HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/30/2001 Environmental Board Minutes( )
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 30, 2001
CITY OF LINO LAKES
MINUTES
DATE : May 30, 2001
TIME STARTED : 6:31 P.M.
TIME ENDED : 10:03 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 and Economic Development
Director Brian Wessel.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Lanyon called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. March 28, 2001 — The following corrections weryreque.,
Pagel, ninth paragraph: "Page 5, insert after tenth paralibilit-rehasKukonen stated that
Lots 37-42, Block 1 appeared to have a stormwater runoff prqh1.91; and recommended
buffering."
-1/44mt
Page 5, fourth paragraph: "Trehus indica, te-d4tge .was fibcreservation in the plans and
that the area was currently zoned R -la
require a higher buffer zone. Aslesonipspondedl."
Page 6, sixth paragraph: "AsliOnlfrdicate' compacted 600 -ft. buffer does not reduce
nutrient loading bounce, urifes'st.Slifgalternatives are included such as eater columning
water treatment train practices.
Page 7, 7, seventh paturaphThe recommendations included staff recommendations,
, s
curbs, gutters, and svqi.les niz-thd cul-de-sacs, the fact that the area was a high ecological
zone, buffers as stated in the -clan -Handbook 7.12, the encouragement to open up the
angle in the swale
V:*
r • ';*1WV
Page 11, Sixth par4p,graph:
Trehus moved to approve the March 28, 2001 meeting minutes as amended above.
Grundhofer seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
• • • • • •
•• • •
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING
B.
MAY 30, 2001
April 25, 2001 — The following corrections were requested:
Page 3, sixth paragraph: "Kukonen inquired whether Target would be willing to use a
non -backlit logo
Grundhofer moved to approve the April 25, 2001 meeting minutes as amended above.
O'Connell seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The following items were added to the meeting agenda:
• Discuss population caps under section 6D — Donlin.
• Discuss communications with other bodies in the City section 6E — Trehus.
• Discuss pond contamination section 7D — Asleson.
The agenda was approved as amended above.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Brian Wessel Community Development
retiring in four months and that Michael
month overlap.
No other comments were made.
PROJECT REVIEW
ef
"----itk
if
Director for the City notified the'iikT,1Wat he would be
Grochala would be starmn g next weeWleaving a four-
,*
A
A. Ryan/Target/Target Super Store Update — Wesel noted the official name was the
Market Place Project, with it beiviopeirvglAily 2002. The City Council decision
would be on July 23, 2001,and wel„dbe breaking ground in September. The June 13,
2001 Planning and Zoning.i3Old,,' ,ould make a recommendation. On July 11,
2001 the Council woultralOove'li*Finvironmental Assessment Worksheet, and begin a
30 -day reviewal proolikt, lierevieWed that the project included a Target, Kohl's, several
small business pads, and thewetIand mitigation was moving ahead.
Chair Lanyon clarified the project would go to the Planning and Zoning Board before the
next meeting with '.Uomments from the Board.
Asleson pOpied mit that the Environmental Assessment Worksheet would be a large
document when it was completed with responses from other agencies included in it. Mr.
Payton indicated the Environmental Assessment Worksheet consisted of their answers to
31 questions and was ready for distribution to the 25 agencies for the 30 -day comment
period. All comments needed to be addressed.
2
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 30, 2001
Donlin noted that the timing did not allow for much time for review or response. Mr.
Payton explained the document would be sent to the Environmental Quality Board on file
for comments on June 4, 2001. The City had two weeks for comments.
Trehus questioned if the Council was scheduled to vote on June 23, 2001 could the
Planning and Zoning Board address the project at the July meeting. Wessel answered the
document could go to the Planning and Zoning Board, then go to the Council directly.
Chair Lanyon inquired how the Board should comment. Wessel responded that the
project was important enough that another meeting might need to be called.
Trehus asked if review of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet in June was possible
in view of the permitting schedule.
Chair Lanyon inquired if staff could find out when the Planning and Zoning Board would
deal with it.
Grundhofer noted one of the small businesses was to be a convenienGestore, and asked if
that meant a gas station. Wessel explained that one would be a,gas station;; one a fast
food, and the other a bank. The developer had received strongnterest in 4 of the
locations, but had no formal acceptance. ., "*'`< a
Trehus indicated in past proposals there had been a second'ary'" access on to 77th Street and
asked about the change. Wessel responded that there=n4were now tyvo accesses to Lake
Drive with no direct access to 77th Street. 4j;il
t
Mti k:=i+,4ran
wty��t+
Mr. Payton stated that June 11th would be the beginnitO8 f the comment period, with
most comments coming in the last week. Wesslrnoted the City's comments were to be
prepared by the development team. Hereiterated;that the document was the City's.
Asleson pointed out a changen thc��,plan included vegetative islands scattered throughout
2,'.s: a ;�
the parking lot for infiltration. : j«�.5rx5��
ra.
Donlin questioned whether a5vegetative plan had been submitted. Mr. Payton answered
that the scattered-islands*uld have various small shrubs and grasses, and noted that
they would beesi hilar' to the plantings in the other areas.
�.x5,� �w, s¢�
1 rd
Grundhofer asked if. he .ponds in the East still existed. Mr. Payton indicated the two
ponds in,eseast were''now depressions for infiltration.
Trehus inquired if the Environmental Assessment Worksheet addressed the impact of the
impervious surfaces on the Chain of Lakes. Mr. Payton responded that it dealt with
various issues such as habitat and vegetation among others, but not the water table
because it was so complex. The typical runoff would flow out of a two-inch pipe, with a
6-8 inch pipe for overflow.
3
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 30, 2001
Trehus posed the question of green parking and asked if other alternatives to asphalt had
been considered. Mr. Payton pointed out that Target had denied them as viable
alternatives.
Donlin stated that the environment would be altered. Grundhofer concurred that the
impact would be farther reaching than the Environmental Assessment Worksheet would
address.
Kukonen inquired if the Watershed District had commented on the project. Mr. Payton
responded that a 404 permit had been submitted, but that they were waiting for a
response.
B. Highland Meadows West 3rd Addition/preliminary Plat — Asleson reviewed the
background information on the project. He indicated the tree inventory was incomplete
relative to the survey map. The water elevations remained unknown. If trees were
removed, there might be tree replacement. It was recommended that different type of
housing be considered.
Chair Lanyon noted there was confusion with the tree inventory:iv,the large map, where
the trees were labeled as retained, however, a cul-de-sac wahocaikaon t9rrof those trees.
e" =
Mr. Cooper of TSL Development answered that the pino trees Were to be relocated on
site. 4,t
%
Grundhofer stated 1,113 were saved according4 the literature, but the number was 95
short when counted. One of the developers answered that an updated tree inventory was
available, and the discrepancy could be explained by some trees having multiple trunks.
Grundhofer indicated she had walked the propert'14: and noticed there were more oak than
were denoted, she asked the number of*e§ lessrifhan 6 inches. One of the developers
responded an an estimate wouldgbe 800 trees.
imSiti.t,
Mr. Cooper explained thgltitets, inches and larger were tagged as significant by the
survey crews and the landscape arc 'Infect. Because there was no ordinance, knowledge of
14,:tv
other cities' ordinances were used as a guide, resulting in 637 oak trees being identified.
11
Chair Lanyon notIonly trees in groups were relocated, and posed the question what
percentage survive Ansplanting. Asleson answered the loss could be 10%.
7,4*.ws's
Mach urgelktlie transplanting of Oak over Pine because the natural ecosystem is Oak
Savanna.
Mr. Cooper indicated that 2 -inch oak trees could be transplanted, but not 6 inch.
4
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 30, 2001
Kukonen inquired if the runoff problem present on the old plan was no longer an issue on
the redesigned plat. Mr. Cooper stated the configuration was redesigned because of the
wetland being nonexistent where one was thought to be, and the presence of a new
wetland, with the new plan there was zero impact on the wetland. The present plan was
in compliance with subdivision ordinances, and no variances would be sought.
Asleson noted in terms of groundwater elevations, the FHA states the bottom of the
houses had to be at least 4 feet, but the City zoning says 6 feet.
Donlin submitted the development was against the vision of the City, with its cookie
cutter plan, and speculations concerning the water levels and flood stages. Schmidt
disagreed that the water levels and flood stages were, based on conjecture, indicating the
groundwater was measured at seven locations on site, and the elevations would
correspond to those numbers.
Asleson stated more trees could be lost if the soil was compacted. Mr. Schmidt indicated
there was a cash escrow for the trees requiring 4 hardwoods per lot, and that he would be
willing to try to save the Pin Oak. The spade to be used has a diameter,of 90 inches. So
far, 40 Norway Pines have already been planted on site.
O'Connell indicated she had visited another development ;at -Noble 'and 97th Avenue N.
and asked the name of the development. Mr. Schmidt explainedaythe name was St.
Gerard's, where 500 trees were moved, and they lost 20tr'ees'mostly: to wind damage.
Asleson expressed concern over the clearcutting, and indicated;other areas developed
without clearcutting were Park Grove, parts ofPheasant Hills; and Clearwater Creek. He
asked to be shown on the map where treesVere not to be`emoved. Mr. Cooper pointed
out two areas. <K
O'Connell stated she observed a .land mover was -parked over many small trees, and
inquired if those trees were cons04d saved °' Mr. Schmidt responded the area would be
set aside, with no traffic. a,; '',ETV's
ntrsarhJ..
Mach asked what werethe expenses' incurred by the developer that would make it better
i�7i..Ka"
to grade the land:than.to work around the trees.
Mr. Schmidt indicated the loss of lots was the issue, because the number of lots makes a
development economically feasible.
Chair Lanyon'`poiited out the Southwest cul-de-sac on the plat tree map had about 7 trees
not locatedwhere the pad would be, and asked why those had to be removed. Mr.
Cooper answered it was a drainage issue, where the water would be trapped and would
not flow.
5
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 30, 2001
Trehus stated that the original recommendation from the Board was to work with staff
using conservation practices. Donlin concurred explaining the zoning and ordinances
were not what they should be, and expressed concern over the area being of high
ecological value.
Mr. Schmidt indicated he was working with the present zoning and ordinances and were
compliant.
Trehus inquired if there had been a response from the Watershed District concerning
runoff and surface water. Mr. Cooper responded that the appropriate forms had been
submitted and rates for stormwater had been approved.
Asleson explained the rates were inconsequential, the greatest impact was the water
volumes. He indicated the City could go beyond the standards of the Watershed District
in terms of water volumes. Discharged water was regulated by the MPCA.
Mr. Cooper noted there were flatter swales in the backyards of the lots. Mach mentioned
the vegetation in the swales was important. �.,Y:
.t:
Irv. ,.,a':.
Asleson pointed out the Watershed District used the numbers �for uncompaoted sandy
y
soils, and had concerns over the compaction. An example was that4,:hobca°t compacted
the soil 18 inches, and urged the plowing to restore the soil. Mr Cooper' indicated he
planned to disc the area. 1 .. "
'"A3w,
Asleson stated using a disc would not be enough and explained -the watershed district
will probably be reworking the requirementslitigeln Tlyee to five years in addition to
adding a maintenance plan.
Trehus reviewed the fmdings that included:
® The proposed development, was not sing.conservation development principles.
® Significant tree loss cowl . be avt ided.' 4
® The developer had notprovdedf�adequaie information on surface water management.
Donlin inquired aboute s , ale in the Southwest corner of the property and the
feasibility of a swahewithe trees present. Mr. Cooper answered the area would be left
as it is presently 'ark
Aslesonndicated theative grasses had deep roots, and there have been studies that it
takes 70 years:forth-plants to recover if the soil is compacted.
Chair Lanyon,reviewed the soil needs to be loosened so that the numbers in the model
being used work.
Mach added there should be an attempt to preserve the trees unless it needed to be graded.
6
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 30, 2001
Chair Lanyon called for a motion. Trehus moved a recommendation to the Planning and
Zoning Board, and to the City Counsel that the present plat proposal be denied, and a
conservation approach be employed. Motion carried unanimously.
C. Lino Lakes Family Dentistry/Apollo Dr./Site Plan Review — Asleson reviewed the
background of the plan. The Dental Office seeks to build an expanded building to be
shared with another business. All water leaving the site flows to a pond across Apollo
Drive. There are staff recommendations for native plantings and because of the
imperviousness of the soils, the need to uncompact them. The plan denotes the planting
of Maples, however they tend to be invasive. There was also a need to be more specific
in terms of the ground level.
Kukonen inquired about the specifics on parking requirements and the need for so many
parking spaces. Asleson concurred that the standard recommendation for decreasing
impervious surfaces applies.
Chair Lanyon stated the lighting used should have no spillage and be a shoebox design.
Trehus pointed out according to page 8, the water runoff rate going into the,storm sewer
will double the present rate. Chair Lanyon agreed the Board was;very concerned about
the increase in runoff.
Asleson indicated the rates should not exceed present rates
greater concern.
w
vii
Chair Lanyon summarized the Board's con i entisr
j,?
• Need for more specificity in the groundco`ver and sales, in particular the use of
native plantings and the minimal use of turf
• Concern over an actual increase in water runoff rates.
• Minimize impervious surfaccs,:spec 'iy,
eall. a'r0eduction in the number of parking
spaces. 0 x 'gym;
• No spill lighting, for. exampleksoebox=style lighting.
• Minimize or eliminate soil coin action.
Chair Lanyon called'for amotion to pass on the recommendations of the Environmental
Board as statedabove'.1 Trelius'moved to pass on the recommendations. Kukonen
,;,,. ter;.
e Volumes are the
t •
seconded the motion.
Trehus stateesire'for a response to the recommendations, if they were addressed
adequatelyof a way to flag it. Asleson answered the reports were flagged.
Rob Raffertyof the Planning and Zoning Board indicated he received tidbits from the
minutes of the Environmental Board, but there was little time for review.
7
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 30, 2001
Donlin inquired who indicated whether the concerns had been adequately addressed.
Asleson pointed out before the Planning and Zoning Meeting, he prepares a 1-2 page
summary report which is then attached
Chair Lanyon reiterated the Planning and Zoning Board received the recommendations
from the Environmental Board. Mr. Rafferty mentioned there needed to be flags on the
issues of great concern.
Donlin submitted the recommendations could use red, yellow or green flags to indicate
the overall response of the Board.
Mr. Rafferty described the constraints of the codes, if the developers were compliant, the
recommendations could not be enforced but only encouraged. Trehus explained
depending on how the recommendations are processed, the impact could be minimal.
Mr. Rafferty lamented poor communications between boards. Asleson explained that the
time between submittal and reviewal could not be increased.
Mr. Rafferty indicated the recommendations of the Environmental`Board';do not come
across to the Planning and Zoning Board with any impact, but t1ebest information
usually came from the staff. Asleson answered if there was more thine to prepare, GIS
could be used with the flags. �
Mach mentioned it was difficult to remember the bi h ictur uhen'the Board was asked
g p,;<w
to comment on a project by project basis. $ ,,%'
Trehus urged the members of the PlanningraY ld, oning"B ►ard to read the Environmental
Handbook. Donlin agreed explaining e cit Ci040 spent considerable money to produce
the document.
Asleson suggested the Envir,$n
the three-legged stool model.
community, and even
xunei l Hanilbitok. could be summed up by remembering
exeatllological, economic, and cultural impacts to the
affected.
Chair Lanyon stated there".was a need to focus efforts on changing the ordinances.
Kukonen indica-601'1e need 10 work together to get the ordinances. Mr. Rafferty
:gin
concurred there neededrto be a minimal level of acceptance.
�.JK�,^,1Lsy12p
O'Connell inquirel: about the townhouses on a recent development project which were
encouraged4by the Environmental Board, but were rejected by the Planning and Zoning
Board. Shelas at a Planning and Zoning meeting and wondered how to address the
issue on behalf of the Environmental Board.
8
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 30, 2001
The motion concerning forwarding the recommendations of the Environmental Board to
the Lino Lakes Family Dentistry carried unanimously.
D. Land Holdings Group/12th and Holly/Preliminary Plat — Asleson stated there was no
tree inventory in the packet, he had spoke with several representatives with no response.
Chair Lanyon strongly urged the Planning and Zoning Board not to act on the project
until the tree inventory was submitted.
Trehus indicated that earlier recommendations needed to be forwarded again. Chair
Lanyon agreed and explained the recommendations needed to be in the development
agreement.
Mach commented on the tree inventory, and suggested a vegetative inventory should be
considered to preserve the entire ecosystem.
Chair Lanyon stated there were ways to make an impact even without ordinances in the
area of native plantings.
Trehus pointed out even though the Planning and Zoning Board "was more visible to the
City Council, it did not have any more authority than the Environmental Board.
Trehus asked staff to please summarize the past reco01 mmendations with teeth, and made a
motion to not approve the plat: p L'
• The Board had a chance to review the tree „rventory and proposed vegetation.
• The past recommendations need to be addressed;$ ,
• Strong consideration needed to be g Ven t9 the developers' attitude toward fulfilling
past promises to the residents of Gemini Estaies.
fir;
Grundhofer seconded the motion;. N,totbi.tcarriei unanimously.
Mach excused himself at 9:,1
444- ereturned at 9:12 p.m.
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD_BUSINESS
A. Draft Comprehensive PlanIReview/ Update/DNR Comments — Asleson indicated the
comments made by:`the DNR had been forwarded.
Donlin pointed put the desire for linking the comments of the Board to the
Comprehensive Plan.
Trehus indicated favorable response by the DNR to the 50% open space requirement.
9
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 30, 2001
Chair Lanyon questioned how to explain the comments, besides merely forwarding the
responses of the DNR and Environmental Board with a request from the Board to request
to comment. Asleson answered staff and individuals on the Board could write a letter.
Mach submitted the Comprehensive Plan was the response. Chair Lanyon expressed the
concern the Board was not convinced it was having an impact on the City, boards, staff,
citizens and ultimately the environment.
B. Environmental Board Goals 2001— O'Connell indicated that by her presence at the
meeting, the Planning and Zoning Board addressed the environmental issues more.
Trehus stated the Board should lobby for change, the Comprehensive Plan needed to have
favorable language to address future ordinances. He inquired whether the City's boards
had ever developed ordinances. Asleson answered the Board could develop ordinances,
but the City Council would have to pass them.
Chair Lanyon asked staff what would be the first ordinance to work on. Asleson
responded the first should be a Conservation Subdivision Development: Ordinance, which
would be in conflict with other ordinances already m effect. `4
Trehus excused himself at 9:24 p.m. He returned at 9:25 p
Grundhofer inquired about goal #6 if the Board developed'.:
be sent. Trehus responded it would be sent to City Council:*
inane, where would it
Kukonen pointed out that he spoke with Elk Riversand `had a copy ordinance of North
Branch, but that it needed to be reviewedr�
Via. a'.,i�.yfFa?•y
14
Chair Lanyon commented goal #9 should be the gnvironmental Board will be involved in
helping Council with the Comprehensive lan.•,
Donlin excused herself at 9':28t . . S'he:x.'turned at 9:30 p.m.ws :};fe.
�,'. iia{.tif'
Mach stated under goal:;;#2,,rtlie lakeshore associations, were a great tool for education and
•enforcement through •peen ressure, and that the homeowner associations could be too.
}�7g, aa. ter.
Chair Lanyon called for a motion to accept the modified goals. Trehus made a motion.
O'Connell seconded' emotion. Motion carried unanimously.
C.
Rules of Orfd'erukonen distributed a summary of the Rules of Order commonly used
to assist the` Board in clarifying procedures.
D. Population caps — Donlin indicated the March minute numbers were incorrectly
reported. At the present time, the population had exceeded the 2010 goal. She stated the
caps were like targets, and identified the need to implement moratoriums automatically.
it
10
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 30, 2001
There needed to be a mechanism to force the City to stay within the set numbers. If there
was a mechanism to limit development, it would aid the rate of project reviews. Chair
Lanyon concurred there needed to be a mechanism to enforce the caps.
E. Communications with other bodies in the City — Trehus requested E -Mailing the
minutes to Board members after the City received them from TimeSaver Secretarial.
Chair Lanyon agreed and asked staff to check into getting the minutes to the Board
members right after they were prepared.
Trehus suggested appointing a recommendation reviewer, who would oversee the word
usage in the recommendations prior to forwarding them to someone else. That person
should also obtain the Planning and Zoning packets regularly to make sure they addressed
the Board's recommendations adequately. The Board unanimously agreed to appoint
Trehus to the position.
O'Connell had volunteered to go to the Planning and Zoning Board meeting, but in the
future would probably stay only for the project reviews.
zn
Asleson indicated someone could attend the work sessions on the"Wednesdays before the
City Council meetings. The Park Board has an ongoing item dnthe agenda;
Chair Lanyon asked staff to obtain schedules for the Planning and Zoning Board meetings
and the work sessions, and try to get the Board on the agenda for updates. In addition,
Chair Lanyon expressed frustration on behalf of the Board.T-Ic.urged staff to invite the
p� ,rjT37;�}
new Community Development Director to the:next meeting.
O'Connell stated she would like to have the ecap of tli&minutes before the Planning and
Zoning Board meeting. 8{
PROGRAM / PROJECT UPDATES,
A. Grant Updates — This item was; ,tab led'.10'the June 27, 2001 meeting.
B. Minnesota DNR/Wildland ,Ynterface — This item was tabled to the June 27, 2001
meeting. "` 1 x
C. Solid Waste/Recycling Updates — This item was tabled to the June 27, 2001 meeting.
D. Pond Contamination— Asleson stated he visited a site where there was a failed septic
system. The4and>s sensitive, and a nearby pond lab samples were being taken, and
tested at Interpol. The watershed district sent their biologist to investigate the problem. It
is a surface water quality concern as well as a health concern, because of the possibility of
waterborne E. Coli contaminating nearby wells.
11
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 30, 2001
CLOSE MEETING AND CONFIRM NEXT MEETING DATE
It was noted that the next meeting of the Environmental Board will be on June 27, 2001.
There being no further business, Trehus moved to adjourn at 10:03 p.m. Grundhofer 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
May 30, 2001
6:30 PM
Agenda
1. Call To Order/Pass Sign -In Sheet 6:30 PM
2. Approval- of Minutes (6:30-6:35)
3. Approval of Agenda (6:35-6:40)
4. Citizen Comments (6:40-6:45)
5. Project Review
A. Ryan/Target/Target Super Store/ Update/Brian Wessel (6:45-6:55)
B. Highland Meadows West 3`d Addition /Preliminary Plat (6:55-7:15)
C. Lino Lakes Family Dentistry/Apollo Drive/ Site Plan Review (7:15-7:25)
D. Land Holding Group/12th and Holly/Preliminary Plat (7:25-7:50)
6. Environmental Board Business
A. Draft Comprehensive Plan Review/Update/DNR Comments (7:50-8:10 )
B. Environmental Board Goals 2001 (8:10-8:30)
C. Rules of Order (8:30-8:35)
7. Program/Project Updates (8:35-8:40)
A. Grant Updates
B. Minnesota DNR/Wildland Interface.
C. Solid Waste/Recycling Updates.
D. Other Discussion Items.
8. Close Meeting and Confirm Next Meeting Date