Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Tuesday, February 18, 2020 <br />6:00 p.m. <br />an arborist to help with a free permit. He reiterated that he feels a tiered or sliding scale system may be <br />the direction to go. <br />Ressler stated that he agreed with a tiered system. He noted that he did not want to spend a lot of time on <br />this issue because there is a lot of ground to cover, but noted that some thought should be given to <br />whether it is a nuisance tree as well. He gave the example of taking down a cottonwood and not having to <br />replace it with a cottonwood. <br />Curtis stated that may lead to people clearing their lots of large, mature buckthorn which can create <br />problems from an aesthetic point and it would qualify as clear cutting. <br />Erickson noted that Plymouth, at one time, had a full-time forester on staff, so it may be helpful to take a <br />look at some of their ordinances to see what they have done in some of these situations. He stated that <br />may be a way to gather information for free without having to consult an arborist. <br />Ressler stated that he is in favor of a sliding scale of some sort, in lieu of a 1:1 replacement. <br />Libby stated that he doesn't think any of the ideas are bad, but when it is exposed to scrutiny from <br />property owners, they may want to know how the City came to these standards without consulting the <br />experts. He stated that he is concerned that this will expose the City and things will be determined by the <br />City Attorney rather than an arborist because the City has a rule that was set up arbitrarily by people <br />simply guessing. <br />Ressler stated that he feels the spirit of this whole thing is trying to eliminate some of the applications that <br />the City is receiving that require variances and things of that nature. He stated that if there can be a <br />language change that helps reduce those applications and not expose the City to other issues such as those <br />raised by Commissioner Libby, because there will be circumstances where it will not make sense to do <br />any of the things being put into place. <br />Libby stated that he is not objecting to Barnhart's proposal but sees a potential avenue for residents <br />contending this. <br />Thiesse stated that residents are free to get their own arborist and come in and tell the City how it should <br />be. <br />Ressler stated that he thinks that is good feedback for this portion of the ordinance. He suggested moving <br />the discussion to the process for when there is slope failure. He stated that the discussion that took place <br />at the work session was that there should be some discretion given to the City Engineer and give the <br />option of expediting directly to City Council for a hearing, discussion, and ruling for mitigating that <br />situation. He asked if anyone on the Commission had a different recollection of the work session <br />discussion. <br />The Commission agreed that this was what was discussed. <br />Barnhart stated that the goal of this from the beginning was to address slope failures and try to avoid the <br />interim use permit process. He stated that the earlier discussion was about the identifying the emergency <br />slope failures that would skip the interim use process and go straight to Council, possibly without the <br />Page 27 of 30 <br />