New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
Trees & Tree Commission
COE
>
PW
>
POS_PWM
>
Parks
>
Street Trees.Urban Forestry
>
Trees & Tree Commission
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/9/2014 2:24:44 PM
Creation date
7/9/2014 2:24:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PW_Operating
PW_Document_Type_ Operating
Correspondence
PW_Division
Parks and Open Space
External_View
No
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
344
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mr. Ahlijian said that when the City does "put some teeth" into its efforts <br /> to preserve historic trees, he hoped that staff such as those in the Public <br /> Works Department, would be fully supported in conducting their work and that <br /> they would be given some time away from other duties to devote special care <br /> to those trees. He felt that without full cooperation among City <br /> departments, education programs and a master plan might be viewed as lip <br /> service. <br /> Mr. Schmaedick said the commission ought to put as much flexibility as <br /> possible in ordinances and its master plan for the benefit of landowners. By <br /> making restrictions on what people can do with their property, trees might be <br /> the center of the growth /no growth argument. He believed that no one really <br /> wanted to destroy trees. Mr. Ahlijian disagreed, explaining that some people <br /> see trees as messy, costly, and obstructive. Some businesses feel trees <br /> impair shoppers' ability to see their stores. <br /> Mr. Kolb said that discussion had begun to concentrate on individual items <br /> and that that discussion should be held after staff had reviewed work done <br /> that evening. <br /> Mr. Post added that at the next two meetings, the commission ought to <br /> concentrate on the presentation it would give the City Council. <br /> IX. REVIEW <br /> Mr. Lum said it was helpful to know other people's perspectives. Mr. <br /> Schmaedick felt Mr. Kolb and Ms. Richman did a great job of steering the <br /> commission towards creating a manageable plan. <br /> Ms. Bentsen said at first she was unsure whether everyone would get an <br /> opportunity to speak but was glad to see that everyone was able to give his <br /> or her opinions and ideas. She felt that knowing who wrote each item would <br /> help her know other members better. Mr. Friedkin agreed. Mr. Schmaedick <br /> pointed out that not knowing "who wrote what" was also beneficial. <br /> Ms. Breen felt the commission had done a good job in focusing a number of <br /> diverse viewpoints. <br /> Mr. Ahlijian said he would like to have another work session, or as many as <br /> it would take to get the commission's work done. <br /> Mr. Kolb said that the discussion on the urban forest definition had <br /> concerned him but was happy that members had moved on. He said he would be <br /> glad to continue work with the commission. <br /> The meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. <br /> (Recorded by Jacqueline Woge) <br /> MNMTC 030890 <br /> MINUTES - -Tree Commission March 8, 1990 Page 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.