Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/04/2010 Environmental Board MinutesENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 4, 2010 DRAFT MINUTES 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES APPROVED SPECIAL BOARD MEETING MINUTES DATE : May 4, 2010 TIME STARTED : 6:30 P.M. TIME ENDED : 8:03 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Mary Jo O’Dea, Barbara Bor, Paula Andrzejewski, Peter Brown, Martha DeHaven and Steve Heiskary MEMBERS ABSENT : None STAFF PRESENT : Environmental Coordinator Marty Asleson 1. CALL TO ORDER Ms. O’Dea called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 2. Swearing in of Board Members The following Environmental Board Members were sworn in by Mayor Jeff Reinert: 1. Barbara Bor – Reappointed 2. Peter Brown – Reappointed 3. Stephen Heiskary – Newly Appointed 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES N/A 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Brown made a motion to approve the agenda. Mr. Heiskary seconded the motion to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously 5. OPEN MIKE Open mike closed at 6:37 p.m. 6. ACTION ITEMS A. Environmental Ordinance Review ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 4, 2010 DRAFT MINUTES 2 Mr. Asleson presented Agenda Item 6A regarding Environmental Ordinance Review. He stated this Ordinance will go before the Planning and Zoning Board on May 12 for Public Hearing. Ciara Schlichting, AICP and Kate Lamers, ASLA from Bonestroo will be reviewing the draft ordinance. Ms. Schlichting stated the purpose of this meeting is to review language of the draft ordinance. She stated Bonestroo and City staff are running on a parallel tract with the Planning & Zoning Board. Ms. Schlichting will start by discussing background and then continue with the overview. Attachment 1: Site and Layout Performance Standards are new and therefore are not replacing any other standards. Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards will replace existing standards. She stated they want to incorporate the standards into the new ordinance. Ms. Schlichting presented background information and the new ordinance language that is building on the Resources Management Plan, the Lino Lakes Parks, Trails and Greenways Plan and Surface Water Management Plan. She stated RCWD gives examples of site design guidelines and puts them out as guidance tool. Techniques have many different names such as: low impact development design with nature, sustainable development and conservation design. She stated there is flexibility in the development code and cited conditional use permits, planned unit development, variances and code revisions as examples. Overview of Site Layout Performance Standards. There are 3 major components of the Site Performance Standards 1. Natural Resource Protected Areas 2. Natural Resource Conservation Areas 3. Natural Resource Corridor Enhancement Areas She stated the design of the Surface Water Management System shall be based on preserving pre-development hydrology and environmentally sensitive areas to the extent practical in accordance with the minimum performance standards. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 4, 2010 DRAFT MINUTES 3 ESAs shall be identified and categorized through the site planning process. Natural Resource Protected Areas: streams, lakes, wetlands, wetland preservation corridor Natural Resource Conservation Areas: wetlands, natural and semi-natural areas and the 100 year floodplain Natural Resource Corridor Enhancement Area: potential linkage for wildlife corridors Categorize sensitive areas as same language in the park plan. She continued the review with the Wetland Buffer and Upland Habitat Requirements, Disconnect and Distribute Stormwater, and Reduction of Impervious Cover. Ms. Bor questioned what is defined with reduction to parking, etc. Ms. Schlichting stated staff does not have an answer at this time. She stated we now have parking requirements. If a developer decided to reduce impervious surface then it might be an option to allow three stalls per 1000. Ms. Schlichting briefly gave an overview of Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards. Ms. O’Dea stated the Board will review this document section by section. She stated the tree ordinance is very specific. When dealing with ordinances or statutes that are very specific it makes it easier to deal with. The Board would like all requirements to say A B & C regarding site performance layout with minimum requirements and language to discuss. She stated incentives are what developers looked for when they developed the Foxborough site. If incentives are not listed in the document stating this is why it is a good thing to do it creates a problem. Ms. Bor stated there are many rural properties throughout the City. If a property owner were to alter drainage, it could affect other properties. Is there some way to consider entire reference regarding this section? Mr. Heiskary stated there is a pre-hydrology plan submitted right up front from a developer. Ms. Schlichting stated in regards to water leaving a site, there will be no more than what it was before the construction. Mr. Asleson stated stormwater is referenced in the Stormwater Management Plan. We would like a developer to improve the current drainage, not necessarily change. Ms. Bor questioned to what extent practical really means in the Environmental Sensitive Areas. Mr. Brown questioned if there is anything that is going to cause ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 4, 2010 DRAFT MINUTES 4 problems such as a red flag what is the comfort level with this. Mr. Asleson stated it will still be okay to cut your own trees down. Ms. Bor questioned Item 2B. 1. Would this require a developer to conduct a natural and endangered species study. Mr. Asleson stated yes. Ms. Bor wanted to confirm 3C which states a minimum setback of 10 feet which equates to a buffer on buffer. Natural Resource Conservation Areas, Subsection B. Top of Page 4. Ms. Bor stated at this time best practices will be used. Ms. Schlichting stated there is research RCWD put together. It is better than what we have today but not everything that RCWD requires. Ms. Schlichting stated there is a minimum and if we can get more we will try. Mr. Brown questioned who decides this. Mr. Smyser emphasized that Mother Nature does not design by numbers. We are trying to approach review of the development of the site in that way. What we plan to do, and you are not seeing yet, is outline the process of developing projects. Ms. Schlichting referred to the handbook for conservation development; if you are going to protect something you need the developer to design the site in such a way that everyone is satisfied. Ms. O’Dea stated this is not defined. There is a variable buffer stated Mr. Asleson. It was suggested that this is vague language and may want to add wording and recommendations. Mr. Asleson stated we should add a range of buffers to work with. Ms. Bor stated to add a collaborative decision of what the buffer would be. Mr. Smyser stated the City has ordinances that go from here to here. That part of it will be covered in a different section. The process will be described in the platting process or the PUD section. When something is developing we will have certain groups looking at certain areas based on expertise. Mr. Heiskary stated there is not a lot of science in the minimum numbers. The idea of the minimum gives the developer the idea they have to do at least this. Ms. Bor questioned if the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) is referenced in the stormwater ordinance? Mr. Asleson stated yes. Natural Resources, Page 5 Ms. Bor questioned the accountability if a tree dies within 3 years of planting, who is responsible. Mr. Asleson stated there are agreements with private pond holders, the City can come in and assess or take care of the problem if owner does not. Mr. Smyser stated if they are on an outlot or easement the City has the right to access. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 4, 2010 DRAFT MINUTES 5 Disconnect and Distribute Stormwater, Page 6. Reduce Impervious Cover. Ms. Bor questioned the threshold. Ms. Schlichting stated staff is going through zoning districts regarding impervious surfaces. Percentage results are determined by a study done by RCWD. Mr. Smyser stated the impervious surfaces will be lowered based on this study. Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards, Attachment 2. Section 8. Page, 7. Boulevard Tree Requirements. Mr. Heiskary questioned adding wording regarding removal of Ash trees on City and private property. Mr. Asleson stated we have an ordinance that covers this. Ms. Schlichting stated at this point all Ash trees are currently prohibited. Section 15, Page 15 – Tree Protection During Construction. It was stated this is determined by routine site inspections. Ms. Bor stated this extends beyond the final platting. The non-compliance still applies down the road stated Ms. Schlichting. Mr. Asleson stated when complete it will then become the property of the owner. It was stated the Planning & Zoning Board will work collaboratively with the Environmental Board on comments. It was stated the Board will see this document again in the form of track changes. 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Arbor Day There will be an Arbor Day celebration at Rice Lake Elementary on May 5 and at Lino Lakes Elementary on May 7. 8. ADJOURN It was noted that the next meeting of the Environmental Board will be on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 at 6:30 p.m. There being no further business, Mr. Brown moved to adjourn at 8:03 p.m. Ms. Andrzejewski seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Lisa Hogstad Community Development Secretary