Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/29/2001 Environmental Board MinutesENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING DATE TIME STARTED TIME ENDED MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT CITY OF LINO LAKES MINUTES AUGUST 29, 2001 : August 29, 2001 . 6:32 P.M. . 9:10 P.M. : Amy Donlin, Constance Grundhofer, Rod Kukonen, Chair Scott Lanyon, Theresa O'Connell, and Mike Trehus. : None. Staff members present: Environmental Coordinator Marty Asleson and Community Development Director Michael Grochala. CALL TO ORDER Chair Lanyon presided and called the meeting to order at 6:.3'2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. June 27, 2001— The following corrections were requested: Page 2, sixth paragraph: "Trehus pointed, outthat tl c taxes for the City that were promised, one million dollars, would r ow be. deferred. Trehus inquired about a newspaper article that cited tax abatement for the project." Page 3, fourth paragraph: "Trehus urged` the Board to make the recommendation, and let the Council decide, for instanci an analysis using computer modeling on the increase volume of runoff into George WatchkLake." Page 4, third paragra Page 7, first.paragraph was a mato'. drawback. onen 7ng:tired, and Trehus submitted..." rehus agreed that it was a major drawback to phasing phasing Page 7, secor aragraph: "Donlin stated the layer City was using..." Trehus moved to approve the June 27, 2001 meeting minutes as amended above. O'Connell seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. B. July 18, 2001— The following corrections were requested: Page 6, eighth paragraph: "Trehus indicated that three agencies stated the impacts were unknown and should be pursued concerns with the proposed project." 1 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING AUGUST 29, 2001 Page 7, fifth paragraph: "The Board seemed to say that they wanted the developers to meet insufficient standards." Trehus moved to approve the July 18, 2001 meeting minutes as amended above. O'Connell seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The following item was added to the meeting agenda: • Discuss 5E the MarketPlace Update as a part of 5A the Ryan Taretp U dxate. g The agenda was approved as amended above. CITIZEN COMMENTS Donlin indicated that two residents had called her by phonOtatmg'thej cTesire to comment on Board Business, but had scheduling conflicts and may be late PROJECT REVIEW A. Ryan/Target/Target Super Store/Update- Gro4chala stated that throughout the life of the project there had been dramatic change,{however the Council denied the project with two abstaining. Wetland mitigation had been a discussion item. There had been two meetings concerning the reduction of pending and increasing the infiltration basins. The landscaping plan indicated 788 trees would_be moved. New improvements would have been necessary to Lake Drive, m additionqothe subsidy issue. Chair Lanyon inquired about the Watershed District's response. Grochala responded that the technology panel did not concern itself with the volume issue, but with rate control. They were seeking to{r.,ednee. the infiltration areas and keep the ponding area. Chair Lanyon_ posed the question if it became a project again, what would be the role of the Environmental Board ` Grochala answered that the Environmental Assessment Worksheet was still :i the approval process. Donlin stated previously Asleson lead several Environmental Board members to the site, which she revisited recently and noted the biodiversity, such as mature oaks, black cherries, pheasants, and tamaracks. She added that there was considerable neighborhood opposition to the project. She visited the SuperTarget at Lexington and Highway 694, and described it as a vast asphalt expanse. She noted some small saplings, the infiltration pond was fenced off because it was deep, and had garbage in it. Chair Lanyon stated that the Board tried to move the project toward an ecological balance. He indicated the Board was not displeased that the project was stopped. Donlin explained that the outcome represented the 20/20 vision, with a prairie -rural flavor to the 2 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING AUGUST 29, 2001 town. If the project had been completed as the last plat indicated, the City would resemble Oakdale or Lakeville. O'Connell posed the question if the Council reopened the project, would the Environmental Board review it and pass on recommendations. Grochala responded that except for the infiltration issue, the bigger picture with a reduction in the tax rate made it primarily an economic issue for the Council. Asleson stated that the environmental issues were pushed as much as possible. Donlin explained that because the supermarket -discount store merchandise was inexpensive, it could put smaller retailers out of business. Grochala colninented on his experience in Cambridge where a large retailer caused a turnover'in businesses from town, but the smaller businesses created niches which benefited`froxm the'draw the larger store brought to the area. Donlin stated she did not want outsiders coming into =town to shop; and other neighbors she spoke with agreed. Another issue would be that'low-ineore'housing would be necessary to accommodate the workers. Grochala introduced Tanda Gretz the new Associate Planner for the City. B. Centennial School District/New Elementary School Site Plan Review/ Conditional Use Permit — Asleson introduced John!Christansein Superintendent for Centennial Schools, and reviewed the site which is.located off 4th Avenue and Highway 35W. He reviewed the background for the ,site that ineluded the site being located in a lake protection area where the soils were sandy, -Wet. In the past, there had been concerns with Isanti wet soils on a floodplain;, Chair Lanyon asked if the area included both the building and the land. Asleson answered that it did. and that e Greenway was previously located through the area, but had since been rerouted., Trehus inquired as to, when,: he Greenway had been initially proposed. Asleson responded that it wasproposed'in the 1992 City Plan. He continued, the landscape plan showed that there were no significant trees, however there were many cedars that could be moved. The landscape architect also suggested it. The salt spray from the adjacent highway would inhibit the growth of the cedars, and staff suggested a hardier species would be Colorado Blue Spruce. Infiltration areas were planned in the northwest and there was a recommendation for a study on the surface water treatment. Native plantings were suggested that would be resistant to salt spray. He indicated the school district wanted to preserve the trees on the ends for a shelter break. Chair Lanyon expressed concerns over water treatment and infiltration on site and specifically as it related to the parking area. He suggested water quality issues were straightforward enough for elementary students to grasp, and the district could create a 3 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING AUGUST 29, 2001 water treatment train on site as a lab and receive assistance in funding it. Donlin concurred with Chair Lanyon that with the school's proximity to the highway, educational opportunities to incorporate water treatment and native plants into the classrooms would be beneficial. Trehus asked what was the timetable of the project. Mr. Christiansen noted it was going to be discussed with the Council at the end of September or October, then the specs would be sent out for bids, followed by some winter construction. Chair Lanyon questioned the meaning of the first bullet on the background sheet. Asleson responded that a surface water management plan was necessary because he was unaware of the movement of the water, and indicated that it was essentially,,a global study. Grundhofer had questions on the plant list, where the sugar=maple.was'planned, but she found that it was not hardy for the area. She also noted concerns over the planting of the thornless hawthorn and suggested that the thorny variety would increase habitat for shrikes. Asleson answered that there would be no thorns 011 scl ool grounds, and he had success with the thornless variety under the wires Trehus expressed a concern for the wetland. Asleson indicated that there would be an infiltration area around it. Mr. Christiansen stated the wetland was' low,quality, and it might be improved with the school. In addition there was to be a cutback on the fields. O'Connell asked if there was,,a4 feedback on businesses nearby. Asleson responded that he was not aware of any. Grundhofer stated that the `middle school was always lit up, and inquired about the lighting for the elementary school. Mr. Christiansen answered that the lighting at the middle school was necessary for safety, but the elementary school would not have lighting needs that extensive -' Trehus recon' mended. adding as a requirement no spill, shoebox lighting. O'Connell moved to approve the project with staff and Board recommendations. Trehus added that the recommendations should be upgraded as requirements. Grundhofer seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. C. Saddle Club/ Preliminary Plat Review — Asleson reviewed the background material. After the denial of the project, a new plat had been submitted for consideration. The new plat includes only the area included in the MUSA and a Greenway dedication. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING AUGUST 29, 2001 O'Connell stated that the plat showed a cul-de-sac, but no houses. Asleson clarified that the cul-de-sac was shown as an outlot. Mr. Hill stated that the plat was the same in the northeast corner, but the southern part was excluded. Grundhofer asked if the southern cul-de-sac was going to be built. Trehus inquired about whether the other cul-de-sac met the R-1 specifications. Mr. Hill responded it did meet the requirements without a variance. It hadb.een resubmitted to the Watershed District because of a change in the grading plan. Chair Lanyon stated that Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, were the same `as'previously seen. He asked if the developer was planning 17 lots in the southernpart Grundhofer asked if the ponds were part of the lots. Mr part of the lots, but part of the easement. O'Connell questioned where the lots ended. Mr south of the easement, but on the lots. answered that they were not esponded that the ponds were Donlin inquired if the residents would mow"around the pond and preserve the trees. Mr. Hill answered that there would be a distributionof,information to the residents. He assured the Board that the area next to ;the pond would remain undisturbed. Chair Lanyon recommended that_sxgnage?should go up in the area for subsequent residents. Donlin indicated that she had reservations when a project comes up for review with two phases involved evidenced by thecul de -sac. She noted there was neighborhood opposition at the Monday highs meeti g. Donlin continued that there were plans to grade the southern part, and she believed the action was premature. Grundhofer agreed that there mi t,be trees there* Mr. Hill clai ned that developing only half of the land was a risk he was willing to take. Donlin stated`that, he was expecting a commitment of MUSA, and she has heard of developers who were willing to take the risk, then filed to sue the city if the project was denied. Trehus inquired about the wetland buffering, noting there appeared to be considerable wetlands, but no buffering. Mr. Hill answered that there was a fifty -foot setback from the houses to the wetland. Trehus stated that the setback should be from the property line. 5 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING AUGUST 29, 2001 The Board discussed the placement of the road and the possibility of shifting it north to save the trees. Shifting the road would encroach on the wetland, which was on a floodplain. O'Connell asked if an association was planned. Mr. Hill responded that there was none planned, just signage. Asleson stated that signage was being used successfully in other developments including Spirit Hills. Chair Lanyon expressed concern over the wetlands and the actions of subsequent homeowners. Trehus noted the plan was to develop 80 acres in the southern paxt Mr Hill indicated that 17 units would be built on that 80 acres. Asleson stated with the plant diversity, the wildlife would.* recommendations included native plantings and signage in, b rn .,Hernoted the past er!areas. 0' Connell made a motion to recommend approval withYthe previous recommendations. Grundhofer seconded the motion. The motion ,carried*th 3 in favor, 1 opposed (Trehus), and 1 abstain (Donlin) because of the two phases, in the plat. D. Molin Concrete/Site Plan Review — Asleson reviewed the background information. Concerns centered on elevated pH levels. the,need for infiltration area, and the need for the berm to be planted and irrigatedto' screen blas area. A wellhead was supposedly located on site, and if it was not being used, it should be capped. Chair Lanyon noted that they dld4o commenting due to lack of data. Asleson reiterated that tl support plantings. ave a landscape plan, so there was no point in e`berm was: "for a visual barrier and needed infiltration so it could Donlin inquired about the site's location. Grundhofer stated she saw a Council meeting, and the neighbors claimed that the company did n`of fulfill promises. Grochala explained that the site had two zoning designations,'General Industrial, and Light Industrial in the north which has been used for storage in the past:° Recently there have been violations in regards to hours of operation, and doing some work in the Light Industrial area. The promises unmet dealt with the Conditional Use Permit. Trehus asked about the vacated 77th Street. Asleson noted that there were two wells on site which should be capped if they were abandoned. 6 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING AUGUST 29, 2001 O'Connell inquired about an automated gantry elevator. Asleson answered that it was an elevator with a rail. Donlin stated that since the company had unfulfilled promises, they should not receive approval until those promises had been fulfilled. Since the company preceded the housing developments—Buyer Beware. She did not want Molin to be alienated, because they have given back to the City. Grochala addressed the issue assuring the Board that the company has worked with staff, and the Conditional Use Permit processing caused misunderstandings. He felt that Molin had tried to comply and would continue to do so. Trehus questioned if there was any information regarding the environmental impact submitted, dealing with the issue of hid pH, or a treatment system withrthe Rice Creek Watershed District. O'Connell agreed with Chair Lanyon that there was*need for more information. Trehus recommended tabling the project until the information was subnutted. O'Connell inquired about any new chemicals 1Vlolm:rrynght,be using, and their environmental impacts. Trehus asked about the location of the vetland. Chair Lanyon posed the question as to why no landscape plan was submitted. Asleson responded that there were no trees. to'rep'ort. Grundhofer noted that landscape plans were required for additions such as garages for residents. Grundhofer made a n .oti on to .table1he discussion until Molin submitted a tree inventory, a landscape plan, estimates of r m' off, `and a lighting plan. Donlin seconded the motion. motion carried unanimously• E. Market Place i;pdate Discussed as a part of the Ryan/Target update. ENVIRONMENTAL. BOARD BUSINESS A. Comprehensive'Plan Update — Grochala commented that the Plan would be submitted to the Metropolitan Council early next week. The delay was due to outdated maps from 1988 needed updating. Gretz was working on the Surface Water Management Plan, and John Powell was working to make the Comprehensive Plan compatible with the Watershed District. B. Environmental Board Goals 2001 — Asleson suggested that the Board discuss the special meeting with the City Council in this section. A date for the meeting was 7 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING AUGUST 29, 2001 discussed. Chair Lanyon stated that the Board Members should provide suggested dates to staff by Friday, specifically Mondays or Wednesdays at 6:30 p.m., or Saturday mornings. C. Xcel Energy/Tree Trust/"Trade a Tree" Program — Asleson indicated that the Board needed to make a motion to accept the program. The program dealt with the trees under the high power lines, which would be removed, leaving the City to remove the stump. It is seen as a win-win situation. The cost for the City is one dollar/inch for the stumps. Donlin expressed concern over Xcel Energy taking advantage of the situation through the program. Asleson responded that the trees would not be removedunless the resident wanted it removed. Chair Lanyon asked about a tree inventory. Asleson indicated about 30 trees would be „t affected. He continued that the tree trimmers working for Xcel `were learning, using good horticulture techniques, trying not to top the tree, and exploring the use of prairie plantings directly under the power lines. Grundhofer inquired about a tree list. Asleson answere would choose the trees. hat the homeowner or the City Chair Lanyon stated that it would be good to have representative from the program meet with the Board. D. Special Council Meeting with they part of Environmental Board Busine E. Council/Environmental Board — Discussed as nvironmental Board Goals 2001. Resignation/Dave Mach Tlie Board noted that the position had been advertised for, and members should let interested indi.Viduals lmow of the opening. F. Surface Water Management 'Plan This item was discussed as a part of Project NEMO. G. Project NEMO Asteson stated he went to a NEMO conference, and Lino Lakes was chosen to participate in two projects. They won't do a build out model, but will discuss the need for` ore Staff recommended that the City collaborate with NEMO. He needed a m consensus frothe Board that it was a good opportunity. Donlin inquired about the cost. Grochala indicated that the cost was expensive, but it could be reduced if the City went in as a pilot project. Donlin made a motion to recommend the City pursue involvement with NEMO. Grundhofer seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. 8 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING AUGUST 29, 2001 Trehus stated that the City needed to pursue volumes, not merely rates in the Surface Water Management Plan. Asleson stated that NEMO would demonstrate the necessity of volumes. Trehus questioned Grochala if he had begun reading the handbook, and stated that the concept of the Greenways tied into it. Grochala stated he had begun to read it and believed that opportunities were coming together. He noted that John Powell could shed some light on the topic. Trehus wanted to know a timetable for the ordinances. Grochala that staff was waiting for Council comments, and there were issues with tlie,Meropolitan Council. Trehus asked when the Council would finish the ComprehensiVe4nan. G rochGrochala responded that it would be 60 days from next week. Trehus expressed concern for the Conservation SubdivisiOn.4 Donlin noted that Clearwater Creek did not have marn\_-3;ieWs.''hods: 4:- \ Trehus asked how the ordinances would be deVelope. rochala answered that NAC would do most of the legwork. He preferredi7d.Megiod tick would allow representatives from all the Boards to work out the problems. Ile Would like to see a joint meeting with the Council, Planning and Zoning 13oard,‘And Entirdnmental Board to establish a base of knowledge. Chair Lanyon stated the Environmental goals for the joint meeting with Council were: • Communication and Prdddqures. • The Comprehensive • The Ordinances. • The Role of theHan PROGRAM /PROJECT UPDATES A. Grant Upilates/Mlimesota DNR Urban Interface — The final reports on the Wildlife Inventory, Fire and GIS for 75% of the City at the DNR would be available at the end of SepteMber. B. Solid Waste/Recycling Updates — This item was tabled to the September 26, 2001 meeting. C. Spirit Hills Update/O&M Plan — This item was tabled to the September 26, 2001 meeting. 9 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING AUGUST 29, 2001 OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS O'Connell mentioned that she attended the Economic Development Advisory Committee, and they did not support a moratorium because its effects on the City. They also wanted to be informed of the length of the moratorium if one was put into effect. The Board agreed that O'Connell would represent the Environmental Board in choosing the Citizen of the Year. CLOSE MEETING AND CONFIRM NEXT MEETING DATE It was noted that the next meeting of the Environmental Board will bekori\September 26, 2001. There being no further business, Trehus moved to adjourn at 9: motion. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Brigette Blesi TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 10 onnell seconded the City of Lino Lakes Environmental Board Meeting Lino Lakes City Hall August 29, 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 (6:45-7:55) B. Centennial School District/New Elementary School Site Plan Review/Conditional Use Permit (7:55 — 8:15) C. Saddle Club/Preliminary Plat Review (8:15 — 8:25) D. Molin Concrete/Site Plan Review ( 8:25 — 8:35 ) E. Market Place Update (8:35 — 8:45 ) 6. Environmental Board Business (8:45- ) A. Comprehensive Plan Update B. Environmental Board Goals 2001 C. Xcel Energy/Tree Trust/ "Trade A Tree" Program. D. Special Council Meeting with the City Council/Environmental Board E. Resignation/Dave Mach F. Surface Water Management Plan G. Project NEMO 7. Program/Project Updates A. Grant Updates/Minnesota DNR Urban Interface B. Solid Waste/Recycling Updates. C. Spirit Hills Update/O&M Plan 8. Close Meeting and Confirm Next Meeting Date