacement trees to be planted on the property in accordance with the tree replacement schedule. i. Signature of the person preparing the plan and statement which includes, acknowledgment of the fact the trees to be used as replacements are appropriate species with respect to survival of the replacement trees. 6. Protective Measures: Measures to protect Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands shall include: a. Installation of snow fencing, silt fence, or polyethylene laminate safety netting placed at the Drip Line of Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands to be preserved. b. Identification of any oak trees requiring pruning between April 15 and July l; any oak trees so pruned shall be required to have any cut areas sealed with an appropriate tree wound sealant. 7. Additional Measures: Measures to preserve or protect Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands mayinclude, but are not limited to: a. Installation of retaining walls or tree wells to preserve trees by eliminating the filling or cutting of soil within drip zones. 4 b. Placement of utilities in common trenches outside of the Drip Line of Significant Trees, or use of tunneled installation. c. Prevention of change in soil chemistry due to concrete washout and leakage or spillage of toxic materials, such as fuels or paints. d. Use of tree root aeration, fertilization, and/or irrigation systems. e. Transplanting of Significant Trees into a protected area for later moving into permanent sites within the Construction Area. f. Therapeutic pruning. 8. Significant Tree/Woodland Removal: Significant Tree and Significant Woodlands removal shall be in accordance with the City -approved tree preservation plan. This removal rate does not apply to unhealthy trees. The plan should remove no more than 25% of the total number of Significant Trees and/or Significant Woodlands which were existing prior to the preliminary plat as a result of the following construction activities, approved by the City as a part of a preliminary plat: a. Site grading b. Installation of public utilities including sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water, natural gas, electrical service, and cable TV. c. Construction of public streets. d. Construction/grading of drainage ways. e. Filling of any area. f. Any other activity within the Construction Area. Where practical difficulties or practical hardships result from strict compliance with the provisions of this paragraph, City Staff may permit the removal of up to an additional 5% of the Significant Trees and/or Significant Woodlands without requiring a variance approval by the City Council. 9. Financial Guarantee: Refer to Zoning Ordinance B Section 8.3.G. 10. Replacement Procedure: Developers shall be required to replace the Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands which were indicated on the tree 5 preservation plan to be saved, but were ultimately destroyed or damaged up to a year after the development is complete. Significant Trees and Significant Woodlands that suffered immediate destruction must be replaced prior to a certificate of occupancy being issued. The developer shall be required to replace each of the Significant Trees destroyed or damaged with (2) replacement trees. In the case of a Significant Woodland being damaged or destroyed the amount of square footage removed must be replaced. Species available to nurseries most similar to lost tree types must be used. Staff will reserve the right to refuse replacement material. Replacement trees must be trees that consist of nursery stock and be no less than the following sizes: a. Deciduous trees - no less than two (2) inches in diameter measured twenty-four (24) inches from the base top of the root system. b. Coniferous trees - no less than six (6) feet high. Replacement trees shall not be placed on easements or street rights -of -ways; the City, however, reserves the right to plant and care for trees planted in public right- of-ways. City Staff can assist in the siting of replacement trees. Should placing the replacement trees on a site, once the site has been developed, prove difficult or impossible, the trees will be placed on public property at the direction of City Staff. Replacement trees shall meet the approval of staff. The following is not an exhaustive fist of trees: Deciduous Trees: Small Trees Lilac Crabapple Hawthorne Plum Serviceberry Coniferous Trees: Fir Medium Trees Linden (Bass Wood) Green Ash Honey Locust Hackberry River Birch Pine European Larch Large Trees Maples (No Silver Maple) Kentucky Coffee Tree Bur Oak Spruce Canadian Hemlock Cedar 11. Other Replacement Tree Requirements: Choice of replacement trees species and location of the trees should also be contingent on the following information: a. Soil Composition: Comparisons should be made between soil conditions and the ecology of the proposed species to make sure they are compatible. G b. Spatial Requirements: The potential height and crown spread of the proposed replacement trees should be known. Usually, half of the adult tree crown diameter is the amount of distance a tree should be planted from any above ground objects. c. Diseases and Insect Problems: Appropriate replacement choices shall also consider insect and disease problems that may be common with particular species in the part of the State in which the City of Rosemount is located. Section III. This ordinance will become effective from and after its date of publication. Adopted this day of .1996. Cathy Busho, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Walsh, City Clerk Published this day of , 1996 in the Rosemount Town Paszes. 7 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION Planning Commission Meeting Date: August 13, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Tree Preservation Ordinance AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, Assistant Planner AGENDA NO. 7D. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Ordinance APPROVED BY: The attached tree preservation ordinance draft represents the combined efforts of Dean Lotter's research and the direction by the Planning Commission. New information and comments resulting from the public hearing coupled with any additional direction the Planning Commission may provide will result in a revised draft that will be forwarded to the City Council. Several principles should be kept in mind when discussing a tree preservation ordinance. 1. The transformation of land from a wooded natural environment to urban residential will never allow a total one for one tree replacement expectation within the same area of the original stand of trees. Right-of-way, buildings, driveways, drainage and yards will displace much of the original environment so that other areas beyond the original woodland has to absorb the replacement trees. 2. The DNR is working on the wildlife corridor concept. This project is in its infancy and has yet to achieve the sophistication of other natural systems regulatory methods such as wetlands and water ways. Staff will be meeting with appropriate DNR personnel in an attempt to identify corridors and determine whether additional ordinance amendments are warranted. As above, rural residential uses may provide opportunities to preserve corridors because of the low density pattern. However, urban residential development at the normal density of 2.5 to 3 dwelling units per acre will severely inhibit the preservation of corridors. 3. Oak wilt is so pervasive that it can occur even though the best management practices for for tree preservation related to construction have been observed. The best opportunity to ensure the highest rate of survival is during the construction process and observing the violation of drip zones and root damage. Penalties must be assessed at this time if the developer is to be held responsible for tree mortality. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to recommend approval of the proposed tree preservation ordinance to the City Council subject to the incorporation of modified language resulting from testimony received at the public hearing and subsequent Planning Commission direction. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: 0 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT E^.;CUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: 07/23/96 AGENDA ITEM:Tree Preservation Ordinance AGENDA SECTION: Old Business PREPARED BY: Dean R. Lotter, Intern AGENDA NO. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Ordinance APPROVED BY: At the June 25, 1996 Planning Commission meeting, several ideas and suggestions were offered in an effort to enhance the ordinance. After further consideration and review by staff, some options have been created. First, some answers will be given in response to questions asked at the last meeting. Then, the options will be discussed. • With regards to the allowed 25% removal rate of significant trees and woodlands, a question was asked as to how that numerical rate compared with other ordinances. Answer: Oakdale also uses a rate of 25%, Burnsville allows anywhere between 40% to 60% depending on the zoning district, Eden Prairie uses a rate of 35%. Other communities such as Lino Lakes seem to define what kinds of trees they want saved and the ordinance kicks in if any of these trees are to be disturbed by development. • Clarification was needed in the ordinance language with regards to exactly what kind of developments or grading activities will need a tree preservation plan. Answer: All sites of new development. It is recommended that already developed sites be exempted due to property rights issues and limited staff resources. • The idea was mentioned that the age of the tree should be taken into consideration when requiring replacement trees. It is staff recommendation that an ordinance be developed that has a replacement schedule based on size of diameter. Essentially, three different options exist with regards to the creation of an ordinance. 1) Less Restrictive: An ordinance that limits the applicability of the language to only specific occasions and circumstances. Defining significant trees using large diameters. Ours currently defines any tree of 4 inches in diameter or more a significant tree. Other ordinances define a significant tree as a tree with a much higher diameter. Allowed removal rates that are high (Burnsville allows 40% to 60% removal rate, whereas our current language allows 25% removal rate.). Replacement schedules could be designed in a way so that replacement trees could be much smaller than the destroyed significant trees. 2) Very Restrictive: This—dinance, of course, would be the--Yact opposite of the weak ordinance. , . ie important issue to remember hey a is that the more restrictive and involved the language in the ordinance, the more staff time would be required. Eden Prairie has one full-time staff member that works on the administration and enforcement of its tree preservation ordinance. 3) Restrictive: The draft ordinance under consideration would probably fit in to this category. While our current definition of a significant tree and our 25% removal rate is a little more restrictive than other ordinances, our replacement schedule is more lenient than others. The fact our ordinance would apply to areas of completely new development and exempt other currently developed areas is a more lenient approach, but limited staff resources would probably make this approach the realistic one to take. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to set a public hearing date for AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY ZONING CODE ORDINANCE B ENHANCING EXISTING TREES BY PRESERVING SIGNIFICANT TREES AND WOODLANDS for August 13, 1996, or Motion to direct staff to revise the proposed ordinance to make it more or less restrictive. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EX_.;UTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: 06/25/96 AGENDA ITEM: Tree Preservation Ordinance AGENDA SECTION: New Business PREPARED BY: Dean R. Lotter, Intern AGENDA NO. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Tree Preservation Ordinance APPROVED BY: As directed by the goal setting session held in early spring of this year, staff has developed a tree preservation ordinance. This ordinance is intended to be aimed at larger developments of land on which significant trees and/or significant woodlands exist. Trees and woodlands benefit the community in a variety of ways such providing noise buffering, having cooling effects, providing an environment for wildlife to live in harmony with the citizens and contributing to an aesthetically pleasing community. The destruction or removal of these community assets has a detrimental effect on the quality of life in the City. This ordinance was developed with the homeowner in mind. Staff wanted to create a "homeowner friendly" ordinance that would not place undue burdens on homeowners. Therefore, the ordinance targets any sites of new development and/or sites in excess of one thousand (1000) square feet that are undergoing grading for any reason. Methods of preservation and other required pieces of information are to be highlighted in a tree preservation plan that would be prepared by a licensed professional for the developer. The plan would then be submitted to the City as part of the development review process. The amount of trees or woodlands that could be removed without penalty has been set at twenty- five (25%) percent. Any significant trees or significant woodlands that were destroyed as a result of development and/or grading activities would have to be replaced according to a replacement schedule also included in this ordinance. Should the replacement of trees prove difficult or impossible after a site has been developed and/or grading has taken place, City Staff must be consulted and the trees will be planted elsewhere in the City. RECOMMENDED ACTION: This item is for discussion only. No action requested at this time. I COUNCIL ACTION: Regular Planning Commission Meeting Proceedings June 25, 1996 Page 3 Commissioner Tentinger questioned whether any discussion occurred at the last City Council meeting in regards to the intended use of the Rosewood Manor outlot the City acquired in the land swap with Wensmann Homes, Inc. Mayor Busho responded to Commissioner Tentinger's question. New Business: Tree Preservation Ordinance Intern Lotter related that at the goal setting session held in early Spring of 1996 Staff was directed to draft a Tree Preservation Ordinance. Mr. Lotter stated that Staff has drafted a proposed ordinance and is seeking input from the Commission in regards to this ordinance. He stated that this ordinance is intended to affect larger developments of land on which significant trees and woodlands exist and was drafted to be "homeowner friendly." Mr. Lotter then reviewed the proposed ordinance including the replacement procedure and the 25% removal limit. A discussion occurred regarding exemptions to the proposed guidelines. Intern Lotter stated that Staff attempted to put the responsibility on the developer and not burden the homeowner and that is the purpose of not regulating any grading that affects less than 1,000 square feet of land. Member Tentinger felt strongly that homeowners should not be affected by this ordinance. He believed that if a homeowner wanted to remove a few trees on their property to construct a garden, etc., they should have that right and not have to consult the City. Member Shoe -Corrigan stated that she has two goals in the adoption of this ordinance: a) to assist in managing wildlife; and b) to assist in the public care of the landscape. She mentioned several suggestions to Staff including the following: (1) the tree replacement procedure section should be more specific. She felt that some trees can not be replicated as certain wildlife resides in those trees and tighter restrictions are therefore needed; (2) identify "critical tree stands" in the City and include language in the ordinance to protect these tree stands; (3) minor suggestions to revise some of the definitions; and (4) creating a Tree Board. The Commission discussed enforcement of this ordinance, the 25% removal limit and various other issues in relation to this proposed ordinance. Intern Lotter reiterated the changes the Commissioners were suggesting and stated that he would redraft this ordinance pursuant to the direction of the Commission. MOTION by Droste to adjourn. Seconded by DeBettignies. There being no further business to come before this Commission and upon unanimous decision, this meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kelli A. Grund Recording Secretary Regular Planning Commission Meeting Proceedings July 23, 1996 Page 2 MOTION by Tentinger to table action regarding the Concept Residential Planned Unit Development for Geronime Pond. Seconded by Shoe -Corrigan. Ayes: Shoe -Corrigan, Droste, Tentinger, DeBettignies and McDermott. Nays: 0. Motion passes 5-0. Old Business: Tree Preservation Ordinance Intern Dean Lotter mentioned that a draft of the Tree Preservation Ordinance was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its June 25, 1996, meeting where several suggestions were made to enhance the ordinance. He stated that since that time he has redrafted the ordinance and is requesting further input regarding how restrictive the ordinance should be and possibly setting this matter for a public hearing. Mr. Lotter reviewed the proposed ordinance, discussing the following: 1) application and exemptions to the ordinance; 2) definition of significant trees; 3) proposed removal rate of 25% (reviewed other cities removal rates); and 4) tree replacement schedule. A discussion occurred regarding the replacement rate and whether a higher ratio should be considered, replacement of trees with similar species, and who would enforce this ordinance as there is limited resources. Chairperson Droste commented that of the 3 options Intern Lotter listed in his executive summary, he felt the Restrictive option was the best. He stated that the proposed ordinance was a basis to work from and was a good first step. Member DeBettignies felt that the City Engineer would need to decide if removal of the trees would effect erosion on the site. He also stated that a disclaimer should be included in the replacement schedule which would state that other species of trees could be approved by City staff. Member McDermott requested that language be included in the replacement schedule that would require a tree to be replaced with a similar species and agreed to by City staff. Member Shoe -Corrigan inquired as to whether the City reviewed initiating a volunteer committee to help with enforcement of this ordinance. Intern Lotter responded that at this time it is proposed that one staff member, with other duties, would enforce this ordinance and if this is inadequate, the City would reevaluate at that time. Chairperson Droste closed this item at 7:05 p.m. in order to open the public hearing scheduled at that time. Public Hearing: Cleansoils Minnesota, Inc. - Concept Planned Unit Development Chairman Droste opened the public hearing to hear public testimony regarding the Concept Planned Unit Development application of Cleansoils Minnesota, Inc. The recording secretary has placed the Affidavit of Publication and Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of Public Hearing Notice on file with the City. Regular Planning Commission Meeting Proceedings August 13,1996 Page 7 ")?Arr he does not see why not the applicant will not complete this development. Mr. Uban commented that if the applicant were to "bail", the Planned Unit Development Agreement would still have to be followed and any changes would need to be approved by the City. Member McDermott questioned if the concerns raised in Assistant Pearson's June 5, 1996 letter had been addressed in regards to snow removal, parking on streets, setbacks, etc. He stated that he approved of a homeowners association but was worried about deterioration of the site in the future with such small lots. He stated that it appeared that this development was being "shoehorned" into a small space when there was plenty of empty land between this site and the Koch Refinery. Member McDermott's concerns were addressed and discussed. Member McDermott stated that he had confidence in the applicant, however, he wants them to retain control of this development in order to retain the character that is proposed. Chairman Droste recommended that the City contact Arbor Pointe in Inver Grove Heights to see how the snow removal in that development is handled. MOTION by Shoe -Corrigan to direct Staff to develop findings and conditions to be reviewed by the Planning Commission on August 27, 1996, in support of the Concept PUD subject to a letter. submitted by CMC (by August 19, 1996) to waive the 120 -day deadline. Seconded by Droste. Ayes: DeBettignies, McDermott, Shoe -Corrigan and Droste. Nays: 0. Motion passes 4- b/ Public Hearing: Tree Preservation Ordinance ?Arr Chairman Droste opened the public hearing to hear public testimony regarding the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance. The recording secretary has placed the Affidavit of Publication and Affidavit of Posting of Public Hearing Notice on file with the City. Senior Planner Mack stated that the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance is the combined efforts of former Intern Dean Lotter's research and direction by the Planning Commission. Mr. Mack mentioned that Staff has contacted Minnesota DNR in regards to Member Shoe-Corrigan's concerns regarding wildlife corridors. Staff was informed that the DNR is currently working on this wildlife corridor concept. Staff will be meeting with the DNR in an attempt to identify corridors and determine whether changes to the ordinance are warranted. Mr. Mack reviewed the changes to the ordinance since the previous meeting. He mentioned that current and potential developers in the area were informed of the public hearing. As there were no comments from audience, MOTION by DeBettignies to close the public hearing. Seconded by Shoe -Corrigan. Ayes: McDermott, Shoe -Corrigan, Droste and DeBettignies. Nays: 0. Motion passes 4-0. Member Shoe -Corrigan thanked Staff and Mr. Lotter for all the work that went into this ordinance. Regular Planning Commission Meeting Proceedings August 13,1996 Page 8 DRAFT MOTION by McDermott to recommend approval of the proposed tree preservation ordinance to the City Council subject to the incorporation of modified language resulting from testimony received at the public hearing and subsequent Planning Commission direction. Seconded by Shoe -Corrigan. Ayes: Shoe -Corrigan, Droste, DeBettignies and McDermott. Nays: 0. Motion passes 4-0. New Business: Rosemount Business Park First Addition- Final Plat Community Development Director Rogness stated that the Preliminary Plat for the Rosemount Business Park was approved on October 19, 1993 with the only platted lot being Cannon Equipment. Mr. Rogness reviewed the site plan and stated that the Final Plat conforms to the approved Preliminary Plat. He mentioned that the surveyor made an error in regards to the southerly lot line and commented that this lot line will be moved approximately 15 feet further south. MOTION by Droste to recommend approval of Rosemount Business Park First Addition. Seconded by Shoe -Corrigan. Ayes: Droste, DeBettignies, McDermott and Shoe -Corrigan. Nays: 0. Motion passes 4-0. MOTION by Droste to adjourn. Seconded by DeBettignies. There being no further business to come before this Commission and upon unanimous decision, this meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kelli A. Grund Recording Secretary U.S. Home Corporation Rosemount Development Co. Suite 300 Chippendale Office Building 8421 Wayzata Blvd. 3480 Upper 149th Street West Golden Valley, MN 55426 Rosemount, NN 55068 1111 11 Rill III I III IIII III IIIIIIII Hampton Development Corp. Meadowood, Inc. 12433 Princeton Avenue 12101 16th Avenue South Savage, MN 55378 Burnsville, NN 55337-2917 CMC Heartland Partners International Development III Suite 206 P.O. Box 6205 3131 Fernbrook Lane Chicago, IL 60680-6205 Plymouth, MN 55447 Ground Development Corp. 1550 Utica Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55416 Wensmann Homes, Inc. 3312 151st Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 Basic Builders, Inc. 14450 South Robert Trail Rosemount, MN 55068