Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/02/2010 Env Bd PacketCity of Lino Lakes Environmental Board Meeting June 2, 2010 6:30 p.m. AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes April 28, 2010 May 4, 2010 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Open Mike 5. Action Items A. Amendments to Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations chapter of the City Code regarding Development in Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Tree Preservation, Landscaping, Planned Unit Developments, and Platting. B. Anoka County Ditch (ACD) 10 -22 -32 Historical Review and Future Objectives /Doug Thomas/RCWD 6. Discussion Items A. Peltier Lake Heron Colony B. Emerald Ash Borer Update C. Wollen's Park Wetland Bank Update 7. Adjourn • • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING DATE TIME STARTED TIME ENDED MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT 1. 2. CITY OF LINO LAKES MINUTES APRIL 28, 2009 : April 28, 2009 . 6:33 P.M. . 8:00 P.M. : Mary Jo O'Dea, Barbara Bor, Paula Andrzejewski, Peter Brown, Martha DeHaven and Stephen Heiskary : None : Environmental Coordinator Marty Asleson CALL TO ORDER Ms. O'Dea called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m. Swearing in of Board Members — Postponed until May 4, 2010. 1. Barbara Bor — Reappointed 2. Peter Brown — Reappointed 3. Stephen Heiskary — Newly Appointed 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES December - Not included in packet. February 24, 2010 — No Changes to the minutes. Mr. Brown made a motion to approve the February 24, 2010 minutes. Mr. Heiskary seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Additional agenda items to be added: Earth Day Heron Rookery signage Ms. Andrzejewski made a motion to approve agenda. Ms. Bor seconded the motion to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously 5. OPEN MIKE Open mike closed at 6:36 p.m. DRAFT MINUTES 1 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 28, 2009 6. ACTION ITEMS A. Surface Water Management Public Hearing /Tim Payne Mr. Payne was present for discussion and review of his PowerPoint presentation on Annual Stormwater Management Public Hearing. He stated this meeting provides a forum for the City to present the purpose, goals, and requirements of the SWPPP to educate, inform and encourage citizen to provide input. The NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) Stormwater Permitting Program for MS4's (Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System) is designed to reduce pollution that enters surface waters from storm sewers to the maximum extent practicable. NPDES Stormwater Permits are issued by the MPCA in three areas: construction sites, industrial sites and municipalities (MS4's). Each type requires the implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Lino Lakes has adopted and implemented SWPPP includes six Minimum Control Measures (MCMs). Mr. Payne presented the City accomplishments in implementing the plan in each of the following MCMs for 2009: 1. Public Education and Outreach 2. Public Participation and Involvement. 3. Illicit Discharge Detection & Elimination 4. Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control. 5. Post - Construction Stormwater Management (New & Redevelopment) 6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping He continued his review with Pond Inspections and Inspection Zones. He stated the City is divided into 5 inspection zones, with each zone being inspected on a five year rotation. He presented the 2009 Surface Water Projects. He stated only 5 out of 13 projects were located in the scheduled inspection zone for 2009, the others scattered throughout the City. He continued to review various project sites out of the 13. He reviewed future projects outside of 2010 inspection zone as well as 2010 Best Management Practice and Implementation Goals. Ms. Bor questioned if there were homeowners doing the projects themselves. Mr. Payne stated no, the 13 projects were City projects, not the homeowner's responsibility. DRAFT MINUTES 2 • • • • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 28, 2009 Ms O'Dea asked if anyone had questions. Mr. Brown questioned if the practices presented are working. Mr. Payne stated yes, overall the plan is working. Success in some areas of the plan is difficult to measure. Mr. Asleson stated if you take any one element out of what we have done and look at end results you would see that it works. Mr. Brown stated do what we are set out to do and we will see the results. Mr. Heiskary questioned if the correction orders for construction sites have all been completed. Mr. Payne stated yes, he tries to visit the sites weekly. Some contractors are very responsive. Some need a little extra push. He stated in some cases work was halted until contractors complied with the rules. Mr. Asleson stated contractor's attitudes have changed with education. Mr. Heiskary stated in the last five years things have really turned around. Contractors are taking it seriously. Ms. Bor stated it is accumulative process over time. Ms. Bor questioned how it is decided as what a City is responsible for and what the homeowner are responsible for. Mr. Payne stated the work completed in 2009 were all located on City owned property (ponds). Ms. Bor questioned if in 2010 they are more deficiencies located will they be flagged. Mr. Payne sated yes. Ms. Bor questioned if RCWD is responsible for say a ditch and is there collaboration. Mr. Payne stated yes. Ms. Andrewjeski asked if they have been working with schools. Mr. Payne stated yes, Centennial Middle School. Mr. Asleson stated there has been native prairie restoration work and Trish and the Toon's educate students in regards to water. Ms. O'Dea opened up the public hearing for anyone wishing to comment: Open up for public comment Open up for public comment It was stated the deadline for a written comment is 30 days from today. Public Hearing Closed. Recommendation made by Mr. Brown to accept the report. Ms. Andrewjeski seconded. Motion carried unanimously. DRAFT MINUTES 3 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 28, 2009 Ms. Bor questioned if the information provided this evening will be on the website. It was stated yes, it will be April 29. B. Storm Water Ordinance Review/ Patrick McLarnon/TKDA Mr. Asleson reviewed his staff report, Agenda Item 6B, on Storm Water Ordinance with the Board. His recommendation is for staff to review Environmental Board comments and suggestions and incorporate them into the document. Mr. Studenski stated there has been a great deal of staff effort that has gone into this report. The Annual Storm Water Pollution Prevention draft is presented to board members this evening. Overall the draft is very solid. A couple of areas that are still being worked on are to make sure this document is consistent with ordinances, zoning, etc. for submittal. Staff will be meeting with the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) to go over the draft with them. Mr. Asleson stated there are many areas that need to be tied together in this draft. . What we are looking for this evening is feedback on areas the board would like to see improved upon. After this review, the document will go back to staff and then be presented again at the next meeting. Mr. Brown questioned if staff has looked at what other cities have done. Mr. Studenski stated yes. Mr. Brown questioned if there is anything unique to the City of Lino Lakes. Mr. Studenski stated uniqueness is that every project has water issues. He stated most of the projects deal with 100 year elevation and ground water. Mr. Asleson stated all cities are addressing the same issues. Ms. O'Dea questioned how the board would like to review this document. Mr. Studenski stated section by section. After each section, questions will be answered. Ms. O'Dea questioned if the City is working with Anoka County Parks as well as RCWD. He stated the critical parts are with RCWD. Mr. Patrick McLarnon reviewed the Storm Water and Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance with the Board. Chapter X Storm Water and Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance Section X.01 Statutory Authorization Section X.02 Findings Section X.03 Purpose Section X.04 Applicability DRAFT MINUTES 4 • • • • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 28, 2009 1. Storm Water Management 2. Erosion and Sediment Control Ms. Bor stated for the average citizen who reads the document 10,000 sq. ft. states as acreage and is EAW applicable here. Developer needs to be conscience as to what is going into storm water. Ms. Bor stated a developer may intentionally design a parking lot just under the threshold. Section X.05 Definitions Section X.06 Exemption Ms. Bor questioned where CUP's fall into this Section. Mr. Studenski stated it would be the same threshold. Section X. 07 Incorporations by Reference Mr. McLarnon stated engineering design standards will be developed to go along with this section as well as the Minnesota Storm Water Manual and RCWD Rules. Mr. Asleson stated they City's wants to implement RMP3 rules and may want to take this out of the ordinance. Mr. Studenski stated the VALAMO area is using RCWD requirements and they City is taking this on as our own and that they will encompass the entire City. In other words, the City has the same requirements as RCWD. Ms. O'Dea questioned if VALAMO has stricter regulations, do developers have to meet that and the City's requirements. Mr. Studenski stated that is correct. Section X.08 Storm Water and Erosion and Sediment Control Performance Standards Ms. O'Dea requested a definition of bankfull discharge. Ms. Bor questioned how this would relate in relation to high quality wet lands to low quality wet lands. It was stated this would be included under Rules for Resource Management Plan. Page 13, Item J: Also requires privately owned infrastructure to have a long term maintenance plan included. Page 12, Item 7: Ms. Bor questioned the meaning of this. Mr. McLarnon stated with residential development this will not go away, it will be redistributed. Page 15, Item 12: Ms. Bor questioned who follows up on site management. Mr. Tim Payne he would look for this as well as a City building inspector Section X.09 Pollution Prevention Section X.10 Inspections and Maintenance Ms. O'Dea questioned if the City runs into contractors who do not comply with the rules and items start falling through cracks what measures are taken. Mr. McLarnon stated if a site is dormant for 30 days there are steps to be followed. Mr. Bor questioned what the consequences would be. A course of action letter, starting letters, and finally work would need to be completed and charged to private owner by city workers. Section X.11 Plan Review Procedure DRAFT MINUTES 5 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 28, 2009 Section X. 12 Financial Procedures and Enforcement Actions Ms. O'Dea questioned the bottom of page 21 Emergency Action: States determined by community, would this also be determined by the City? Mr. McLarnon stated yes. He will document search and add City as well as Community. Ms. Bor questioned if any developers have given feedback on this document? Mr. McLarnon stated no. Mr. Studenski stated for the most part we have had this information available. This item will come before the board again. There is not action needed at this time. 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Recycle Day/May 1 Board members were updated on the City's upcoming Spring Recycle Day. Mr. Asleson mentioned he was not sure if the City Council will allow a Fall Recycle Day this year. B. Arbor Day There will be an Arbor Day celebration at Rice Lake Elementary on May 5 at Lino Lakes Elementary on May 7. Mr. Asleson stated Trish and the Toons will be performing at Rice Lake Elementary. C. Earth Day There were roughly 250 people who participated in Earth Day events this year on April 24. Ms. Andrzejewski and one of her Rice Lake Elementary 5th grade students had a display table at Wargo Nature Center. D. Heron Rookery Ms. Bor questioned signage for Peltier Island. Mr. Asleson stated the Highway Department makes the signs. We are on bottom of production, low priority. We will eventually get them. Ms. Bor stated the City Council showed interest in the progress and history of what could still be done if anything. Ms. Bor stated she would put together a sheet on progress. It was stated there is a Girl Scout troop that would like to plant trees on the island in August. DRAFT MINUTES 6 • • • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 28, 2009 8. ADJOURN It was noted that the next meeting of the Environmental Board will be a special meeting on May 4, 2010. There being no further business, Ms. DeHaven moved to adjourn at 8:00 p.m. Mr. Heiskary seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Lisa Hogstad Community Development Secretary • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 4, 2009 CITY OF LINO LAKES 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, 2009 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. DRAFT MINUTES 2 • • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 4, 2009 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, 2009 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 Mr. 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. DRAFT MINUTES 4 • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MAY 4, 2009 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 DRAFT MINUTES 5 • Agenda Item 5A Staff Originator: Marty Asleson Environmental Board Meeting Date: June 2, 2010 Topic: Amendments to Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision regulations Chapter of City Code Regarding Development in Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Tree Preservation, Landscaping, Planned Unit Developments, and Platting Background: The Environmental Board discussed the site layout, landscaping, and tree preservation standards on May 4. The P & Z discussed those and the collaborative design process on May 12. Some revisions have occurred since those meetings. The revisions are attached to this memo for discussions by the Environmental Board on June 2 and the P & Z on June 9. Since the late 1990s Lino Lakes has been pursuing a more environmentally sound means of handling new development. The city's Handbook for Environmental Planning and Conservation Development was printed in 1999. We followed that with the 2004 Parks, Natural Open Space /Greenways and Trail Plan. The I -35E Corridor Alternative Urban Areawide Review in 2005 established a "conservation design framework" for all development within the study area. The draft new Comprehensive Plan further promotes the conservation design principles laid out in all these documents. Chapter 2 creates the Resource Management System Plan, establishing an open space system that corresponds with Environmentally Sensitive Areas created by plans and rules of the Rice Creek Watershed District. Now the City is creating and amending official controls to implement the ideas and plans. The subjects of the public hearing tonight are sections of the zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations, the primary controls for regulating new development. (A new stormwater management ordinance also is in the works.) All the different ordinance requirements need to work together toward the goals of preserving and creating a city wide greenway system through the identification and protection of Environmentally Sensitive Areas. The Rice Creek Watershed District is the governmental entity that regulates wetland impacts and the public drainage ditch system. Extensive environmental research by the District and Lino Lakes resulted in the creation of an overall Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) map for Lino Lakes. The District's new rule RMP -3 is designed to identify and protect ESAs on individual development sites. The District's rules protect wetlands and include requirements for stormwater design. The Lino Lakes ordinances are intended to provide standards for aspects of development that are beyond the scope of the Watershed District's authorities. In this way, the City and the Watershed District's actions are partners in creating the citywide greenway system of ESAs. City staff have worked with Bonestroo to prepare draft new site layout performance standards and landscaping and tree preservations standards. All of these are intended to apply to all new plats, site plans for commercial /industrial /institutional uses, conditional use permits —in fact, all new development in the city. The site layout performance standards are new. The landscaping and tree standards would replace the existing sections of the zoning ordinance. The process for reviewing new development is as important as the regulatory standards that must be met. While we have been practicing the collaborative method for the past few years, the new process sections will codify those practices into ordinance form. The new collaborative design sections of the subdivision regulations would apply to all new plats and planned unit developments. The PUD section of the zoning ordinance would refer to those sections of the subdivision regulations. This will eliminate redundant and potentially conflicting requirements in the current ordinance. All these documents are drafts that are undergoing revision. It is likely the levels of requirements now in the tables will be pared down. We also will need to clarify some things. For example, tree preservation requirements for a development project should be different from a builder getting a permit for a house and from a homeowner removing a tree in his yard. Recommendation: Staff recommends discussion of the amendments, and make recommendation on the material presented. Attachments: 1. Transmittal Memo from Bonestroo o Attachment 1: Draft Site Layout Performance Standards o Attachment 2: Draft Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards 2. Draft of part Chapter 1001 of City Code, Subdivision and Platting § 1001.020 CONCEPT PLAN § 1001.025 COLLABORATIVE DESIGN PROCESS 3. Draft of part of section of Zoning Ordinance Section 2, Subd. 10.F. Procedure for Processing Planned Unit Development • • ATTACHMENT 1 • Memorandum 4 Bonestroo • • To: Michael Grochala, AICP, Community Development Director, City of Lino Lakes From: Ciara Schlichting, AICP Date: May 26, 2010 Re: Draft Ordinance Language The purpose of this memo is to transmit revised draft ordinance language for the Environmental Board to review at their meeting on June 2, 2010 and for the Planning and Zoning Board to review at their meeting on June 9, 2010. The proposed revisions are intended to address comments received from the Environmental Board, Planning and Zoning Board, and city staff. No public comments were received during the public hearing held May 12, 2010 (the public hearing is still open). The attachments to this memo include the following: Attachment 1: Site Layout Performance Standards The Site Layout Performance Standards include four minor revisions. Since the revisions are minor only a "tracked changes" version of the proposed language is being transmitted. The revisions are intended to address the following comments: 1. The need to clarify that surface water management needs to be based on predevelopment conditions. 2. Remove reference to tree preservation levels (e.g., Level T -1, T -2) since labeling the requirements as "levels" was removed from the tree preservation standards. Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards The Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards contain numerous minor revisions; therefore, both a "tracked changes" and "clean" version of the draft ordinance language is being transmitted. The revisions are intended to address the following comments: 1. Overall, the text was reorganized to make the language more "user friendly" and to simplify administration of the standards. Most of these revisions did not result in substantive changes to the standards. For example, the concept of "levels" was removed; however, the general intent of the standards remain although the numbers (e.g., planting requirements) may vary slightly from the previous version. 2. Require one canopy coverage percent (e.g., 40 %) for all uses rather than have two levels. 3. Increase the incentive (e.g., assigned canopy coverage value) to have more than two trees in an interior parking lot island. 4. Increase minimum soil volume requirements for trees in a single or shared bed. 5. Clarify that existing lots with existing buildings can remove trees without triggering mitigation requirements. 6. Clarify that the non - compliance measures also apply to tree preservation plans. Attachment 1: Site Layout Performance Standards - REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 1 E. Site Layout Performance Standards. All uses shall comply with the requirements of this section. 1. Purpose. The City developed a Resource Management System Plan based on a water and natural resource inventory and assessment and the vision, goals and policies developed through the comprehensive planning process. The performance standards established in this section are for the purposes of accommodating development that protects, conserves and enhances the city's water and natural resources consistent with Comprehensive Plan goals. 2. Natural Resource Conservation. The two overall components of natural resource conservation are the surface water management system and environmentally sensitive areas. a. Surface Water Management System. The design of the surface water management system shall be based on preserving predevelopment hydrology (i.e., existing surface water runoff volumes and rates) and environmentally sensitive areas to the extent practical in accordance with the following minimum performance standards: 1) Establish the wetland preservation corridor in accordance with watershed district rules. 2) Reduce the need for surface water management facilities by preserving and integrating natural topography, soils and site drainage into the surface water management system to the degree they can accommodate the additional flow and volume of water without compromising water quality. 3) The preferred conveyance strategy is to transport wherever possible untreated and treated runoff in conveyance facilities open to the atmosphere (e.g., swales, vegetated buffer strips, energy- dissipating structures, etc.) rather than through enclosed pipes, so • as to decrease runoff velocity, allow for natural infiltration, allow suspended sediment particles to settle, and to remove pollutants. 4) Site grading shall be minimized to the maximum extent reasonable to minimize impacts to environmentally sensitive areas. 5) The surface water management system shall be designed to meet the performance standards in the Lino Lakes Stormwater Management Ordinance, Lino Lakes Stormwater Design Manual & RCWD Rules. b. Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs). The design of the site shall be based on protecting, conserving, and enhancing ESAs to the extent practical while allowing for equitable economic return. ESAs shall be identified and categorized through the site planning process. 1) ESA Identification and Categorization. During the resource inventory and site analysis process for a property that has an ESA, all ESA features on the site shall be identified on the resource inventory map. Landscape -scale ESAs are mapped and on file with the City. Balancing the goals of natural resource protection and conservation with land use goals requires prioritizing ESAs. ESA categories (i.e., Natural Resource Protected Area) are listed in descending order from the highest to the lowest level of priority. ESA features (i.e., wetland preservation corridor, natural areas, etc.) listed under each category are not prioritized. • Attachment 1: Site Layout Performance Standards Page 2 a) Natural Resource Protected Areas. These areas include: i. Streams ii. Lakes iii. Wetland Preservation Corridor (WPC): Areas designated as wetland preservation corridor on the landscape -scale WPC boundary shown on Figure 1 in Rice Creek Watershed District Rule RMP 3, as amended. The wetland preservation corridor may include: • Wetlands • Natural and Semi - Natural Areas: Areas designated as Natural and Semi - Natural Areas in accordance with Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS). Natural areas are comprised of more than 50% native plants. Semi - Natural areas are comprised of less than 50% native plants. • Floodplain: Areas designated as 100 -year floodplain and regulated under the Lino Lakes Floodplain Ordinance. b) Natural Resource Conservation Areas. These areas include: i. Wetlands Non - contiguous to the WPC. ii. Natural and Semi - Natural Areas: Areas designated as Natural and Semi- Natural Areas in accordance with the MLCCS. Natural areas are comprised of more than 50% native plants. Semi - Natural areas are comprised of less than 50% native plants. iii. Floodplain. Areas designated as 100 -year floodplain and regulated under the Lino Lakes Floodplain Ordinance. c) Natural Resource Corridor Enhancement Areas: Corridors that provide connections between environmentally sensitive areas to establish a more contiguous and complete natural open space system. 2) Minimum Performance Standards for ESAs. The following are the minimum performance standards that shall be used in the site planning process to maximize the function and value of ESAs, to minimize adverse impacts to ESAs, and to allow development activities that will provide equitable economic return. a) Natural Resource Protected Areas. These areas shall be protected and incorporated into new development to maintain the function and value of water resources and associated upland habitat areas while allowing for passive recreational use. Development within natural resource protected areas is largely controlled, and where applicable, prohibited under established regulations. Specific performance standards within a Natural Resource Protected Area are as follows: i. Surface Water. Incorporate lakes and streams into the surface water management system consistent with applicable watershed district, State of Minnesota, and Federal statutes and rules (e.g., pre -treat runoff before discharging into a lake or stream, volume control, and rate control). • 1 • 1 • Attachment 1: Site Layout Performance Standards Page 3 ii. Wetland Preservation Corridor. Establish the WPC in accordance with watershed district rules. The delineated WPC will be established during the site planning process. iii. Vegetated Wetland Buffer. Establish an upland buffer of native vegetation around wetlands within the WPC to maintain water quality and habitat. Development is regulated in the following manner: (a) The buffer shall average at least 50 feet in width, measure at least 25 feet at all points, and meet the average width at all points of concentrated inflow. The location of the buffer shall maximize the protection of ESAs. (b) The vegetated wetland buffer and upland habitat area must meet the requirements in RCWD RMP -3 and the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization, as amended (c) Structures shall be setback a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of the wetland buffer. iv. Natural and Semi- Natural Areas. Conserve and enhance the function and value of these areas for habitat, water quality, surface water management, aesthetics, and passive recreational use. (a) Suitable habitat for rare, threatened, or endangered species shall be protected to the extent practical. (b) The Level Two (T 3) tree preservation and mitigation requirements in Section 3. Subd.4.Q shall apply to Natural Resource Protected Areas. (c) Prairie and other non -woody natural and semi- natural communities shall be considered for protection, restoration, and /or inclusion in the surface water management system. (d) Structures shall be setback a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of protected natural and semi - natural areas. b) Natural Resource Conservation Areas. These areas shall be conserved to maintain the function and value of the area while allowing encroachment and disturbance to accommodate development. Specific performance standards within a Natural Resource Conservation Area are as follows: i. Natural and Semi- Natural Areas. Conserve and enhance the function and value of these areas for habitat, water quality, surface water management, aesthetics, and passive recreational use. (a) Suitable habitat for rare, threatened, or endangered species shall be protected to the extent practical. (b) The Lcvcl Two (T 2) tree preservation and mitigation requirements in Section 3. Subd.4.Q shall apply to Natural Resource Conservation Areas. (c) Prairie and other non -woody natural and semi - natural communities shall be considered for protection, restoration, and /or inclusion in the surface water management system. Attachment 1: Site Layout Performance Standards Page 4 (d) Structures shall be setback a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of protected natural and semi - natural areas. ii. Wetlands Non - contiguous to the WPC: These areas shall be conserved in accordance with applicable watershed district and Army Corps of Engineers rules and permit requirements, as amended. iii. Vegetated Wetland Buffer. Establish an upland buffer of native vegetation to wetlands non - contiguous to WPC to maintain water quality and habitat. (a) The buffer width must be at least 25 feet adjacent to the entire wetland. The location of the buffer should maximize the protection of ESAs. (b) The vegetated wetland buffer and upland habitat area must meet the requirements in RCWD RMP -3 and the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization, as amended. (c) Structures shall be setback a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of the wetland buffer. c) Natural Resource Corridor Enhancement Areas. These corridors shall be established to provide contiguous and complete natural open space system, surface water conveyance, and passive recreational uses. Specific performance standards for Natural Resource Corridor Enhancement Areas are as follows: i. Corridors should minimize natural resource fragmentation by creating connections within and between natural resource protected areas or natural resource conservation areas located on site and on adjacent properties. ii. Corridors should be established where there is a convergence of multiple features, such as surface water management areas, natural and semi- natural areas, and existing or proposed trail corridors. iii. The Level Two (T 2) tree preservation and mitigation requirements in Section 3. Subd.4.Q shall apply within Natural Resource Corridor Enhancement Areas. 3) Wetland Buffer and Upland Habitat Requirements. a) As a condition of approval, a property owner must record a declaration in a form approved by the City establishing vegetated wetland buffer area adjacent to the delineated edge of a wetland and upland habitat defined as an ESA through the site planning process. The declaration must state that on further subdivision of the property, each subdivided lot of record shall meet the monumentation requirement of paragraph E.2.b.3.b. On public land or right -of -way, in place of a recorded declaration, the public owner may execute a written maintenance agreement with the City. The maintenance agreement will state that if the land containing the buffer or upland habitat area is conveyed to a private party, the seller must record a declaration for maintenance in a form approved by the City. b) Buffer or upland habitat area is to be indicated by permanent, freestanding markers at the buffer or habitat area upland edge, with a design and text approved by City staff in writing. A marker shall be placed at each lot line and at all angle and curve points, with additional markers at an interval of no more than 200 feet. On public land or right -of -way, the monumentation requirement may be satisfied by the use of • • • • • • Attachment 1: Site Layout Performance Standards Page 5 markers flush to the ground, breakaway markers of durable material, or a vegetation maintenance plan approved by City staff in writing. c) The application must include a natural resource management plan for City approval that includes the following: site inventory, management goals, management activities, maintenance activities, monitoring activities, funding mechanisms, and any other information requested by City staff. d) The buffer or upland habitat area will consist of vegetated land, primarily plant species native to this region that is not otherwise disturbed, except for periodic cutting or burning that promotes the health of the buffer or upland habitat area, actions to address disease or invasive species, or other actions to maintain or improve buffer or habitat area quality, each as approved in writing by City staff. The following are prohibited: land that is cultivated; cropped; pastured; mowed; fertilized; used as a site for depositing snow removed from roads, driveways or parking lots; or subject to the placement of mulch or yard waste. For public road authorities and stormwater system maintenance, the terms of this subsection will be modified as necessary to accommodate safety and maintenance feasibility needs. e) Wetland buffer and upland habitat area may be disturbed to alter land contours or improve buffer and upland habitat function if the following criteria are met: i. An erosion control plan is submitted under which: • alterations are designed and conducted to expose the smallest amount of disturbed ground for the shortest time possible; • fill or excavated material is not placed to create an unstable slope; • mulches or similar materials are used for temporary soil coverage; and • permanent native vegetation is established as soon as possible. ii. Wooded buffer and native riparian canopy trees are left intact. iii. When disturbance is completed: • sheet flow characteristics within the buffer are improved; • average slope is no steeper than preexisting average slope or 5:1 (horizontal:vertical), whichever is less steep; however, preexisting slopes steeper than 5:1 containing dense native vegetation will not require regrading; • the top 18 inches of the soil profile is not compacted, has a permeability at least equal to the permeability of the preexisting soil in an uncompacted state and has organic matter content of between five and 15 percent; and • habitat diversity and riparian shading are maintained or improved. iv. A re- vegetation plan is submitted specifying removal of invasive species and establishment of native vegetation suited to the location. v. A recorded declaration or, for a public entity, maintenance agreement is submitted that states that for three years after the site is stabilized, the Attachment 1: Site Layout Performance Standards Page 6 property owner will correct erosion, maintain and replace vegetation, and remove invasive species to establish permanent vegetation according to the re- vegetation plan. vi. Disturbance is not likely to result in erosion, slope failure or a failure to establish vegetation due to existing or proposed slope, soil type, root structure or proposed construction methods. f) No above- or below- ground structure or impervious surface may be placed within the buffer or upland habitat area permanently or temporarily, except as follows: i. A public utility, or a structure associated with a public utility, may be located within a buffer or upland habitat area on a demonstration that there is no reasonable alternative that avoids or reduces the proposed buffer intrusion. The utility or structure shall minimize the area of permanent vegetative disturbance. ii. Stormwater features that are vegetated consistent with E.2.b.3.d may be located within buffer on site - specific approval. iii. Buffer or upland habitat area may enclose a linear surface no more than 10 feet in width and, for buffer, no less than 25 feet from the delineated wetland edge for non - motorized travel if wetland habitat will not be measurably reduced. Trail edge mowing is not permitted. 3. Disconnect and Distribute Stormwater. The guidelines established in this section are for the purposes of maximizing the use of pervious areas at the site to help filter and infiltrate runoff generated from impervious areas and to spread excess runoff over pervious areas. a. Compost and Amended Soils. To recover soil porosity lost due to compaction, soils should be amended to allow for adequate water holding capacity for plant growth and infiltration of runoff. b. Disconnect Impervious Surfaces. Runoff from impervious surfaces such as parking lots, driveways, and sidewalks should be routed to adjacent pervious areas to be filtered or infiltrated into the soil. c. Rooftop Disconnection. Runoff from rooftops should be spread over lawns and other pervious areas. 4. Reduce Impervious Cover. Less impervious cover directly results in less stormwater runoff and pollutant loads generated at the site. Impervious surface should be reduced to the extent practical. • • • Attachment 1: Site Layout Performance Standards Page 7 Incentives. To provide for equitable economic return in consideration of protection and conservation of ESAs and surface water management areas, potential incentives may be offered. The following are potential incentives that may be offered (the location of these incentives in the ordinance is yet to be determined): 1) Wetland replacement credits 2) Stormwater management credits 3) Density bonus or transfer 4) Tree preservation credits 5) Landscape requirement credits 6) Park ded /cation credits 7) Trunk utility and stormwater management fee credits 8) Reduced setbacks 9) Staging plan flexibility 10) Financial incentives when consistent with city poly 11) Reduce required front yard setback to reduce driveway length 12) Reduce required side yard setback to allow narrower frontages to reduce street length 13) Reduce required street width 14) Reduce required cul -de -sac radius 15) Reduce required parking ratios 16) Reduce required parking lane widths 17) Reduce required parking stall dimensions 18) Reduce driveway width 19) Allow shared driveways 20) Allow alternative surfaces for driveways (pervious) 21) Reduced sidewalk requirements • • Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards - REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 1 Q. Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards 1 Purpose. To establish landscaping standards and tree preservation requirements to promote high quality site development, compatibility of uses, biodiversity, tree japateetieopreservation, and to enhance the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the community. 2 Definitions. The following words and terms, wherever they occur in this Ordinance, shall be interpreted as herein defined: Approved Species: Species found on the City maintained list which may be planted. The City may restrict applicant's use of approved species in certain situations where the species may be inappropriate. Basic use area: Area dedicated to site's primary- use, including buildings, parking, loading, driveways, streets, outbuildings, trash enclosures, utilities, landscaping, and grading necessary for cmc . the construction of the above uses. Surface water detention ponds are not part of the basic use area. Biodiversity: The variety, distribution and abundance of living organisms in an ecosystem. Buffer: Linear bands of vegetation, and /or space providing separation between two separate land uses. Caliper: Standard measure of tree size for newly planted trees. The caliper inches of a tree is the diameter of the trunk. This dimension is measured at 6" above the ground when the trees are 4" caliper and less. For trees over 4" caliper, the diameter of the trunk is measured at 12" above the ground. Canopy: The top layer or crown of trees. Cutting: The feeling or removal of a tree or any procedure in which the natural result will lead to the death or substantial destruction of a tree. Such acts include, but are not limited to, severe cutting back of limbs to stubs larger than three inches in diameter, and damage inflicted upon the root system of the tree. Cutting does not include normal pruning within the bounds of normal arboricultural practice. Damage: Action or inaction which does not follow good arboriculture practices. Damage may include damage inflicted upon roots by machinery, changing the natural grade above the root system or around the trunk, destruction of the natural shape or any action which causes infection, infestation or decay. DBH: Diameter at breast height, typically measured at 4' -6' above the ground. Detention Area: Area of a detention pond from the normal water level and up the side slopes to 10' offset from the high water level. Disturbance: Any construction, development, removals, earth movement, clearing or other similar activity. Diseased tree: A tree with a health condition which makes it subject to a high probability of failure. Dripline: Imaginary line on the ground that is extended straight downward from the outermost edge of the canopy. Foundation Landscape Zone: Within 15' of the building. Invasive species: A plant non - native to the local ecosystem which exhibits, or has the potential to exhibit, uncontrolled growth and invasion or alteration of the natural functions of any native habitat. 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards - REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 2 Large Shrub: Large shrubs have a mature height over 6'. Large Tree: Overstory deciduous trees with a mature height of at least 40'. Medium Shrub: Medium shrubs have a mature height of 3' -6'. Medium Tree: Deciduous trees with a mature height over 18' and up to 39'. Native species: A plant species that is indigenous to the local ecosystem. Perennial: A plant, usually a flowering species, having a lifespan of more than two (2) years. Prohibited species: Species that may not be planted within the City that are typically invasive or considered a nuisance. Removal: Actual removal or effective removal through actions resulting in the death of a tree. Root Protection Zone: A protected area around an existing tree established by offsetting the dripline 5' away from the tree center. Screen: A barrier that hinders sight and, potentially, access. Small Shrub: Small shrubs have a mature height of less than 3'. Small shrubs are interchangeable with perennials, ornamental grasses and groundcovers to fulfill landscape requirements. Small Tree: Understory deciduous trees with a mature height of 18' and under. Tree: Any self supporting woody plant, growing up the earth with one trunk of at least 3" dbh, or a multi- stemmed trunk system with a definitely formed crown. Undesirable tree: Trees that are dead, diseased, structurally weak, invasive or trees that are hazardous to people, infrastructure or buildings. Topping: Severe pruning removing at least 30% of a tree canopy, and drastically altering the shape. Whip: Small bare root tree with a juvenile root system. • • • • • 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards - REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 3 I3 ApplieabilityLandsca ping Standards. New residential platted subdivisions, mixed use, commercial, institutional and industrial uses shall be subject to the landscaping requirements. The landscape requirements have been divided into four categories: Canopy Cover (C), Foundation Landscape (FL), Open Areas Landscape (OL),. Landscape Screen (LS) and boulevard trees. - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - levels for the C, FL, and OL Use Mixed-Use Buildings Connnereial Institutional Industrial NA X10% C 2 Foundation Foundation Open -Areas Landscape-EFL) Landscape CQ � . NA F 2. Front Facade F i1--L : back and sidefacades 10% C 1 IL 2:facadc3 facing -public -reads of-less-intense uses FL 1: all othcr facades X10°/, C 2 FL 2:facadc3 faces- public -reads . t. vIet-less-intense nRCl'19e uses FL 1: all othcr facades 10% C 2 FL 2: facades facing public -reads or 1. nt USE'S FL 1: all othcr facades 10% C 2 FL 2: facades facing - public -reads et-less-intense uses FL 1: all other facades NA Sec Section Q.5 for Foundation Landscape fequirement fet-frontr sidei back. -and facing-stfeets OL 1: outietsj areas OL 2: outlot; OL 3: dctcntion pond areas detention -areas areas OL 1: applicable non dctc as areas dctcntion a OCTCRI'IOII'QreQJ OL 3: dctcntion pond areas OL 2: applicable non detention- areas areas Landseape See-Sectien Q.7 for Landscape Seteen t 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards - REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 4 4 Canopy Cover (C). The purpose of this requirement is to mitigate the effects of vehicular hardscape by establishing tree canopy cover to intercept rainfall, protect pavement from sun deterioration, reduce the heat island affect, and improve aesthetics. Vehicular hardscape areas includes loading drives, parking lots, driveways, dropoffs and other areas covered with a hard surface intended for vehicles. a. The required minimum canopy coverage for all uses is 40 %. each level is described in tne-following table- b. The following equation shall be used to calculate required canopy coverage: Vehicular Hardscape (Square Feet) x Canopy Cover Percent = Required Minimum Canopy Cover (Square Feet) The total of the assigned canopy coverage values for all the trees in or near the vehicular hardscape must be equal or greater than the required minimum. Pervious pavements are considered 50% hardscape. c. The assigned canopy coverage value of each tree is based on planting location, tree size and anticipated tree canopy size 15 years after planting. The assigned canopy cover value to each deciduous tree is described in the following table and illustrations: Assigned Canopy Cover Value Planting Location (for new trees) Interior parking lot islands Within less than 7' of vehicular hardscape edge 7' -12' from vehicular hardscape edge Assigned Canopy Coverage Value 100% of the canopy square footage 50% of the canopy square footage 25% of the canopy square footage Square feet (SF) of canopy coverage assigned to each deciduous tree* Large Tree 1200958 SF, or 600175 SF SF 9504489 SF per tree in islands with 1 or 2 treesh 3 or trcc morc Medium Tree 498 -500 SF 215 250 SF 123 125 SF Small Tree 250 SF 125 SF NA Existing Tree: 6 -12 "dbh 1900 SF 950 SF NA Existing Tree: 12+ "dbh 2850 SF 1425 SF NA • • • • • Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards - REVISED Mav 26, 2010 Page 5 d. Existing trees may be used to fulfill canopy coverage as described in Section 9 when the dripline has proximity to the edge of the hardscape; therefore, existing trees do not need to be within less than 7' feet of the vehicular hardscape edge. Wrge trey, an is nd containing 3 more trees are given oicabond Canopy Wlue. See Crape Cordage Table Trees unfounded by hardscape on 3 sides are valued at 100% Canopy. Trees with access to planting soil outside of the island are required to meet soil volume requirements for a shared bed. Trees in anterior ilia 100% Canopy 5 Foundation Landscape (FL). The purpose of this requirement is to soften and enhance building architecture, define access points, add color and seasonal interest, and to blend buildings in with the natural environment. a. The foundation landscape planting requirement for cash tcvcl 'care described in the following table: Foundation Landscape (FL) Requirements *Round to the nearest plant b. The following equation shall be used to calculate required foundation landscape plantings: Building Linear Feet / 100 = # of required trees and shrubs c. _The foundation landscape shall be planted in the foundation landscape zone adjacent to the building face where the requirement applies. The City may allow flexible planting locations where service areas or other constraints make the requirement difficult to meet. a-d. Existing trees may be used to fulfill foundation landscaping as described in Section 9. 6 Open Areas Landscape (OL): The purpose of this requirement is to provide general site beautification and high aesthetic quality with a mix of plant materials in open areas. Open areas include disturbed site areas, such as outlets; cul de sac islands, boulevard medians, storm water detention-management areas, common areas in multifamily sites that are not for Per 100 linear feet (LF) of Building* Locationevel Trees and Shrubs Rear and Side 1 large, 1.5 medium, or 2 small 3 large, 5 medium, or 10 small �� y T'��Z' Front and Street 2 large, 3 medium, or 4 small 6 large, 10 medium, or 20 small Foundation Landscape Zone Within 15' of the building *Round to the nearest plant b. The following equation shall be used to calculate required foundation landscape plantings: Building Linear Feet / 100 = # of required trees and shrubs c. _The foundation landscape shall be planted in the foundation landscape zone adjacent to the building face where the requirement applies. The City may allow flexible planting locations where service areas or other constraints make the requirement difficult to meet. a-d. Existing trees may be used to fulfill foundation landscaping as described in Section 9. 6 Open Areas Landscape (OL): The purpose of this requirement is to provide general site beautification and high aesthetic quality with a mix of plant materials in open areas. Open areas include disturbed site areas, such as outlets; cul de sac islands, boulevard medians, storm water detention-management areas, common areas in multifamily sites that are not for 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards REVISED May 26, 2.01.0 Page 6 recreation facilities, and disturbed areas that are not located within the foundation landscape zone, vehicular hardscape area or the building footprint. Open areas landscaping shall meet the following requirements. a. The open areas planting requirements for-each Icvc is described in the following table: Open Areas Landscape (OL) Requirements Level Per 2000 SF Trees and Shrubs 1 large, 1.5 medium, or 2 small 3 large, 5 medium, or 10 small AL-I Per-WOO-SF Per 5000 SF OL-2 Per 3000 Sf Per-3094.-6F 9143 Per 2000 Sr 2000 Per SF b. Round all calculations to the nearest whole number of plants. c. Only land above the normal water level shall be included in the open area calculation for storm water detention areas. Planting shall be located above the normal water level in detention areas. The City may require specific tree species in locations where water levels vary. d. Existing trees may be used to fulfill open areas landscaping as described in Section 9. e. Areas that are included in a project - specific natural resource management plan that addresses vegetation are not subject to the open areas landscaping requirements. 7 Landscape Screen: The purpose of this requirement is to separate and buffer different land use types, screen roads and parking, and hide utility and loading areas. Landscape screens shall meet the following requirements. residential uscs, provide a year round scrccn at least 30" in hcight. Tlhe parking lot years. Sec Q.7.d. 1) Between residential uses and arterial or collector roads. • • • • • 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards - REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 7 #eHewing mctheds .. -- - -- a. Required screen location, height, and materials are described in the following table: Screen Location, Height and Materials Location Required Required Screen Materials Screen Height Between a parking lot 30 inches • year round continuous planting screen in and public right of way or accordance with paragraph 7.b. sidewalk or • continuous wall or fence of permanent material Between a parking lot 30 inches • continuous berm or wall or fence of and permanent materials to block headlights adjacent residential and uses • plantings shall provide shrub cover for 50% of the wall or fence on the exterior side Between residential 6 feet • year round continuous planting screen in uses accordance with 7.b. and or • wall or fence of permanent materials arterial or collector road Between any and plantings shall provide shrub cover for development 50% of the wall or fence on the exterior side and or • 6 ft. berm adjacent, less intense, residential land use or • 4 ft. berm with additional 2 ft. year round Between loading /service area continuous screen in accordance with and paragraph 7.b. public view +#b. - - e : S .:.. - - .: ,AII continuous year round planting screens shall require at a minimum a double row of plans with . triangulated spacing ke -u;ed. See illustration. Shrubs Plantings shall be spaced so that visibility through the screen is completely blocked within 5 years of the time of planting. Small shrubs shall be a planted at a maximum of interval of 3' on center, medium shrubs shall be planted at a maximum 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 8 interval of 4' on center, and large shrubs shall be planted at a maximum interval of 6' on center unless otherwise authorized by the City. c. A wall or fence intended to provide a continuous year round screen shall block visibility completely. d. In addition to the shrub and wall /fence screen requirements, all screens shall be planted with large trees every 50 LF, medium trees ever 35 LF, or small trees every 25 LF or some combination thereof, along the length of the screen. . Existing vegetative screens should be left in place unless composed of invasive species or otherwise directed by the City. Existing screens may be enhanced with new plantings to comply with the requirements. f. Berms shall be irrigated withand have maximum side slopes of 3:1. g. Permanent walls and fences shall be offset by a minimum of 2' at intervals of 75' maximum length for stability and visual relief. See illustration. 1 mr h. Approved permanent wall /fence materials include wood, metal, masonry, concrete and stone. Fences also may be vinyl. 8. Boulevard Tree Requirements: a. Boulevard trees are required at the rate of one tree per 70 linear feet of road frontage where property fronts any public road. The City shall collect a standard fee per tree based on the estimated market rate cost to purchase and install trees within the development site. b. Existing trees may be used to fulfill boulevard tree requirements at the City's discretion. 9. General Landscaping Requirements: a. Desirable existing trees may be used to fulfill Canopy Cover, Foundation Landscape and Open Areas Landscape requirements if applicable by placement. Desirable existing trees are valued according to the following table: Existing Tree Value Tree Size Deciduous trees under 6" DBH or Evergreen trees under 12' tall Deciduous trees between 6 " -12" DBH or Evergreen trees between Deciduous trees over 12" DBH or Evergreen trees over 20' tall. 12' -20' tall Tree Value 1 large tree 2 large trees 3 large trees b. Requirements may be met by grouping different sizes of trees and shrubs. c. New trees may fulfill Canopy Coverage, Foundation Landscape and Landscape Screen requirements simultaneously if applicable by placement. d. An existing tree is considered to be removed if the tree trunk is damaged or if more than 30% of the dripline area is disturbed during the construction process. • • • • • • 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 9 e. The City may allow flexibility in landscape requirements if there are conflicts with solar power, wind power, water harvesting, food production or other innovative measures proposed for the site. f. The landscape plan shall be compared to all applicable CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) standards and reviewed by the police department. g. Trees and shrubs shall not be planted in the right of way without City authorization. 10. Landscaping Guidelines and Technical Requirements: The purpose of the guidelines and technical requirements is to encourage plant longevity, minimize maintenance, and mitigate conflicts with other site features. An initial investment in high quality materials, careful design and planning, and proper construction techniques can result in plant longevity and long term maintenance cost reduction. a. Species Selection: Appropriate species selection is critical to maximize the benefits of plant materials. Healthy, long lived plants well suited to a site will reduce maintenance and replacement costs, while providing the most aesthetic and environmental gain. Native species in the built environment will supplement and connect the existing natural areas. Diversity is also important for an overall healthy and balanced landscape that is less susceptible to pests and disease. 1) The City shall maintain a list of approved species. The list is based on Lino Lakes area natural vegetative cover and includes additional hardy, non - invasive species. Approved species are classified by size. For each site, plants shall be selected based on mature size and adaptability to site conditions, such as microclimate, salt, pollution and other factors. The list of approved species is not exhaustive. Applicants requesting to plant a species not on the list shall submit species name, height, width, form, hardiness zone, and other relevant information. The City shall classify new species based on tree size standards. For large projects the City may require applicants to comply with the following requirements: i. Species diversity ii. A minimum percentage of native species iii. A minimum percentage of large trees iv. A minimum percentage of evergreen trees. 2) The City shall maintain a list of prohibited species. This list includes species that are invasive or have other negative characteristics that may lead to ecological damage. 3) Exposed soil is not allowed. All areas not covered by a structure or hardscape shall be planted and mulched in accordance with the following: i. In areas with low pedestrian traffic, the use of low maintenance turf, typically fescue blends, is encouraged. In areas of high pedestrian traffic, the use of turf mixes with a higher percentage of rye grass is encouraged. ii. Turf in areas near roads and parking lots shall be salt tolerant. iii. Groundcovers shall be turf, perennials, annuals, small grasses, or low spreading shrubs. Type of groundcover should be determined by site conditions and 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 10 anticipated use. Mulch is acceptable in landscape beds and areas not suitable for living groundcovers. iv. Hardy perennial forbs and ornamental grasses should be used in car overhang areas and places where snow may be stored. 4) Annual plantings should be minimized within 10' of a tree. The process of frequently replanting may damage the tree's shallow root system. 5) Seed mixes should be used in large expanses of naturalized areas. The City shall maintain a list of approved seed mixes. Where seed mixes are used, the City may request that visible edge treatments be planted with more deliberate groupings of flowering plants. 6) A permanent solid edge such as a 6" concrete, stone or other barrier is required between native seeded areas and turf unless otherwise approved by the City. b. Planting Requirements: 1) To promote development of a large, healthy canopy, trees shall be planted in accordance with the requirements in the following table and illustration: Planting Requirements Tree Size Minimum island width for roots (back of curb to back of curb) Minimum tree opening Minimum planting soil depth Minimum cubic feet of soil available per tree in a single bed Minimum cubic feet of soil available per tree in a shared bed or three sided island Large Tree 9, 0„ 4' x 6' or 5' x 5' 2430" 440486 CF — 400325 CF — Medium Tree 6' -0" 4' x 6' or 5' x 5' 2430" — 300256 CF — 27024 -5 CF — Small Tree 5' -0" 4' x 5' 1830" 250486 CF 2254-35 CF F c a L E 51y c inimum Island Width i Calculate planting soil volume by Length x Width x Depth 16' typical car space At tr. Tea LIGel nf:.ic = .litTttt ?�: Planting Soil Engineered Planting Soil Minimum Island Width dimension can be reduced to the Minimum Tree Opening dimension if engineered planting soils are used beneath adjacent hardscape to achieve required soil volume. • • • • • 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards - REVISED Mav 26, 2010 Page 11 2) Soils: Landscaped areas need high quality soils that retain moisture for plants to use, but drain adequately. Soil shall be uncompacted existing soil, new planting soil or engineered soils designed to allow plant growth. Proper soil preparation helps to ensure long term survival of the plants and to reduce the need for ongoing maintenance, additives, and pest control. If soil compaction exceeds 1400 kPa (200 psi) at the time of planting, the soil shall be loosened. Preexisting soils may be used and should be protected from compaction during construction. 3) Mulch: Mulch helps plant health by keeping the soil moist, protecting soil nutrients, preventing erosion, encouraging infiltration, and inhibiting weed growth. Mulch from decomposing materials such as wood chips enriches the soil over time. Although decomposing mulch needs to be replenished approximately twice a year to maintain adequate thickness, once plants grow together there is often need for little or no mulch. Mulch shall comply with the following requirements: a) Provide mulch at a depth of 3 -4" for wood chips, 4 -6" for shredded bark and 3 -4" for rocks or other non - organic matter. b) Provide a 3' minimum diameter mulch ring at the base of trees. c) Prohibit mounding mulch at the bases of trees, or allowing mulch within 4" of plant stems and trunks, as this will cause them to rot. d) If used, only water permeable fabric is permitted as a weed barrier. e) Leave one inch of space from the top of the mulch layer to adjacent hardscape surfaces to prevent spilling. f) The City may limit certain types of mulch in areas where safety or spilling may be an issue. g) Mulch should not be mixed with underlying soil. 4) Fertilizer: When fertilizer is used, organic and slow release fertilizers are recommended. 5) Drainage: Tree planting pits shall drain adequately. Drainage for trees may be accomplished through the use of non - compacted and well draining soils. The City may require the following drainage test: Dig 8" diameter holes 1' deep and fill with water. If the holes do not drain within 24 hours adjust bed design or composition in order to achieve proper drainage. If the underlying soils retain water, the applicant shall provide additional drainage measures. 6) Tree protection after construction: Bollards, barriers, or spacing may be necessary to protect trees from cars. Bike parking should be included to discourage locking bikes to trees. For tree protection during construction see Section Q.15. c. Tree and Infrastructure Placement: Tree placement should be given consideration when locating overhead and underground utilities. Service utilities should be located outside of plant beds where they may conflict with tree plantings. Consider using conduits for buried utilities to allow future work with less disruption to roots. The clearances in the 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards - REVISED Mav 26, 2010 Page 12 following table are recommended from the center of the tree trunk to avoid future conflicts: Tree and Utility Spacing Recommendations Utility Distance to Center of Tree Lights, Utility Poles, Fire Hydrants 10' Water, Sanitary, Storm and Gas lines 6' from the center of the line. Conduit for dry utilities (electric, cable) 3' Utility clean outs and access points 3' Overhead utility lines (consult utility company for additional requirements) 5' to mature tree canopy (may require trimming, topping is prohibited, see Section Q.10.f) d. Clear Vision Area for Local Residential Roads: Shall mean the triangular area of a corner lot formed by the intersection of the right -of -way (ROW) lines and a line connecting them at points 20' from the intersection unless otherwise directed by the City (see illustration). Within this area, visibility shall be unobstructed between a height of 30 inches and 8 feet above the center line grades of the intersecting roads. Clear Vision Area for County Roads: Shall be determined on a case by case basis, depending on the road alignment, grading, traffic speed and the nature of the intersection and is subject to County and City review. e. The minimum plant size requirements are described in the following table: Minimum Plant Size Requirements Plant Type Minimum Size* Large trees Bare Root - 1.75" Balled and Burlapped or Container - 2" caliper Medium and small trees Bare Root - 1.5" Balled and Burlapped or Container - 1.5" caliper Evergreen trees 6' height Large shrubs 3 gallon container Medium shrubs, small shrubs and groundcovers 1 gallon container Ornamental grasses and perennials 4" pot * City may limit bare root plantings in areas of high visibility. In selected situations the City may allow ten (10) whip bare root plantings, or five (5) 3/4" caliper bare root plantings to be substituted for 1 large tree. Bare root plantings must be protected with rodent guards. f. All boulevard trees shall be balled and burlapped and a minimum size of 2" caliper g. Installation and Maintenance 1) Installation: Proper planting is the first and most important step toward establishing healthy and low maintenance vegetation. All plantings shall be installed in accordance with standard practices of horticultural professionals. • • • • • • 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards - REVISED May 26 2010 Page 13 Stem girdling roots are often fatal for trees that have been planted too deep or have mulch or soil built up around the trunk. All trees shall be planted so that the root flare (where the trunk widens out just above the roots) is visible above the ground level and the highest large root is within 1/2" of the ground surface. All adventitious roots should be cut away at the time of planting to avoid the formation of stem girdling roots. 2) Maintenance: The property owner or if applicable, the homeowners association, shall be responsible for maintenance of landscape elements (plants, structures, pavement, etc.) so as to present a neat and aesthetically pleasing appearance free of any unhealthy or potentially unsafe conditions. Landscaping shall be maintained to be weed -free, healthy, trimmed, mown, edged, reseeded, pruned, and replaced with similar plant species if necessary. Specific requirements for watering and pruning follow: i. Watering: All plantings require regular watering for at least the first three years to get established. Once the root system has developed, many hardy plants, especially native plants, may only need supplemental watering in drought conditions. Cultured turf areas and landscape berms shall be permanently irrigated. The City may allow low maintenance turf to be non - irrigated if a method for supplemental watering, such as a spigot or rain barrel, is provided. For landscape beds ongoing irrigation may be provided through a permanent or temporary system, or by hand. (Note: typical installed irrigation systems do not provide adequate water for new trees.) Permanent irrigation systems with an automatic controller shall utilize rain sensing technology. Overspray should not fall outside of the landscaped area. Water efficient drip or underground irrigation is required in shrub and groundcover landscape beds for permanent systems. Temporary systems may use spray irrigation for shrubs or plugs. See Water Conservation Ordinance for additional watering requirements. ii. Pruning: Plants shall be pruned to avoid conflict with other structures, remove dead or diseased limbs and for optimum shaping. The City recommends that trees be pruned by a certified arborist every 4 -7 years, which can help reduce maintenance costs. Topping or extreme crown reduction is prohibited unless the tree is a safety hazard or such measures are approved by the City. Trees overhanging walkways should be pruned up to 7' when mature. Trees overhanging streets should be pruned up to 10' when mature. Smaller trees should receive limited pruning appropriate to the size and age of the tree. Branches that are hazardous for any reason shall be removed immediately. The City may direct pruning. The property owner or if applicable, the homeowners association, shall be responsible for removing any trees or shrubs or parts thereof that are dead, diseased or overhang or interfere with traffic control devices, public sidewalks, or rights -of -way. Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 14 1 11. Tree Preservation and Mitigation StandardsRequirentents: The purpose of these requirements is to protect valuable trees and stands of vegetation, while not interfering with landowners' reasonable use and development of property. The goal is to minimize unnecessary loss of habitat, biodiversity and forest resources and to replace removed trees in areas where tree cover is most critical. Except where specifically excepted, tree preservation and mitigation requirements apply to all plats, site plans, conditional use permits, interim use permits, excavating, grading, building, or other similar activity. 1 1 a. Tree preservation and mitigation requirements fer—eaehIevclare described in the following table: Tree Preservation and Mitigation Requirements Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) Category Tree Location: within Basic Use Area Tree Location: not within Basic Use Area Deciduous trees 6" dbh and over or Evergreen trees between 12'- 20' tall Deciduous trees 6 -12" dbh or Evergreen trees between 12' -20' tall Deciduous trees over 12" dbh or Evergreen trees over 20' tall Non ESA Lcvcl T 1 no mitigation required provide 1 tree per 1 tree removed provide 2 trees per 2 1, trees removed Natural Resource Conservation Area or Natural Resource Corridor Enhancement Area Lcvcl T 2 provide 1 tree per 4 removed provide 2 trees per 1 tree removed provide 3 trees per tree removed Natural Resource Protected Area provide 1 tree per 2 removed provide 2 trees per 1 tree removed provide 3 trees per tree removed b. Trees used for mitigation purposes must meet the Landscaping Guidelines and Technical Requirements in Section Q.10. c. Trees used for mitigation may also fulfill the Open Areas Landscape Requirement at the discretion of the City. d. Trees with thirty percent (30 %) of the roots damaged are considered to be removed and must be mitigated for at the applicable rates. e. Undesirable trees are not subject to preservation and mitigation requirements. f. On existing Tots with existing buildings where no building or development activity that requires a permit or approval from the City is occurring, the removal of trees Trccs on is not subject to tree preservation and mitigation requirements. g. Replacement trees shall be planted on site. h. The applicant may request to pay a fee per tree in lieu of some or all of the trees required for mitigation. At the City's discretion, the City may accept the fee for planting trees within the general area of the development project. The City shall maintain a standard fee per tree based on the estimated market rate cost to purchase and install trees. • • • • • Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards - REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 15 12. Tree Survey: a. A tree survey is required for all property that contains a deciduous tree greater than 6" dbh or an evergreen tree greater than 12' tall. b. The tree survey shall be the basis for the tree preservation plan, tree mitigation requirements, and the use of existing trees to fulfill landscape requirements. c. The tree survey shall provide the following information: 1) in the basic use area and other areas where tree removal is proposed, for all deciduous trees over 6" dbh and all evergreen trees greater than 12' tall: i. tree species ii. size iii. location iv. dripline v. tree condition 2) the location of the combined driplines of all tree stands designated for preservation tree-stands-on the development property 3) on adjacent properties, the dripline of deciduous trees over 6" dbh and evergreen trees greater than 12' tall where the dripline is within 5' root zone extends ofnte the development property. d. For a new plat or new Planned Unit Development, the tree survey shall be one plan sheet and the tree preservation plan shall be a separate plan sheet. e. For a building permit for a new structure on an existing lot, the tree survey and preservation information may be included on the lot survey typically required for a building permit instead of on a separate document. For a building permit for an addition to an existing structure, the tree survey information may be provided in an informal medium that sufficiently conveys the information. f._ At the City's discretion, the tree survey requirement may be waived under the following circumstances: 1) Deciduous trees greater than 6" dbh or evergreen trees greater than 12' tall will not be removed e� -and are not likely to be impacted by construction. 2) Deciduous trees greater than 6" dbh or evergreen trees greater than 12' tall will only be removed within the basic use area and the basic use area is not an ESA. 13. Tree PretectienPreservation Plan: a. A tree pretectienpreservation plan shall be required for all soil disturbance activities where tree preservation and mitigation requirements apply in accordance with Q.11.a. A tree preteetienpreservation plan shows how pretectiernpreservation and mitigation requirements will be met and how preserved trees will be protected during construction and other potentially harmful activities. 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards - REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 16 b. The tree preteetionpreservation plan shall be based on the tree survey. c. If a tree survey shows that no desirable deciduous trees over 6" dbh or evergreen trees greater than 12' in height on the development property or adjacent properties are near the construction area, the City may waive the tree preteetienpreservation plan requirement. d. A tree preservation plan shall include: the basic use area, the disturbance area, tree size (dbh), species, condition, location, and root protection zone (5' out from the dripline) for all deciduous trees over 6" dbh or evergreen trees greater than 12' tall to be preserved or the combined root protection zone of all stands of trees designated for preteetienpreservation, whichever is applicable. The plan shall show location and type of tree protection fence, staging areas, and concrete washout areas. Fencing shall be installed and inspected by the City prior to soil disturbance. The plan shall show directional felling if necessary to avoid damage to adjacent trees. e. Trees to be preserved shall be tagged in the field and keyed to the tree preservation plan. The City may inspect the trees to verify compliance with the preteetienpreservation plan at any time during construction. f. The tree preteet+enpreservation plan s#heeld- -shall not conflict with natural resource management plan required for environmentally sensitive areas. See Section 2, Subd. 6.E.2.b. g. See the Stormwater Ordinance for other construction related requirements. 14. Individual Lot Tree Preservation Plan: To be determined. 15. Tree PreteetienPreservation During Construction: Trees that are to be preserved must be protected by the following methods unless otherwise approved by the City. 1) Tree protection fencing shall be installed and maintained 5' out from the identified drip line of the trees (root protection zone) prior to soil disturbance. Fencing shall be a minimum of 4' high and of a highly visible material, such as snow fence or polyethylene laminar safety netting, and must be standing throughout the construction process. Cut roots with clean, pruning cuts at the fence line prior to fence installation to avoid later tearing of the roots. Signage should be installed to instruct workers to stay out of the root protection zone. 2) Areas where development must encroach upon the root protection zone must be identified on the tree preservation plan in which case the fencing shall be installed at that edge. 3) No actions that may harm the health of the tree, including, but not limited to construction, traffic, compaction, storage of equipment or materials, including soil, grading, or concrete washout areas may occur in the root protection zone. 4) Trees damaged by construction, or with more than thirty percent of the roots disturbed, shall be counted as removed and mitigated at applicable rates. 16. Non - Compliance: If the City finds that the property is not in compliance with the approved landscaping plan or tree preservation plan, it shall inform the property owner or if applicable, the homeowners association, regarding the non - compliance and describe, in writing, the steps needed to bring the property into compliance within a reasonable timeframe, not to exceed sixty (60) calendar days. • • 1 Attachment 2: Landscaping and Tree Preservation Standards REVISED May 26, 2010 Page 17 • 17. Use of Performance Security: If after notification of non - compliance, the property owner or if applicable, the homeowners association, fails to achieve compliance within sixty (60) calendar days, the City may exercise its authority to use the performance security to address compliance. • • • § 1001.02S -020 GENERAL. .1.° - CONCEPT PLAN plat, applicants shall prepare and submit a concept plan. infermal-review-prief 4e- - • :. .. -. . The concept plan shall be the product of a collaborative design process. On the basis of the concept plan, the city shall informally advise the subdivider as- pfemptly- spossible of the extent to which the proposed subdivision generally conforms to the Comprehensive Plan, to the design standards of this chapter, and to other applicable requirements, and shall discuss possible modifications. (Ord. 04 -03, passed 2 -24 -2003) ATTACHMENT 2 19 Prior to submittal of a preliminary Purpose. The purpose of the Concept Plan is to provide an opportunity for the applicant to submit a plan to the City showing the basic intent and the general nature of the entire development before incurring the substantial cost of preparing a preliminary plat application. This Concept Plan provides an opportunity for the proposal to be publicly considered at an early stage. § 1001.021 4 1001.024 reserved § 1001.025 COLLABORATIVE DESIGN PROCESS !l Purpose. The purposes of the collaborative design process are: (a) to incorporate into the design of the project the goals and public values in the Comprehensive Plan and other elements deemed to serve public purposes; (b) to gather information and obtain guidance as to the general suitability of the proposal for the area in which it is proposed and its conformity to city policies; (c) to determine as early as possible if a Planned Unit Development is the most appropriate and effective means of achieving the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and complying with the City's site performance standards; (d) to recognize the economic needs of the project and incorporate them into the project design; draft revisions to Chapter 1001 subdivisions draft date 5/17/2010 Page 19 of 72 20 (e) to provide the opportunity to accomplish these things before incurring the substantial public or private expense of preparing detailed plans and information required for formal application and review of a preliminary plat. (2) City staff and the applicant shall meet to collaborate on the design of the project to incorporate the goals and public values in the Comprehensive Plan. Specialists with expertise on the issues and elements of the site shall be included in the process when deemed appropriate by the City or the applicant. For projects that include land within Environmentally Sensitive Areas, the discussions and meetings shall include representatives of the Rice Creek Watershed District. The collaborative design process shall include three steps: initial collaboration meeting, neighborhood meeting, and the collaborative design meeting. Initial Collaboration Meeting. (a) Prior to preparing and submitting the concept plan under the requirements of this chapter, an applicant for a project requiring aplat or Planned Unit Development (PUD) shall meet with city staff to discuss the proposed development, the requirements for pursuing a development application, the collaborative design process, and other issues relevant to the project. note: The City strongly recommends that the applicant refrain from preparing any site layout plans prior the initial collaboration meeting in order to avoid the expense of changing the plans. (b) _ Information for collaborative design process. The City staff shall assemble and provide at this meeting environmental information it has that is relevant to the project. (c) At the initial collaboration meeting, City staff, selected specialists, and the applicant shall discuss elements to be considered and included in theproject design when applicable, including but not limited to: site District 1. City goals and public values described in Comprehensive Plan relevant to the 2. the City's Resource Management System Plan 3. Resource Management Plan and Rule RMP -3 of the Rice Creek Watershed 4. the collaborative design process 5. existing conditions and environmental features 6. preservation and/or enhancement of Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) 7. site layout performance standards and other official controls 8. economic needs of the developer 9. potential for flexibility with a PUD 10. general location of streets and utilities 11. general location and extent of public and common open space draft revisions to Chapter 1001 subdivisions draft date 5/17/2010 Page 20 of 72 21 • 12. general location of land use types (residential and non - residential) and intensities 13. architectural themes 14. a staging and time schedule of development 15. other special criteria relevant to development of the site (4) Neighborhood meeting. After the initial collaboration meeting, the City and applicant shall hold a neighborhood meeting for discussion and feedback prior to,submitting a concept plan application. The purpose of the neighborhood meeting is to discuss the relative issues listed in paragraph (3) above and gather information and input from the community. (5) Collaborative design meeting. After the neighborhood meeting, a collaborative design meeting shall occur. The applicant, City staff and consultants, and appropriate specialists with expertise on the issues and elements of the site shall meet to collaborate on designing the concept plan. The applicant shall incorporate information and recommendations of the meeting and prepare the concept plan submittal information required in § 1001.026. (a) For projects that include land within Environmentally Sensitive Areas, this design group shall include a representative of the Rice Creek Watershed District. (6) The City may waive the need for the collaborative design meeting if, at the discretion of the City, the site design issues are resolved to a sufficient degree that the concept plan can be prepared based on information gathered by the initial collaboration meeting and the neighborhood meeting. draft revisions to Chapter 1001 subdivisions draft date 5/17/2010 Page 21 of 72 draft date 5/14/2010 • Zoning Ordinance: Section 2 Subd. 10. PUD, Planned Unit Development. • ATTACHMENT 3 OP/en Space Ownership and Management. Each designated open sOece area shall be owned and managed in acbordance with standards,,ih Section 1.001.099 of the Lino Lakes City Code. a-} The 2) The PtJD design wrig roc It in h tion :, -- - - -- - - (12) et- pe The- PUD ctecign wit# -ae• hasis- ► streetscape, - • - - , - • e • - - - - ilding b. Architectural Guidelines. Commercial and industrial buildings shall comply with design standards of Section. 3, Subd. 4.B.4 (future §1007.04) of this Ordinance. Uses within a commercial, industrial, or institutionalPUD ;shall be consistent with the land use categories of the Comprehensive Plan. F. Procedure for Processing a Planned Unit Development. 1. Stages of PUD. All PUD applications shall be subject to the information submittal requirements and the review process described in Chapter 1001, even if the PUD does not include a subdivision. As described in this chapter and in Chapter 1001, additional information may be required for a PUD compared to other development applications. The information and review processing steps for a PUD are intended to provide for an orderly development and progression of the PUD project -flan, with the greatest expenditure of developmental funds being made only after the City has had ample opportunity for informed decisions as to the acceptability of the various segments of the whole as the plan affects the public interest. The various steps and applications, wed -i detail +n the feliewing sections, are: a. lication . discussiens, - General PUD Concept Plan Application. Collaborative desiqn of and consideration of the overall concept and plan, including the information and process required in this chapter and the information and process required for a concept plan in § 1001. This includes the information, Zoning Ordinance Sec. 2, Subd. 10 —PUD —Page 13 of 25 Zoning Ordinance: Section 2 Subd. 10. PUD, Planned Unit Development. draft date 5/14/2010 meetings, and process for collaborative design described in § 1001.The concept plan review is voluntary „ strongly ended. Gb. PUD Preliminary Plan Application. One-of-more detailed lens as part of4hewhole-final plan Consideration of plans and documents establishing the uses, densities, architectural themes, conditions, management structure and duties, staging, layout of streets, utilities, open space, and building sites, and other elements of the project, including information and process required in this chapter and the information and process required for a preliminary plat in § 1001. dc. PUD Final Plan Application. • - • • _ _ - - - - ' - _ _ . _ _ _ • e each Development-Stage Plan in planConsideration of the Final Plan, which is to serve as a complete, final, detailed, and permanent public record of the PUD and the manner in which it is to be developed. It shall incorporate all prior approved plans and all approved modifications thereof resulting from the PUD process, including the information and process required in this chapter and the information and process required for a final plat in § 1001. w+t tie Development Department , applicant-shall-be- -to proviele wit# eppoFtunity-to gather information -the -for-the-area-for - ch-it is-proposedand its conformity to the icion &-of cub&tantial expense-i-n4he , . a Neighborhood Meeting - neighborhood meeting -4o feedbaslec- prier#a -submitting • 23. The person applying for a planned unit development shall fill out and submit to the Zoning Administrator an application form together with a fee as established by the City_ -GGLI-1461---reseitttien, The request for wed be-plased-en-- tbeagendaeof# The Park Board leg and-Zoninghoard according -to Zoning Ordinance Sec. 2, Subd. 10- -PUD —Page 14 of 25 • • Zoning Ordinance: Section 2 Subd. 10. PUD, Planned Unit Development. draft date 5/14/2010 34.PA planned unit developmentlfezening application shall be posted and advertised as required by city code for a zoning amendment. in- Section 2, bbd- 4 of this finance 46.PA public hearings shall be held at-for the PUD Preliminary Plan development stage. 57. General Concept Plan Application. a. Purpose. The purpose of the PUD Concept Plan is to provide an opportunity for the applicant to submit a plan to the City showing the basic intent and the general nature of the entire development before incurring the substantial cost of preparing a preliminary plat application. This Concept Plan provides an opportunity for the proposal to be publicly considered at an early stage. eppertunity-fer-the-applioant 4e-submit- showing -his- basic tent -and# general fie of the before cost. This stage. The -fellowing-elements-of-the-proposecl-General-Goneept-Plan-represent the immediately _ - _ - - •• - - • - • - which decision staff note these "immediately significant elements" have been incorporated into collaborative design discussion points at 1001.025 1 }erali 3} 4)- General Uses with-Approximate Typeand Intensities-of Development -Gommon--Open 5-} -A-Staging-and- Development. 6} derespecial Criteria -#e staff note: submittal information to be listed in platting chapter, not PUD chapter Zoning Ordinance Sec. 2, Subd. 10 —PUD —Page 15 of 25 • Agenda Item 5B Staff Originator: Marty Asleson Environmental Board Meeting Date: Environmental Board June 2, 2010 TOPIC: Anoka County Ditch 10 -22 -32 Historic Review /Request for Support Background: Anoka County Ditch (ACD) 10 -22 -32 is located in the NW corner of Lino Lakes with a small portion in Columbus Township. A series of separate and new ditch improvements has occurred over the years, since the first ACD 10 ditch was constructed in 1890. Each new recorded ditch segment added to ACD 10 overlapped the previous ditch section. Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD), the ditch authority for 10- 22 -32, intends to consolidate these ditch segments into one legal ditch branch. The Rice Creek Watershed District is requesting a resolution of support from the cityfor the use of the District's authorities under the watershed law and metropolitan surface water management act to repair and /or maintain public • drainage ditches, including 10- 22 -32, located in the city. In legal terms, they are looking for municipal concurrence for the drainage authority to use its alternative authorities under the watershed law. • This request has been prompted by the district's efforts to systematically inspect and repair the legal drainage systems in the district (approximately 100 miles) as necessary. In Lino Lakes this includes Anoka County Ditch (ACD) 10- 22 -32, ACD 25, ACD 72 and ACD 53. Since the Rice Creek Watershed District recently started the repair report on ACD 10 -22 -32 system, and as they progress through the repair report, they want to make sure they have the City's concurrence to use the authorities granted under the watershed law and surface water management act to pay for the work required. This is important to RCWD for the following reasons: 1. If they stay under the narrow confines of the ditch law, the district would have to do a re- determination of benefits and damages which would add unnecessary costs to any project. 2. Watershed law would allow them to set up a stormwater charge system which is more equitable since the land use is no longer just agricultural. 3. It allows the District to better address the protection and enhancement of wetlands and other water resources as part of any project to repair and maintain the system. This approach falls in line with the processes set up in the Resource Management Plan (RMP). The ACD 10 -22 -32 branch system is the largest and most complex in Lino Lakes. The headwaters of the ditch are in Columbus, where traditional agricultural land use is principally in practice and drainage is an important benefit. Aggressive management of a ditch system management plan will incorporate the need for agricultural benefit practices that maintain drainage in the headwaters, and also respect the shift away from agricultural land uses downstream, incorporating and recognizing the new urban ditch benefits. The new urban benefits will provide ancillary benefits for subwatershed —wide flood reduction and wetland protection where such benefits are desired. New ditch management planning will use branch maintenance in rural areas, retrofits in urbanizing areas, and master planned communities with greenways and open space to reduce downstream flooding and retain and reuse water in local catchments. Since the RCWD has a legal obligation to inspect, operate and maintain surface water management systems in Lino Lakes, it would be beneficial to the city to support the RCWD in a way that follows our RMP The recognition of the use of alternative authorities is important. This does not mean, however, that concurrence with the use of alternative authority is an endorsement of any project, and that there will be a separate public process for any future project. Recommendation: Recommend resolution of support for the use of the District's authorities under the watershed law and metropolitan surface water management act to repair and /or maintain public drainage ditches, including 10 -22 -32 located in the city. Further recommend that this resolution be forwarded on to the City Council with any comments the Environmental Board has. Attachments: 1. Miscellaneous RCWD Attachments 2. Draft Resolution • • • • DRAFT RESOLUTION CITY OF LINO LAKES APPROVAL TO CONDUCT DRAINAGE PROCEEDINGS FOR ANOKA COUNTY DITCH 10 -22 -32 UNDER THE WATERSHED LAW WHEREAS, Rice Creek Watershed District ( "RCWD ") is the drainage authority for Anoka County Ditch 10- 22 -32. (the "Drainage System "); WHEREAS, RCWD is proceeding on a petition to repair the Drainage System; WHEREAS, the RCWD Engineer is preparing a repair report recommending a repair option that balances the drainage function of the Drainage System with ecological concerns in the watershed; WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 103D.621 Subd. 4, grants RCWD the authority to undertake proceedings related to the Drainage System in accordance with the Watershed Law (Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103D) rather than the Drainage Code (Minnesota Statutes Chapter103E), subject to concurrence by city councils and town boards where the Drainage System is located; WHEREAS, RCWD has requested concurrence from the City of Lino Lakes to conduct the necessary proceedings related to the Drainage System under the Watershed Law, rather than the Drainage Code; WHEREAS, the purpose of conducting proceedings under the Watershed Law is to provide consistent management of all drainage systems under RCWD management, comprehensive wetland management, and appropriate administration of resource management plans; and WHEREAS, conducting the proceedings under the Watershed Law will facilitate flexibility in financing the recommended repair option. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF LINO LAKES THAT: The City of Lino Lakes, in accordance with Minnesota Statute 103D.621 Subd. 4., consents to the Rice Creek Watershed District's request to conduct proceedings for Anoka County Ditch 10- 22-32 under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103D. Adopted , 2010. ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk/Administrator DRAFT 1 Rice Creek Watershed District Ditch Origins in 53 -62, 10 -22 -32 Area "1890 - Anoka Count y Ditches 9, 10 • ai r1... 26L'. K.IJrPo /i71�1ar t,.IJf,, . "1 . , ... r -rsy y Psrl.y ls�rt 1�i,�+ . /aSc J'eic X. r. ?Ind re( r 26 6C. 141'. See, 6t;. ° - 4.16O. See.5 '4 14 4 160. .2 le • Jeri( .r€-. n SeC 7 Y _ f.6 v '!r L 160. 160 Sea At; J I«•,/ .44 ✓ Str.IS. z 1.144.1. 160 Main Line i ,z COUNTY DITCH 9 Legend • Background shows Original Public Land Survey Maps - -' 1890 Ditch Excavation (Co. Ditches 9& 10) Future Major Roads Original Marsh Survey 2 { 11 N.)Y+ 01 !VIER RNOLke N wwdircwd !cwmpsl63- 62Jhistorical ditc Rice Creek Watershed District Ditch Origins in 53- 62,10 -22 -32 Area 1894 - Anoka County Ditches 22, 24 w4*N 040: a iac. x. aJS JJ-4 ,ree t 40 ft 100: 4Iii' I MI Ser.5 .44#t 1+ SO_f � 4 160. .2 I CO t . TY DITCH 22-" Ma►n`toe eCQUNTY DITCH 10 160, SACJI. t. Main Line Legend Background shows Original Public Land Survey Maps 1894 Ditch Excavation (Co. Ditches 22 & 24) --- 1890 Ditches (Co. Ditches 9 & 10) Future Major Roads Original Marsh Survey 0 0 0 N L) Rice Creek Watershed District Ditch Origins in 53-62, 10-22-32 Area 898 - Anoka County Ditch 32 49,01e 7 .710 t'-'.1.1114 iIJV#g Li 1.1%4; ..rec 2. 14 11 J Yer..5 ,lit '4. 6'17. '1 260. 160. L 1 16 161. striz Branch 13 -Line Branch 5 Main Line • set: 26. Legend Background shows Original Public Land Survey Maps 1898 Ditch Excavation (Co. Ditch 32) 1894 Ditches (Co. Ditches 22 & 24) 1890 Ditches (Co. Ditches 9 & 10) Future Major Roads Original Marsh Survey Miles pvn nt.,„,,,„ &o,& .„... x /wdircwdicwmps /53- 62lhistorical _ditch _ Rice Creek. Watershed District Ditch Origins in 53- 62,10 -22 -32 Area 1911 - Anoka County Ditch 53 are 2 ! _lr a� 1641. !�r Sft.5 .IiJ! /y 4 .1 160. i 111 Branch 13 Ser,I Mai.s. �� y0 LegenLegend " Background shows Original d Public Land Survey Maps 1911 Ditch Excavation tCo. Ditch .53) 1898 Ditches (Co. Ditch 32) 1894 Ditches (co. Ditches 22 & 24) 1890 Ditches (Co. Ditches 9 & Ifl! Future Major Roads Original Marsh Survey kso t NMONS . Ol t%9EA ON/UK/Er • Rice Creek Watershed District Ditch Origins in 53-62, 10-22-32 Area 1917 - Anoka County Ditch 62 f 1.4 160 Int 'fr. 5 .414) 160. Main Branch 13 160. JAL 1,V.1s11 f..1.0.4 • ree- /4' , e ne Legend Background shows Original Public Land Survey Maps 1917 Ditch Excavation (Co, Ditch 62) 1911 Ditches (Co. Ditch 53) 1898 Ditches (Co. Ditch 32) 1894 Ditches (Co. Ditch 22 & 24) 1890 Ditches (Co. Ditches 9 & 10) Future Major Roads Original Marsh Survey anch 4 Is. $t(27. AV. ,`.114,410, *40-11.4, Hennepin Anoka Project Location Location Map �, • Ramsey Washington J t Blaine Anoka Ham Lake -- ----------------------------------- - - - - -- Washington Columbus Columbus twp. CrosisWays Upper Rice ! Creek Forest Lake rip Horseshoe Forest Lake twp. Hardwood Creek Loch Ness Middle Rice Creek Circle Pines Golden • o ' Baldwin Lexington ' George Watch Centerville Marshan Centerville CShennan Reshanau Cedar Spring fake Mounds Park View Shoreview Spnng, Brooklyn Fridley Park iLocke. Hennepin WesttMoore EasVMoore 350 3 Nevi Brighton' 1, Rush h Pike Long Lower Rice Creek Marsden Evergreen Fonds North P4Pa r� ;_ Oaks Arden HiIIS Sunfish__iMartha Round Karth U Columbia Height ve 3ir Poplar llai Anthony 'Roseville Farrel's Valentine Island Johanna Litt le— Jo es p anna hine Joh 1 Little Jshephine Langton Minneapolis Lauderdale Falcon ! "'Heights Zimme aan White u B- ald Bean Eagle twp.) r ' Sunset Clearwater r'-r1 Creek y Dellwood Pia) _„jTree Ramsey White Bear Grant Mahtomedi gyp' )Birchwood L. j Village' _. Preys Wllernie - Lo'Washingtonj • Pine Springs Long !f White,,Rock New Scandia twp. May twp. Rice Creek Watershed District Hydrologic Boundary Anoka County Ditch 10 -22 -32 Hydrologic Boundary ACD 10 -22 -32 Public Drainage Systems Interstate Lakes Lino Lakes Rivers - ! Counties ! ! Clearwater Creek Planning Region L____ - ! Hardwood Creek Planning Region Lower Rice Creek Planning Region - _ ! Middle Rice Creek Planning Region i Upper Rice Creek Planning Region � - - - - -, p p g 9 0 1.25 2.5 Sources: RCWD, TLG, MN DOT 5 Miles Figure 1: Hydrologic Boundary -Anoka County Ditch 10 -22 -32 Scale: AS SHOWN Drawn by: I Checked by: SMW MRD Project No.: 5555- 080.10 Date: 06/04/08 Sheet 1 of 1 i Houston Engineering Inc Hennepin Project Location Map 8 Washington 9 17 20 29 32 16 21 33 26 35 2 25 30 29 28 32 36 �i iii � 4 i i 4�� 4i Pr' .4 ir Wen" , 4 ' er : Pzir.• ror re.; 'ffin Jr' proir r.rarAntaraio APPM 4 27 Crossways 34 3 RondeaLi ACD 10- 22 -32` Hydrologic Boundary 9 10 " , ri 'AP/2 7" , !dr" Pin Er WM /17,4:07.1 r.".1 Loch Ness 22 Aed ANA rA PA r GoAliden 26 35 24 tV 19 30 N Baldwin �} 31- Rice 9t Reshanau George Watch 16 21 28 15 Centerville 22 Sherman - , Wards,— 27 4 Cedar Rice Creek Watershed District Benefitted Areas Anoka County Ditch 10 -22 -32 /// RCWD Boundary ACD 10 -22 -32 Hydrologic Boundary ACD 53 -62 Benefitted Area Lakes ACD 22 Benefitted Area ACD 32 Benefitted Area ACD 10 Benefitted Area JSection Lines 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Note: Area outside of subwatershed boundary now part of Anoka County Ditch 53/62 system. Source: MN DNR Data Deli; Basis for hydrologic boundary EOR. Figure 2: Benefitted Area -Anoka County Ditch 10 22 -32 Scale: AS SHOWN Drawn by: SMW Checked by: MRD Project No.: 5555- 080.10 Date: Sheet 06/04/09 I 1 of 1 Houston Engineering Inc. t/le Gro. 763 493 45[ Rice Creek Watershed District • Anoka County Ditch 10 As Designed (1890) As Designed - ACD 10 RCWD Boundary Lakes Cities Section Lines s 0 0.25 0.5 1 Note: Alignment based upon 1890 plan sheets. Source: MN DNR Data Deli Figure 3: As Designed - Anoka County Ditch 10. Miles Scale: AS SHOWN Drawn by KZS Checked by: MRD !Project No.: 5555- 080.10 Date: 06/04/09 Sheet 1 of 1 Houston Engineering Inc Rice Creek Watershed District Anoka County Ditch 22 As Designed (1894) As Designed -ACD 10 As Designed - ACD 22 RCWD Boundary Cities Section Lines Lakes Note: Alignments based upon 1893 plan sheets. Note: Penoc Branch added in 1915 repair. Described in 1893 procedings as Pin Oak Detach of ACD 22. 0 0.25 0.5 1 Source: MN DNR Data Deli Miles Figure 4: As Designed -Anoka County Ditch 22. Scale: AS SHOWN Drawn by: KZS J Checked by: MRD Project No.: 5555- 080.10 Dale. 06/04/09 Sheet I 1 of 1 u Houston Engineering Inc. Rice Creek Watershed District Anoka County Ditch 32 As Designed (1898) Designed But Not Constructed As Designed - ACD 32 RCWD Boundary Cities Section Lines ILakes Note: Alignments Based upon 1898 plan sheets. Public System west of Sunset Avenue is now incorporated into Anoka County Sitch 53/62 system. 0 0.25 0.5 Source: MN DNR Data Deli 1 Miles Figure 5: As Designed - Anoka County Ditch 32. Scale: AS SHOWN Drawn by KZS Checked by: MRD Project No.: 5555- 080.10 Date: 06/04/09 Sheet 1 of 1 Houston Engineering Inc 76? 443 45: 14 OTI1 Hennepin Anoka Washington Ramsey Project Location Map wI_ 2 14 14 1- 12 . 13 'Cock `Ness (1 Rice Creek -Watershed District Drainage System Anoka County Ditch 10-97-3 Flow Direction Private Drainage Public Drainage RCWD Boundary Section Lines Township /Range Note: Alignment based on survey data provided by RCWD. 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Sources: MN DNR Data Deli, TLG Figure 6: Public Drainage System Anoka County Ditch ACD 10 -22 -32 Scale: AS SHOWN Drawn by: SMhfJ Checked by: MRD Project No.: 5565060.10 Date: 06/04 .09 Sheet: 1 oft Houston Engineering Inc. >- 140TH 211' f'r µP 39TH LN Anoka Washington Ramsey Project Location Map -0KINAWA CIR NE 3 125T , LN NE z Z O LAKESpkw 2 0 „'i 128TH AVE NE wti aN Z U' 126TH AVE NEE rn N 11 14 0r ti NE 0'w 3 0,z f` 0 7tH AVE NE 14 111TH AVE NE LEVER ST NE T32N -R23W T32N -R22W 124TH LN NE T31 N -R23W 1212 _ 1ST LEVER _ 121ST AVE NE _ t. AVE NE CT NE 4_ T31 N -R22W ROBINSON DR Z.. 32 Br. 14 PINE ST N m Br. 14 Er1 m!, UI AND/U1 81 STNS of 5 Penoc Br. NDALL ST T32N -R22W T31 N -R22W 1� 9114• .0▪ 0 N LN 0NTURY ..TRL 'AR ST � Br. 12 go PALOMINO PALOMINO LN CARL ST 1 THOMAS ST Penoc 0 0 w 33 0 O 0 35TH AVE NE z C 2 0 g 0 :LN o' ZI JE'� 4-Q4,,,, z VIIC KY LN 41 LNVRTLEIw HIGHLAND Gi, Z Br. Iy TRL; ARLO LN 'P / a _ z f;HERWOOD ti LN 0 GREENWOOD LN LOIS LN > h 00_ ° PRAIRIE VIEW PL NA79TH ST W NCY` k1AK <ar LN O'0 T-1 BARBARA ¢. LN 23 Z =• =...ern.— OLIVE ST <ORANGE ST MAPLE ST DIANE T 10 OAK LN EVERGREEN P 0O_ JAMES ST KELLY ST LOIS LN �y0 77TH ST W °NYYcMain Trunk BEHM LN MUSTANG Z CT .7.7-' TECKLA r5.1Z e CT LILAC ST 153 ¢• Ui 77TH ST W A. ��,oe QOM F � APOLLO 4R' 115TH AVE,I, F w' r9�0 .1N AVE NE 13 yF9 `Loch Ness w: 1- rn o: z' B °LEVr! ST 0 MARCIA • LN O 0 w z • F', w a', CONNIE_ LN 18 George Watch 16 74TH ST '0 MARVY ST PARK CT 12 -y is ARSHAN CT Marshan Rice Creek Watershed District Drainage System Anoka County Ditch 10 -22 -32 Flow Direction ACD 22 ACD 32 Branch 11A ---- -- ACD 32 Branch 11B ACD 32 Branch 12 ACD 32 Branch 14 ACD 32 Branch 15 ACD 32 Main Trunk ACD 32 Penoc Branch Private RCWD Boundary Section Lines Twp Range Note: Alignment based on survey data provided by RCWD. 0 0.25 0.5 1 Sources: MN DNR Data Deli, TLG Miles Figure 7: Functional Alignment of ACD 10 -22 -32 Scale: AS SHOWN Drawn by: SMW Checked by: Project No.: 5555- 080.10 Date: 07/06/09 Sheet 1 of 1 Houston Engineering Inc It !19714 763 443 457; F 7634 ',," • p aoy - pau6!sea sy Background: 1938 Agricultural Stablization and Conservation Service (ASCS) Figure 8 Public Drainage System 1890