Live stream not working in Chrome or Edge? Click Here
No Bookmarks Exist.
32. 00:00:00
And we will get started with our work meeting in committee or in attendance tonight is everyone. 00:00:01
Which is great. We all didn't have anything planned for our holidays. So the entire Commission is here and we have our legal 00:00:09
counsel and both city staff here as well. So we are excited and we have three public hearing items because #4 has been rescheduled 00:00:16
and then approval of minutes. 00:00:22
And the calendar, yes, thank you. Can't forget the important meeting scheduled for next year because we want to tweak that maybe. 00:00:30
So with that we will jump right in and ask Miss Marsh if you would want to cover the first item for us. 00:00:37
OK, so the first item is Country Pine View subdivision of PUD. This is the landscaping plan amendment. 00:00:47
Regarding the trees that are in the. 00:00:56
West N northwest corner of the property on the PUD. Those were designated as remaining on the site, the applicant submitted. 00:00:58
Assessment by. 00:01:11
They're AR. 00:01:13
It's when they went to go and start removing trees that the arbors did their assessments, so that's why they came back to amend 00:01:15
the landscape plan. 00:01:18
The amendment that I sent over yesterday does have the new landscaping plan in it. 00:01:23
Does anyone have any questions on this one? I don't know if I got a chance to Scroll down. Could you just pull that up before us 00:01:31
real quick so I can see it? 00:01:35
And this is the one where they're taking out. They propose taking out some trees because they're diseased or near utility lines or 00:01:44
leaning or whatever, but they're going to add back more than. 00:01:50
They were. 00:01:57
Their original plan I. 00:01:59
Was replacing more than they were removing. This new plan is replacing the same amount that they're removing OK? 00:02:01
So they had some cushion that was already built into their prior approved. 00:02:11
I think we've got one more page. 00:02:17
So are they not proposing to replace that Grove then? 00:02:19
They are. 00:02:23
With the same number of trees, because that looks like fewer. 00:02:24
Because on the arborist report that calls for this Grove to be removed, there are, if I remember correctly, 16 trees in total I 00:02:30
count. 00:02:35
Seven now in that corner, right? 00:02:39
That seems like half. 00:02:42
My mistake. And if they put the tree somewhere else. 00:02:45
I believe they added some more up in the front. 00:02:48
Unless you have additional requirements to meet one. For one, it's the canopy spread 1:00 to 1:00. 00:02:53
So that old clump of trees met 900 square feet and they have the seven trees that. 00:02:59
At full maturity will equal that 900 square feet. That's the ordinance. But this is a PUD. 00:03:05
You've already granted flexible setbacks. 00:03:11
To this project so conditional uses. 00:03:14
Flexibility to requests are warranted. 00:03:18
It's up to you. 00:03:21
OK. I mean, I'm OK with less trees, Do we? What are the trees they're planning to put in there? A whole bunch of Norway maples? 00:03:22
And what are the larger ones? 00:03:27
Let me zoom in on that the London plane. 00:03:32
Which is a Sycamore tree which gets anthrax in the entire city is riddled with problems with those. 00:03:35
Unless they get the disease resistant variety, which I don't think has been invented yet. 00:03:43
Such an interesting knowledge base I have. Just random stuff when it comes to trees. Sorry, it's that arborist in me. 00:03:49
And there's their canopy notes on there. So 12,513 square feet of canopy removed and 13,522 to be replaced. 00:03:56
So just about 1000 square feet more is what they're proposing back in. 00:04:06
So have the trees been removed? 00:04:13
The ones that were originally permitted to be removed have been so the neighbor whose comments were in the report. 00:04:16
Said it. 00:04:24
He basically took everything out. I'm just curious if we. 00:04:26
We typically want them to get this type of approval before they start chopping those things down, right? Right. And he went in and 00:04:29
started removing the trees that we already approved to be removed on the site plan. 00:04:35
Thanks for that clarification. 00:04:42
This property does have four housing units being placed on it and then kind of a unique shape with it being narrow at the bottom, 00:04:45
so. 00:04:49
What was reviewed? 00:04:54
Preliminary kind of the placement of the houses around existing trees. 00:04:56
I think there were not a lot of trees that were going to remain on there just based off the coverage and the amount of units that. 00:05:03
Were permitted for the. 00:05:11
Memory serves, this was two or three meetings ago, but one of the conditions or one of the requests for the PUD and the setbacks 00:05:15
to be allowed to be moved like that wasn't just for the aesthetics, but also because they initially were talking about wanting to 00:05:21
protect this Grove of trees, right? 00:05:27
There is the trees and then also angling houses so that there's more open space. That's common, right? So they wanted it 00:05:34
aesthetically for the house placement and. 00:05:39
Secondly, for this Grove of trees, which now the person who has removed all the trees says, Oh my gosh, these trees are sick too. 00:05:43
You should let me remove them. 00:05:47
Essentially, right, right. 00:05:52
Carrie, at what point do we concern ourselves with Canopy, in other words? 00:05:55
He can replace trees. 00:06:00
But if he replaces them with saplings? 00:06:03
The canopy. 00:06:05
Not going to. 00:06:08
Reveal itself for many years, right? Our ordinance does say that they have to have the same canopy at maturity. 00:06:09
So they're replaced with 1 1/2 diameter caliper trees. 00:06:17
That's the requirement. So it is specified in our code that they have to be at least 1 1/2 inch caliper tree. That's measured at 00:06:24
chest height. 00:06:28
And then the canopy has to reach the maturity of what was removed, so that could be 20 years. 00:06:34
Right. 00:06:43
19 proposed. 00:07:06
So are they 3000? 00:07:08
Square feet short. 00:07:11
So those were initial calculations that I had off of their original before they submitted their what their actual landscape plan 00:07:15
was. It was here's kind of a rough estimate of these trees that they're now proposing to be removed, but I didn't have actual 00:07:21
square footage from them yet. 00:07:27
Brad, did you have a? 00:07:35
Yeah, just just to give you some maybe a little bit of insight here. So this is the. 00:07:36
In my experience, the most aggressive progressive tree preservation plant in the state. 00:07:43
Ordinance in the state. I'm not saying there's no room for improving anything. I'm just telling you that this. 00:07:49
Is, I would say and I remember. 00:07:55
I'm going to forget his name. He used to be on the council. He is an attorney. 00:08:00
Yeah, Steve Gunn, he was a big proponent of this. He was assigned to the tree committee and I remember doing quite a bit of 00:08:04
research for him on this particular issue and turning it over all to him. And then he helped, you know, take that research and 00:08:10
provided. 00:08:15
Created a draft, you know him and I worked together and creating a draft for that tree preservation ordinance and then it went 00:08:21
through several. 00:08:24
Iterations and revisions at the tree committee, and that's how we ended up with this, but it is. 00:08:28
We tried to make sure it was constitutional so we could do, we could regulate in the way we did and you know, unfortunately you're 00:08:35
it's really difficult to transplant a 50 year old tree. 00:08:41
And have it survive. 00:08:47
And so we are taking out old trees and mature, replacing them with. 00:08:48
But overtime? 00:08:53
It should you know main. 00:08:55
And potentially increase the the actual tree canopy in the city. So anyway just wanted to give you a little bit of background on 00:08:59
that, but. 00:09:03
I think after our pre meeting that Commissioner Roche. 00:09:08
Chair Roach has some ideas on how to strengthen or some he wants to make some requests to strengthen this so that we can 00:09:13
potentially avoid these kind of things. Yeah, I think I'll I'll wait and do a little bit of fact finding with the applicant to to 00:09:19
ensure my understanding and comprehension of how this was put together before I move forward with any recommendation or requests. 00:09:26
And I think as as you as we talked in the pre meeting, I think it is perfectly. 00:09:32
Within the Commission's purview to request staff to come back with some ways that we could strengthen this, I've got. 00:09:40
You know, we talked, we identified a couple of ideas and I think they're. 00:09:48
You know, I'm almost certain there are probably some that we didn't think about. So anyway, perfect, thank you. What would that 00:09:52
mean from a practical standpoint? 00:09:55
With regard to what we're facing tonight. 00:10:00
You know that when you're taking out this number of trees and there is a question on whether or not. 00:10:04
For example, the Arborist report went into sufficient detail and provide sufficient evidence. 00:10:12
That the trees actually are diseased or dying, I. 00:10:20
Is there an opportunity for the city to challenge that or to, you know, at the city's expense, get their own expert to review? 00:10:24
That report, maybe you could beef up what the report requires. 00:10:31
When they're taking out, I mean the larger the Grove that you're taking out, the larger number of. 00:10:35
The more detailed the report has to be. 00:10:40
Things along those lines are kind of things that were kind of discussed. 00:10:42
So perhaps we would want to continue this. 00:10:46
So here's where I would say that there's. 00:10:50
Potentially. 00:10:55
I'm not saying there's not a hill that's worth fighting for. 00:10:59
But the particular tree species might play into that and whether this is the right hill. 00:11:05
In other words, we are talking about a Grove of Russian olives and Siberian Elms. Siberian Elms, which are not regarded as the 00:11:11
most aesthetic. 00:11:16
And highly invasive in some areas in fact. So it's not necessarily the quality of what's there, it's just the fact that it's there 00:11:24
and we're going to lose it and is there. 00:11:30
Enough justification based on someones opinion who works for a tree removal company to justify removing a Grove of trees in our 00:11:36
city. This just may not be the. I'm not saying there's not a hill that is worth. 00:11:43
Looking into that, but we need it would help to have a strengthened ordinance in addition to. 00:11:50
Finding the right hill, right. Well, yeah, I think if I might just clarify, up until this point you've been presented with 00:11:56
documents that. 00:12:01
Is providing a development pattern which hinges on the preservation of this growth of trees or more. 00:12:06
When you get to a point where you're like where your shovel hits the dirt and you start realizing. 00:12:14
Well, this house might be placed in a way that we can't get to those trees. If they do die or if they need to be maintained 00:12:19
another way, let's address them now. 00:12:23
And we're backtracking. That's what we're doing right now. We're backtracking it back into a preliminary level review. 00:12:28
So if this if you believe that this consideration hinders the way you approve the setbacks for this PUD. 00:12:33
That's in play. 00:12:41
So not necessarily the type of tree, or, you know, whether it's diseased or not. You developed a development pattern. You created 00:12:47
a contingent development pattern upon trees that were supposed to be protected. 00:12:53
So, you know, does the layout of the trees now in this configuration warranty the flexibility and setbacks? 00:13:00
That that could be a way that some considerations to think about. 00:13:07
Nobody on this Commission thought they'd spend this much time talking about tree placement, did they? It's great. 00:13:13
I see this as an opportunity to get rid of a lot of bad trees. 00:13:20
Especially ones that are power lines that we're all spending our money. 00:13:25
I had a house like that right before the cities ordinance went and we pulled all the trees out. 00:13:31
Power lines in the corner for the same reason it was not worth. 00:13:38
In there. 00:13:42
At some point, trees. 00:13:48
Agreed. 00:13:51
Good option to do that when. 00:13:55
I absolutely agree and please don't regard me as the the tree hugging hippie that thinks to save them all. I just. 00:14:00
Well, one thing that I might from a personal arborist. 00:14:10
Perspective challenge in this particular situation. 00:14:22
Is there a larger tree further into the lot line that doesn't actually impact power lines and is that really that disease and sick 00:14:26
based on the arborist report or are we talking about slime flux on a branch that was found at the top of the tree and now this 45 00:14:32
foot established tree needs to come out? 00:14:39
A word that's allowed for. 00:14:47
City evaluation. 00:14:49
An evaluation. 00:14:51
Right. With all of that said, I I just think it's important as long as tree discussion is within our purview that we remember that 00:14:54
the tree canopy is one of the things that sets holiday apart. 00:15:00
But I will say this, I am pro property rights and I don't want anyone to tell me I can't cut down a tree I don't like on my 00:15:08
property or a disease sick tree. But I will comply with city code if required to put it back or get a permit to do so. And in this 00:15:15
particular case, I think it warrants A heavier discussion than just a simple property ownership, property rights situation because 00:15:22
of the meeting we had three meetings ago or two meetings ago. 00:15:28
Regarding the request. 00:15:35
To adjust the PUD and the placement of the homes based contingent on aesthetics and the trees. 00:15:37
So with that, sorry, but any other questions about this one before we move to the next item? 00:15:45
All right, roll into #2 carry. 00:15:51
All right, #2 is for a building footprint size for an existing building. Currently, the building is over the allowed footprint 00:15:54
size For an accessory building. They're making some modifications on the footprint, and with the modifications, it does require a 00:16:00
conditional use permit. 00:16:06
So the footprint is detailed. There's a area that's being removed and then area that's being added. 00:16:13
Any questions on this? 00:16:24
Is the. 00:16:26
The home that was removed from this site, is that in a plan to be put back in and this will still continue to be an accessory to 00:16:28
this 'cause, I mean at this point this is kind of the main building at this right? They do have a building permit for a for a 00:16:34
residence. Primary use of the property is residential. 00:16:40
So this will continue to be accessory building. 00:16:48
Under the building footprint maximum, I was looking at each of the size of the properties they had to be. Is there a maximum the 00:16:53
accessory building can be? There's not a maximum. OK, so as long as the conditional use permit, you could go well beyond. 00:17:01
Right. What would come into play is lot coverage. Percentage structures can only cover a certain percent of the setbacks and so 00:17:09
forth. Would kick in, and that would kind of restrict how big ultimately could be. But it still has to get a conditional use for 00:17:16
being over the maximum outright permitted. 00:17:23
What is the percentage of lot size that can be covered by an accessory building? 00:17:31
Generalities I mean. 00:17:39
10%, twenty percent, 50% Usually for a structure it. 00:17:41
As the property size increases, then your percentage goes down. I want to say for an acre it's 30. 00:17:46
35%. 00:17:54
John Gino off the top of your head. 00:17:56
That's why I don't memorize these things. I'm looking at our discussion. I'm just recognizing that it's a 10 acre property, so. 00:17:59
Strikes me. 00:18:07
There's a lot of percentage to work with there. 00:18:09
1% is 10,000 square feet, so I might have missed it, but is there? 00:18:12
A picture of where it's going to be on the lot. I could see the lot and I could see the building up, but I I might it's not a full 00:18:20
picture of the of the site, but this does show the property boundary that is on. 00:18:27
The oh, I'm not sure what side of the property it's. 00:18:35
Oh, I see. I didn't recognize that as a property. Yeah, so the solid line is a property boundary. So this is where the building 00:18:40
is. They're already very close to the property line, and they're making it bigger. They're pretty far from the property line. So 00:18:47
here's where the building is. The property line is out here. Oh, I see. Yep, I see it now. Got it. 00:18:54
Thank you. 00:19:01
And looking at this diagram just so I have my bearings straight and I know I'm looking at it right, the. 00:19:03
House that was there, The estate house was to the right of this. Yes. OK. 00:19:07
Commissioner Prince, yes, I think we already presumed it was. It's a large number, but it's. 00:19:13
20% of the lot size that's owned can be covered in structures. 00:19:19
For this works out to be 87,000 square feet. So we're. 00:19:23
I believe so. Good to know well based on what the building footprint for the house and then the existing other two houses that are 00:19:28
on that right And we do evaluate that lot coverage when building permits are submitted. 00:19:33
OK, good. 00:19:39
Any other questions on this one? 00:19:42
The other thing to note there is that I believe two or three trees are being removed. That's on this plan. 00:19:46
They're small XS on here. They're a little bit hard to see. 00:19:55
Do they have a replacement 1 here? 00:20:01
On this corner. 00:20:04
And then there's a couple of down here. And so their landscape plan is this next plan. 00:20:06
You can see an addition of trees here. They're planting multiple trees across the site. 00:20:12
But that can be a specific condition of trees being removed by this addition to the building be replaced on the site. Is that in 00:20:19
the? 00:20:24
Suggested motion. I don't believe I have a suggested motion for the tree. You can note that if that is something you'd want to 00:20:30
consider. 00:20:34
And that's also something that we check for on the on the building permit. So with the building footprint affecting trees being 00:20:40
removed, those ones would be required to be replaced. 00:20:47
Which it sounds like they're putting 2 to one if they're putting those six out front, OK. 00:20:54
All right, perfect. Any other questions on item 2? 00:20:59
All right. And then lastly is item 3, the text amendment that we're all excited to hear you've been working on. 00:21:04
Yes, So this is for home occupations, the basic. 00:21:11
Outline of this is one thing that we wanted to address was parking that became an issue for one of our prior conditional use 00:21:16
permits. Also being able to approve home occupations with a set list of standards instead of having them be reviewed by the 00:21:22
Planning Commission with a conditional use permit. 00:21:29
So additional languages added. There's some highlighted portions. 00:21:36
That there's some flexibility on any other things that you'd want to add. 00:21:42
Can be added in. We just note that and that would then go to planning or to City Council. If there was a positive recommendation, 00:21:49
you could have the conditions of with language. 00:21:54
Specific, You know, outline whatever you wanted to add in or change in the proposed language. 00:22:00
Kind of. The key points on this are hours. 00:22:11
7:00 AM to 10:00. 00:22:14
Not exceeding 6 people at A. 00:22:16
The on street parking would be approved in certain conditions or circumstances. 00:22:20
Usually if there's an unsafe circumstance or property access, that can be tweaked if that is something that you feel would be 00:22:26
unreasonable. 00:22:30
Off site parking agreements can be utilized. 00:22:36
And I added in a temporary exceedance of the allowed parking on site can occur twice within a month. 00:22:40
So that accounts for like recitals or graduations or other kinds of big larger group events that require more people to be there. 00:22:50
That can be adjusted as well or removed entirely. 00:22:58
I'm only concerned with that and we can talk about that in the work meeting might just. 00:23:02
How does that work from an enforcement standpoint like who's out there measuring you know like what's what's looky loo neighbor or 00:23:07
we encouraging to track it was more than twice that they had more than one car out front. 00:23:13
You could add in language about a single event permit being required if they were to have an event associated with their home 00:23:20
occupation. 00:23:24
So you're saying that the items that are highlighted in green are the items that we have an opportunity to weigh in on, Those are 00:23:28
some that are identified, any anything else is open to discussion as well if there's particular pieces that you'd like to see 00:23:34
added or pieces that you'd like to see removed. 00:23:40
Can you give us an idea on the parameters for the on street parking? 00:23:49
What if they want to have? They'll say the parking is a block away. 00:23:55
To me it doesn't do any good unless there is a distance to the site so that. 00:24:00
So what are what are you thinking as far as letting the? 00:24:05
Director make that approval. 00:24:10
But what is that based on? It is just. 00:24:12
I don't see any parameters by which they have to be measured by to make sure that. 00:24:18
They're in compliance and makes the directors position, so he's not just changing. 00:24:23
So we could say within a distance of 100 feet or. 00:24:30
There's or immediately adjacent to the property owner's property, or if that's not available then across the street or one house 00:24:36
down. Because you do run into issues sometimes with corner properties where you can't park right in front of the house, so then it 00:24:43
would have to be adjusted. That's one of those safety issues. 00:24:51
But we could put a distance on that. I think that would be reasonable. 00:25:00
OK, good catalog. 00:25:04
All right. Any other questions on item three? Yeah, one more. How much of the parking can they have on street? Are you thinking 00:25:08
the entire requirement they could use on street parking? 00:25:13
Or is. 00:25:19
They would have to have specific circumstances that they detail in their application in order for. 00:25:21
On street parking to be approved. 00:25:28
The parking is detailed that it has to be has all parking has to be on site. 00:25:31
Except if there are circumstances where there's personal property. 00:25:36
Access issues or unsafe conditions then we could look outside of that on site requirement. 00:25:43
So at this point in time, you're not sure if it'll be all acceptable off the site, I mean. 00:25:48
They can park on the street 100% or half and OK there would be some circumstances that that may occur where. 00:25:54
All of their parking would be on. 00:26:04
You said, Do you see the difficulty? I don't want to put you guys into another type of thing where you're having to try and figure 00:26:07
out what's the best way to interpret the codes. I think we want to make it as simple as possible. 00:26:13
Because you're not going to be able to meet everybody. 00:26:20
You know, difficulty with having on site parking. 00:26:24
Would it be acceptable to do limited to one on street parking space? 00:26:27
Are you asking me? 00:26:34
Yes. 00:26:36
So I know that. So we had a we had an issue a couple of months ago if you remember that is kind of driving the state law changes, 00:26:38
but there's also. 00:26:42
A couple of other issues that are changing kind. 00:26:47
Creating the catalyst for bringing this out. 00:26:50
And it's kind of, I don't want to say it's an unintended consequence, but it's a consequence that. 00:26:54
May be encompassing too much. How about that? 00:27:00
And so there are particular situations, for example, a corner lot. You can't park in front of a corner lot without violating 00:27:06
Clearview, right? So. 00:27:10
Are you basically saying, well the person on the corner because they can't violate peer review therefore, and they only and they 00:27:15
have a shared driveway. They can't have a home based business period and a discussion move on next person. 00:27:20
Right. I mean, that's kind of the situation that we're trying to address in this particular thing. 00:27:25
The default. 00:27:31
Isn't on street parking. That's not the default. The default is off street parking, and it leaves the director some flexibility if 00:27:33
there are some circumstances that make it impossible to comply. 00:27:39
With the on site parking. 00:27:45
So that's kind of and if there's suggestions in language and we want to tighten something up, I mean certainly. 00:27:48
There's an opportunity to look at that and make some recommendations. 00:27:54
Making some adjustments or changes to that, I mean that's certainly within your purview. 00:27:58
As. 00:28:03
But that's kind of the idea behind this is we had a situation where. 00:28:04
A particular home that has. 00:28:09
The way the code is written, she can't comply. 00:28:11
End of discussion. I mean, she either has to move. 00:28:14
Or do offsite parking, or get some parking across parking arrangement with the neighbor. 00:28:17
Basically, and so it's. 00:28:25
And this was for a music lessons, if you recall. I know most of you are here. 00:28:28
But so this. 00:28:33
And the other thing. 00:28:36
How much, how much regulation should we have on? So certainly we have a safety issue when plowing needs to happen, right? 00:28:40
But we have an aesthetic issue. 00:28:47
Not necessary safety issues, aesthetic issue, if everybody's parking on the street as well, right? And we know that's a problem 00:28:49
and we know that number one, one of the biggest. 00:28:53
Complaint generators in that city is on street parking. 00:28:58
So, but we're trying to come up with some with a kind of a regulatory. 00:29:03
Pattern that. 00:29:08
Has some flexibility, but doesn't open. 00:29:09
The floodgates to create even more. 00:29:13
Complaints, but allows for individuals. 00:29:15
That are doing music less. 00:29:19
They live on a corner. 00:29:21
But we also have language elsewhere in the document about. 00:29:22
Less in home. 00:29:26
For up to six people. 00:29:28
So what do we do in that case if we've got six students at a time? 00:29:30
Do we? I mean, does the teacher have to suggest carpooling? Yeah, And that's I'm going to have you table that question until we 00:29:35
actually get to the discussion on the the. 00:29:40
Agenda in the full formal meeting because it sounds like we've got some great jumping off points for that discussion. So hold on 00:29:45
to those, don't lose them because we'll we'll come back to them here. But with that, any other questions during our work meeting 00:29:51
before we roll into the official meeting? 00:29:56
OK. And just real quick. Well, with that we'll go ahead and close the work meeting. Does anyone need a quick brief recess for any 00:30:04
reason before we start the work meeting? 00:30:08
All right, we're ready to rock'n'roll. 00:30:14
So with that we will get started. It is 6:02 PM. 00:30:16
And welcome to the Holiday City Planning Commission on December 19. 00:30:20
We are going to go through three different public hearing items today and then we have approval of meeting changes and minutes 00:30:26
after those. 00:30:31
As with every meeting, we have a list of things which we read to the public, and I have asked Commissioner Barron if he would do 00:30:38
that for us. 00:30:43
The City of Holiday Planning Commission is a volunteer citizen board whose function is to review land use plans and other special 00:30:48
studies, make recommendations to the City Council on proposed zoning, map and ordinance changes, and approve conditional uses and 00:30:54
subdivisions. 00:31:00
The Planning Commission does not initiate land use applications. 00:31:06
Rather acts on the applications as they are submitted. 00:31:09
Commissioners do not meet with applicants except at publicly noticed meetings. 00:31:13
Commissioners attempt to visit attempt to visit each property on the agenda. 00:31:18
Where the location, the nature of the neighborhood, existing structures and uses related to the proposed use are proposed chain 00:31:24
are noted. 00:31:29
Decisions are based on observations, recommendations from the professional planning staff, the city's general plan, zoning 00:31:33
ordinance and other reports by all verbal and written comments. 00:31:39
And evidence submitted, all of which are part of the public record. 00:31:46
Excellent. Thank you very much for that, Commissioner Barron. And with that we will get started on our meeting. We have on item 00:31:51
number one country Pineview Landscaping plan amendment. 00:31:57
And we will ask city staff if they will go ahead and walk us through the particulars before we invite the applicant up for that. 00:32:03
Thank you, Chair Roche. The first item is a subdivision plan amendment or PUD plan amendment for a landscaping plan. This PUD was 00:32:19
approved with a Grove of trees on the northwest side of the property that was going to stay on the lot. 00:32:28
The applicant went in and started removing trees that were approved to be removed on their PUD plan and their arborist. 00:32:39
Provided an assessment stating that trees on that northwest corner that were originally. 00:32:51
Designated to remain on the property were had various disease or other issues with them and recommended removal. So on the OR the 00:32:57
applicant submitted that assessment by their arborist and a new landscaping plan and I will have the applicant come up and they 00:33:05
can detail that. Great. Thank you very much. And do we have Grant Harrison here today as the applicant. 00:33:14
I'm going to defer to my son who is a little more. 00:33:23
Excellent. If you'll state your name and address for the record and go ahead. Good evening. Mark Harrison, obviously grandson, I'm 00:33:28
the general contractor and developing partner that will actually be building the homes on this site. 00:33:33
Like Carrie said. 00:33:39
We're here to ask for an addendum to the existing proposed or approved plan. As we started the project, we removed the items that 00:33:41
were scheduled to be removed. 00:33:46
But in the process we were left with this Grove of trees in the corner. 00:33:52
We approached our tree experts, which were diamond tree experts, were actually doing the removal and said to them, you know, what 00:33:56
can we do with this Grove of trees that is in this corner to make it look? 00:34:01
Good. Beneficial. 00:34:07
In this corner consists 15 trees, roughly. 00:34:10
13 Siberian Elms, 1 box elder and an apple tree. 00:34:14
Roughly. 00:34:18
These trees have not been touched in probably over 50 years extremely. 00:34:20
Unmaintained. 00:34:26
There is a lot of deadfall consistent in the trees right now. The Northside of the property is being topped by Rocky Mountain 00:34:28
Power, trying to keep their power lines safe. 00:34:33
There's. 00:34:39
Large trees hanging over the neighbor's property. We just we wanted to see, you know, can we can we trim them up? Can we lift them 00:34:41
up? Can we prune them? Can we make them look good? They just don't believe that it's worth the effort to try and save the trees. 00:34:47
We would propose that we come in, take out the existing trees, plant an equal number of trees to replace those just like we are 00:34:54
with the previous ones that we have removed. 00:35:00
And try and make that a little bit. 00:35:07
More quality trees than box. 00:35:10
You know those type of trees? 00:35:14
We understand that the tree ordinance, you know, holiday is holiday because of the tree cover, the canopy that they do have. We 00:35:17
want to maintain that, but we just don't feel that these trees that have not been touched in 60 years and pose A relative amount 00:35:24
of danger to property owners. 00:35:30
And the and we just don't believe. 00:35:37
We can do better. We can replace them. They've kind of reached their lifespan and we can do better and have them be something 00:35:41
beneficial for this property that is going to be. 00:35:46
Appreciate that. And if you do have any questions, we do have the arborist here that did the report and he can answer the disease 00:35:53
questions. Well, the first question I'd like to ask you, if I May is what was the date of, I did not see it on the arborist report 00:35:59
that was submitted to us. What was the date of this assessment? 00:36:05
Before we started removing any trees, it doesn't have a date on it. 00:36:13
But it. 00:36:19
It was. 00:36:20
Do you remember what day we did that, November 16, 1116? 00:36:23
OK. I appreciate that. And if perhaps city staff can just refresh my member. 00:36:33
What was the date we approved the PUD? 00:36:40
Request for this October 24th, October 24th, OK. 00:36:45
So this was just a couple weeks later. 00:36:50
And to also clarify. 00:36:53
Diamond Tree is who you've contracted with. They were contracted to do the removal on all the other trees and then at that time 00:36:56
provided you with this assessment. 00:37:01
Appreciate that. 00:37:09
Commissioners, do we have any other questions for the applicant at this time? 00:37:11
Just because I'm new, Wendy anticipates starting construction on the. 00:37:15
Homes. We still have the development to do so we've just cleared the lot. We just demoed the house and demo the trees and that's 00:37:20
where we are. 00:37:23
So typically in this kind of situation, I'm not the expert. Do you plant now in the winter or wait till the spring? 00:37:26
Probably planting will happen after the houses are built. OK. OK. That's kind of what I was going. So, all right, thank you. As a 00:37:35
general rule of thumb, it's, it's difficult for the trees if there's heavy equipment and you know those. 00:37:42
Construction conditions, that's why my question. Yeah, good question. Thank you. One thing I might just add is we do, we are 00:37:49
required to put in a large French grain system that is on the West side of the property and if you go to, I don't know if you can 00:37:54
pull up page 4. 00:37:59
Of not the landscape plan but the regular plan. I don't have those, but I can pull it up. There is a large French drain that we 00:38:05
have to put in and. 00:38:09
It does encroach on that Grove of trees. We will have to put in a dry well. 00:38:13
Right on the edge of this group of trees. 00:38:19
Which is going to require a large amount of excavation. 00:38:23
And will that well impact your landscape trees that you're proposing to put in there in a way to where it will limit their ability 00:38:27
to reach that full canopy maturity over time? 00:38:34
And it's all buried and then we can plant around it. 00:38:42
Totally fine. OK. I see. All right, Commissioners, any other questions? 00:38:49
OK, we'll go ahead and have you sit. Commissioners, did we want to invite the, well, I guess should we take public comment and 00:38:54
then invite the arborist or take public comment? 00:38:59
Your purview chair. All right, well. 00:39:06
Let's. 00:39:10
All right, let's go ahead. We're going to open the public meeting and invite anyone up to the wants to make comment on the 00:39:12
landscaping plan amendment. We do ask that if you come up, you state your name and address for the record and that you try and be 00:39:19
brief and direct to the point with your comments taking no more than three or 4 minutes. And then if you are following someone 00:39:25
who's already made comments that you do not reiterate the same comments made. 00:39:31
And with that, we'll invite any members of the public that we should come up at this time. 00:39:39
Hi, I'm Megan Miller and I live at 2775 E, 4510 S which is right next door. 00:39:46
And that Grove of trees, they're terrible trees. 00:39:54
There were beautiful trees taken off that had to be taken off and those are, those are really bad trees. I can't imagine anyone. 00:39:59
Living in that in a brand new house that would want those trees in their backyard. So that's our input right next door, looking at 00:40:06
them all the time. And if you if you could just expand on that to Miss Miller, What is it that makes them terrible, Theresa? 00:40:13
They're they're kind of half dying, and they're not quality trees. They're not the kind of tree that someone would want to plant. 00:40:22
You know, if they wanted landscaping, if they'd built a brand new house, I would take them out if I built a house there. 00:40:28
OK. Thank you. I appreciate that. 00:40:34
My name is Scott Miller. I'm Megan's husband next door. Anyway, for years I've been going over there and helping Mrs. Sweet and 00:40:45
kind of maintain some of that area. 00:40:51
And in fact, I took a lot of the dead fall and I. 00:40:57
Stand them up against the fence to try to keep the deer out of there and their big large deadfalls. They just. 00:41:00
Crack off and they're just, it's just a junk tree. They're really hard to maintain and they're hard to keep clean. 00:41:07
We were all for taking him out, OK? 00:41:14
Thank you. Appreciate that. That's very helpful. 00:41:17
And with that, any other members of the public that wish to make comment on the trees at this time? 00:41:21
All right. And with that, I believe we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. They did bring the arborist. So I think it's only 00:41:28
fair that we invite the representative from Diamond to come up and make any comment on this. 00:41:34
On these terrible trees. 00:41:40
Hey everybody, My name is Sean Sortland. I am the certified arborist who works with diamond tree experts. 00:41:44
I live at 1541 S 200 W in Bountiful, UT. 00:41:49
Yeah, these trees. I agree with the Millers completely. Everyone of the Elms is exhibiting. 00:41:55
Slime flux, which is a bacterial infection. It leads to rot in the trees and it's also. 00:42:03
It's gathering right in the union of the Co dominant lead, so I'm not sure if you guys were. 00:42:11
What neighbor you are, but some of the larger trees they are compromised. 00:42:19
They all have included bark with these codominant leads. That compromises them and makes them less strong. 00:42:23
Everyone of the Elms also exhibited signs of leaf miners. 00:42:31
Which will dramatically. 00:42:35
Decrease the canopy of these trees because they feast on the leaves and then. 00:42:37
They produce little flies that fly around everywhere and, you know, make enjoying your backyard pretty tough. 00:42:44
The apple tree is totally dead. That's not coming back at all. And then the box elder after years of Rocky Mountain power 00:42:51
hammering on it. I'm sure there are many capitals and other weak unions up there too, that. 00:42:57
You know that tree should just be removed? 00:43:04
Even if they were cleaned. 00:43:08
With the hazards in the upper canopy would be pretty unsafe for you know any little kids playing in the backyard, anybody just 00:43:10
trying to enjoy their space back there. So, and I appreciate you mentioning your is a certified. I was just curious are you also 00:43:15
track certified? 00:43:20
And for anyone not aware, track is Tree Risk Assessment Qualification, which is an additional certification by ISA. 00:43:26
And so this line flux you found to be in the main trunk of the trees on everyone of them. It wasn't like higher up on branches. 00:43:34
They're kind of bad. I could e-mail you them too really quick if you wanted to bring them up on your computer, but. 00:43:44
Yeah, every single one of the Elms exhibited this. 00:43:51
Slime. 00:43:55
OK. And then as far as determining leaf miners, I'm assuming being in November, you were looking at the leaves on the ground. Well 00:43:56
you could see the the, the leaves that were still on. I mean you can see some of the little larva still inside of the leaves that 00:44:01
didn't make it out. You know it's it's pretty obvious to tell. 00:44:07
I have pictures of those too, if you'd like. OK, gotcha. All right. Any other questions for the arbors? 00:44:13
All right. We'll go ahead and have you sit down. Thank you very much. 00:44:21
All right. 00:44:24
With that, we'll go ahead and move into. 00:44:27
Discussion. 00:44:31
So I'm grateful that the applicant took the time to have the arborist take a look at these and I do like the plan that they've 00:44:33
presented to try and make sure the canopy is met. 00:44:39
And with. 00:44:46
Drainage that they have to put in, yes. The disturbance to the root zone is going to be very problematic in there and it's 00:44:48
definitely going to impact the long term survival of the trees and push them into a further decline, which it sounds like quite a 00:44:54
few of them already might may be in. 00:45:00
That being said, I do have some concerns or reservations just from the. 00:45:07
Way the ordinance is set up and written currently. 00:45:14
To allow the. 00:45:19
Assessment or. 00:45:21
To allow an arborist. 00:45:24
To be done by also a company that specializes in removal and this is not targeting any specific company, but I think there may be 00:45:28
sometimes a conflict of interest. 00:45:32
If there's financial benefit to. 00:45:38
Person conducting the report. 00:45:41
To say, well, we can also take those out for you. Um. 00:45:44
So I think it might be something looking future into our ordinance and the way it's written, it might be beneficial to have it be. 00:45:48
Done by a representative who is not in the business also of removal but specializes just in care and. 00:45:58
Preservation. 00:46:08
But obviously still take into account when removal is recommended. 00:46:11
Chair, I'm curious, are there enough companies out there? 00:46:15
That do this in terms of care and observation that are not. 00:46:20
Tree removal services or would that be a cumbersome? 00:46:26
I believe I can think of several off the top of my head that do exist. Are they as large and well established as the one the 00:46:31
applicant is used? Maybe not, but I do believe there are other companies out there that could provide that and I would just look 00:46:37
to staff if maybe there's a way to. 00:46:42
Articulate that better in the ordinance for future. 00:46:49
Amendment. 00:46:54
But I think as far as what the applicants have presented tonight. 00:46:55
Based on the tree health assessment and the fact that he does carry the track certification, which I think is very important in a 00:47:01
situation like this. 00:47:05
Safety is paramount, right? Like I'll cut down a whole forest if it means we're going to save someone from Hazard. 00:47:11
Right. So I think that's definitely something that must be considered. And again, when you talk about the grading and everything 00:47:16
that's going to go into where this was preserved. 00:47:21
I don't think the trees would handle the additional stress, so I do agree with the arborists. 00:47:28
Recommendation based on all those factors. That being said, I do think it's important because of the conversation that we had with 00:47:34
the applicant 2 months ago back on October 24th. 00:47:41
Where you know, 50% of the PUD approval for this project was based on trying to protect that Grove of trees that we hold them 00:47:49
accountable to, ensuring that they're still going to be a sufficient tree canopy of what hopefully the neighbors, the Millers next 00:47:56
door can call quality or aesthetic trees as opposed to terrible ones. 00:48:03
To be placed back in there and along with that I might make a recommendation that we also ensure that proper watering. 00:48:12
Place a factor in that as well. Not just the planting of the trees, but ensuring that proper irrigation techniques is outlined in 00:48:20
city code as far as drip systems and everything else. 00:48:25
Are added in there as well to ensure long term viability so that we do obtain that lush canopy. 00:48:30
That the terrible trees were trying to provide. 00:48:38
So that's my thoughts and with that I will open it up for other commissioner dialogue, feedback or input on this. 00:48:42
So Chair, you're suggesting that any requirements moving forward that we have a secondary assessment? 00:48:51
Not apply in this. 00:49:00
Correct. I think in this case that would be onerous and outside of what's currently in code. 00:49:03
And I don't think that's a fair requirement to put on the applicant at this time. And also. 00:49:10
Is it important moving forward that a secondary assessment be conducted by an organization that? 00:49:18
Would also be qualified to remove the trees. 00:49:28
I would be concerned about a secondary organization that specializes or profits from removal. 00:49:34
Because even though, excuse me, but even though they don't also have the same conflict of interest as would be the case here. 00:49:42
In other words, the secondary assessment wouldn. 00:49:50
Provide the conflict of interest. 00:49:53
We have here. Are you suggesting that they could go with any vendor that can provide an assessment that does removal as long as 00:49:55
they don't contract that for the applicant? 00:50:01
I would be interested in that discussion with city staff at a future time. 00:50:09
I mean, it gives us more flexibility, right? Yeah. I mean, I don't want to limit any business. 00:50:15
Link
Start video at
Social
Embed

* you need to log in to manage your favorites

My Favorites List
You haven't added any favorites yet. Click the "Add Favorite" button on any media page, and they'll show up here.
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
Unable to preview the file.
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
Unable to preview the file.
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
Unable to preview the file.
32. 00:00:00
And we will get started with our work meeting in committee or in attendance tonight is everyone. 00:00:01
Which is great. We all didn't have anything planned for our holidays. So the entire Commission is here and we have our legal 00:00:09
counsel and both city staff here as well. So we are excited and we have three public hearing items because #4 has been rescheduled 00:00:16
and then approval of minutes. 00:00:22
And the calendar, yes, thank you. Can't forget the important meeting scheduled for next year because we want to tweak that maybe. 00:00:30
So with that we will jump right in and ask Miss Marsh if you would want to cover the first item for us. 00:00:37
OK, so the first item is Country Pine View subdivision of PUD. This is the landscaping plan amendment. 00:00:47
Regarding the trees that are in the. 00:00:56
West N northwest corner of the property on the PUD. Those were designated as remaining on the site, the applicant submitted. 00:00:58
Assessment by. 00:01:11
They're AR. 00:01:13
It's when they went to go and start removing trees that the arbors did their assessments, so that's why they came back to amend 00:01:15
the landscape plan. 00:01:18
The amendment that I sent over yesterday does have the new landscaping plan in it. 00:01:23
Does anyone have any questions on this one? I don't know if I got a chance to Scroll down. Could you just pull that up before us 00:01:31
real quick so I can see it? 00:01:35
And this is the one where they're taking out. They propose taking out some trees because they're diseased or near utility lines or 00:01:44
leaning or whatever, but they're going to add back more than. 00:01:50
They were. 00:01:57
Their original plan I. 00:01:59
Was replacing more than they were removing. This new plan is replacing the same amount that they're removing OK? 00:02:01
So they had some cushion that was already built into their prior approved. 00:02:11
I think we've got one more page. 00:02:17
So are they not proposing to replace that Grove then? 00:02:19
They are. 00:02:23
With the same number of trees, because that looks like fewer. 00:02:24
Because on the arborist report that calls for this Grove to be removed, there are, if I remember correctly, 16 trees in total I 00:02:30
count. 00:02:35
Seven now in that corner, right? 00:02:39
That seems like half. 00:02:42
My mistake. And if they put the tree somewhere else. 00:02:45
I believe they added some more up in the front. 00:02:48
Unless you have additional requirements to meet one. For one, it's the canopy spread 1:00 to 1:00. 00:02:53
So that old clump of trees met 900 square feet and they have the seven trees that. 00:02:59
At full maturity will equal that 900 square feet. That's the ordinance. But this is a PUD. 00:03:05
You've already granted flexible setbacks. 00:03:11
To this project so conditional uses. 00:03:14
Flexibility to requests are warranted. 00:03:18
It's up to you. 00:03:21
OK. I mean, I'm OK with less trees, Do we? What are the trees they're planning to put in there? A whole bunch of Norway maples? 00:03:22
And what are the larger ones? 00:03:27
Let me zoom in on that the London plane. 00:03:32
Which is a Sycamore tree which gets anthrax in the entire city is riddled with problems with those. 00:03:35
Unless they get the disease resistant variety, which I don't think has been invented yet. 00:03:43
Such an interesting knowledge base I have. Just random stuff when it comes to trees. Sorry, it's that arborist in me. 00:03:49
And there's their canopy notes on there. So 12,513 square feet of canopy removed and 13,522 to be replaced. 00:03:56
So just about 1000 square feet more is what they're proposing back in. 00:04:06
So have the trees been removed? 00:04:13
The ones that were originally permitted to be removed have been so the neighbor whose comments were in the report. 00:04:16
Said it. 00:04:24
He basically took everything out. I'm just curious if we. 00:04:26
We typically want them to get this type of approval before they start chopping those things down, right? Right. And he went in and 00:04:29
started removing the trees that we already approved to be removed on the site plan. 00:04:35
Thanks for that clarification. 00:04:42
This property does have four housing units being placed on it and then kind of a unique shape with it being narrow at the bottom, 00:04:45
so. 00:04:49
What was reviewed? 00:04:54
Preliminary kind of the placement of the houses around existing trees. 00:04:56
I think there were not a lot of trees that were going to remain on there just based off the coverage and the amount of units that. 00:05:03
Were permitted for the. 00:05:11
Memory serves, this was two or three meetings ago, but one of the conditions or one of the requests for the PUD and the setbacks 00:05:15
to be allowed to be moved like that wasn't just for the aesthetics, but also because they initially were talking about wanting to 00:05:21
protect this Grove of trees, right? 00:05:27
There is the trees and then also angling houses so that there's more open space. That's common, right? So they wanted it 00:05:34
aesthetically for the house placement and. 00:05:39
Secondly, for this Grove of trees, which now the person who has removed all the trees says, Oh my gosh, these trees are sick too. 00:05:43
You should let me remove them. 00:05:47
Essentially, right, right. 00:05:52
Carrie, at what point do we concern ourselves with Canopy, in other words? 00:05:55
He can replace trees. 00:06:00
But if he replaces them with saplings? 00:06:03
The canopy. 00:06:05
Not going to. 00:06:08
Reveal itself for many years, right? Our ordinance does say that they have to have the same canopy at maturity. 00:06:09
So they're replaced with 1 1/2 diameter caliper trees. 00:06:17
That's the requirement. So it is specified in our code that they have to be at least 1 1/2 inch caliper tree. That's measured at 00:06:24
chest height. 00:06:28
And then the canopy has to reach the maturity of what was removed, so that could be 20 years. 00:06:34
Right. 00:06:43
19 proposed. 00:07:06
So are they 3000? 00:07:08
Square feet short. 00:07:11
So those were initial calculations that I had off of their original before they submitted their what their actual landscape plan 00:07:15
was. It was here's kind of a rough estimate of these trees that they're now proposing to be removed, but I didn't have actual 00:07:21
square footage from them yet. 00:07:27
Brad, did you have a? 00:07:35
Yeah, just just to give you some maybe a little bit of insight here. So this is the. 00:07:36
In my experience, the most aggressive progressive tree preservation plant in the state. 00:07:43
Ordinance in the state. I'm not saying there's no room for improving anything. I'm just telling you that this. 00:07:49
Is, I would say and I remember. 00:07:55
I'm going to forget his name. He used to be on the council. He is an attorney. 00:08:00
Yeah, Steve Gunn, he was a big proponent of this. He was assigned to the tree committee and I remember doing quite a bit of 00:08:04
research for him on this particular issue and turning it over all to him. And then he helped, you know, take that research and 00:08:10
provided. 00:08:15
Created a draft, you know him and I worked together and creating a draft for that tree preservation ordinance and then it went 00:08:21
through several. 00:08:24
Iterations and revisions at the tree committee, and that's how we ended up with this, but it is. 00:08:28
We tried to make sure it was constitutional so we could do, we could regulate in the way we did and you know, unfortunately you're 00:08:35
it's really difficult to transplant a 50 year old tree. 00:08:41
And have it survive. 00:08:47
And so we are taking out old trees and mature, replacing them with. 00:08:48
But overtime? 00:08:53
It should you know main. 00:08:55
And potentially increase the the actual tree canopy in the city. So anyway just wanted to give you a little bit of background on 00:08:59
that, but. 00:09:03
I think after our pre meeting that Commissioner Roche. 00:09:08
Chair Roach has some ideas on how to strengthen or some he wants to make some requests to strengthen this so that we can 00:09:13
potentially avoid these kind of things. Yeah, I think I'll I'll wait and do a little bit of fact finding with the applicant to to 00:09:19
ensure my understanding and comprehension of how this was put together before I move forward with any recommendation or requests. 00:09:26
And I think as as you as we talked in the pre meeting, I think it is perfectly. 00:09:32
Within the Commission's purview to request staff to come back with some ways that we could strengthen this, I've got. 00:09:40
You know, we talked, we identified a couple of ideas and I think they're. 00:09:48
You know, I'm almost certain there are probably some that we didn't think about. So anyway, perfect, thank you. What would that 00:09:52
mean from a practical standpoint? 00:09:55
With regard to what we're facing tonight. 00:10:00
You know that when you're taking out this number of trees and there is a question on whether or not. 00:10:04
For example, the Arborist report went into sufficient detail and provide sufficient evidence. 00:10:12
That the trees actually are diseased or dying, I. 00:10:20
Is there an opportunity for the city to challenge that or to, you know, at the city's expense, get their own expert to review? 00:10:24
That report, maybe you could beef up what the report requires. 00:10:31
When they're taking out, I mean the larger the Grove that you're taking out, the larger number of. 00:10:35
The more detailed the report has to be. 00:10:40
Things along those lines are kind of things that were kind of discussed. 00:10:42
So perhaps we would want to continue this. 00:10:46
So here's where I would say that there's. 00:10:50
Potentially. 00:10:55
I'm not saying there's not a hill that's worth fighting for. 00:10:59
But the particular tree species might play into that and whether this is the right hill. 00:11:05
In other words, we are talking about a Grove of Russian olives and Siberian Elms. Siberian Elms, which are not regarded as the 00:11:11
most aesthetic. 00:11:16
And highly invasive in some areas in fact. So it's not necessarily the quality of what's there, it's just the fact that it's there 00:11:24
and we're going to lose it and is there. 00:11:30
Enough justification based on someones opinion who works for a tree removal company to justify removing a Grove of trees in our 00:11:36
city. This just may not be the. I'm not saying there's not a hill that is worth. 00:11:43
Looking into that, but we need it would help to have a strengthened ordinance in addition to. 00:11:50
Finding the right hill, right. Well, yeah, I think if I might just clarify, up until this point you've been presented with 00:11:56
documents that. 00:12:01
Is providing a development pattern which hinges on the preservation of this growth of trees or more. 00:12:06
When you get to a point where you're like where your shovel hits the dirt and you start realizing. 00:12:14
Well, this house might be placed in a way that we can't get to those trees. If they do die or if they need to be maintained 00:12:19
another way, let's address them now. 00:12:23
And we're backtracking. That's what we're doing right now. We're backtracking it back into a preliminary level review. 00:12:28
So if this if you believe that this consideration hinders the way you approve the setbacks for this PUD. 00:12:33
That's in play. 00:12:41
So not necessarily the type of tree, or, you know, whether it's diseased or not. You developed a development pattern. You created 00:12:47
a contingent development pattern upon trees that were supposed to be protected. 00:12:53
So, you know, does the layout of the trees now in this configuration warranty the flexibility and setbacks? 00:13:00
That that could be a way that some considerations to think about. 00:13:07
Nobody on this Commission thought they'd spend this much time talking about tree placement, did they? It's great. 00:13:13
I see this as an opportunity to get rid of a lot of bad trees. 00:13:20
Especially ones that are power lines that we're all spending our money. 00:13:25
I had a house like that right before the cities ordinance went and we pulled all the trees out. 00:13:31
Power lines in the corner for the same reason it was not worth. 00:13:38
In there. 00:13:42
At some point, trees. 00:13:48
Agreed. 00:13:51
Good option to do that when. 00:13:55
I absolutely agree and please don't regard me as the the tree hugging hippie that thinks to save them all. I just. 00:14:00
Well, one thing that I might from a personal arborist. 00:14:10
Perspective challenge in this particular situation. 00:14:22
Is there a larger tree further into the lot line that doesn't actually impact power lines and is that really that disease and sick 00:14:26
based on the arborist report or are we talking about slime flux on a branch that was found at the top of the tree and now this 45 00:14:32
foot established tree needs to come out? 00:14:39
A word that's allowed for. 00:14:47
City evaluation. 00:14:49
An evaluation. 00:14:51
Right. With all of that said, I I just think it's important as long as tree discussion is within our purview that we remember that 00:14:54
the tree canopy is one of the things that sets holiday apart. 00:15:00
But I will say this, I am pro property rights and I don't want anyone to tell me I can't cut down a tree I don't like on my 00:15:08
property or a disease sick tree. But I will comply with city code if required to put it back or get a permit to do so. And in this 00:15:15
particular case, I think it warrants A heavier discussion than just a simple property ownership, property rights situation because 00:15:22
of the meeting we had three meetings ago or two meetings ago. 00:15:28
Regarding the request. 00:15:35
To adjust the PUD and the placement of the homes based contingent on aesthetics and the trees. 00:15:37
So with that, sorry, but any other questions about this one before we move to the next item? 00:15:45
All right, roll into #2 carry. 00:15:51
All right, #2 is for a building footprint size for an existing building. Currently, the building is over the allowed footprint 00:15:54
size For an accessory building. They're making some modifications on the footprint, and with the modifications, it does require a 00:16:00
conditional use permit. 00:16:06
So the footprint is detailed. There's a area that's being removed and then area that's being added. 00:16:13
Any questions on this? 00:16:24
Is the. 00:16:26
The home that was removed from this site, is that in a plan to be put back in and this will still continue to be an accessory to 00:16:28
this 'cause, I mean at this point this is kind of the main building at this right? They do have a building permit for a for a 00:16:34
residence. Primary use of the property is residential. 00:16:40
So this will continue to be accessory building. 00:16:48
Under the building footprint maximum, I was looking at each of the size of the properties they had to be. Is there a maximum the 00:16:53
accessory building can be? There's not a maximum. OK, so as long as the conditional use permit, you could go well beyond. 00:17:01
Right. What would come into play is lot coverage. Percentage structures can only cover a certain percent of the setbacks and so 00:17:09
forth. Would kick in, and that would kind of restrict how big ultimately could be. But it still has to get a conditional use for 00:17:16
being over the maximum outright permitted. 00:17:23
What is the percentage of lot size that can be covered by an accessory building? 00:17:31
Generalities I mean. 00:17:39
10%, twenty percent, 50% Usually for a structure it. 00:17:41
As the property size increases, then your percentage goes down. I want to say for an acre it's 30. 00:17:46
35%. 00:17:54
John Gino off the top of your head. 00:17:56
That's why I don't memorize these things. I'm looking at our discussion. I'm just recognizing that it's a 10 acre property, so. 00:17:59
Strikes me. 00:18:07
There's a lot of percentage to work with there. 00:18:09
1% is 10,000 square feet, so I might have missed it, but is there? 00:18:12
A picture of where it's going to be on the lot. I could see the lot and I could see the building up, but I I might it's not a full 00:18:20
picture of the of the site, but this does show the property boundary that is on. 00:18:27
The oh, I'm not sure what side of the property it's. 00:18:35
Oh, I see. I didn't recognize that as a property. Yeah, so the solid line is a property boundary. So this is where the building 00:18:40
is. They're already very close to the property line, and they're making it bigger. They're pretty far from the property line. So 00:18:47
here's where the building is. The property line is out here. Oh, I see. Yep, I see it now. Got it. 00:18:54
Thank you. 00:19:01
And looking at this diagram just so I have my bearings straight and I know I'm looking at it right, the. 00:19:03
House that was there, The estate house was to the right of this. Yes. OK. 00:19:07
Commissioner Prince, yes, I think we already presumed it was. It's a large number, but it's. 00:19:13
20% of the lot size that's owned can be covered in structures. 00:19:19
For this works out to be 87,000 square feet. So we're. 00:19:23
I believe so. Good to know well based on what the building footprint for the house and then the existing other two houses that are 00:19:28
on that right And we do evaluate that lot coverage when building permits are submitted. 00:19:33
OK, good. 00:19:39
Any other questions on this one? 00:19:42
The other thing to note there is that I believe two or three trees are being removed. That's on this plan. 00:19:46
They're small XS on here. They're a little bit hard to see. 00:19:55
Do they have a replacement 1 here? 00:20:01
On this corner. 00:20:04
And then there's a couple of down here. And so their landscape plan is this next plan. 00:20:06
You can see an addition of trees here. They're planting multiple trees across the site. 00:20:12
But that can be a specific condition of trees being removed by this addition to the building be replaced on the site. Is that in 00:20:19
the? 00:20:24
Suggested motion. I don't believe I have a suggested motion for the tree. You can note that if that is something you'd want to 00:20:30
consider. 00:20:34
And that's also something that we check for on the on the building permit. So with the building footprint affecting trees being 00:20:40
removed, those ones would be required to be replaced. 00:20:47
Which it sounds like they're putting 2 to one if they're putting those six out front, OK. 00:20:54
All right, perfect. Any other questions on item 2? 00:20:59
All right. And then lastly is item 3, the text amendment that we're all excited to hear you've been working on. 00:21:04
Yes, So this is for home occupations, the basic. 00:21:11
Outline of this is one thing that we wanted to address was parking that became an issue for one of our prior conditional use 00:21:16
permits. Also being able to approve home occupations with a set list of standards instead of having them be reviewed by the 00:21:22
Planning Commission with a conditional use permit. 00:21:29
So additional languages added. There's some highlighted portions. 00:21:36
That there's some flexibility on any other things that you'd want to add. 00:21:42
Can be added in. We just note that and that would then go to planning or to City Council. If there was a positive recommendation, 00:21:49
you could have the conditions of with language. 00:21:54
Specific, You know, outline whatever you wanted to add in or change in the proposed language. 00:22:00
Kind of. The key points on this are hours. 00:22:11
7:00 AM to 10:00. 00:22:14
Not exceeding 6 people at A. 00:22:16
The on street parking would be approved in certain conditions or circumstances. 00:22:20
Usually if there's an unsafe circumstance or property access, that can be tweaked if that is something that you feel would be 00:22:26
unreasonable. 00:22:30
Off site parking agreements can be utilized. 00:22:36
And I added in a temporary exceedance of the allowed parking on site can occur twice within a month. 00:22:40
So that accounts for like recitals or graduations or other kinds of big larger group events that require more people to be there. 00:22:50
That can be adjusted as well or removed entirely. 00:22:58
I'm only concerned with that and we can talk about that in the work meeting might just. 00:23:02
How does that work from an enforcement standpoint like who's out there measuring you know like what's what's looky loo neighbor or 00:23:07
we encouraging to track it was more than twice that they had more than one car out front. 00:23:13
You could add in language about a single event permit being required if they were to have an event associated with their home 00:23:20
occupation. 00:23:24
So you're saying that the items that are highlighted in green are the items that we have an opportunity to weigh in on, Those are 00:23:28
some that are identified, any anything else is open to discussion as well if there's particular pieces that you'd like to see 00:23:34
added or pieces that you'd like to see removed. 00:23:40
Can you give us an idea on the parameters for the on street parking? 00:23:49
What if they want to have? They'll say the parking is a block away. 00:23:55
To me it doesn't do any good unless there is a distance to the site so that. 00:24:00
So what are what are you thinking as far as letting the? 00:24:05
Director make that approval. 00:24:10
But what is that based on? It is just. 00:24:12
I don't see any parameters by which they have to be measured by to make sure that. 00:24:18
They're in compliance and makes the directors position, so he's not just changing. 00:24:23
So we could say within a distance of 100 feet or. 00:24:30
There's or immediately adjacent to the property owner's property, or if that's not available then across the street or one house 00:24:36
down. Because you do run into issues sometimes with corner properties where you can't park right in front of the house, so then it 00:24:43
would have to be adjusted. That's one of those safety issues. 00:24:51
But we could put a distance on that. I think that would be reasonable. 00:25:00
OK, good catalog. 00:25:04
All right. Any other questions on item three? Yeah, one more. How much of the parking can they have on street? Are you thinking 00:25:08
the entire requirement they could use on street parking? 00:25:13
Or is. 00:25:19
They would have to have specific circumstances that they detail in their application in order for. 00:25:21
On street parking to be approved. 00:25:28
The parking is detailed that it has to be has all parking has to be on site. 00:25:31
Except if there are circumstances where there's personal property. 00:25:36
Access issues or unsafe conditions then we could look outside of that on site requirement. 00:25:43
So at this point in time, you're not sure if it'll be all acceptable off the site, I mean. 00:25:48
They can park on the street 100% or half and OK there would be some circumstances that that may occur where. 00:25:54
All of their parking would be on. 00:26:04
You said, Do you see the difficulty? I don't want to put you guys into another type of thing where you're having to try and figure 00:26:07
out what's the best way to interpret the codes. I think we want to make it as simple as possible. 00:26:13
Because you're not going to be able to meet everybody. 00:26:20
You know, difficulty with having on site parking. 00:26:24
Would it be acceptable to do limited to one on street parking space? 00:26:27
Are you asking me? 00:26:34
Yes. 00:26:36
So I know that. So we had a we had an issue a couple of months ago if you remember that is kind of driving the state law changes, 00:26:38
but there's also. 00:26:42
A couple of other issues that are changing kind. 00:26:47
Creating the catalyst for bringing this out. 00:26:50
And it's kind of, I don't want to say it's an unintended consequence, but it's a consequence that. 00:26:54
May be encompassing too much. How about that? 00:27:00
And so there are particular situations, for example, a corner lot. You can't park in front of a corner lot without violating 00:27:06
Clearview, right? So. 00:27:10
Are you basically saying, well the person on the corner because they can't violate peer review therefore, and they only and they 00:27:15
have a shared driveway. They can't have a home based business period and a discussion move on next person. 00:27:20
Right. I mean, that's kind of the situation that we're trying to address in this particular thing. 00:27:25
The default. 00:27:31
Isn't on street parking. That's not the default. The default is off street parking, and it leaves the director some flexibility if 00:27:33
there are some circumstances that make it impossible to comply. 00:27:39
With the on site parking. 00:27:45
So that's kind of and if there's suggestions in language and we want to tighten something up, I mean certainly. 00:27:48
There's an opportunity to look at that and make some recommendations. 00:27:54
Making some adjustments or changes to that, I mean that's certainly within your purview. 00:27:58
As. 00:28:03
But that's kind of the idea behind this is we had a situation where. 00:28:04
A particular home that has. 00:28:09
The way the code is written, she can't comply. 00:28:11
End of discussion. I mean, she either has to move. 00:28:14
Or do offsite parking, or get some parking across parking arrangement with the neighbor. 00:28:17
Basically, and so it's. 00:28:25
And this was for a music lessons, if you recall. I know most of you are here. 00:28:28
But so this. 00:28:33
And the other thing. 00:28:36
How much, how much regulation should we have on? So certainly we have a safety issue when plowing needs to happen, right? 00:28:40
But we have an aesthetic issue. 00:28:47
Not necessary safety issues, aesthetic issue, if everybody's parking on the street as well, right? And we know that's a problem 00:28:49
and we know that number one, one of the biggest. 00:28:53
Complaint generators in that city is on street parking. 00:28:58
So, but we're trying to come up with some with a kind of a regulatory. 00:29:03
Pattern that. 00:29:08
Has some flexibility, but doesn't open. 00:29:09
The floodgates to create even more. 00:29:13
Complaints, but allows for individuals. 00:29:15
That are doing music less. 00:29:19
They live on a corner. 00:29:21
But we also have language elsewhere in the document about. 00:29:22
Less in home. 00:29:26
For up to six people. 00:29:28
So what do we do in that case if we've got six students at a time? 00:29:30
Do we? I mean, does the teacher have to suggest carpooling? Yeah, And that's I'm going to have you table that question until we 00:29:35
actually get to the discussion on the the. 00:29:40
Agenda in the full formal meeting because it sounds like we've got some great jumping off points for that discussion. So hold on 00:29:45
to those, don't lose them because we'll we'll come back to them here. But with that, any other questions during our work meeting 00:29:51
before we roll into the official meeting? 00:29:56
OK. And just real quick. Well, with that we'll go ahead and close the work meeting. Does anyone need a quick brief recess for any 00:30:04
reason before we start the work meeting? 00:30:08
All right, we're ready to rock'n'roll. 00:30:14
So with that we will get started. It is 6:02 PM. 00:30:16
And welcome to the Holiday City Planning Commission on December 19. 00:30:20
We are going to go through three different public hearing items today and then we have approval of meeting changes and minutes 00:30:26
after those. 00:30:31
As with every meeting, we have a list of things which we read to the public, and I have asked Commissioner Barron if he would do 00:30:38
that for us. 00:30:43
The City of Holiday Planning Commission is a volunteer citizen board whose function is to review land use plans and other special 00:30:48
studies, make recommendations to the City Council on proposed zoning, map and ordinance changes, and approve conditional uses and 00:30:54
subdivisions. 00:31:00
The Planning Commission does not initiate land use applications. 00:31:06
Rather acts on the applications as they are submitted. 00:31:09
Commissioners do not meet with applicants except at publicly noticed meetings. 00:31:13
Commissioners attempt to visit attempt to visit each property on the agenda. 00:31:18
Where the location, the nature of the neighborhood, existing structures and uses related to the proposed use are proposed chain 00:31:24
are noted. 00:31:29
Decisions are based on observations, recommendations from the professional planning staff, the city's general plan, zoning 00:31:33
ordinance and other reports by all verbal and written comments. 00:31:39
And evidence submitted, all of which are part of the public record. 00:31:46
Excellent. Thank you very much for that, Commissioner Barron. And with that we will get started on our meeting. We have on item 00:31:51
number one country Pineview Landscaping plan amendment. 00:31:57
And we will ask city staff if they will go ahead and walk us through the particulars before we invite the applicant up for that. 00:32:03
Thank you, Chair Roche. The first item is a subdivision plan amendment or PUD plan amendment for a landscaping plan. This PUD was 00:32:19
approved with a Grove of trees on the northwest side of the property that was going to stay on the lot. 00:32:28
The applicant went in and started removing trees that were approved to be removed on their PUD plan and their arborist. 00:32:39
Provided an assessment stating that trees on that northwest corner that were originally. 00:32:51
Designated to remain on the property were had various disease or other issues with them and recommended removal. So on the OR the 00:32:57
applicant submitted that assessment by their arborist and a new landscaping plan and I will have the applicant come up and they 00:33:05
can detail that. Great. Thank you very much. And do we have Grant Harrison here today as the applicant. 00:33:14
I'm going to defer to my son who is a little more. 00:33:23
Excellent. If you'll state your name and address for the record and go ahead. Good evening. Mark Harrison, obviously grandson, I'm 00:33:28
the general contractor and developing partner that will actually be building the homes on this site. 00:33:33
Like Carrie said. 00:33:39
We're here to ask for an addendum to the existing proposed or approved plan. As we started the project, we removed the items that 00:33:41
were scheduled to be removed. 00:33:46
But in the process we were left with this Grove of trees in the corner. 00:33:52
We approached our tree experts, which were diamond tree experts, were actually doing the removal and said to them, you know, what 00:33:56
can we do with this Grove of trees that is in this corner to make it look? 00:34:01
Good. Beneficial. 00:34:07
In this corner consists 15 trees, roughly. 00:34:10
13 Siberian Elms, 1 box elder and an apple tree. 00:34:14
Roughly. 00:34:18
These trees have not been touched in probably over 50 years extremely. 00:34:20
Unmaintained. 00:34:26
There is a lot of deadfall consistent in the trees right now. The Northside of the property is being topped by Rocky Mountain 00:34:28
Power, trying to keep their power lines safe. 00:34:33
There's. 00:34:39
Large trees hanging over the neighbor's property. We just we wanted to see, you know, can we can we trim them up? Can we lift them 00:34:41
up? Can we prune them? Can we make them look good? They just don't believe that it's worth the effort to try and save the trees. 00:34:47
We would propose that we come in, take out the existing trees, plant an equal number of trees to replace those just like we are 00:34:54
with the previous ones that we have removed. 00:35:00
And try and make that a little bit. 00:35:07
More quality trees than box. 00:35:10
You know those type of trees? 00:35:14
We understand that the tree ordinance, you know, holiday is holiday because of the tree cover, the canopy that they do have. We 00:35:17
want to maintain that, but we just don't feel that these trees that have not been touched in 60 years and pose A relative amount 00:35:24
of danger to property owners. 00:35:30
And the and we just don't believe. 00:35:37
We can do better. We can replace them. They've kind of reached their lifespan and we can do better and have them be something 00:35:41
beneficial for this property that is going to be. 00:35:46
Appreciate that. And if you do have any questions, we do have the arborist here that did the report and he can answer the disease 00:35:53
questions. Well, the first question I'd like to ask you, if I May is what was the date of, I did not see it on the arborist report 00:35:59
that was submitted to us. What was the date of this assessment? 00:36:05
Before we started removing any trees, it doesn't have a date on it. 00:36:13
But it. 00:36:19
It was. 00:36:20
Do you remember what day we did that, November 16, 1116? 00:36:23
OK. I appreciate that. And if perhaps city staff can just refresh my member. 00:36:33
What was the date we approved the PUD? 00:36:40
Request for this October 24th, October 24th, OK. 00:36:45
So this was just a couple weeks later. 00:36:50
And to also clarify. 00:36:53
Diamond Tree is who you've contracted with. They were contracted to do the removal on all the other trees and then at that time 00:36:56
provided you with this assessment. 00:37:01
Appreciate that. 00:37:09
Commissioners, do we have any other questions for the applicant at this time? 00:37:11
Just because I'm new, Wendy anticipates starting construction on the. 00:37:15
Homes. We still have the development to do so we've just cleared the lot. We just demoed the house and demo the trees and that's 00:37:20
where we are. 00:37:23
So typically in this kind of situation, I'm not the expert. Do you plant now in the winter or wait till the spring? 00:37:26
Probably planting will happen after the houses are built. OK. OK. That's kind of what I was going. So, all right, thank you. As a 00:37:35
general rule of thumb, it's, it's difficult for the trees if there's heavy equipment and you know those. 00:37:42
Construction conditions, that's why my question. Yeah, good question. Thank you. One thing I might just add is we do, we are 00:37:49
required to put in a large French grain system that is on the West side of the property and if you go to, I don't know if you can 00:37:54
pull up page 4. 00:37:59
Of not the landscape plan but the regular plan. I don't have those, but I can pull it up. There is a large French drain that we 00:38:05
have to put in and. 00:38:09
It does encroach on that Grove of trees. We will have to put in a dry well. 00:38:13
Right on the edge of this group of trees. 00:38:19
Which is going to require a large amount of excavation. 00:38:23
And will that well impact your landscape trees that you're proposing to put in there in a way to where it will limit their ability 00:38:27
to reach that full canopy maturity over time? 00:38:34
And it's all buried and then we can plant around it. 00:38:42
Totally fine. OK. I see. All right, Commissioners, any other questions? 00:38:49
OK, we'll go ahead and have you sit. Commissioners, did we want to invite the, well, I guess should we take public comment and 00:38:54
then invite the arborist or take public comment? 00:38:59
Your purview chair. All right, well. 00:39:06
Let's. 00:39:10
All right, let's go ahead. We're going to open the public meeting and invite anyone up to the wants to make comment on the 00:39:12
landscaping plan amendment. We do ask that if you come up, you state your name and address for the record and that you try and be 00:39:19
brief and direct to the point with your comments taking no more than three or 4 minutes. And then if you are following someone 00:39:25
who's already made comments that you do not reiterate the same comments made. 00:39:31
And with that, we'll invite any members of the public that we should come up at this time. 00:39:39
Hi, I'm Megan Miller and I live at 2775 E, 4510 S which is right next door. 00:39:46
And that Grove of trees, they're terrible trees. 00:39:54
There were beautiful trees taken off that had to be taken off and those are, those are really bad trees. I can't imagine anyone. 00:39:59
Living in that in a brand new house that would want those trees in their backyard. So that's our input right next door, looking at 00:40:06
them all the time. And if you if you could just expand on that to Miss Miller, What is it that makes them terrible, Theresa? 00:40:13
They're they're kind of half dying, and they're not quality trees. They're not the kind of tree that someone would want to plant. 00:40:22
You know, if they wanted landscaping, if they'd built a brand new house, I would take them out if I built a house there. 00:40:28
OK. Thank you. I appreciate that. 00:40:34
My name is Scott Miller. I'm Megan's husband next door. Anyway, for years I've been going over there and helping Mrs. Sweet and 00:40:45
kind of maintain some of that area. 00:40:51
And in fact, I took a lot of the dead fall and I. 00:40:57
Stand them up against the fence to try to keep the deer out of there and their big large deadfalls. They just. 00:41:00
Crack off and they're just, it's just a junk tree. They're really hard to maintain and they're hard to keep clean. 00:41:07
We were all for taking him out, OK? 00:41:14
Thank you. Appreciate that. That's very helpful. 00:41:17
And with that, any other members of the public that wish to make comment on the trees at this time? 00:41:21
All right. And with that, I believe we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. They did bring the arborist. So I think it's only 00:41:28
fair that we invite the representative from Diamond to come up and make any comment on this. 00:41:34
On these terrible trees. 00:41:40
Hey everybody, My name is Sean Sortland. I am the certified arborist who works with diamond tree experts. 00:41:44
I live at 1541 S 200 W in Bountiful, UT. 00:41:49
Yeah, these trees. I agree with the Millers completely. Everyone of the Elms is exhibiting. 00:41:55
Slime flux, which is a bacterial infection. It leads to rot in the trees and it's also. 00:42:03
It's gathering right in the union of the Co dominant lead, so I'm not sure if you guys were. 00:42:11
What neighbor you are, but some of the larger trees they are compromised. 00:42:19
They all have included bark with these codominant leads. That compromises them and makes them less strong. 00:42:23
Everyone of the Elms also exhibited signs of leaf miners. 00:42:31
Which will dramatically. 00:42:35
Decrease the canopy of these trees because they feast on the leaves and then. 00:42:37
They produce little flies that fly around everywhere and, you know, make enjoying your backyard pretty tough. 00:42:44
The apple tree is totally dead. That's not coming back at all. And then the box elder after years of Rocky Mountain power 00:42:51
hammering on it. I'm sure there are many capitals and other weak unions up there too, that. 00:42:57
You know that tree should just be removed? 00:43:04
Even if they were cleaned. 00:43:08
With the hazards in the upper canopy would be pretty unsafe for you know any little kids playing in the backyard, anybody just 00:43:10
trying to enjoy their space back there. So, and I appreciate you mentioning your is a certified. I was just curious are you also 00:43:15
track certified? 00:43:20
And for anyone not aware, track is Tree Risk Assessment Qualification, which is an additional certification by ISA. 00:43:26
And so this line flux you found to be in the main trunk of the trees on everyone of them. It wasn't like higher up on branches. 00:43:34
They're kind of bad. I could e-mail you them too really quick if you wanted to bring them up on your computer, but. 00:43:44
Yeah, every single one of the Elms exhibited this. 00:43:51
Slime. 00:43:55
OK. And then as far as determining leaf miners, I'm assuming being in November, you were looking at the leaves on the ground. Well 00:43:56
you could see the the, the leaves that were still on. I mean you can see some of the little larva still inside of the leaves that 00:44:01
didn't make it out. You know it's it's pretty obvious to tell. 00:44:07
I have pictures of those too, if you'd like. OK, gotcha. All right. Any other questions for the arbors? 00:44:13
All right. We'll go ahead and have you sit down. Thank you very much. 00:44:21
All right. 00:44:24
With that, we'll go ahead and move into. 00:44:27
Discussion. 00:44:31
So I'm grateful that the applicant took the time to have the arborist take a look at these and I do like the plan that they've 00:44:33
presented to try and make sure the canopy is met. 00:44:39
And with. 00:44:46
Drainage that they have to put in, yes. The disturbance to the root zone is going to be very problematic in there and it's 00:44:48
definitely going to impact the long term survival of the trees and push them into a further decline, which it sounds like quite a 00:44:54
few of them already might may be in. 00:45:00
That being said, I do have some concerns or reservations just from the. 00:45:07
Way the ordinance is set up and written currently. 00:45:14
To allow the. 00:45:19
Assessment or. 00:45:21
To allow an arborist. 00:45:24
To be done by also a company that specializes in removal and this is not targeting any specific company, but I think there may be 00:45:28
sometimes a conflict of interest. 00:45:32
If there's financial benefit to. 00:45:38
Person conducting the report. 00:45:41
To say, well, we can also take those out for you. Um. 00:45:44
So I think it might be something looking future into our ordinance and the way it's written, it might be beneficial to have it be. 00:45:48
Done by a representative who is not in the business also of removal but specializes just in care and. 00:45:58
Preservation. 00:46:08
But obviously still take into account when removal is recommended. 00:46:11
Chair, I'm curious, are there enough companies out there? 00:46:15
That do this in terms of care and observation that are not. 00:46:20
Tree removal services or would that be a cumbersome? 00:46:26
I believe I can think of several off the top of my head that do exist. Are they as large and well established as the one the 00:46:31
applicant is used? Maybe not, but I do believe there are other companies out there that could provide that and I would just look 00:46:37
to staff if maybe there's a way to. 00:46:42
Articulate that better in the ordinance for future. 00:46:49
Amendment. 00:46:54
But I think as far as what the applicants have presented tonight. 00:46:55
Based on the tree health assessment and the fact that he does carry the track certification, which I think is very important in a 00:47:01
situation like this. 00:47:05
Safety is paramount, right? Like I'll cut down a whole forest if it means we're going to save someone from Hazard. 00:47:11
Right. So I think that's definitely something that must be considered. And again, when you talk about the grading and everything 00:47:16
that's going to go into where this was preserved. 00:47:21
I don't think the trees would handle the additional stress, so I do agree with the arborists. 00:47:28
Recommendation based on all those factors. That being said, I do think it's important because of the conversation that we had with 00:47:34
the applicant 2 months ago back on October 24th. 00:47:41
Where you know, 50% of the PUD approval for this project was based on trying to protect that Grove of trees that we hold them 00:47:49
accountable to, ensuring that they're still going to be a sufficient tree canopy of what hopefully the neighbors, the Millers next 00:47:56
door can call quality or aesthetic trees as opposed to terrible ones. 00:48:03
To be placed back in there and along with that I might make a recommendation that we also ensure that proper watering. 00:48:12
Place a factor in that as well. Not just the planting of the trees, but ensuring that proper irrigation techniques is outlined in 00:48:20
city code as far as drip systems and everything else. 00:48:25
Are added in there as well to ensure long term viability so that we do obtain that lush canopy. 00:48:30
That the terrible trees were trying to provide. 00:48:38
So that's my thoughts and with that I will open it up for other commissioner dialogue, feedback or input on this. 00:48:42
So Chair, you're suggesting that any requirements moving forward that we have a secondary assessment? 00:48:51
Not apply in this. 00:49:00
Correct. I think in this case that would be onerous and outside of what's currently in code. 00:49:03
And I don't think that's a fair requirement to put on the applicant at this time. And also. 00:49:10
Is it important moving forward that a secondary assessment be conducted by an organization that? 00:49:18
Would also be qualified to remove the trees. 00:49:28
I would be concerned about a secondary organization that specializes or profits from removal. 00:49:34
Because even though, excuse me, but even though they don't also have the same conflict of interest as would be the case here. 00:49:42
In other words, the secondary assessment wouldn. 00:49:50
Provide the conflict of interest. 00:49:53
We have here. Are you suggesting that they could go with any vendor that can provide an assessment that does removal as long as 00:49:55
they don't contract that for the applicant? 00:50:01
I would be interested in that discussion with city staff at a future time. 00:50:09
I mean, it gives us more flexibility, right? Yeah. I mean, I don't want to limit any business. 00:50:15
scroll up