08-13-2020 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, June 15, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 8 of 12 or flexibility for any of the standards, and the Planning Commission can judge them as the recommending body. Now there is a better definition of what the expectation is from the Council. Historically, at least recently, there have been circular cul-de-sacs. He reiterated the Planning Commission can still support waivers if a project comes forward that can be justified. Bollis said that the definition is being narrowed. Barnhart agreed and said the expectation is being better defined based on more recent activity from the Council. Bollis asked if Barnhart was expecting approval tonight. Ressler noted it was guidance, if he was not mistaken. Barnhart stated it was the first reading and he is asking for approval, but if the Commissioners were uncomfortable and would like another month to review it, there is no rush. It could be put on the next meeting and reviewed again. Erickson referenced Line 1618, which talks about trees, and said he is fully prepared to argue both sides of the coin. He thinks the question is well-raised as far as if the Council feels it may be needless, unnecessary, and so on. His other point is that if the Council should decide they want to continue regulating trees, he has a couple of suggestions as to how to do it better than what has been presented. The paragraph beginning with Line 1618 discusses shade trees, which the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) uses the term “deciduous,” and also, they specify being planted within five feet of the right-of- way. He has a concern about that, because subdivisions typically have drainage and utility easements in the first five feet, and he asked if trees should be planted on top of that if there are underground telephone and electric lines. He suggested going out as far as 15 feet from the right-of-way and then they can put in a big tree spade and will not hit any wires. Also, starting on Line 1623, there is a fairly short list of allowable trees which could be longer. He suggested, instead of a limited number of trees, it could say, “Oak, honey locust, maples, hackberry, birch, hickory, or other deciduous trees recommended by the DNR for Central Minnesota.” He said the DNR has recommended trees in different parts of the state according to climate, etc. He noted the whole regulation begins with the word “may'' so it is not a requirement, but he would be willing to go either way on it. Ressler asked Erickson if it would be prudent, instead of listing the species, to clean it up and allow it to point towards the Minnesota DNR acceptable species; therefore, if there was some reason that it was amended, the City would not have to change the language. Erickson stated however the Commission wanted to do it. Kirchner said he is not an arborist and the City should defer to a professional source, being the DNR, in his opinion. Libby asked Barnhart if the City of Orono has a credentialed arborist. Barnhart stated he is sure there is one that resides in town, but not on Staff.