Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/17/2004 Environmental Board MinutesENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 27, 2004 CITY OF LINO LAKES APPROVED MINUTES DATE : October 27, 2004 TIME STARTED : 6:33 P.M. TIME ENDED : 10:15 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Barbara Bauman, Constance Grundhofer, Rod Kukonen, , Mary Jo O’Dea, and Dennis Smith MEMBERS ABSENT : Barbara Bor, Teresa O’Connell STAFF PRESENT : Environmental Coordinator Marty Asleson and Michael Grochala 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Kukonen called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES August 25, 2004 August minutes were reviewed and approved by O’Dea and seconded by Grundhofer. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The Board approved the agenda as proposed. 4. OPEN MIKE No citizen comments were made. 5. ACTION ITEMS A. Fox Den Acres/Preliminary Plat/PUD - Jeff Schoenbauer/CD Staff Asleson reviewed the background and analysis, and introduced the consultant from Brauer and Associates Jeff Schoenbauer. Mr. Schoenbauer discussed contractor development, and the achievement of public values. He used Fox Den Acres as an example. Chair Kukonen inquired if Mike Quigley’s development was phased. Asleson answered yes. Mr. Schoenbauer discussed economies of swale issues in developments. 1 APPROVED MINUTES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 27, 2004 O’Dea inquired how to get the developer to begin the process. Mr. Schoenbauer answered the developer would notify the City. The City then would sit down with the developer. Developers do not want to have to guess. Grundhofer questioned who was the owner of the radio tower in the North, and had questions about the road extension. Grochala responded it is under private ownership, and Fox Den may extend thorough this area in the future. Chair Kukonen asked for confirmation that the cul-de-sac was only temporary. Grochala indicated that it would have signage posted indicating a future road through the area. Grundhofer inquired about more information concerning the South and East, if it could be saved with a higher quality. Asleson answered the Southeastern corner of the property was extremely unique according to Jason Huesveth. The open space was a nice buffer. Mr. Schoenbauer stated the roads had been narrowed thereby reducing the impervious surface. He suggested other values the City might possibly want to consider in the future could be affordability and mixed housing. O’Dea made a motion to approve the Fox Den Preliminary Plat with the previous recommendations from staff and Board. Bor seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Grundhofer thanked Mr. Black on his willingness to work on the project. B. Amendment to the Growth Management Ordinance - Jeff Schoenbauer/Mike Grochala Mr. Schoenbauer stated the growth control should be used in the traditional approach, but it should be acceptable to waive the control in a Conservation Development. Grochala added that the City would need to bring something to the table. O’Dea asked for clarification that there were two versions of the amendments, one with phasing and one without phasing. Mr. Schoenbauer responded that phasing could still be a part of the discussion. The economics of development would dictate how a developer might wish to phase. Smith posed a question for staff. He referred to the second paragraph, 5b inquiring how “successfully collaborating” was defined. Mr. Schoenbauer answered that success would be defined by the City. If the development could not go as far as the City would like, they would have to go through the traditional approach. 2 APPROVED MINUTES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 27, 2004 Smith stated that he appreciated that the public values were identified in the document. Bor inquired about the application, could it be applied equitably, and would it be limited to existing MUSA. Grochala answered that there was a cap of residential MUSA. A stage 1 growth area with MUSA could qualify for a conservation approach using the amendment provision. It would remain at 147 for the Conventional approach. Chair Kukonen indicated that option 2 was appealing. Mr. Schoenbauer responded that phasing was a disincentive for the developer, and with no advantage to the City. Chair Kukonen questioned if they would still be limited by the stage 1 growth area. Grochala answered that anything outside the stage 1 growth area would have to go through a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Phasing could still have a role due to infrastructure, the market, or size of the site. Chair Kukonen inquired if in section 3 a minimum of 50% open space should be stated. Mr. Schoenbauer did not believe the City should. Parks and Recreation Board continued their meeting elsewhere at 7:40 p.m. Smith moved to approve the Growth and Management Ordinance Amendment option #1. O’Dea seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. C. Mike Vaughan Subdivision Asleson reviewed the background and analysis. Grundhofer inquired if there would be signage by the rain gardens. O’Dea questioned if the rain garden would act as a buffer to the wetland. Asleson responded that the rain garden would also act as an infiltration pond. O’Connell inquired about the circles around trees 3 and 4. Asleson answered that they were the trees he wanted to save, using tree protection fences. Chair Kukonen noted he had rain gardens in the South, but inquired about screening and buffering in that area. Asleson responded that the recommendation of screening species such as dogwoods could be used. O’Dea questioned the reason for the size of the cul-de-sac being so large, was there an island within it. Grochala stated that it was a huge amount of impervious. A question would be who was responsible to maintain an island. He 3 APPROVED MINUTES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 27, 2004 indicated that the Public Works Department did not like the islands because snow plows have difficulty maneuvering in them. Grundhofer suggested a rain garden in the cul-de-sac. O’Connell noted that it was a City road, it seemed wrong for five houses to have their own road, and it could possibly be connected to the West. Grochala responded that other adjacent developments would probably have a similar situation. There would not be enough room for a 90-degree turn. The area was guided for single-family homes. The Board reviewed the recommendations • Work with staff on native plantings in the South for screening. • No importing or exporting of soils without City approval. • Work with staff on an alternative to the cul-de-sac. • Establish a no mow zone in buffer around the rain gardens with signage. • Work with staff to provide a landscaping plan appropriate for rain gardens and ponding areas. • Plant one boulevard tree per lot. Grundhofer made a motion to recommend approval with the staff and Board recommendations. O’Connell seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. D. Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses Asleson reviewed the background and analysis. He added that there appeared to be enough separation where the septic system was, but believed it would be better if it was moved back. He noted that the City usually asked churches to hook up when MUSA was available. O’Connell inquired if the developer had submitted a tree inventory. Asleson answered they had not yet received the inventory. Grundhofer questioned if the landscape plan had been received, because one was not included in the packet. Grochala responded that one was submitted, but there were some concerns. Asleson presented the large landscape plan and indicated it needed screening for the lake. Grundhofer mentioned that a person from the adjacent seaplane property had counted 33 species of ducks on the lake. O’Dea inquired if there was any comment on whether they would use the lake. O’Connell inquired if there would be a lighted monument. 4 APPROVED MINUTES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 27, 2004 O’Dea stated there should be a light and sound time limit. Bauman inquired if the septic was a drainage or a mound system. Smith referred to attachment 6. Bauman questioned the location for the reserve, if the septic were to fail. It was usually close to the original so new lines would not be necessary. Asleson stated that it was 50-feet from the neighbor’s well. Bauman responded it appeared that the reserve would be within the 60’ by 65’ area, and asked staff to ask Christianson if it was acceptable. O’Connell questioned if the septic could be located in front of the church near Lake Drive because it would be easier to hook up to MUSA at a later date. Bauman indicated she had reservations having the drainfield next to the pond. Grundhofer inquired about the lighting plan, and mentioned on County Road J and 85th Avenue the Rice Creek development had effective and directed lighting that had no glare. Chair Kukonen reviewed the Board recommendations: • Define lake use intentions. Show a willingness to establish a Conservation Easement for the lake. • Establish light and sound limits. • Reserve drainfield requires feedback from John Christianson. Move the drainfield if possible. Hook up to City utilities as soon as possible. • Design lighting plan so that there is no glare on the lake. • Meet minimum lighting requirements for the City. • Work with staff for effective screening. • No importing or exporting of soils without City approval. O’Dea made a motion to refer back for further review along with staff and Board recommendations. Bauman seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. E. Friends of the Mississippi River Storm Water Management Ordinance Review Grochala stated the organization had recently become interested in Lino Lakes as they expanded their scope to upstream users of the Mississippi River. He reviewed the background and analysis. The goal was to gather city ordinances into one cohesive and comprehensive plan. O’Dea made a motion to recommend moving forward with the ordinance review. Bor seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. 5 APPROVED MINUTES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 27, 2004 F. Friends of the Mississippi River Water Quality Workshop Grochala stated they offered a water quality workshop to the City. Bauman inquired if there would be a residential turnout, they could invite representatives from homeowners’ associations. Asleson mentioned that Hugo would be a good partner as well. Smith made a motion to move forward with the water quality workshop. Grundhofer seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. G. AUAR/Appointments to an AUAR Advisory Panel - Michael Grochala Grochala stated they were looking for an alternative area-wide review. An open house and a meeting with the Boards were planned. From staff standpoint, the process of environmental review was not macro enough. The process would begin in February or March, and fits in with the Council goals of the master plan for 35W and 35E and County Road 14. After the global issues were decided, development scenarios could then be strategized. This would be accomplished by the using the Comprehensive Plan as the standard and worst-case scenarios. The meetings would have a good facilitator. Various funding sources were identified. The open house was planned for November 18, 2004 at 6:30 p.m. Grochala had indicated that they were looking for 3 or 4 people from each Board for the meeting, along with developers and property owners. The various agencies would need to comment. The initial meeting would involve a tour of the area, lunch, then the agencies would be given a list of the meetings with an invitation to participate in specific meetings. The process should build consensus. Grundhofer indicated that Grochala mentioned the Comprehensive Plan, but if the process puts forth 3-4 scenarios, would those scenarios need to stay in the Comprehensive Plan. Grochala responded there could be changes in land use could take place. Bor inquired who would decide the members on the advisory panel. Grochala answered he did, and invited any interested community members and business people. Part of Centerville was also included. Bor posed a question concerning the worst-case scenario. Grochala stated that they would need to calibrate every 5 years. It would force the City to be proactive. Asleson added that it was a more holistic approach to environmental planning. 6 APPROVED MINUTES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 27, 2004 Grochala stated that the goal was to understand the cumulative effect, and there were a lot of opportunities. Chair Kukonen inquired if the advisory panel would vote. Grochala responded they would not necessarily vote. Grundhofer inquired if Anoka County Staff would be involved. Asleson answered that Jeff Perry would probably participate. O’Connell questioned if participants had to be available for every date, because it would help people decide. Grochala responded that every date was important, and he understood that it was tough to schedule. Chair Kukonen called for volunteers. The Board members coming forth were Barbara Bor, Barbara Bauman, Dennis Smith, and Teresa O’Connell as an alternate. Grochala mentioned they were probably going to meet in the Community Room. Bauman asked for clarification that volunteers should go to the meeting, and would confirmed on the 8th. O’Dea made a motion to approve the member representatives for the Advisory Panel. Grundhofer inquired about the 49 Club. Grochala answered they were building a new restaurant and a separate bar. There were utility and right-of-way issues. A consultant was hired for a plan. The Council was focusing on the gateways to the Cities. They wanted to lay out the vision, and then make it happen. 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Hardwood Creek Restoration Asleson stated the project would cover 14,000-17,000 acres. The water quality in Rice Lake was good, but was greatly decreased by the time it reached Peltier Lake. Asleson went to the Rice Creek Watershed District Board meeting where they discussed alternatives. There seemed to be a consensus to reconstruct the ditch to a stable stream profile. The response of the people at the meeting was positive. As a result, a public meeting was scheduled for November 10, 2004. Grochala indicated that ditching was not a long-term solution. For Hugo the ditching was a major issue. He noted that he would be attending the November 10, 2004 meeting with Asleson. 7 APPROVED MINUTES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 27, 2004 O’Dea made a motion to recommend that the City of Lino Lakes supports the creek restoration for Rice Creek Watershed District with a letter of support. O’Connell seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. B. FireWise Update Asleson stated that there was a meeting with the neighborhood property owners for the FireWise program. C. Solid Waste Recycling Update Asleson indicated that the numbers were not tabulated yet, but it had great attendance. 7. OTHER DEPARTMENT REPORTS A. Forestry Asleson stated that people were looking into non-reflective flashing to go around the trees at the rookery. B. Solid Waste Recycling This item was tabled to the November 24, 2004 meeting. C. Environmental Chair Kukonen urged Board members to check the information kiosk. 8. ADJOURN It was noted that the next meeting of the Environmental Board will be on November 24, 2004. There being no further business, O’Dea moved to adjourn at 10:15 p.m. Bauman seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Brigette Blesi TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 8 APPROVED MINUTES