Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/10/2003 Environmental Board MinutesENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETINGSEPTEMBER 10, 2003 1APPROVED MINUTES CITY OF LINO LAKES APPROVED MINUTES DATE: September 10, 2003 TIME STARTED: 6:37 P.M. TIME ENDED: 9:18 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Amy Donlin, Constance Grundhofer, Rod Kukonen, and Mary Jo O’Dea MEMBERS ABSENT: Patrice Toler Halen, Teresa O’Connell, and Nikki Schneider STAFF PRESENT: Environmental Coordinator Marty Asleson and Community Development Director Michael Grochala 1.CALL TO ORDER Chair Kukonen called the meeting to order at 6:37 p.m. 2.APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 30, 2003 Page 1, last paragraph: The Board requested this paragraph be deleted. Page 5, fourth paragraph: “O’Dea inquired if comments from the Board go to Council, was the neighborhood notified before the time those comments were given to the Council.” Page 8, eighth paragraph: “O’Dea questioned whether each subsection be explained ...O’Connell stated the first impact would be the bridge construction.” Page 8, ninth paragraph: “Grochala clarified the document should address the impact, with scaring away wildlife, then subsequent actions with increasing impact.” Page 12, fourth paragraph: “The 10,000 cubic yards should be verified.” Page 12, eleventh paragraph: “O’Dea stated that dewatering with a pump generated considerable noise and should be addressed.” The July 30, 2003 meeting minutes were approved as corrected. 3.APPROVAL OF AGENDA The Board approved the agenda for the September 10, 2003 meeting. 4.OPEN MIKE No citizen comments were made. 5.ACTION ITEMS ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETINGSEPTEMBER 10, 2003 2APPROVED MINUTES A.EAW Comment Review, Marshan Lake Industrial Park Mr. Moberg was present for responding to comments. Responses from the 30- day comment period were received from MNDOT, Metropolitan Council, the Department of Natural Resources and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The letter from the Department of Natural Resources had Tetratech do a walk through of the area for the presence of potential rare plants and found none. The MN Historical Society had been consulted to study the area and found it did not meet the National Register criteria. SHPO agreed with their findings. He had contacted Anoka County that indicated they were comfortable, if the issues raised by other agencies were addressed. He also left a message with Rice Creek Watershed District, with no response. The applicant had already submitted applications and could receive comment formally. Grochala stated that in August the Council gave conditional approval of the plat. Asleson indicated a lot was located on the South side of the easement. Grochala noted from the standpoint of Rice Creek Watershed District, they would like to work with Rehbein’s NETLAWN. The engineering comments had been received, and there would probably be no further problems. Donlin added, or no staff to adequately review the document. Mr. Moberg stated that it was the responsibility of the Regulating Government Unit to send out copies, they had received the usual responses. There were three modes of notification being the EQB Monitor, direct mailings, and to publish a notice in the local newspaper. O’Dea inquired if it was common to not receive a response, which was echoed by Donlin. Mr. Moberg stated there was a meeting, and the concerned agencies had responded to the platting. Grochala indicated that they had responded to the full plat plan. Donlin expressed concern for the County Ditch 10. Asleson stated that it was almost a creek. Grochala stated there would be a 50-foot easement on both sides. A fire lane was required around the Panettoni site, that would be paved with NETLAWN. Asleson indicated the product would be ideal for that purpose. Grochala noted the private ditch would be gone. Mr. Moberg mentioned it might have functioned to bring water to Ditch 10. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETINGSEPTEMBER 10, 2003 3APPROVED MINUTES Grochala explained the water would go through ponds, before discharging into the Ditch 10, and mentioned the Panettoni site would be a warehouse. The Board decided that they would make comments section by section. Grochala began with the section FINDINGS OF FACT, and indicated that he wanted to add, “The area guided South of ditch was in the City’s Comprehensive Plan for Zoning Subdivisions Light Industrial, while North of ditch was zoned Commercial.” Chair Kukonen inquired the meaning of the phrase, “ensure environmental protection.” Grochala responded that the meaning was strictly in the physical sense. It would provide jobs and a tax base, and benefits to the Parks and Recreation Department. They do a lot of warehousing. Chair Kukonen requested the removal of the whole paragraph. Donlin referred to the findings of the DNR, and believed it was possible that Blanding’s Turtles might be present on site. Asleson answered that the wetland at the City Hall had all the conditions for its presence. He indicated that other plant species should be on site for the conditions the turtles required. O’Dea inquired if there would be any alterations to the ditch. Grochala responded that there was an effort to maintain the existing vegetation. Grundhofer posed the question under WETLAND IMPACTS if the buffer would improve the ditch. Asleson confirmed that native plantings were wanted along the ditch. The water would be filtered further in post-development. The water quantities were still a concern, but the buffer would lower the pH levels. Mr. Moberg indicted the locations of the modifications for overflow control, at the beginning, and where it flowed into the ditch. Grochala added the ditch would be undisturbed except for slight modifications at either end for overflow. Asleson stated that all attempts would be made to minimize the impact in engineering constraints, except for the storm water overflows. Mr. Moberg added that it might be mandated to go through the process at 3,000 square feet. Grochala mentioned it was a scoping process. Donlin requested that it be compared to the Target site. Asleson answered that the site was about 29.5 acres, while the Target site was about 40 acres. Grochala reminded the Board that the build out was more on Target. The site has wetlands in the South, where there were none in 1953 according to the aerial photographs. He referred to the East part of the site in Lot 1 and Lot 4 would need to make 60% maximum impervious because of its proximity to Marshan ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETINGSEPTEMBER 10, 2003 4APPROVED MINUTES Lake shoreline. Mr. Moberg added it would need to be under 70% for the whole site. O’Dea inquired if the street coming in would be the only outlet from the site. Donlin mentioned it could change considerably. Grochala stated the EAW was not meant to be very detailed. Grochala referred to the WATER QUALITY IMPACTS section and stated it should be added, in the first paragraph Rice Creek Watershed District, the City of Lino Lakes, and MNDOT all required that the post-development rates do not exceed the pre-development runoff rates. Donlin inquired if there would be something to clean the water. Asleson responded that the buffering and NETLAWN would serve that purpose. Grochala noted the NURP ponds would also filter the water. Mr. Moberg added that the spring events had more pollutants. He indicated the skimmers did not last long, but now they were made of concrete, so the material rested higher than the high water level. Grundhofer referred to the HAZARDOUS WASTE and questioned the nature of the material in the tanks. Mr. Moberg responded he was unsure, however steps had been taken to clean the leak according to MPCA, and it was no longer on the list to be cleaned. Asleson mentioned it was probably petroleum, because it was a trucking firm. Donlin inquired about the meaning of “outdoor housekeeping practices.” Mr. Moberg answered that it was not regularly maintained, left uncovered, or open to the elements. The debris was probably concrete and rock dumped on site. O’Dea inquired about a further explanation for the potential for encountering buried debris. The Board recommended paragraph be changed to “...These findings are considered to constitute recognized environmental conditions. Based on the potential for encountering buried debris during redevelopment activities, it is recommended that soils will be screened as a part of geotechnical investigations to be conducted on the proposed project area in preparation for future development activities.” Asleson questioned if the section was written by the same person who performed the Phase I study. Mr. Moberg confirmed it was the same person. The Board addressed the VISUAL IMPACTS section, and recommended that “enhanced,” be changed to “minimalize adverse.” ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETINGSEPTEMBER 10, 2003 5APPROVED MINUTES Grundhofer stated that two shovels did not appear to be deep enough for an accurate assessment of the sites possible HISTORICAL AND ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Mr. Moberg responded that it was standard practice and typically went back to the year 1938. Grochala stated that after something had been disturbed for an extended period of time, a phase II was unnecessary. Mr. Moberg agreed, the contractors were 106 Group were known to be archeological professionals who were ultra-conservative in their approach. Grochala noted that SHPO confirmed their findings, which was a good indicator nothing would be found. Asleson assured the Board that if something was found, more study would be necessary. Grochala recommended in the TRAFFIC section that the Northbound left turn land was now required, to the word “desirable” should be removed. Donlin addressed the MNDOT review #1, where it referred to “no acceptable analysis has been submitted by the City or by a developer.” Grochala noted that every three months they were submitted. Mr. Moberg indicated that MNDOT had never acknowledged receiving the documents. Grochala stated that the traffic was at capacity during the afternoon peak time with no signals. MNDOT’s concern was for stacking onto the highway. The position of the City was that the developments needed to be separated. Meanwhile, an overall study was being done. Grochala addressed #3, in that there were physical issues to consider. This plat would not have much impact on the interchange, because the ADT was twice as high as was accurate. Mr. Moberg inquired if the afternoon peak of vehicles per minute from the development was included. Grochala confirmed that it was included. He mentioned that when the Village is developed, the interchange would require improvements. The Board reviewed the comments from the Metropolitan Council and MPCA with no further comments or recommendations. Donlin made a motion to forward comments and the recommendation that an EIS was not required. Grundhofer seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. 6.DISCUSSION ITEMS ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETINGSEPTEMBER 10, 2003 6APPROVED MINUTES A.Sketch Plan Review, Circle-Lex VFW This item was discussed later in the meeting. B.Sketch Plan Review, ProTerra Grochala introduced the item and indicated his concern was the ability to do routine maintenance. He directed the Board to the NWI Wetlands map. Mr. Moberg explained the old NWI maps were crude, and that the new legislation exempts from isolated wetlands. The ProTerra Group introduced themselves. Troy Nemmers, Jeffery McDonall Landscape Architect, Greg Morris Engineer, Philip Carlson with Equinox Development, Judy Helin and Craig Piette with Equinox Development were present. Asleson noted he visited the site. A forest bordered the site as Oak Woodland, but it had several opportunistic trees. Some remaining specimen Oaks could be preserved, but he saw no rare or endangered species or wetlands present. Mr. McDonall stated the site would include a hotel, retail and restaurant. He admitted that they were overparked, however they wanted the flexibility until the final design. He assured the Board there would be a sincere attempt to integrate the oaks into the plan and it would have an environmental theme. He planned to have pedestrian connections between the buildings and to Apollo Drive. The property was flat, and he indicated they would work with Rice Creek Watershed District for ponding. Any tree species recommendations the Board or staff might have would be welcomed. Asleson described the treatment train for surface water to keep the water on site. Rainwater gardens were recommended. The City had seed specs mix, but the concern was for maintenance. Usually businesses wanted irrigated sod in the front of the buildings. Mr. Morris stated that there would be an underground storage facility under the parking lots for infiltration. The majority of storage was underground. Asleson mentioned that a challenge was there was a three foot separation for the infiltration elevations. Mr. McDonall inquired if the levels were consistent across the City. Asleson answered that parts of the City had clay while others had sandy soils. He urged the developers to keep the seasonal high water level in mind, in addition to water volumes leaving the site. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETINGSEPTEMBER 10, 2003 7APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Morris stated that they were attempting to incorporate the red brick silo into the plan. They were going to analyze it and save as much as possible. Mr. McDonall indicated the parking would be broken up. Asleson inquired about the possibility of shared parking. Mr. McDonall agreed, with overlapping parking as well. Asleson questioned if the underground infiltration would be similar to one in Lakeville. Mr. McDonall indicated it would be a corrugated metal pipe. Mr. Morris explained that there was new technology with a filtering house. There were two cells in the house, where one would be sedimentary and one for rate control. The maintenance would be similar to a pond. Grundhofer asked for the name of the technology. Mr. Morris indicated he could obtain the name, but did not recall at the time. Donlin inquired if the hotel would have one or two stories. Mr. Morris answered that it would have a banquet facility and a pool and would not be a lower end motel. Mr. McDonall explained the cultural part was important, and that they would play off each other. The goal was to look at the uses, incorporate water, integrate the oaks, and possibly the silo, if it was structurally sound. Mr. Morris stated there were single family homes adjacent to the property, but it was zoned commercial. Grundhofer stated the City had a lighting ordinance, and inquired about the plans. Donlin clarified that the ordinance required low-impact lighting with recessed boxes. Mr. Morris indicated a concrete plant was adjacent. Grundhofer stated that buffering would be desirable. Mr. McDonall noted that buffering was a natural part of the plan. Mr. Morris added that it would be for noise reduction. O’Dea inquired if the greenways would also have walkways. Grundhofer stated the canopy of trees would be attractive with walkways. Mr. Morris stated that there were plans for walkways in the greenways, but the final plans would be determined by the tenants. He indicated this was the worst case scenario, but things would be shifted and removed for the final plan. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETINGSEPTEMBER 10, 2003 8APPROVED MINUTES Asleson noted that Rehbein’s NETLAWN had survived the winter. Donlin mentioned she liked ivy on buildings. Mr. Morris indicated that the tenants would have their own standards. Mr. McDonall stated that wisteria worked well for him for two years, or a climbing rose. Another option was a vine trouse. Grundhofer added that clematis was another possibility. Chair Kukonen reviewed the issues of lighting, parking, incorporate pervious parking, and landscaping. Philip Carlson responded that they would be careful with the installation. Mr. Morris mentioned that communication was the key, and could resolve all issues that would arise. He assured the Board of their desire to incorporate the unique aspects into the site plan. Asleson reminded the group of the importance of the surface water issue. Mr. Morris assured the Board it would not only be functional, but visually appealing. If care is taken during construction, it will minimize negative impacts. C. Sketch Plan Review, Circle-Lex VFW Asleson noted that there were no representatives present for the review. He indicated that lighting, infiltration, and parking were concerns. O’Dea stated there was a lot of parking. She indicated it was difficult to comment except to decrease the impervious. At present, the site could use improvement. Asleson indicated it probably did not support any rare species, because it was pounded down pavement. Chair Kukonen mentioned there were parking issues, lighting concerns, and serious buffering for noise and light. Donlin indicated that nothing would be lost ecologically, but parking would need to be greatly reduced. Asleson stated that there should be islands for vegetation in the parking lot. The front drop-off area should be narrowed. Impervious parking should also be incorporated. 7.OTHER DEPARTMENT REPORTS A.Forestry This item was tabled to the September 24, 2003 meeting. B. Solid Waste Recycling/Recycling Day ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETINGSEPTEMBER 10, 2003 9APPROVED MINUTES Asleson indicated that October 4, 2003 was Recycling Day, and asked for help. C.Environmental/Heron Issues Asleson noted there were 15 pair of Herons, he also had the official estimate. There was a pretty good success rate for the Herons. Donlin counted 78 Egrets on the east side of Main Street, and probably roughly that same amount on the West side. O’Dea inquired if the Heron Study was completed. Asleson answered it was finished. Grundhofer mentioned the Director of the Audubon Society might be at the presentation of findings. Donlin stated that Glen Fox and she were at the North end of Peltier Lake and could not tell by the vegetation if the ski course had been used, but the carp were thick. Chair Kukonen inquired about the 2004 goals. Asleson agreed they should be updated. The plow availability, and the need for a Master Gardener was discussed. 8.ADJOURN It was noted that the next meeting of the Environmental Board will be on September 24, 2003. There being no further business, O’Dea moved to adjourn at 9:18 p.m. Grundhofer seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Brigette Blesi TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.