Laserfiche WebLink
agreed that Sycamores would be on the new approved list. He said that the City <br />does plant Sycamore and there are new varieties that are resistant. <br />M/S Ira /Hartnett to close the public hearing. The motion passed by a <br />unanimous voice vote by those present. <br />Council discussed the conflict in values between people wanting to produce <br />versus having tree -lined streets. The removal of City -owned trees is inconsistent <br />with long- standing policy for tree canopy, City right of way, and the roof line is not <br />high enough to allow canopy. One thing the City can look at is the solar access <br />issue and maybe suggest changes but they cannot grant the appeal based on the <br />type of tree. <br />Planning Manager Ekas confirmed that the current Tree Task force is looking at <br />updating the approved list of trees <br />Vice Mayor Foust stated that she could not vote in favor of the staff <br />recommendation due to the 1998 City policy that prohibits these trees versus the <br />fact that these trees are planted around the City. She encouraged anyone on <br />staff or in the community to please help the appellants with their situation by <br />contacting staff. <br />M/S Hartnett/Aguirre reviewed and approved the motion to uphold Staff's denial of <br />the permit application for the removal of two- City -owned Sycamore street trees <br />located in the planting strip adjacent to 111 Nevada Street. The motion passed <br />by a majority voice vote by those present with Vice Mayor Foust voting no <br />and Council Members Bain and Howard absent. (603) MINUTE ORDER 06 -190 <br />8. STAFF REPORTS <br />A. Discuss Pilot Street Sweeping Project Concept <br />PWS Superintendent Harang presented the report and asked for Council direction <br />on the proposed three -month pilot program. <br />Council Members discussed the need for more community involvement such as a <br />neighborhood member assisting in reminding residents of the street sweeper <br />schedule. Other comments included support for the pilot program as a creative <br />solution, that some neighborhoods do not have an option to park on the opposite <br />side of the street (might need to be neighborhood specific), citations may not be <br />the best option, that the Utilities Committee could review the program, and that an <br />efficient monthly sweep might be better than a more frequent sweeping schedule. <br />JOINT CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY <br />MEETING MINUTES <br />SEPTEMBER 11, 2006 <br />PAGE 7 <br />MINUTE BOOK NO. 61 <br />Paae 255 <br />