Laserfiche WebLink
! <br />5. <br />MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION <br />TREE PRESERVATION WORK SESSION HELD SEPTEMBER 12,1997 <br />Replacement of trees native to the area is appropriate. It is standard for a developer to post <br />a bond for completion of a subdivision project. Gaffron agreed that a Letter of Credit is <br />common. If dead trees were not replaced, the Letter of Credit would not be released. <br />Berg questioned how the City would know if significant trees were removed within 2 years <br />of a subdivision application. Van Zomeren responded that it would be difficult to monitor. <br />Lindquist added that this issue could be dealt v^ith at the time of a new application. <br />Tree Sizes <br />Van Zomeren suggested referring to lakeshore standards once again to be consistent <br />6. Before Starting Work <br />Members agreed this section was well written. <br />7. City Forester Tree Species List <br />Hawn suggested a list be kept at the City offices rather than listing the good/bad trees in an <br />ordinance. Stoddard did not think it was a bad idea to include a listing in the ordinance as <br />a forester would agree with such a list. <br />Van Zomeren continued with discussion of "An Ordinance Amending Minnetonka City Code <br />Chapter 300 Regarding Tree Protection and Density Ranges" as it would relate to Orono’s situation. <br />In Section I, the definition of a Significant Tree would parallel the lakeshore ordinance. <br />I