Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/31/2001 Environmental Board MinutesENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 CITY OF LINO LAKES MINUTES DATE : January 31, 2001 TIME STARTED : 6:34 P.M. TIME ENDED : 9:16 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Amy Donlin, Constance Grundhofer, Rod Kukonen, Scott Lanyon, Dave Mach, Theresa O'Connell, and Mike Trehus. MEMBERS ABSENT : None. Staff members present: Environmental Coordinator Marty Asleson. CALL TO ORDER Chair Lanyon called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. January 3, 2001— The following corrections were requested: Page 9, sixth paragraph: "Trehus stated that by unanimous vote the Board recommended that the tower not be built in that location." , • 4 , Page 11, first paragraph: "O'Connell indicated that the DNR study on greenway space could be used as a model. Trehus agreed that Saddle Club should correspond with the model." , g'''' '''1,i''''J•'• i., ...i Trehus moved to approve the January (-:,l,001.me4ingminutes as amended above. ry O'Connell seconded the motion. otiokca7d unanimousiy. „TY , ,,:. APPROVAL OF AGENDA ,,.. — _..,,„, ',..,',. .,...,,:!..,..z.:::,:::.,,,4,-, • The Board would not addr4s 6BSaddl#Club Update (Item 1-02). • Comments on the meeting Chay,Lanyon attended would be added on to Section 7C: Environmental Board Gals 2001 ;.)• The agenda was approved as amended above. CITIZEN COMMENTS' No comments wereade. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR/VICE CHAIR It was decided that Scott Lanyon would continue as Chair, and that Dave Mach would be the Vice Chair. Kukonen moved to approve the appointments of Chair and Vice Chair. Grundhofer seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. PROJECT REVIEW A. Ryan/Target Project Submittal (Item 1-01) — Asleson explained that the green sheet was to help recall previous information relevant to present discussion. There was no green sheet given for this item, because a formal submittal had been received. Asleson read the background section of the agenda sheet item 1-01. Several plans have been submitted including formal project submittal, a grading plan, a tree inventory and preservation/restoration plan, surface water infiltration proposals, a landscape plan, and a lighting plan. No response from the Rice Creek Watershed District has been received. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) still needed to be completed and the wetland mitigation area is still yet to be determined. Asleson asked for comments or recommendations from the Board. Chair Lanyon stated that the Board did not know the recommendationstle Watershed District had discussed. The tree inventory was the most important e'oricern for the Board, specifically where the tamarack trees would be planted. .-.i i•. Grundhofer asked if the size of the trees had been determined. Asleson answered that the trees would be two inches in diameter. Chair Lanyon noted that until the Board.had comments and or recommendations from the Watershed District the Board could not make any recommendations. Asleson confirmed that no comments were received in is office from the Watershed District. Chair Lanyon pointed out that other species had encroached in the area. Asleson addressed'the surface water flow, stating concerns about the efficiency of installed infiltration tubes iii the low area before it leaves the site. ic, Y�yF ,heat!, Donlin inquired about the preparation of the area, if they were going to grade and drill. Asleson asked_John Johnson if he could make some general comments about the subject. is .,,r:_ ,h, ':;iS"yY" John Johnson, Civil Engineer, stated that the infiltration tubes were typically 15'x 2'x 3' and worked like a drain field in situations where there was above normal rain and below 100 year rain. The concern was that the ponds would not work as well over time, because of build up of sediment. The infiltration tubes are installed by building trenches with a backhoe, then covering them up. 2 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 Donlin admitted that she had reservations with the tamarack plantings, if the cottonwood and the aspen were removed and the tamarack did not do well, it would be barren. She commented on the beauty of the cottonwood and aspen which were planned for removal. Asleson noted that the present state of the area was impacted, with most of the tamarack trees gone after 1967 when the highway was put in. This was an attempt to bring it closer to its original state prior to 1967. Donlin said that by removing the aspen and cottonwood 70% of the significant trees on site would be removed. She feared that if the tamarack plantings were unsuccessful, the area would remain essentially treeless. Asleson stated that the tamaracks were in a wet meadow before the highway went through. Chair Lanyon asked if the Board could make a recommendation not knowing the water impact. Mach stated that a restoration of the tamarack theme could be recommended, because aspen would probably encroach fairly quickly, and tamaracks grow more slowly than cottonwoods and aspen. Asleson noted that the Watershed District would probably not recommend the infiltration tubes. Grundhofer inquired on the lighting of the pylons, if they met the code standards. 4! 4 O'Connell mentioned that there was no reference tk.color in the ordinance. Asleson indicated the lights were highntensi reduce glare. h the center, but were quickly reduced to Chair Lanyon offered that there had not been aresponse to the recommendations of the Board at the January 3, 2001 meeting and added the necessity of hearing from the Rice Creek Watershed District Donlin agreed and asked if their responses to the recommendations would be at the next meeting, in addition to the proposed choices of vegetation. Asleson indicate at the architect had called to ask for the list of recommended plantings.,Donlin urged that the plantings consist of those that would attract bird species, and have;`several textures and colors including prairie gardens, would soften the big box appearance. ,x„ y'i.4'J4i Asleson noted that there were several lists, and assured the Board that the Ryan/Target representatives would receive them. Donlin indicated that the Board members would like the lists to be sent to them by E -Mail. 3 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 B. Saddle Club Addition (Item 1-02) — Tabled to the February 28, 2001 meeting. C. Summit Fire Protection/Minor Subdivision/Apollo Business District (Item 1-03) — Asleson read the background for agenda item 1-03. The company assembles and installed sprinkler systems submitted a site plan, which was reviewed at the June 28, 200 meeting. Excavated areas were made into infiltration ponds and storm pipes feed rainwater directly into the ponds. Soil compaction was 95%, a spec for the vegetation growth areas was requested. Options noted were to change the soil specs to reflect less than 1.7 G/cu cm. Second to require a native plant maintenance contract. Third to require a few native flowerbeds in the front which is consistent with other nearby businesses. He asked for questions or comments. Trehus asked the meaning of .134 on the infiltration worksheet. Mr. Johnson replied that it was the percentage that allowed infiltration to occur/acre. The measurement was the bottom, of the infiltration basins to differentiate from grass, also to compare the volume generated to be infiltrated at a certain level. Grundhofer inquired about the proposed 22,00 square foot expansion Mlle future. Mr. Johnson answered that the proposed infiltration system was designed to accommodate the expansion. Asleson added the change, which had taken place since ifwas last reviewed, was the land two acres in the north had been approved by the W4rsliedpistridk ---, t.• 'it.4 4, Donlin stated that the City should take the lead, from North Oaks m promoting prairie gardens. Mr. Johnson replied that the businesses 1 WantsOmething that looks attractive. The business owners were apprehensive.about,the required regular burnings for prairie grasses. V' Donlin urged that an attempt be made to fmd a location on the property where native grasses could safely be grow/AThe issue was a lack of understanding. Chair Lanyon agreed adding that it was an educational, process IL- Mr. Johnson indicated -that it was not appealing because there were no examples of mature gardens. He explained what was needed was specific examples of native grasses nearby that the business representatives could see and learn from. He added that there was fear of managing infestation like purple loosestrife. O'Connell respondedthatthe ADC in Shakopee has an entryway that was entirely native, and that itwai Weirestablished. Johnson indicated that they needed to see the difference between native grasses and an untended meadow. Chair Lanyon suggested that business owners be invited to established sites to see the plantings and ask maintenance questions. As to the 4 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 recommendations, the Board concurred with staff in promoting native vegetation, along with the standard recommendations. Mr. Dalbee, Project Designer for Ryan Companies US, Inc., indicated that an environmental architect had been hired. Donlin complimented the use of premium cut off lamps because it was a good choice to reduce glare, and suggested to staff that the information about these lamps be given to Target. Chair Lanyon stated that the Board recommended the project. D. VFW Post 6583/Apollo Drive (Item 1-04) — Asleson read the background sheet. The VFW wishes to sell 1.5 acres and have the area surveyed. Staff recommends that the elderberries on the bank's property be extended to Lake Drive, and that the Board should approve the request to sell and survey the VFW land. He asked for comments. O'Connell asked for a clarification who the buyers would be. Asleson, answered a dental group, and that it was zoned commercial. Donlin inquired about the access road. Asleson indicated :it would be on the regional road Apollo Drive. Chair Lanyon questioned if the property had ,77.e.levance to thegreenway. Asleson answered the woodland in the eastern part weatened. a} No additional recommendations with staffrecommendations included from the Board were stated. The project was approved unanimously. E. 12th and Holly Drive/Subdivisiolication.Review (Item 1-05) — The background for agenda Item 1-05 was read by Asleson The area on the northern side had been impacted, and shows no evidence oarm or unique species. Staff visited the site and made recommendations Asleson asked for any new recommendations. Grundhofer suggested shortening the road and removing Lot 5. Donlin stated that:withthe possibility of rich fen on the site, there should be no grading. In the past, the area`was;a wetland, a bog type landscape, and quite wet. Asleson noted 'thatthe went to look at the site, it had been heavily impacted, and ditched in the west:.,, Chair Lanyon asked what recourse the Board had to respond to the delineation of the project plan, and if there was disagreement, could it be recommended that the report be repeated. 5 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 Donlin indicated there is bias when a company hires another company to report findings. Asleson continued that it had been impacted. Chair Lanyon mentioned that there was a difference between the wetland delineation of 20 years ago and that of today in the vegetation. Mach pointed out that there was no plan for restoration, and submitted the possibility the Board not approve. Donlin agreed in light of the ditches and the past projects the company has worked on, they have not fulfilled the obligations of those projects. Chair Lanyon explained that the Board was concerned about those previously unfulfilled obligations. Mach indicated that the goal should be to raise the environmental quality of the parcel, which would ultimately increase the value. Chair Lanyon advised the applicable information should be reissued, because even if the area was degraded, it may not take much to restore the area to increase its value. Asleson identified the parcel was the same size as Peregrine Pass at 80 acre's, where the streets were narrowed, retention ponds added. With no conservation `ordinance on the books, there seems to be no way to implement the same procedure with 12th and Holly. t.. Trehus noted the plat map had been modified, and Smyser's report stated concerns over multiple driveways that connect to 12th Streetorfolly,,Dr��ive. He explained that there 4 n5 should be no driveways on arterial roads, :because traffie�congestion was an environmental issue. Chair Lanyon submitted that other groups would follow this example, Lots 1 and 8 with a driveway going onto 12th Street should beremoved to retain open space. Donlin stated that Smyser'again {supports it with the statement, "When 5 to 7 of the 14 lots don't meet the standards..." Grundhofer reviewed the recommendations to reduce the number of lots, which were not attempted, but Merely changed the street position. The present proposal threatens the potential fen site. Sle;then asked if the person in the existing house was developing the property. Chair Lanyon stated that the proposal was a step backwards in terms of efforts promoting green developments. E. Apitz/Birch/Hodgeson (Item 1-06) — Mr. Goertz stated that the area in the west was in the greenway corridor so the configurations had been changed, although the same maps 6 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 were used as in the concept plan. Asleson clarified general comments were wanted for a future concept plan. Grundhofer asked if there was a garage located in the white space. Mr. Goertz explained that the proposal was to subdivide the area leaving the piece for the farm. The house on the corner was working with the county. Grundhofer inquired about the split of 3.98 acres from the rest of the property set aside for future development. Mr. Goertz responded that there was a renter living in the house. The owner wanted to continue renting to them. Chair Lanyon stated the concern was for the greenways, and the needed buffers near the wetlands. An increase in open spaces and connections with the greenspaces were key. He urged them to work with the Greenway Project, that it would be beneficial. Mr. Goertz explained that the owner's association would own the land and a landscape committee would decide future changes. Kukonen indicated that a standard buffer would be required around a wetland. Asleson agreed that a buffer was needed with the greenway The bridge on Highway 49 would make a walkway. The soils in the area were found to beIsanti wet, which was sandy with water down about 18 inches, and supports canary grass Mr. Goertz stated that they had talked to the Watershed District, and those areas were avoided. The ditch was dug 35 years ago The has been in probate for five years. The townhouses were in the $200,000 and -over price range. Mach stated that he was impressed with' amount of land that was to remain untouched. Mr. Goertz explained that about 30% of the land was to remain untouched, with 70 units on 40.5 acres. There were plans for the association to control the use, and staff had recommended a conservation easement. Asleson agreed that a conservation easement was needed to preserve the buffer, so that it would not be seen:as unnecessary and mowed down. Chair Lanyon stated that there had been no discussion of landscaping, and the Board ' recommends native -plantings. Asleson concurred and suggested that a management plan be drawn up for the undeveloped areas. Chair Lanyon pointed out that it takes creative design, but buildings could be closer together to give larger views. Mr. Goertz responded that the configurations were designed to break up the impression of a line of garages. He explained that in Roseville the pads were 32 feet by 80 feet, but here they would be 40 feet by 80 feet. 7 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 Mach stated that it appeared to be an attractive place to live, and they could charge more for the lots. Grundhofer noted that a new road would be created off of Highway 49, and inquired about the median. Mr. Goertz answered that they have been working with the County concerning the median. Trehus questioned the location of the greenway in the Comprehensive Plan, was there supposed to be an area zoned commercial. Mr. Goertz responded that in the northeast there would be an outlot. Asleson asked for comments and recommendations on the green sheet. Chair Lanyon stated the general set of guidelines. Mr. Goertz stated that he had the information, and would work on it. Donlin noted that lighting was also important. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD BUSINESS A. Minnesota DNRJWildland Interface Project/Updates —Asleson stated that there was a meeting the day before. It was noted that Hugo appeared to bOhead Of Lino Lakes in both the formations of Zoning Ordinance and a ConsrerviiihnbrairianCe. A base map for three-fourths of the City had been completed. Ms. Sind had several pages of issues, however there were no written comments. A wildlife survey hiCl'been completed. There was a discussion that the Comprehensive Plan and-Zpnipg information for the City was better than average. It was noted that whenttaff receives written comments, they would be forwarded in March or April. The Metro Greenway Plan was submitted with the Watershed District, concerning 12,000 acres. There was $2,600 budgeted to 2002, with the work needing to be done from January to June. The inventory will be done for the entire City, because the Soil„cpnservation District can go on private property without landowner consent, so there Will be a.pretty-high level of classification. = , Donlin asked if the information would also be obtained through GIS. Asleson answered that the high level:of,classification will be available through Metropolitan Council's 2000 - photography. Mr. Husveth was contracted through the State to do the inventory. B. Development Concerns/Birch Street and Centerville Road — Asleson stated that there were no plans to do anything on that comer. Donlin inquired about the plans for the trees in the area, it appeared that they were being removed. Asleson replied that things were happening, but there were no plans for development. 8 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 C. Environmental Board Goals 2001— Chair Lanyon stated that the Board should be proactive, not reactive. He explained many times the project review takes considerable time, but if it could be reduced, it would leave more time for environmental education. Trehus asked if there were other cities with checklists of the criteria. Asleson stated with the timelines, the Board could be more proactive. Chair Lanyon suggested to have specified roles for each person, then the specified person comments on that subject for every project review. O'Connell agreed and added if another has comments on that topic they could be E -Mailed to the designated person. Trehus asked if they were to pick tonight from a list of categories. Asleson stated it should focus on the review process. Chair Lanyon agreed to make the process more effective. There were nine points on the guidelines, so each person should pick two points. Mach mentioned that through the specialization, the Board could educate itself by sharing what each is learning. Trehus noted it would be beneficial to inquire what other cities were doing. Asleson indicated he could bring information on what other cities are doing to the Board, and mentioned that Blaine was putting together an Erivironmental Board. Lanyon added that it would be beneficial to get people from other cities together and informally discuss issues. O'Connell noted that the tour she went on none of the cities represented had an Environmental Board. Chair Lanyon suggested that the goals needed to be prioritized, to streamline the review process. Donlin pointed out #3 Grundhofer identified #2, Chair Lanyon urged the Board to choose a different goal because #2 would be too nebulous; it needed to be identifiable. O'Connell stated part of #1, specifically to continue with the City Council with the property adjacent to the elementary school, find a way to protect and celebrate the area in 2001. Chair Lanyon indicated that there should be 3-4 specific goals, not necessarily written, as the 2000 goals were to be used as guiding principles. Asleson mentioned that a website could be created as an ongoing educational aide. Chair Lanyon suggested an agenda item for next time to build a list of goals. Mach pointed out that a pilot site should be built for a local example to show developers. 9 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 Asleson responded that several already existed. Chair Lanyon asked if those sites were established, mature plantings. Mach asked if the Board was encouraging the use of cultivars. Asleson answered that cultivars were not against the recommendations. Kukonen noted that the Sawmill Golf Course had some nice plantings, and there was a video available that could be shown to developers as a good example. Chair Lanyon indicated that the Board needed to streamline the meetings, and partnership with other towns. Mach stated community education should be a goal, not just for developers. Trehus submitted there needed to be a focus on community where a pilot restoration project could be showcased on Earth Day, and advertise for it. Chair Lanyon submitted that because Earth Day was early in the growing season, a poster board of pictures could be compiled. Chair Lanyon asked what Wargo had done. Donlin responded they had plantings 3 years old. r.:. . cd1, ,•a: ,,. Asleson added that a local artist made interpretive signs thaNere4ell done. Donlin mentioned a site owned by Angstrom who was proud of his prairie, and that he may be willing to give tours. If4 Chair Lanyon noted there were seven issues: 1. Develop an ongoing website to possibly be updated by the High School. 2. To preserve of thearea adjacent to the elementary school on the north side. 3. Environmental staff 'support.,, 4. Network with other communities. .t. 5. Develop a pilot restoration project 6. Community education. 7. Greenspace Development Ordinance: inside and outside MUSA both in terms of adoption and iMplementation. O'Connell gated that the Citizen's Environmental Landscaping packet should be updated by April 1; 2001.V' Chair Lanydn explained that the developers needed to see it and talk to the person who of maintained it. 10 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 Donlin suggested that the City allow prairie restoration companies to advertise with brochures in City Hall. Asleson agreed and noted that a local artist could take the City Hall area and depict it through the stages. Chair Lanyon stated that steps to attain the goals should be on the next meeting agenda. Kukonen mentioned that a development ordinance could be developed using copies from North Branch and Lake Elmo. Trehus concurred that there were seven to eight cities with development ordinances already, and one could be compiled from those. Chair Lanyon noted that there were seven goals, and someneeded to be accomplished within a year, while others were ongoing. Donlin submitted that was a plan for no net loss of wetlands, but it should be extended to include prairie and woodlands as well. Trehus indicated the need for more environmental support staff. Chair Lanyon identified the need for more regular communication with'the City Council. He stated that he would try to get the language clear by the next meeting Time was a factor, so there was a need to stay focused. O'Connell noted that February 14, 2001 there was a prod ect hearing for Target, and inquired if a representative of the Environmental Board should be present. Chair Lanyon urged that comments needed to be considered if in terms of a private citizen or a representative of the Environmental Board. Trehus asked for the City Council minutes in the packets for follow-up purposes. PROGRAM / PROJECT UPDATES A. Environmental 1. Aqua -Force Research Project — Asleson described a cap program at the graduate research level, that was studying the water quality of ponds, buffers, and the possibility of new beneficial bacteria. The student needs a place to work, but the help would be free of ;charge. The beneficial bacteria were to be obtained from the sludge;ponds at Pig's Eye. Donlin, indicated a concern with salts and the impact that they have in retention ponds." Chair Lanyon noted the infiltration of salts might accumulate as build up. Asleson explained the salts were water soluble, so they are dissolved. 11 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 Chair Lanyon submitted that the concentration of salts might be reduced quickly, but we do not see the effect. Asleson responded that ponds were biofilters, if stressors were introduced into the system the life would be affected. B. Solid Waste/Recycling Updates — This item was tabled to the February 27, 2001 meeting. CLOSE MEETING AND CONFIRM NEXT MEETING DATE It was noted that the next meeting of the Environmental Board will be on February 28, 2001. There being no further business, Kukonen moved to adjourn at 9:16 p.m. Donlin seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Brigette Blesi TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 12 City of Lino Lakes Environmental Board Meeting Lino Lakes City Hall January 31, 2001 6:30 PM Agenda 1. Call To Order/Pass Sign -In Sheet 6:30 PM 2. Approval of Minutes 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Citizen Comments 5. Appointment of Chair/Vice Chair 6. Project Review 6:35 PM A. Ryan/Target Project Submittal (Item 1-01) 6:35 - 6:55 B. Saddle Club Addition (Item 1-02) 6:55 - 7:05 C. Summit Fire Protection/Minor Subdivision/Apollo Business District (Item 1-03) 7:05 - 7:15 D. VFW Post 6583/Apollo Drive (Item 1-04) 7:15 - 7:25 E. 12th and Holly Drive/Subdivision Application Review (Item 1-05) 7:25 - 7:35 F. ApitzBirch/Hodgson ( Item 1-06) 7:35 - 7:45 7. Environmental Board Business 7:45 PM A. Minnesota DNR/Wildland Interface Project/Updates B. Development Concerns/Birch St. and Centerville Rd. C. Environmental Board Goals 2001 7:55 - 8:25 8. Program/Project Updates 8:25 PM A. Environmental 1. Aqua -Force Research Project 8:25 - 8:28 B. Solid Waste/Recycling Updates 8:28 - 8:30 9. Close Meeting and Confirm Next Meeting Date 8:30 PM 7:45 - 7:50 7:50 - 7:55