Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/26/2000 Env Bd PacketCity of Lino Lakes April Environmental Board Meeting Lino Lakes City Hall April 26, 2000 6:30 PM Agenda 1. Call To Order/Pass Sign -In Sheet 2. Approval of Minutes 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Citizen Comments 5. Environmental Board Business A. Tree Preservation Ordinance B. Environmental Education Packet C. DNR Project D. Community Service Award 6. Project Review A. Behms/Rice Lake Estates Park Prairie Projects. Other Discussion Items A. Solid Waste/Recycling Day B. Earth Day Summery C. Arbor Day D. City News Letter 9. Close Meeting and Confirm Next Meeting Date City of Lino Lakes April Environmental Board Meeting Lino Lakes City Hall April 26, 2000 6:30 PM Agenda 1. Call To Order/Pass Sign -In Sheet 2. Approval of Minutes 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Citizen Comments 5. Environmental Board Business A. Tree Preservation Ordinance B. Environmental Education Packet C. DNR Project D. Community Service Award Project Review A. Behms/Rice Lake Estates Park Prairie Projects. 7. Other Discussion Items A. Solid Waste/Recycling Day B. Earth Day Summery C. Arbor Day D. City News Letter 9. Close Meeting and Confirm Next Meeting Date AGENDA ITEM STAFF ORIGINATOR: Marty Asleson DATE: April 18, 2000 TOPIC: Tree Preservation Plan Consideration BACKGROUND: Please find attached a copy of the second draft Tree Preservation Ordinance. The second draft copy has been modified after the Environmental Board review in March. In addition please find attached a copy of the City Attorney's response to legal questions. Staff would like this document to be forwarded to the City Council for consideration upon your approval. OPTIONS: 1. Approve the Draft Tree Preservation Ordinance. 2. Approve the Draft6 Tree Preservation Ordinance with recommended changes. 3. Do not approve the Draft Tree Preservation Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Option 1 or 2 • APR -18 -2000 08:02 651 292 0083 P.02/12 REVIEW DRAFT 04/18/00 LINO LAKES — TREE PRESERVATION AND REPLACEMENT ORDINANCE L INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE Preservation of trees, woodlands, and the other significant natural resources within the City of Lino Lakes is a stated priority of the community. The City Council finds it in the best interest of the City to protect, preserve, and enhance the natural resources and environment of Lino Lakes and to encourage a resourceful and prudent approach to development of land. In the interest of achieving these objectives, the City of Lino Lakes has established the tree preservation regulations herein to promote the furtherance of the following: • Natural Environment: Recognize and protect the natural environment consistent with the City's mission statement and goals of the Comprehensive Plan and Handbook for Environmental Planning and Conservation Development through preservation and protection of significant trees and woodlands. ■ Protect Benefits: Maintain and enhance the benefits provided by trees and woodlands including beauty, protection against wind and water erosion, enhancement of property values, air quality improvement, energy conservation, buffering of cultural and natural resources, and protection of natural habitats. ■ Enhance Quality of Development: Encourage creative land use and environmentally compatible site design which preserves trees and minimizes tree removal and damage during development and enhances the natural aesthetics of the community. • Control Loss: Define standards to control cutting, removal, destruction, and protection of existing trees on private property, particularly significant trees and woodlands, as a result of land alteration or development. • Require Replacement: Establish reasonable requirements for replacement of significant trees and woodlands lost on private property as a result of land alteration or development. • Administration: Provide for administration and enforcement of the tree preservation regulations herein to promote and protect the public health, safety and welfare of the community. II. DEFINITIONS Applicant means any person or entity who is required to submit and implement a city - approved tree preservation plan under this section. Builder means any person or entity to whom a building permit is issued for the construction of a single -family residence. 1 APR -18 -2000 08:02 651 292 0083 P.03/12 REVIEW DRAFT 04/18/00 Caliper inch (Replacement Tree) means the diameter of a tree measured at twelve (12) inches above the ground. Caliper inch (Significant Tree) means the diameter of a tree measured at breast height (DBH). For multi- stemmed trees, the diameter shall be measured at the widest point of the largest trunk stem between one foot and 4.5 feet above ground. Canopy means the extension of a tree's branches in all directions from its trunk. Canopy coverage means the area on a horizontal plane that is located under the crowns of all the trees on the site. Coniferous (evergreen) tree means a cone - bearing woody plant which, at maturity, is at least 12 feet or more in height, having foliage on the outermost portion of its branches year - round. Construction area means any area in which movement of earth, alteration in topography, soil compaction, disruption of vegetation, change in soil chemistry, or any other change in the natural character of the land occurs as a result of the site preparation, grading, building construction or any other land disturbing activity. Critical damage means injury that results in tree removal or significant alteration of the natural form of the tree due to inappropriate pruning or other actions. Critical root zone (CRZ) means the circular area surrounding a tree trunk with a radius distance of one and one -half (1' /z) foot per inch of tree diameter, measured at DBH (e.g. a 20 -inch diameter tree has a CRZ with a radius of 20 feet). The minimum CRZ for any tree shall be six (6) feet. Deciduous tree (Large) means a woody plant which, at maturity, is more than 30 feet in height, having a defined crown, and which sheds its leaves annually. Deciduous tree (Medium) means a woody plant which, at maturity, is between 15 and 30 feet in height, having a defined crown, and which sheds its leaves annually. Deciduous tree (Small) means a woody plant which, at maturity, is between 12 and 15 feet in height, having a defined crown, and which sheds its leaves annually. Developer means any person or entity other than a builder, as defined herein, who undertakes to improve a parcel of land, by platting, grading, installing utilities, or constructing or improving any building thereon. Diameter means the length of a straight line measured through the trunk of a tree. For multi - stemmed trees, the diameter is measured through the widest point of the largest trunk stem. 2 APR-18 -2000 13:58 651 292 0083 P.02'03 REVIEW DRAFT 04/18/00 Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) means the length of a straight line measured through the trunk of a tree 54 inches (4.5 feet) above ground. Forester means a person designated by the City with specialized knowledge of forestry and aboriculture. Hardwood deciduous tree includes, but is not limited to: ironwood, oak, maple (hard) walnut, ash, hickory, black cherry, hackberry, honey - locust, and basswood. Land disturbing activity means any excavating, grading, clearing, filling, or other earth moving and land reclamation which may result in movement of: ■ Five thousand (5000) cubic yards anywhere in the City; • One hundred (100) cubic yards per acre, or more, anywhere in the City; • Within a Shoreland Overlay District, ten (10) cubic yards on steep slopes or within Shore Impact Zones; or • Within a Shoreland Overlay District, fifty (50) cubic years per acre. Landscape architect means a person licensed by the state as a registered landscape architect. Pine Plantation means an area of low plant diversity consisting of a pine canopy with little or no ground story or shrub layer vegetation. Significant tree (coniferous /evergreen) means a healthy evergreen tree measuring a minimum of twelve (12) feet in height. Significant tree (hardwood deciduous) means a healthy hardwood deciduous tree measuring a minimum of six (6) inches in diameter DBH, as defined herein. Significant tree (softwood deciduous) means a healthy softwood deciduous tree measuring a minimum of eight (8) inches in diameter DBH, as defined herein. Significant woodland means a grouping or cluster of coniferous and/or deciduous trees providing contiguous canopy cover over 1000 or more square feet of the property, which includes hardwood deciduous trees over four (4) inches in diameter, softwood deciduous trees over six (6) inches in diameter, and/or coniferous trees over six (6) feet in height, and associated ground story vegetation. A woodland covering less than 1000 s.f. on a property may also be considered significant if it is a continuation of a larger woodland on an adjacent property, with a cumulative area of at least 1000 s.f., or if it is part of an identified buffer area. Softwood deciduous tree includes, but is not limited to: cottonwood, poplars /aspen, birch, boxelder, catalpa, willow, silver maple and elm. Tree removal means the loss of a significant healthy tree as a result of: • • APR -18 -2000 09:03 651 292 0083 P.05/12 REVIEW DRAFT 04/18/00 ■ Land disturbing activity, whether temporary or permanent, affecting thirty (30) percent or more of a significant tree's critical root zone; ■ Utility construction (i.e. sewer, water, storm sewer, gas, electirc, telephone and cable TV and trenching) resulting in the cutting of thirty (30) percent or more of a significant tree's roots within its critical root zone; ■ Mechanical injury to the trunk of a significant tree causing wounds or loss of bark, which may result in tree decline; • Compaction of thirty (30) percent or more of the surface of the soil within a significant tree's critical root zone. This includes compaction caused by vehicle movement, material storage, or similar actions; • Chemical pollution from leaking or spilling of liquids (e.g. paint, fuels, concrete rinsewater) that alters the soil chemistry; • The complete removal of a tree. III. APPLICABILITY A. Tree Preservation Plan Required: 1. On individual single- family lots with existing significant trees or woodlands as identified by the City, a Tree Preservation Plan, as described in Section IV.A. herein, shall be submitted for review by City staff in conjunction with a building permit application. 2. A Tree Preservation Plan as described in Section W.B. herein, shall be reviewed and approved by the City in conjunction with all applications for: • Preliminary Plat • Planned Development Overlay (PDO) • Site and Building Plan Review • Earth moving and land reclamation or other land disturbing activity. B. Plan Review Process: 1. The applicant is encouraged to meet with City staff prior to submission of a Tree Preservation Plan to determine the most feasible and practical placement of buildings, parking, driveways, streets, storage and other physical features, in order to minimize loss and damage to significant trees and woodlands. 2. Upon submittal, City staff will review the Tree Preservation Plan to evaluate compliance with the regulations and standards herein. City staff will notify the applicant of any deficiencies with the plan or if additional information is needed to complete the evaluation. 4 • APR -18 -2000 08:03 651 292 0083 P.06'12 REVIEW DRAFT 04/18/00 3. For any project that requires a Tree Preservation Plan, the City will make a determination that the Tree Preservation Plan is acceptable prior to issuance of any permits. C. Relationship to Other Ordinances: The requirements of this ordinance are separate from the City's Shade Tree Ordinance and Aboriculture Specifications and Standards of Practice. Required replacement tree plantings may be used to satisfy other landscaping requirements on private property, as defined elsewhere in the City Zoning Code, however, they cannot be used to fulfill boulevard street tree planting requirements. IV. TREE PRESERVATION SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS A. Plan Submission Requirements (Individual Single Family Lots): Applicant's for building permits on single family lots shall submit the following information in addition to plans required for a building permit: 1. A certificate of survey that accurately identifies the location and types of all existing significant trees and woodlands to be removed and those to be preserved on the lot. The drawing shall illustrate where protection devices will be placed and areas to be used for material and equipment storage. 2. A description of the measures to be used to protect the trees and woodlands to be preserved on the property. These measures shall be consistent with the measures outlined in Section IV.B.3. unless otherwise approved by the City. B. Plan Submission Requirements (General Development): For applications outlined in Section III.A.2., a Tree Preservation Plan shall include the following components. However, the City can use its discretion to waive submittal of some of this information, or to require additional information, if appropriate to the specific situation. 1. Tree Inventory: A tree inventory shall be prepared by a landscape architect, forester or certified registered land surveyor knowledgeable in identification of tree species and shall include: a) The names), telephone number(s), and address(s) of applicants, property owners, developers and/or builders. b) The size, species, condition and location of all existing significant trees and significant woodlands on the property. c) The estimated size, species, condition and location of significant trees and significant woodlands within one hundred (100) feet of the property boundary. d) Table summarizing the size, species, condition, and number of existing significant trees and significant woodlands on the property. Table should list plants individually and provide summary of total caliper inches. 5 APR -18 -2000 08:03 651 292 0083 P.07/12 REVIEW DRAFT 04/18/00 e) Delineation of existing buildings, structures, and/or impervious surfaces on the property. f) Signature of person(s) preparing the plan and date inventory completed. 2. Tree Preservation and Replacement Plan: A tree preservation and replacement plan shall be prepared by a landscape architect, forester, or certified registered land surveyor knowledgeable in identification of tree species and shall include: a) The name(s), telephone number(s), and address(s) of applicants, property owners, developers and/or builders. b) Delineation of all buildings, structures, utilities, irrigation systems, or impervious surfaces to remain or be built on the property. c) Delineation of all existing and proposed grade changes and limits of land disturbance. d) The size, species, and location of all existing significant trees and significant woodlands to be removed from the property. e) The size, species, and location of all existing significant trees and significant woodlands to be protected on the property. f) The estimated size, species, and location of all existing significant trees and significant woodlands within one hundred (100) feet of the property boundary. g) The size, species, and location of all replacement trees proposed to be planted on the property in accordance with the tree replacement schedule. If all or some replacement trees are to be planted off -site, a plan showing off -site planting locations should also be submitted, unless determined unnecessary by the City. h) Table summarizing total caliper inches of existing significant trees and woodlands to be removed, percent ( %) of total caliper inches to be removed, and total inches of replacement trees to be planted. i) Itemized estimate of costs of replacement trees, protection devices (e.g. fencing), labor, and other elements necessary to implement plan. j) Signature of the person(s) preparing the plan and date plan prepared. 3. Tree Protection: The Tree Preservation Plan shall identify the measures that will be used to protect significant trees and woodlands on the property or on abutting property. All tree protection measures shall be installed prior to and maintained throughout any land disturbing activity and should not be removed until all new planting is installed. These measures may be identified directly on the Tree Preservation and Replacement Plan drawing and/or included in a companion document. Unless otherwise approved by the City, the following protection measures shall be required: a) Trees and woodlands designated for preservation shall be identified and/or enclosed with brightly colored protective fencing (minimum four (4) feet high) or other means acceptable to the City. The protective measures must encompass the entire Critical Root Zone of the trees or woodlands, unless less protection is necessary due to the proximity of a structure, road or similar obstruction to be a part of the development, in which case, at least seventy percent (70 %) of the 6 APR -18 -2000 08:04 651 292 0083 P.08/12 REVIEW DRAFT 04/18/00 Critical Root Zone of the tree must be protected. No grade change, construction activity, or storage of materials shall occur within this protected area. b) Where possible, a two (2) foot deep trench shall be cut around the edge of the tree /woodland protection area to sever the roots between the trees to be saved and those to be removed. c) Identification of any oak trees requiring pruning as part of proposed land disturbance activity. Any oak trees pruned between May 1 and July 1 shall be required to have any cut areas sealed with an appropriate nontoxic tree wound sealant immediately after the wound is made. d) Identification of areas on property where soil chemistry may be altered due to concrete truck rinsing and leakage or spillage of toxic materials, such as fuels or paints. e) Identification of areas on the property where tree debris will be stockpiled. f) Identification of areas on the property used to burn tree debris. g) Identification of areas on the property to be used for building material and equipment storage and/or staging. h) Identification of vehicle access points to the property. i) Additional information, as requested by the City, to demonstrate adequate measures will be taken to protect against spread of tree diseases. For example, providing information to confirm felling of trees to be removed will not result in injury or wounds to trees to be protected. C. Performance Security Required: The applicant shall provide security for the performance of its obligations pursuant to this section following City approval of the Tree Preservation Plan and prior to commencement of any land disturbing activity as follows: 1. Amount of security: a) Letter of Credit — A letter of credit equal to one - hundred fifty percent (150%) of the estimated cost of the required replacement trees and other elements of the approved Tree Preservation Plan. The applicant shall submit a schedule of costs associated with implementation of the approved Tree Preservation Plan. In the event of any disagreement, the City will use the current Bachman's Wholesale Catalog (published annually), or equivalent regionally -based wholesale nursery catalog, to estimate the cost of replacement trees proposed in accordance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan. b) Cash Escrow - A cash escrow equal to one hundred percent (100 %) of the cost of staff time associated with monitoring and enforcement of the Tree Preservation Plan as estimated by the City. c) Single Family — No performance security shall be required for applicants of building permits for single - family units. [OPTION — could require a nominal set guarantee (e.g. $1000) to function as an incentive to comply with approved plan. however, this requires collection, inspection for compliance, and release of guarantee. City must decide if it wants to expend that much staff time on this single -lot level of review. It is probable that most owners of 7 APR -19 -2000 08:04 651 292 0083 P.09/12 REVIEW DRAFT 04 /18 /00 individual lots will want to preserve their trees and will design their house and site grading to do so. Or they may want to remove a tree to open a view or create firewood etc. The City must decide how strict it wants to be with individual property owners. Currently, the City tries to negotiate with builders /owners to save trees but there is no compliance requirement or punishment for removing trees.] 2. Release of security - The applicant shall notify the City when the planting has been completed so the City can verify that tree planting is completed, identify any discrepancies with the approved Tree Preservation Plan, and establish the planting completion date. a) The security shall be retained for at least one year after the date that the last replacement tree has been planted. b) Prior to release of the security, the City shall inspect the site to verify compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan as described in Section VI - Compliance and Enforcement. If non - compliance is found, the City may retain security to cover the cost of bringing the project into compliance. c) In no event shall the performance security be released before expiration of the one -year plant warranty period. V. GENERAL STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS A. Required Tree Replacement: The following table identifies the required amount of tree replacement based on type of development. Percent of Total Significant Tree* Caliper Inches Removed Required Replacement Tree Caliper Inches Per Inch Removed Single family & large lot residential Multi- family (medium -high density) Commercial, industrial, institutional 0 -9.9 -- -- -- 10 -19.9 .4 -- -- 20 -29.9 .5 .4 -- 30 -39.9 .6 .5 .4 40 -49.9 .7 .6 .5 50 -59.9 .8 .7 .6 60 -69.9 .9 .8 .7 70 -79.9 1.0 .9 .8 80 -89.9 1.1 1.0 .9 90 -100 1.2 1.1 1.0 ft NOTE: The amount of replacement is to be measured in "Replaccmcnt'1'ree" capper Inches (measured 1 inches above normal grade) and the amount removed is measured in "Significant Tree' caliper inches (measured 4.5 feet above normal grade). * Caliper inches of significant woodlands shall be based on the cumulative total inches of all trees within the significant woodland. 8 • APR -18 -2000 13:58 651 292 0083 P.03/03 REVIEW DRAFT 04/18/00 1. Pine Plantation Management: Pine plantations, as defined herein, are exempt from replacement requirements when thinning of the tree stand would improve tree health. The applicant shall submit information as necessary to adequately describe how the plantation will be managed (i.e. amount and location of thinning). B. Location of Replacement Trees: Replacement trees shall be planted: 1. On Site — Planting located within the subject property described in the application. 2. Off Site — If there is insufficient suitable area on the subject property to accommodate all required replacement trees, the City may consider allowing planting on other land. Priority will be given to public land owned by the City or other land (public or private), to be approved by the City. 3. Payment to Tree Fund — The City may accept a payment for the required caliper inches of replacement trees, if no suitable on -site or off -site location can be found to accommodate the trees. The exact dollar amount shall be established by the City Council. (see City Attorney's comments) C. Size, Type, and Quality of Replacement Trees 1. No more than one -third (1/3) of the replacement trees on a property shall be of the same species, unless approved by the City. 2. Replacement trees shall be of a species similar to the trees which are lost or removed or of a species similar to the indicator species of the Ecological Prototype of the property as defined in the City's Handbook for Environmental Planning and Conservation Development, unless otherwise approved by the City. 3. Large to medium sized deciduous trees shall be a minimum of two and one -half (2 1) caliper inches at time of planting. 4. Small deciduous trees shall be a minimum of one and one -half (1 '/2) caliper inches at time of planting. 5. Evergreen trees shall be a minimum of six (6) feet in height at time of planting. 6. Replacement trees shall be healthy stock, free of insects and disease, and meet the guidelines set by the American Standards of Nursery Stock and/or Inspection and Contract Administration Guidelines for MnDOT Landscape Projects. The City can reject trees if found to not meet these standards. 7. The following shall not be used as replacement trees: • Siberian Elm • Norway Maple 9 TOTAL P.03 • APR -18 -2000 08:05 651 292 0083 P.11'12 REVIEW DRAFT 04 /1 8/00 • Amur Maple (A. ginnala) • Cottonwood or Silver Maple (unless specifically approved by City) • Black Locust VI. COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT A. Compliance with Approved Plan: 1. Protection Measures: The applicant shall implement the tree protection measures indicated on the approved Tree Preservation Plan prior to commencement of any land disturbance activity on the property. The tree protection measures shall remain in place until all grading and construction activity is terminated, or until a request is made to and approved by the City. 2. Plan Implementation: Replacement trees shall be planted within six (6) months after completion of site construction activities, unless otherwise approved by the City. Failure to implement the plan within this time frame shall constitute non - compliance, subject to the actions outlined in Section VI.B. 3. Unauthorized Removal: If a significant tree(s) or woodland that was intended to be preserved in accordance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan is removed without permission of the City or sustains critical damage resulting in tree removal as defined herein, the applicant shall replace each tree so removed or destroyed at a rate of three (3) caliper inches (replacement tree) for each caliper inch (significant tree) removed. Replacement trees shall be of the same, or similar species as the lost tree. The size and quality of replacement trees shall meet the requirements of Section V.C. B. Inspection and Enforcement: The City shall have the right to inspect the development and/or building site in order to determine compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan. 1. Compliance Inspection: One year after all replacement trees have been planted the applicant shall make a request in writing to the City for an inspection to determine compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan. Upon inspection, the City shall determine whether compliance has been achieved and, if so, release the performance guarantee. 2. Non - compliance: If the City finds that the property is not in compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan, it shall inform the applicant 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. 3. Dead Trees: Any replacement tree that is not alive or healthy one year after planting in accordance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan, shall be removed and replaced, by the applicant, with a new, healthy tree of the same size and species. 10 • APR -18 -2000 08:05 651 292 0083 P.12/12 REVIEW DRAFT 04/18 /00 4. Use of Performance Security: If after notification of non - compliance, the applicant fails to achieve compliance within sixty (60) calendar days, the City may exercise its authority to use the performance security to complete the planting in accordance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan. 11 TOTAL P.12 LAW OFFICES OF William G. Hawkins and Associates Legal Assistant WILLIAM G. HAWKINS TAMMI J. UVEGES BARRY A. SULLIVAN April 11, 2000 Mr. Jeff Smyser Lino Lakes City Hall 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Re: Tree Preservation Ordinance Dear Jeff: 2140 FOURTH AVENUE NORTH ANOKA, MINNESOTA 55303 PHONE (612) 427 -8877 FAx (612) 421 -4213 I am responding to your letter regarding, the proposed tree preservation ordinance question. You raised three questions that you wanted me to address. 1. I have a question regarding the legal authority of the City to require cash for replacement of lost trees. All legal authority the City receives in dealing with the subdivision of properties is granted by State law. In Minn. Stat. § 462.358, the City is given the authority to require cash in lieu of land for park dedication. I am unable to find any provision in this statute that allows us to collect money for trees that may be lost. I will continue to review possible sources for legal authority, however, at this time I believe it is questionable. 2. The issue of extensive tree removal is a difficult one. At what point does the City regulation regarding a property owner's use of their land become so intrusive that it constitutes a "taking." Also, in order to enforce such a provision it will be necessary to come up with an elaborate set of regulations as to what constitutes extensive tree removal. I think that while in theory the idea sounds good, its practical application would be very difficult both legally and politically. My comments would also apply to #3. Finally, the tone of your letter indicates your reluctance for the City to become involved in this type of regulation as it relates to real property. As you can see, I agree and would proceed very cautiously in this type of a regulation. erely, illiam G. Hawkins WGH /tju APR 1 3 2000 I CITY OF U OL ! 600 Town Center Parkway Phone: (651) 982 -2400 Fax: (651) 982 -2499 Fax To: Bill Hawkins From: Jeff Smyser (651)982 -2425 Company: Hawkins and Associates Fax: (612) 421 -4213 cc: Brian Wessel Pages: _2_ including cover Date: 4/7/00 We are preparing a new tree preservation ordinance. I will send you a draft when we have it a little more refined. The ordinance will apply to private property development applications. A plat or site plan application will require a tree preservation plan including tree replacement. The required information will be spelled out in the new ordinance. For a preliminary plat, the tree replacement will apply to trees lost to grading and construction for roads and other infrastructure. For commercial sites, replacement will apply to any trees cut on the site. Three questions have arisen and I would appreciate your thoughts by the end of next week, if possible. 1. We are considering creating a special fund with the City to accept cash in lieu of replacing lost trees. That is, if the project site doesn't include enough land after development to provide locations for replacement trees, the City could opt for cash instead of the new trees. The cash amounts will be listed in the ordinance and would be calculated during the project review. I don't see any problem with creating such a fund as long as the dollar amounts are reasonable and consistently applied. I will talk with our new finance director. Do you foresee any problems? 2. The Environmental Board asked if we can prevent extensive tree removal on private lots if there is no development application. For example: somebody owns 20 • Bill Hawkins April 7, 2000 page 2 acres and cuts trees for whatever reason, or; an owner of 20 acres cuts all the trees because he knows when he submits a plat application, he'll have to go through the expense of preparing a tree survey, preservation plan, etc. My initial thought on this is that it would require extensive policing of the City, with a significant commitment of staff time. There is also the question of the extent of the City's police power, and how much authority over private property we should assume. Any thoughts? ;. We are wondering if we should even get into the regulation of tree cutting when somebody buys a single family residential lot and applies for a building permit for a house. Currently, I think our Environmental Specialist looks at the building permit application and makes some suggestions to the builder. Little is actually mandated regarding tree preservation other than a fence around trees that will remain. This is similar to question number two. To require, review, and follow up on preservation plans for individual lots may be a tricky policy and significant City expense that would be difficult to justify. And again, do we want to tell individual lot owners which trees they can't cut? Any thoughts? I appreciate your help. • • MEMORANDUM April 21, 2000 to: Environmental Board from: Jeff Smyser subject: Tree Replacement Requirements of New Tree Preservation Ordinance cc: Marty Aslesen, Julie Farnham, John Powell On page 9 of the draft of the new ordinance, you'll see `B. Location of Replacement Trees ". Paragraph two requires off -site replacement if there is insufficient area on site. Paragraph three allows for an "in lieu" payment if trees are not replaced somewhere. You'll find some correspondence with the City Attorney attached to the 4/18/00 draft of the tree ordinance. Requiring replacement off site or requiring cash in lieu of replacement probably exceeds our authority under state law. After receiving Bill Hawkins' April 11 letter, I spoke with him further. A quick summary: off -site trees do not benefit the developer's land, nor does using the developer's cash to plant trees elsewhere. This is not allowed in Minnesota unless specifically addressed under state law. For example, state law specifically allows a city to require park and roadway dedications. Alternatively, I suggest we require all tree replacement on site. If there is not enough land immediately available for the replacement in areas such as parks, boulevards, and private open space, the developer can offer free trees to lot buyers to plant on individual lots after the house is built. This would ensure tree replacement on the development site. It also would be a nice bonus offer for lot buyers. If the developer doesn't provide the replacement trees, the City could draw from the letter of credit (see page seven of the draft) and provide trees to the lot owners. We would like to keep this ordinance moving through the approval process so that we can use it this building season. With the Environmental Board's understanding of the intent, we can refine the tree replacement language in the draft to clarify that replacement will occur on site. This will be done before the draft goes to the Planning & Zoning Board on May 10. 600 Town Center Parkway, Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014 -1182 Phone: 651 - 982 -2400 • Fax: 651 - 982 -2499 • TDD: 651 - 982 -2410 • • Memo To: Lino Lakes Environmental Board From: Marty Asleson Date: 04/20/00 Re: Environmental Education Packet/Clearwater Creek Please find revisions to the Environmental Education Brochure for Clearwater Creek for you review. Please think of a purpose statement that we can add to the document. I would also like to hand out one of the Environmental Board education folders to each homeowner. • Page 1 • 04/20/2000 09:00 6124018798 Fax 7b1 Malty A. KJOLHAUG ENVIR SERV PAGE 01 KJ0LI-IAUG ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMPANY Provking Sang eel raced Gbmprehensilm Neural Resource rcie Sautes From: Mat golhoaug Faec 651-982-2499 Prime 3 Rona Oats 4120/00 ❑ Urgent ❑ For R.MI.w ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Maw Recycle • Comments: Marty — I have made the requested additions /changes. If you would like, l will e-mail you the file. I did not add anything for the statement of purpose. I think that is something that the City should decide on. (Gor -em did it this way because the City wanted it that way and I did it this way because you and Mike Q asked me to.) I have a good idea what your purpose was, but thought you might already have some stated intent. Please call with questions. Mark 26105 Wild Rose Lane, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, Phone: 612401 -8757, Fax 812401 -8798 04/20/2000 09:00 6124018798 • • KJOLHAUG ENVIR SERV PAGE 03 Clearwater Creek 3'i Addition is among the most unique and ecologically sensitive residential developments within the metro area. Gor -em Development and the City of Lino Lakes have made significant efforts to protect and incorporate more than 60 acres of woodland, prairie, and wetland open space habitats for the benefit of the environment and residents. Walking trails and habitat corridors connect this series of greenways, which will ultimately be owned by the City of Lino Lakes. Nearly 60 percent of all lots in the development abut these greenways and trails, allowing convenient access and visual enjoyment of the areas. The concept for this project originated as a joint effort between the City and developer and represents a focussed effort to protect the environment while meeting demands for single - family homes in Lino Lakes. Wetlands have received considerable attention during the past 2 decades because of an increased public recognition of the abundant social and ecological benefits that they provide. These benefits include: • Wetlands filter surface water runoff prior to discharge into s, protecting water quality • Wetlands store water during peak runoff periods, lessening potential for downstream flooding. Water is then released gradnaiy, contributing to the maintenance of stream flow rates during low flow periods. • Wetlands provide habitat for a variety of insects, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and mammals. Deeper wetlands also provide important spawning habitat for a several fish species. More recently, attention has been given to providing upland buffers to protect wetlands from runoff from developed and agricultural areas. Buffers remove contaminants before they enter wetlands, preventing degradation of water quality and plant communities. Buffers also provide habitat for upland wildlife species and nesting cover for waterfowl and other water birds. Protecting areas supporting mature, high value oak, ash, maple, and basswood trees benefits wildlife and adds visual diversity to the development. Opportunities for observing birds and many other species of woodland wildlife enhance the enjoyment of development residents and all users of the trail. The developer has made substantial efforts to restore and enhance wetland and upland habitats within the greenways. In wooded areas dominated by mature oak, maple and basswood trees, these efforts have included removal of non - native invasive shrubs such as buckthorn, prickly ash, and honeysuckle. Removing dense shrub growth will allow sunlight to reach the ground and stimulate the growth of lush herbaceous ground cover. Some degraded wetland and grassland plant communities have been removed and replaced with diverse, native plant communities. Because of past use of portions of the site as pasture, many of the grasslands had been previously converted to agricultural 04120/2000 09:00 6124018798 • • KJOLHAUG ENVIR SERV pasture crops such as timothy and alfalfa. Restoring native vegetation within these areas will improve the aesthetic and wildlife values. In total, more than 35 acres of degraded plant communities have been restored to provide more diverse and higher quality wildlife habitats. Long-term management plans include repeat treatments of woodlands, as necessary, to prevent reinvasion by buckthorn and other weedy shrubs. Grasslands buffering wetlands will be monitored for invasive weeds and shrubs and management tools such as fire, spray and mechanical control will be used to remove undesirable species. Along with the privileges of living near this unique resource come responsibilities for protecting it for all others to enjoy. These responsibilities begin with wise management of adjacent lots to limit contaminants from entering wetlands. Water running off lawns often includes nutrients and pesticides that may harm adjacent natural communities located down stream. Careful use of lawn chemicals will help minimize the potential for contaminants from entering the system. Because the greenways are public lands, no mowing or disposal of private yard waste such as leaves, grass clipping, and branches is allowed. Even these biodegradable wastes will harm wetlands and adjacent buffers by suffocating natural plant growth and adding excess nutrients. Ultimately, these nutrients flow through waterways and end up in our lakes and rivers. The greenway boundaries shown on the adjoining map are clearly identified by signs. By following the guidelines for these areas it will ensure the success of this unique environment and preserve it for future generations. Additional information is available from the City Environmental Program Coordinator at (651) 982-2400. PAGE 02 • Memo To: Lino Lakes Environmental Board From: Marty Asleson Date: 04 /18/00 Re: Soils Information Soil compaction and soil "interface" are topics I have brought up in the past. An understanding of the composition and characteristics of soils before and after construction activities is something we have discussed several times. I have copied some information from a text book called "Turfgrass Management" by A.J. Turgeon and Technical reports from 'Watershed Protection Techniques, Vol.3, No.2, January 2000; `Technical Note 107 and 108" for your review. The Turgeon Book describes the interface dynamics of modified turf situations and the Watershed Protection Techniques Technical Reports discuss the increase in bulk density of construction sites and remedial steps that may be taken. • Page 1 'echnical Note 107 The Compaction of Urban Soils Many professionals have an interest in the compaction of urban soils. For example, a structural engineer may need to increase compaction to provide a stable foundation for a road or building. Conversely, an urban forester or landscaper may want to decrease or prevent compaction in order to improve root growth and plant survival. A stormwa- ter engineer must understand soil compaction to accu- rately model the runoff from lawns and landscaped areas, to identify suitable locations for stormwater treatment practices, or to stabilize an embankment or slope. Soil compaction is also an important issue for managers involved in land conservation, erosion and sediment control, watershed education and watershed Tanning: In this note, we examine how soil compac- increases in response to watershed development d the implications it has for watershed professionals. What distinguishes soil from dirt? One of the major factors is the amount of "fluff' within a soil. Undisturbed soils have a lot of pore space. Indeed, air comprises from 40 to 55% of the soil volume (unless it has recently rained, in which case the pore spaces are filled up with water). Scientists and engineers frequently measure bulk density to indicate how much fluff is present in a particular soil. Bulk density is defined as the mass of dry soil divided by its volume, and is expressed in units of grams per cubic centimeter (gms /cc). Bulk density is a useful indicator of the structure of a soil, and can help predict its porosity, permeability, infiltration rate and water holding capac- ity. In general, as the bulk density of a given soil increases, it will produce more surface runoff and allow less infiltration. What distinguishes soil from dirt? The surface bulk density of most undisturbed soils ranges from 1.1 to 1.4 gms /cc, depending on the type of soil present (Table 107.1). Soils that are predominately Downer Soil Bulk Density (grlcc) 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 4 6 8 10 12 Depth (inches) 14 • 16 18 20 22 24 Forest Pasture ' t Urban • • k 1 1 • • Depth (inches) 1.2 Freehold Soil Bulk Density (prlcc) 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 1 Pasture• Forest i. • Urban Figure 107.1: Change in Bulk Density in the Soil Profile as a Function of Land Use Watershed Protection Techniques • Vol. 3, No. 2 • January 2000 661 • Technical Notes. sands or clays are on the lower end of the range, whereas silts and silt loams are on the high end of the range. Glacial tills, which were compressed by thousands of feet of ice in the last ice age, can have a bulk density ranging as high as 1.6 to 2.0 gms /cc, depending on how much they have weathered. Highly organic soils, like peat, can be as low as 0.3 gms/cc. In general, bulk density increases with soil depth, reflecting the compression by the overlying soil, and the decline in the abundance of soil fauna and organic matter. Figure 107.1 shows a typical profile of how bulk density changes with depth for soils of different land use (Smith, 1999). In contrast, many urban soils and surfaces have much higher bulk densities (Table 107.1). The highly disturbed soils of urban lawns range from 1.5 to 1.9 gms/ cc, while athletic fields and fill soil typically range from 1.8 to 2.0 gms /cc. These bulk density values approach the density of concrete (2.2 gms /cc). Soils adjacent to building pads and along the road rights of way are intentionally compacted to meet engineering specifica -' tions, and can range from 1.5 to 2.1 gms /cc, depending 0 08 10 20 0 ac so 0 40 50 60 Bulk Density (gm /cc) 1.2 1.6 2 2.4 2.8 Figure 107.2: Relationship Between Soil Bulk Density and Soil Porosity Table 107.1: Comparison of Bulk Density for Undisturbed Soils and Common Urban Conditions (Compiled from various sources) Urban Lawns Crushed Rock Parking Lot 1.5 to 1.9 Urban Fill Soils Athletic Fields 1.5 to 2.0 1.8 to 2.0 Rights of Way and Building Pads (85% Compaction) Rights of Way and Building Pads (95% Compaction) 1.8 to 2.0 1.5 to 1.8 Concrete Pavement Quartzite (Rock) 1.6 to 2.1 2.2 2.65 on local compaction standards and the compressibility of the underlying soil. The Consequences of Compaction The extensive compaction of urban soils has many adverse hydrologic impacts on a watershed. The pri- mary impact relates to the change of porosity within a soil. Figure 107.2 illustrates how soil porosity dimin- ishes as bulk density increases. Porosity is important because it governs the soil's capacity to hold water, infiltrate runoff and allow roots to penetrate. As poros- ity declines, compacted urban soils can produce much more surface runoff than is normally expected for grass or meadow cover. While pervious areas are not gener- ally thought to contribute much stormwater runoff, when urban soils become highly compacted, their runoff response more closely resembles that of an impervious surface, particularly during large storm events. For example, Wignosta et al. (1994) found that compacted soils produced from 40 to 60% of the annual runoff for a small developed catchment, and that the soils had an effective runoff coefficient as high as 0.5. Other researchers have also noted that com- pacted urban soils can have effective runoff coeffi- cients in the 0.2 to 0.45 range (Pitt, 1992, and Legg et al., 1996). While these runoff coefficients are still lower than those commonly reported for completely paved areas (0.50 to 0.99), they are very significant since lawns can comprise as much as 50 to 70% of residential cover. Thus, from a practical standpoint, soil compaction increases watershed runoff and creates Watershed-Protection Techniques •!Vol.. 3, No. 2 • January 2000? Technical Notes ainage problems such as surface ponding, since no longer have their water - holding capacity. The second key concern with soil compaction relates to its impact on the roots of trees, shrubs and ground covers. Generally, once bulk density exceeds 1.6 gms /cc, roots are no longer able to penetrate through the soil, and growth is limited. The critical bulk density for root penetration for different kinds of soils is indicated in Table 107.2. The practical consequence of the lack of root growth is that trees, shrubs and grass cover are extremely difficult to establish without extensive soil preparation or plant- ing pits. Since compacted soils hold little water, plants are more prone to drought, and may require supplemental irrigation to survive even in humid climates. Likewise, compacted soils have lower oxy- gen transfer, extreme summer soil temperatures, less nutrient retention, less soil fauna (such as earth- worms) and less mycorrhyizal fungi compared to uncompacted soils (Bethenfalvay and Linderman, 1992 and Craul, 1994). Consequently, urban trees and ground covers tend to be very sparse, short- lived, and disease- prone, unless they are provided with significant irrigation, soil amendments, fertilization and other inputs. Bulk Density Increases in Response to Watershed Development We do not walk very lightly on the earth. Nearly every kind of watershed development compacts the soil and increases bulk density. Soil compaction begins with grazing, as the weight of livestock tramples soils of the pasture. A modest increase in soil bulk density of 0.12 to 0.20 gms /cc has been observed in pasture soils, compared to forest ones (See Table 107.3). Soil compaction, however, is largely confined to the surface, and does not extend more than a few inches into the soil profile. Compaction becomes much more severe when crops are cultivated. As heavy farm machinery passes over the field, soils are compressed up to two feet below the surface. In addition, as topsoil is eroded, more compacted subsoils are exposed. The common practice of tilling the fields does relieve compaction in the upper few inches of the soil profile, but the effect is seasonal and does not extend more than six inches to a foot below the surface. Overall, the effect of cropping is to increase bulk density by an average of 0.25 to 0.35 gms /cc, compared to forest soils, depending on the hydrologic soil group (Table 107.3). Compaction becomes even more dramatic dur- ing the urbanization of a watershed. Soil structure is compacted in three different ways during the con- Table 107.2: A Comparison of Root Limiting Bulk Density for Different Soil Types (after Morris et a1., 1988) Sandy Loam Sandy Loam Silt Loan Clay Loam 1.5 *only soil types which do not limit root growth after 85% compaction by proctor test Table 107.3: Comparison of Bulk Density in New Jersey Soils Average bulk density in first foot of soil (gmslcc) computed from database provided by Smith (1999) NRCS Hydrologic Soil Group Cultivated Soils 1.61 gals/cc HC" Soils Moderate runoff potential This table' provides a conpanson of the bulk density fordifferent hyrtologc soil "groups (HSGs), as classified by the Nature Rear) cesConsovation Service. Hydrologic soil groups are frequently used to define curie nun to characterize runcff potential vfthin; various hyridogic malels The HSG dassifrcatior; is nct stnctlybased on the porosityof the soil „but also includes bother soil crc ernes that govern runoff pdential, such as the infrl f afon rate, depth to watertable and the presence of opnfining layers such as hardpans: and fragipans M re information on HSG can be found in the 'National Resources ConsenrationService,National Engineering Hancbooh'_Chapter 2 . ` Notes pasture categoryincludas grassland, hay and-grazed lards. Watershed Protection Techniques • Vol. 3, No. 2 • January 2000 Technical Notes. Table 107.4: Reported Land Use or Activities That Increase Soil Bulk Density Grazing Crops ncrease in "Bulk Density (gms /cc) 0.12 to 0.20 Smith, 1999 (Table 2) Construction, mass grading Construction, mast gradin Constru ion, -no gradin Construction. traffic Construction traffi Athletic field 25 to 0.35 Smith,: 1999 (Table 2) Randrup, 1998 Lichter and - Lindsey, 1994 Lichter and ;Lindsey, 1994 .25 to 0.40 Lichter and - 'Lindsey, ,1994 Smith, ,1999, Friedman, ~ 1 `Urban lawn and turf',; 38 to 0.54' Smith, 1999 Various Sources struction process. First, grading equipment works over the site to cut and fill and achieve the desired elevations for building. As a consequence, existing top soil is stripped, stockpiled or even removed from the site, and compacted subsoils are exposed at the surface. Second, as construction equipment and vehicles work the site, their tracks and tires compress the remaining soils several feet below the new surface. Lastly, certain portions of the site are intentionally compacted with vibrators or rollers to meet soil engineer- ing standards for bearing structures or traffic loads. This intentional compaction usually occurs along the right of ways for roads, a ten foot envelope around building pads, and around stormwater ponds. Other areas of the site are also frequently compacted as the equipment moves from lot to lot. Local development standards typically require that soils be compacted to within 90 or 95% of their maximum bulk density within these zones. Taken together, construction increases the bulk density of surface soils on the order of 0.35 gm /cc over the pre - development land use, whether it is forest, pasture or crops (Table 107.4). The compaction can extend up to two feet down in the soil profile, according to Smith (1999). One of the best studies on the impact of construc- tion on soil compaction was performed by Randrup (1998), who examined 47 Danish construction sites and adjacent undeveloped soils. He reported an average increase in bulk density from 1.60 gms /cc to 1.94 gms /cc, with the greatest compaction found more than a foot below the soil. Lichter and Lindsay (1994) found a similar increase in soil bulk density at several California construction sites. They also noted that bulk density increased by 0.2 gms /cc at a construction site whose soil was not mass The compaction of urban soils has many implications for the watershed manager. ' ri•. e:!: 'i'.i`1iic.�i'•:+:53'�'.".L�r,Y o:ti ic.J��,�!"'•c' ^•?dl. graded nor compacted to meet engineering standards. Clearly, mass grading and the passage of construction equipment are both important factors leading to soil compaction on most construction sites (see Table 107.4). According to recent research, soil compaction continues after turf and landscaping are established at the site, at least for the first few years. Bulk density values typically remain about 0.30 to 0.40 gms /cc above pre - development levels after development (Table 107.4). A few urban areas continue to become more compacted. Most notable are athletic fields, park areas, pathways and unpaved parking lots that con- tinue to experience extensive foot and/or vehicular traffic after development. Surface bulk densities for these compacted soils often range from 1.9 to 2.1 gms /cc, which is almost equivalent to the bulk density for impermeable concrete surfaces. Implications of Soil Compaction for the Watershed Manager The compaction of urban soils has many implica- tions for the watershed manager. As soil compaction appears to be virtually unavoidable once clearing begins and the site experiences construction traffic and activity, site planners must physically exclude any construction equipment from portions of the site where undisturbed soils are required or desired. Many storm - water practices utilize the soil to treat or infiltrate stormwater runoff, and are designed under the assump- tion that the underlying soil is uncompacted and relatively undisturbed (infiltration, filter strips, grass swales, disconnection of rooftop runoff, some forms of bioretention and even septic systems). As aresult, these practices should be located outside the limits of con- struction disturbance. Otherwise, they may require 664 atershea Protection ::Techniques Vol , 3;. No. 2- " < `January ' 2000` Technical Notes iiensive soil amendments to restore their intended tion. The second key implication of compaction relates to the objectives for local erosion and sediment control plans during construction. From a watershed stand- point, these plans should not only focus on preventing soil loss, but go further to prevent soil compaction. Any reduction in clearing, grading and construction access will provide a stormwater management benefit. Un- cleared and ungraded portions of the site represent an important "hydrologic reserve area," and erosion and sediment control plans should clearly demarcate the limits of disturbance over as much of the site as possible to retain these. Hydrologic reserves can include wet- lands, conservation areas, buffers, setbacks, open space, and even portions of individual lots. However, draw- ing the limits of disturbance on a plan is much easier than actually enforcing them in the field, so increased contractor training and fencing are essential. Commu- nities should also carefully reevaluate their current compaction requirements and grading standards to ensure that they only compact those areas of the site that are absolutely necessary, and otherwise promote the retention of undisturbed soils. The third implication of urban soil compaction is t severe soil compaction fundamentally alters the hydrology of a site, and makes many pervious areas function more like impervious ones. This suggests that engineers will need to explicitly incorporate the ef- fects of soil compaction into their models that predict the changes in runoff as a result of development. The challenge is that while it is relatively easy to predict the increase in bulk density caused by construction, it is much harder to predict precisely how much this in- crease in bulk density will increase the runoff coeffi- cient or curve numbers for pervious areas. More re- search is urgently needed to characterize runoff from lawns and landscaped areas on compacted urban soils. Until better data are available, it seems prudent to model the runoff from pervious areas differently. For example, it may be advisable to adjust runoff coeffi- cients upwards for compacted pervious areas (by ap- proximately 0.1 to 0.15) or, when using the NRCS TR- 55 model, to automatically shift curve numbers (CN) upward by at least one hydrological soil group (HSG) when a site is cleared (i.e., if the original pervious area was a B soil, model it as if it were a C soil). An even larger shift is probably justified if the area is planned to e an athletic field or a new lawn. In summary, watershed managers should bear in mind that the quality of soils is inextricably linked to the quality and quantity of water. Greater efforts to prevent or reduce the compaction of soil quality that results from construction are an important element of any urban watershed protection strategy. —TRS Editor's Note: Thanks are extended to Chris Smith and David Friedman, who supplied data and information for this technical note. Contact: Chris Smith: 732 - 246 -1171 ext 175. References Bethlenfalvay, G. and R. Linderman. 1992. "Mycor- rhizae in Sustainable Agriculture." ASA Special Publication No. 54. American Society of Agronomy. Madison, WI. Craul, P. 1994. "Urban Soils: An Overview and Their Future." pp 115 -125 in The Landscape Below Ground. Proceedings of International Workshop on Tree Root Development in Urban Soils. Inter- national Society of Arboriculture. Champaign, Illinois. Friedman, D. 1998. Personal communication. District Director. Ocean County Soil Conservation Dis- trict. Forked River, N.J. Legg, A. R. Bannerman, and J. Panuska. 1996. "Varia- tion in the Relation of Rainfall to Runoff from Residential Lawns in Madison, Wisconsin, July and August, 1995." U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation Report 96 -4194. With the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Madison, WI. Lichter, J. and P. Lindsay. 1994. "Soil Compaction and Site Construction: Assessment and Case Studies." pp. 126 -130 in The Landscape Below Ground. Proceedings of International Workshop on Tree Root Development in Urban Soils. International Society of Arboriculture. Champaign, Illinois. Morris, L. and R. Lowery. 1988. Influence of Site Preparations on Soil Conditions Affecting Stand Establishment and Tree Growth." Southern Jour- nal of Applied Forestry. 12(3): 170 -178. Pitt, R. 1992. Small Storm Hydrology. SLAMM Docu- mentation. Randrup, T. 1998. "Soil Compaction and Construction Sites." pp. 146 -154 in The Landscape Below Ground. II. Proceedings of International Work- shop on Tree Root Development in Urban Soils. International Society of Arboriculture. Champaign, Illinois. Schueler, T. 1995. "The Peculiarities of Perviousness." Watershed Protection Techniques. 2(1): 233 -238. Smith, C. 1999. Soil Compaction Findings and Inter- pretation. Natural Resources Conservation Ser- vice. Wignosta, M., S. Burges, and J. Meena. 1994. "Model- ing and Monitoring to Predict Spatial and Tempo- ral Hydrological Characteristics in Small Catchments." Water Resources Series Technical Report #137. University of Washington. Dept. of Civil Engineering. Seattle, WA. Watershed Protection Techniques Vol. 3, No. 2 January 2000 Technical Note 108 Can Urban Soil Compaction Be Reversed? Soil compaction appears to be an inevitable result of current construction practices (see Technical Note 107). The key question is whether it is possible to reverse soil compaction. Numerous soil scientists have evaluated practices that can avoid compaction during construction or reverse it after it occurs (Table 108.1). These practices include selective grading, special construction equip- ment, reforestation, mechanical loos- ening, and the use of soil amend- ments. This note reviews what is cur- rently known about how well these practices work and evaluates their potential as a stormwater management strategy in urban watersheds. The consensus among soil scientists is that alleviating urban soil compaction is a very hard job. Indeed, Randrup (1998) notes that once a soil is compacted, it is extremely difficult to restore its origi- nal structure, particularly if the compaction extends several feet below the surface. The only truly effective tech- nique for avoiding compaction is prevention. gatw..11,21 :ag. W3' '.i.7liAlr: :i ILVi'I.i^ Z11^- ' Techniques to Avoid Compaction During Construc- tion The traditional remedy for soil compaction has been to require contractors to loosen soil by tillage, ripping or other techniques before lawns are estab- lished (much as a farmer plows a field). However, Randrup (1998) could find no significant difference in soil bulk density between Danish construction sites that had been loosened and those that had not. Similarly, Paterson and Bates (1994) found that tilling resulted in only a minor improvement in compaction in urban soils in Washington, D.C. (See Table 108.1). Another common technique for avoiding soil compaction is the practice of selective grading, where only the most critical portions of the site are mass graded, and the remainder of the site is cleared but not graded. Again, neither Randrup (1998) nor Lichter and Lindsay (1994) were able to detect any improve- ment in soil bulk density in the selectively graded construction sites. These soils still experienced ex- tensive compaction by construction equipment, stockpiling and vehicle traffic. The only soils where compaction was prevented were areas that were fenced to exclude all construction activity. In the past several decades, specialized equip- ment has been developed to minimize compaction (e.g., terralifts, and subsoil excavators). Rolf (1994) detected a modest improvement in bulk density Table 108.1: Reported Activities That Restore or Decrease Soil Bulk Density iecrease`in Bulk Densi' (gms /cc) Tilling of Soil Specialized Soil "Looseninc .05to0.15 Soil Amendmen Compost Amendment Randrup, 1998 and Lichter and Lindsey, 1994 Patterson and Bates19 Kolsti et al., 1995 Reforestation 0.25 to 0.35 See Technical Note 107 666 Watershed, Protection ..Techniques'. Vol. 3;, No. 2 • January. 2000 Technical Notes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CUMULATIVE RAINFALL, IN CENTIMETERS Figure 108.1: Cumulative Rainfall Versus Runoff Coefficients for Different Lawn Age Groups (0.05 to 0.15 gm/cc) when this specialized equipment was used at several Swedish construction sites, com- ared to traditional construction equipment. Even so, specialized construction equipment still resulted in it compaction at the site. Based on current research, it appears that the best construction techniques are only capable of preventing about a third of the expected increase in bulk density during construction. Further, it is evident that the only truly effective technique for avoiding compaction is prevention, i.e., setting limits of disturbance that are capable of physically excluding all construction traffic from portions of a site. Techniques to Reverse Soil Compaction After Construc- tion Once soil is compacted, is there anything that can be done to reverse the process? Many natural processes act to loosen up soil, such as freezing /thawing, particle sorting, earth worm activity, root penetration and the gradual buildup of organic matter. Often, however, these processes take decades to work, and operate primarily within the first foot or so of soil. In addition, many of these natural processes are effectively turned off when soil compaction becomes severe (i.e., bulk density greater than 1.7) because water, plant roots and soil fauna simply cannot penetrate the dense soil matrix and get to work. There is some evidence that the bulk density of sidential lawn soils does gradually recover over sev- eral decades. Legg et al. (1996) monitored the soil and runoff properties of 20 residential lawns in Madison, Wisconsin that ranged in age from one to 70 years. They found that newly established lawns (less than three years old) had the highest bulk density and lowest organic matter content of all the lawns sampled. Subsequent analysis indicated that these younger lawns produced significantly more runoff than their older counter- parts (Figure 108.1). As lawns grew older, bulk den- sity declined modestly and the amount of organic matter increased in the first foot of the soil profile. It was speculated that root penetration, earthworms, and general soil building created more macro pores, and contributed to the improvement in bulk density and soil quality over time. Another long -term approach for restoring com- pacted urban soils is reforestation. Trees and shrubs gradually build soil structure through root penetra- tion, leaf fall, macro pores and associated soil fauna. However, this process may take decades to occur, and usually requires a helping hand in urban watersheds. For example, establishing trees in compacted urban soils often requires the excavation of larger and deeper tree pits filled with special soil mixes to allow tree roots to flourish. Soil Restoration Through Soil Amendments A quicker technique for reducing soil compac- tion involves amending the soil with organic matter that has a low bulk density, such as compost, fly ash, or peat. Patterson and Bates (1994) found that amend- ments of sintered fly ash were able to decrease bulk density by 0.17 gms /cc over a 22 -year period on soil test plots on the heavily used Mall in Washington, D.C. Other researchers have reported decreases in bulk density of as much as 0.30 gms /cc when compost was incorporated into glacial till soils in the Pacific North- west (Kolsti et al., 1995). Clearly, the compost amend- ment technique shows promise in reducing compac- tion in urban soils, and has recently received a great deal of attention as a potential practice for reducing stormwater runoff problems at the site level. Much of the work in this area has been conducted in the Pacific Northwest, and is focused on incorporating compost amend- ments for new or existing resi- dential lawns. The compost amendment practice is fairly simple, and is best started in the very early spring or early fall, during rela- tive dry conditions. For an existing lawn, it begins with a soil test to determine existing bulk density for the yard. If the test indicates that soils are compacted, the next step involves deep tillage of at least the top foot of soil, using a rototiller or ripper. After the sod has had a few months to decompose, compost is incorporated into the soil at the volumetric ratio of one part compost to two parts loose soil (or three to four inches over the lawn). As a rule of thumb, about The compost amendment technique shows promise in reducing compaction. Watershed Protection Techniques • Vol. 3, No.2 January 2000 Technical Notes ten cubic yards of compost are needed per 1,000 square feet of lawn that is amended. Helpful specifications on determining the proper amount of compost are provided in Chollak and Rosenfeld (1998), as well as guidance on selecting compost of the right source and age. It may also be neces- sary to add dolomitic lime at a rate 100 lbs /1,000 square feet to control acid- ity. After compost amendment, grass is then reestablished by seeding or sodding. The process for amending compost into new lawns is slightly different; more detailed information can be found in Chollak and Rosenfeld (1998) and McDonald (1999). Compost amendment can also provide benefits for the lawn owner. „i, While compost amendment seems like an ideal practice, there are a number of situations where it is not feasible. These include sites that have steep slopes, a high water table, wet saturated soils, or downhill slope toward the house foundation (these areas are usually are poor candidates for a traditional lawns, as well). In addition, deep tillage within three feet of the drip line of trees and shrubs should be avoided. The cost to install a compost amended lawn on a new residential lawn is about 72 cents per square foot, according to Chollak and Rosenfeld (1998), but can drop to 66 cents per square foot if applied across all the lawns in a new subdivision. For a typical quarter -acre lawn, the cost of installing a compost- amended lawn is about $7,200, including labor, equipment rental, com- post and hydro- seeding. This is about twice the cost of traditional methods to establish a new lawn (Chollak and Rosenfeld, 1998). However, the cost of compost amendment drops to about 20 cents per square foot if labor is excluded (assuming compost is available at $12 /cy, delivered, rental of tiller /spreader, soil test, lime and grass seed). Thus, if a homeowner were to do it himself, the cost of amending an existing quarter acre lawn might run about $2,200, with the time investment of two or three weekends. A faster and less costly compost amendment prac- tice has been recently introduced in the Pacific North- west. It involves aeration of existing soil (but not deep tillage), followed by the placement of about three inches of compost over the surface of the lawn in the fall. The lawn is then seeded in the spring. Initial results indicate that this simplified practice produces good turf, but the hydrologic benefits have yet to be quan- tified. If future monitoring indicates that this simpli- fied practice works, it will sharply reduce the costs and effort for the individual homeowner to restore his or her yard. Benefits of Soil Compost Amendments A number of recent research studies have explored the potential hydrologic benefits of compost - amended soils. Kolsti et al. (1995) monitored test plots of amended and unamended soils over ten storm events in Seattle, and reported that compost - amended soils reduced surface runoff by 29 to 50 %, depending on the amount and type of compost used. Even higher reduc- tions in lawn runoff (53 to 74 %) were predicted if compost amendments were implemented across a small watershed, according to amodel developed by Hieliema (1999). Chollak and Rosenfeld (1998) estimated that stormwater detention basin volumes could be reduced by 5 to 15% if compost amendments were incorporated into new subdivisions in glacial tills soils near Seattle, Washington. Compost amendment can also provide benefits for the lawn owner. For example, compost- amended lawns generally have a fraction of the summertime irrigation needs of a normal lawn. In addition, the organic matter in compost supplies meets all of the lawn's fertilization needs, at least for the first year (Landschoot, 1996). Grass also appears to grow better on compost- amended soils. Indeed, researchers have reported that compost - amended lawns exhibit more rapid turf coverage, denser root networks, greater rooting depths, lower bulk den- sity and higher organic matter (Harrison et al., 1996 and Kolsti et al., 1995). Compost Amendments as a Stormwater Management Strategy The compost amendment practice should be con- sidered an element of better site design, and could be a useful technique to reduce stormwater at the residen- tial lot level. It is likely that its benefits would be amplified in conjunction with lawns also designed to treat rooftop, driveway and sidewalk runoff. Several creative designs to integrate compost amendments with other on -site practices in residential areas are described in Konrad et al. (1995). Compost amend- ments could also be used to improve the performance of grass swales, biofilters and filter strips. Communi- ties may want to encourage developers to install com- post amendments during new lawn and landscape construction (possibly through stormwater credits). Compost amendments might also prove to be an effective tool for watershed restoration, particularly in watersheds where other stormwater retrofit options are not feasible. The cumulative hydrological benefits of restoring soil quality on hundreds of lawns, athletic fields, and vacant lots could potentially be significant. The critical management issue is determining how to deliver lawn and landscape compost amendment ser- vices to homeowners in a cost - effective manner across 668 Watershed Protection: Techniques • Vol:. 3; No -2. •. January: 2000 • TechnicaI Notes entire watershed. Communities may need to make ee compost and technical assistance available to achieve wider restoration of compacted soils in the urban landscape. Summary While the initial research on compost amended soils is promising, more research and demonstration are needed to more precisely define the stormwater management benefits of the practice. In particular, paired monitoring of the runoff and pollutant load from amended and unamended lawns should be a high priority. Further long term research is also needed to determine how long the benefits of compost amend- ments persist. For example, are compost amendments only needed once, or must they be repeated as the compost decomposes? What kind of lawn mainte- nance practices are needed to maintain the benefits of amended lawns? How should the compost amendment practice be adapted to suit conditions in other climatic regions of the country? Still, perhaps the greatest property of compost amendment is its potential to develop into a true homeowner management practice, particularly if a more simplified version can be developed. A home- owner gets the benefit of a better yard, and possibly a better watershed, for simply changing how he or she invests in lawn practices. —TRS Editor's Note: Thanks are extended to David McDonald, Phil Cohen and Chris Smith for their helpful review of an earlier draft of this note. Also, 1 plan to experiment with compost amendments to restore the soils on my own worn-out lawn. I'll let you know how it works out. Contacts: Phil Cohen: City of Redmond Public Works (206) -556 -2815 David McDonald: Seattle Public Utilities (206)- 684 -7650 • References: Amended With Compost. MS thesis. College of Engineering. University of Washington. Seattle, WA Kolsti, K, S. Burges, and B. Jensen. 1995. "Hydro- logic Response of Residential -scale Lawns on Till Containing Various Amounts of Compost Amendment." Water Resources Technical Report No. 147. University of Washington, Dept of Civil Engineering. Seattle, WA. Konrad, C., B. Jensen, S. Burges, and L. Reinelt. 1995. Onsite Residential Stormwater Man - agement Alternatives. Center for Urban Water Resources Management. University of Wash- ington. Seattle, WA. Landschoot, P. 1996. Using Compost to Improve Turf Performance. Pennsylvania State Uni- versity Cooperative Extension. University Park, PA. Legg, A. R. Bannerman, and J. Panuska. 1996. "Variation in the Relation of Rainfall to Run- off From Residential Lawns in Madison, Wis- consin, July and August, 1995." U.S. Geologi- cal Survey Water Resources Investigation Report 96 -4194. With the Wisconsin Depart- ment of Natural Resources. Madison, WI. Lichter, J. and P. Lindsay. 1994. "Soil Compaction and Site Construction: Assessment and Case Studies." pp. 126 -130 in The Landscape Be- low Ground. Proceedings of International Workshop on Tree Root Development in Ur- ban Soils. International Society of Arboriculture. Champaign, Illinois. McDonald, D. 1999. Ecologically Sound Lawn Care for the Pacific Northwest: Findings From Scientific Literature and Recommendations From Turf Professionals (draft). City of Seattle Public Utilities. Patterson, J. and C. Bates. 1994. "Long -term, Light- weight Aggregate Performance as Soil Amend- ments." pp. 149 -156. In The Landscape Below Ground. Proceedings of International Work- shop on Tree Root Development in Urban Soils. International Society of Arboriculture. Champaign, Illinois. Chollak, T. and Rosenfeld, R. 1998. Guidelines for Landscaping with Compost - amended Soils. Pre- pared for City of Redmond Public Works. Redmond, WA. 60 pp. available at http: // depts.washington.edu/cuwrm/ Harrison, B, C. Henry. M. Grey and D. Xue. 1996. Field Test of Compost Amendment to Reduce Nutrient Runoff. University of Washington. College of Forest Resources. Hielema, E. 1999. Hydrologic Simulation of the Klahanie Catchment, King County, Washington, With and Without a Landscape Consisting of Soil Randrup, T. 1998. "Soil Compaction in and Con- struction Sites." pp. Land- scape Below Ground. II. Proceedings of Inter- national Workshop on Tree Root Develop- ment in Urban Soils. International Society of Arboriculture. Champaign, Illinois. Rolf, K. 1994. "Soil Compaction and Loosening Effects on Soil Physics and Tree Growth." pp. 131 -146 in The Landscape Below Ground. Proceedings of International Workshop on Tree Root Development in Urban Soils. Inter- national Society of Arboriculture. Champaign, Illinois. Watershed Protection Techniques Vol. 3, No. 2 January 2000 A. illu Fl• This intro grass ecosy the ment are consi turfy GRA past sive s devel is in proce Di MAN cesses thoro chapt growt emph on th turfgr and c of gr compel the a ences gatio and qualit guide A ch meth tions chapt yield of to i (contli 106 THE TURFGRASS ENVIRONMENT used for soils. Particle density (PD) is the density of dry, solid soil particles. It averages 2.65 g /cc. Bulk density (BD) is the dry weight of an undisturbed volume of soil. A well - structured, fine- or medium- textured soil will have an abundance of large and small pores, and its bulk density will be low compared to the same soil in a compacted state. If a soil could be so com- pacted that virtually all pore spaces were removed, bulk density would equal particle density. Comparisons of the bulk densities of different soils may not provide reliable indices for deter- mining their suitability for growing plants. Sands have predomi- nantly large pores; yet, their bulk densities are high because of the relatively large mass of solids making up these media. For example, a bulk density of 1.5 g /cc may indicate a rather com- pacted loam soil with insufficient large pores for drainage. How- ever, in a coarse sand of the same bulk density, aeration would not be a limiting factor in plant growth, but water retention might be. Within soil type, bulk density values are valuable for assessing the physical condition of a soil. Soil porosity can also be determined from bulk density: percent porosity = 100 - (PD X 100) A loam soil with a bulk density of 1.3 would thus have 49 percent pore spaces: 1.30 100 - ( X 100) = 49 percent 2.65* The percent pore space is only a measure of total porosity and does not directly indicate the distribution of different size pores. Within a particular soil type, however, the percent porosity can provide a reasonable assessment of pore size dis- tribution if a sufficient bank of information exists to compare plant growth response to different soil porosities. SOIL MOISTURE The importance of soil structure and density lies in their influence upon the number and size of pores and the conse- quent movement of water and air within the soil. Water drains rapidly from large (aeration) pores due to gravitational force. This is called gravitational water (Figure 4.16). The remaining water is retained as thin films on the surfaces of soil particles and as wedges where two or more particles come together. To *PD of soil particles averages 2.65 g /cc. EDAPHIC ENVIRONMENT 107 Saturated Soil Capillary (available & unavailable) Water Unavailable Water Gravitational Water Decreasing Soli Moisture Dry Soil Figure 4.16. Illustration of different types of soil water. Gravitational water drains from the large (aeration) pores, while capillary water is held as films on soil surfaces. absorb this water, plants must overcome forces of adhesion and cohesion that hold water in the soil. Adhesion is the attraction between soil surfaces and water; cohesion is the attraction be- tween water molecules. The portion of retained water that plant roots can absorb is called available water. When water films are reduced in thickness the attraction of the soil for water be- comes greater, and eventually plants can no longer secure enough water to satisfy their needs. The tightly held water that is essentially unavailable to plants is simply called unavailable water. A well- structured soil will release enough water in response to gravity so that aeration porosity is adequate to sustain healthy plants. The water content of the soil following drainage of the aeration pores is called field capacity and the air content is called aeration capacity. These are not precise values but are useful as indices of soil structure for a given soil. In a poorly structured soil, removed water may not be replaced by air because of soil shrinkage. Such soils form massive clods with large cracks instead of friable granules. The thickness of a water film at which plants can no longer absorb sufficient water to sustain growth is about the same for all soil types. However, the water content, measured in grams of water per gram of dry soil, at which this occurs varies among soils because of large differences in total surface area. When plants growing in a particular soil wilt irreversibly, the soil is said to be at its permanent wilting point, and the amount of water remaining in the soil is called the permanent wilting percentage. This amount ranges from 1 to 2 percent for sandy A.J. illust Floy This pr introduc grass ecc ecosystere the prov ment. are used consisten turfgrass GRASS A past pub' sive sumrr develope4 is inform processes • Divide MANAG cesses, a thorough chapters growth ai emphasize on the tax turfgrasses and cultur of grasses componen the atmos ences that gation. and susta quality ar guide to A chapter methods tions whil chapter on yield meth of turfgras 108 THE TURFGRASS ENVIRONMENT soils to 25 to 30 percent for fine - textured (clayey) soils.' Thus, a measure of soil water content cannot serve as a guide to a plant's soil water requirement, but a good relationship exists be- tween a plant's water needs and the work required to remove a unit of water from the soil. Water potential (i ,) is an expres- sion of the energy status of soil water relative to pure, free water. Soil - adsorbed water is not capable of doing as much work as pure, free water; thus, its energy, or water potential, is lower. Differences in water potential between two locations in a soil, called the water potential gradient, provide a force that causes water to flow from locations of higher to lower water potential. Soil water conductivity is an expression of the ease with which the soil conducts water. In compacted soils, conductivity is low because of high resistance to flow. Well - structured soils conduct water more rapidly. Where a plant is pulling water from the soil immediately surrounding its roots, replenishment of this root zone soil moisture is dependent upon: (a) the water poten- tial gradient between the root zone soil and a location in the soil where water is available and (b) the conductivity of the soil. In a saturated soil, water potential near the soil surface approaches zero. As the soil drains, water potential becomes progressively lower (more negative). Water movement in satu- rated and unsaturated soils should be considered as two distinct processes. Saturated flow occurs when all or most of the pores are filled with water. It takes place through large pores and, thus, is most rapid in coarse - textured soils. The principal force acting upon the water is gravity, and the direction of flow is primarily downward. If the number of large pores decreases suddenly at a given soil depth, downward movement is re- stricted, and water may accumulate above the interface where the two media meet, resulting in a temporary water table. This occurs in sand or thatch overlying loam soil, or with a compact subsoil. Unsaturated water flow occurs in soils in which the large pores are not filled with water. The rate of unsaturated flow depends upon the thickness of water films surrounding soil particles; thicker water films allow faster flow rates than thinner films, due to the differences in water potential. Thus, water moves faster in moist soils than in dry soils. Unsaturated flow proceeds in any direction, irrespective of gravitational force. 'Taylor, S.A. and G.L. Ashcroft, Physical Edaphology, (San Francisco, Cali- fornia: W.H. Greeman and Company, 1972), p. 8. EDAPHIC ENVIRONMENT 109 The so- called wick action or capillary flow of water from lower to upper soil locations is actually unsaturated flow. Where the continuity of water films is disrupted, as at the interface between a fine - textured soil and an underlying coarse - textured soil, unsaturated flow is slowed, or may stop alto- gether. This can result in an accumulation of water, called a perched water table, above the interface. Water will not move across the interface until the water potential in the above soil builds to a level sufficient to overcome the attraction between the water and the fine - textured soil. When sufficient water potential has built up from continued downward flow toward the interface, water will enter the coarse- textured soil and be conducted rapidly away. This principle can be applied to turf soils in which layers exist either by design or by error. Consider a fine - textured soil that has been modified by incorporation of sand or other coarse amendments. If the incorporation is not uniform, but results in subsurface layers of coarse material, water flow within the pro- file can be disrupted. On the other hand, where a layer of coarse sand has been intentionally positioned beneath finer - textured sand with some loam soil and organic amendments, a perched water table will develop following irrigation or rainfall. In this instance, the perched water table is desired to compen- sate for the low water retention of the fine sand. A USGA green is constructed in this fashion to combine the advantages of com- paction resistance and moisture retention in the root zone. Results are only satisfactory, however, where the design in- cludes a critical depth of the surface medium; a too - shallow sur- face layer will not drain properly, while a layer that is too deep will be too dry at the surface. This can be illustrated using a rectangular household sponge measuring 5 by 3 by 1 inches. When the sponge is saturated and positioned with its 5 -inch and 3 -inch sides in the horizontal plane, very little water drains out. Turning the sponge 90 degrees to position the 3 -inch side verti- cally results in more drainage. Rotating the sponge so that its 5 -inch side is vertical results in still further drainage. This demonstration shows the relationship between height of the water column and water retention within the pore volume of the sponge. Cutting the sponge horizontally into three equal sections while it is still in the 5 -inch vertical orientation and squeezing each section to remove internal moisture would reveal that the uppermost section was driest and the lowermost section was wettest. Thus, the distribution of moisture within (continued ar', co tur pas siVe devel !, ie inf roces Dvi NA ssAes, oroug apterwth s hasiiz the tax &'asses cuitura 'asses. orients tmosph that afi cut ti ustainin are sh 0 sod p ter on or rn l,le m Props ods fo , Ses nee 110 THE TURFGRASS ENVIRONMENT the sponge is not uniform, but moisture is predominantly within the lower levels. The sponge analogy facilitates understanding of some soil the water phenomena. In a USGA green, the sponge represents p th the surface soil medium, and the air, or "free space, sponge represents the coarse sand or gravel layer underlying the surface medium. A workable greens design depends upon rather precise application of principles of soil physics. settled depth (depth after soil settling) of the surface medium must be correct, and the physical composition of the medium must be such that air and moisture within the turfgrass root zone are sufficient to sustain growth. The USGA green and other designs are discussed further in Chapter 9. SOIL AERATION The process by which soil air is replaced by atmospheric air is called soil aeration. Soil air differs from atmospheric air in that it has higher concentrations of carbon dioxide and water vapor but less oxygen. These differences are due to the con - sumption of oxygen and production of carbon dioxide by soil organisms. The magnitude of these differences depends upon the rate of gaseous exchange between the atmosphere and soil. Aeration is brought about by processes of diffusion and mass flow. Diffusion is the movement of gases through air - filled pores from regions of higher to lower concentration of the gas, and is proportional to air- filled porosity. Diffusion is low in com- pacted soils because of reduced pore size and number and dis- continuity of soil pores. Similarly, diffusion is low in wet soils because of the absence or reduction of air - filled pores and the extremely low diffusion rate of air in water. Mass flow occurs as a result of 1. Expansion and contraction of soil gases due to tempera- ture and barometric pressure changes 2. Soil air removal, through precipitation and irrigation, , and replacement, as water is removed by drainage, plant and evaporation 3. Wind action causing air to be forced into the soil at some locations and pulled out at others. Relative to diffusion, mass flow is considered to have a minor influence on soil aeration. Poorly aerated soils are often deficient in oxygen. Oxygen is utilized by plant roots and soil organisms for respiration, and EDAPHIC ENVIRONMENT 111 of carbon dioxide is evolved. ohe Without soil, adequate oxygen levels de line gases between the atmosphere and carbon dioxide o i levels reduced absorption nutrients and water by plant roots, since they must have suffici�ne oxygen respiration actgvity for de- energy necessary for processes. composing organic matter is also inhibited in oxygen- deficient itro- soils, as is the bacterial oxidation of ammonia to nitrate nN20 gen. Denitrification, the conversion of nitrate to N2 gases, occurs in persistently wet soils, resulting in a loss of soil nitrogen to the atmosphere. Turfgrass communities growing in compacted or p ersis- tently wet soils are often invaded adaptation of plants to poorly reflects, in part, the differential P grow under aerated soils. Some weed possess typically transmit foliar- absorbed conditions may p absorbed oxygen to their roots to satisfy respiratory require - man. Thus ass cles through their ability to 1persist under ethese many y turfgr conditions. SOIL TEMPERATURE Many of the physical, chemical, and biological events that take place in soil are strongly temperature adependent. Soil conditions tem- perature affected by: (a) (i.e., re is, in and solar radiation), (i.e., air temperature, moisture, wind, (b) thermal absorption and nfluenceston vity soil f temmperature he (v) plant cover. Atmospheric been discussed in an earlier section of this chapter. Thermal absorption is a function of the color, moisture level, and organic matter content of the soil. Generally, darker soils, high in organic matter, are a absorption occurs absorbing as heat from the atmosphere. drier soils, since the heat ( neces- sary to raise ep ratureof1gram of a substance by 1 °C) humus is 1.0, 0.2, and 0.4, for water, dry mineral soil, and dry respectively. Therefore, as the water content of a given soil increases, the amount of energy from solar radiation or at- mospheric air required to raise its temperature increases air- prop ortionately. Changes in soil a in the soil. eSandy soils warm and cool at moisture -solid bala a faster rate than clayey soils, due to generally higher aeration • w April 19, 2000 To: Marty From: Cathy Wyland 763- 792 -6101 Re: City Newsletter — deadline April 28 Your articles for the city newsletter should be in my box at city hall by noon on Friday, April 28. Suggested items include an Earth Day summary along with photos. I will also be taking a few photos on Earth Day. Please call me with any questions. Thanks! • Memo To: Lino Lakes Environmental Board From: Marty Asleson Date: 04/19/00 Re: Community Service Award Nominations Please find attached a flyer for the Lino Lakes Community Service Award. The City is asking for one volunteer from each Board to help select the nominations for the recipient of this award. • Page 1 • • Lino Lakes Community Service Award This award is designed to recognize individuals who have made a significant contribution(s) to the community. Contributions could come in — but not limited to - the areas of community service, enhancing the environment or quality of life, volunteerism, lifetime service. The Director of Administration will supervise the program. Nominating Committee The committee would consist of one council member, and one member of each of our four advisory boards. The make -up of the committee would change each year (part of our annual appointment process). This committee would evaluate the applications and select two recipients. Nominations Both the nominator and nominee must be Lino Lakes residents. The application would consist of an essay. The essay would include: > a brief biography of the nominee, ➢ a list of accomplishments, > rationale for choosing this individual to receive the award. Award Recipients would receive a plaque, which would be presented at a council meeting by the mayor on behalf of the community. The names of the recipients will also be placed on a plaque at city hall. An article highlighting the winners of the Lino Lakes Community Service Award would be published in fall newsletter. Time Line A newsletter article requesting applications will be published in the summer and fall city newsletter (the last weeks of May & August) . An article will be placed in the quad press as well as a notice on the government channel. Deadline for receiving applications will be September 8. The nominating committee will meet prior to 22 September to consider applications. Awards would be presented at the second meeting in September (25 September) of each year. 8 march 2000 / j:/ citycouncil/linolakescommunityserviceaward • City of Lino Lakes Environmental Board Meeting Lino Lakes City Hall May 31, 2000 6:30 PM Agenda Call To Order/Pass Sign -In Sheet 2. Approval of Minutes Approval of Agenda 4. Citizen Comments 5. Environmental Board Business A. New Members B. DNR Project C. Environmental Education Packet D. Letter of Recommendation/Brauer &AES E. PCA Volunteer Groundwater Monitoring and Assessment Program 6. Project Review A. GM Development/Apollo Dr. CUP /Stockpiles 7. Project Updates A. Behms/Rice Lake Estates Park Prairie Projects. B. Clearwater Creek III Environmental Updates C. Forestry Updates C. Solid Waste/Recycling Updates 8. Other Discussion Items 9. Close Meeting and Confirm Next Meeting Date ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MARCH 29, 2000 CITY OF LINO LAKES MINUTES DATE : March 29, 2000 TIME STARTED : 6:30 P.M. TIME ENDED : 8:40 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Maurine Davidson, Amy Donlin, J.P. Houchins, Rod Kukonen, Scott Lanyon, and Teresa O'Connell MEMBERS ABSENT : None. Staff members present: Environmental Coordinator Marty Asleson, and Community Development Director Brian Wessell. CALL TO ORDER Chair Houchins called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chair Houchins requested corrections on Page 5 Solid Waste Update and to correct highway 25 correction on page 2, Project Funding Up comments made by Asleson under itch 25. Kukonen requested a e spelling of Linda Waite- Smith. Davidson moved to approve the Feb,``'" eeting minutes, as revised above. O'Connell seconded the motion % • c 3 unanimously. APPROVAL OF AGEND, Asleson noted the att project review be cons considered following A hie Lessard representing Dairy Queen and requested that er in the meeting. Chair Houchins asked that item 6B be ov.+` of the Agenda. The Commission agreed. Davidson added item 7A comments on Sustainable Housing. Chair Houchins added 7B, Review of Goals; 7C, Environmental Board Vacancies; and 7D Elect Chair and Vice Chair. The agenda was approved as revised above. PROJECT REVIEW B. Dairy Queen — Asleson explained this would be the second building proposed for the west side of I -35E in the Lino Lakes Business District. The site is just south of the 1 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MARCH 29, 2000 Tschida Convenience Store and the applicant is Don Rolf of Archnet, Inc. The proposed lot area is 29,223 square feet and the required "green area" is 30% or 8,767 square feet. The proposal indicates 37% green area or 10,945 square feet. Surface water for the Dairy Queen will be diverted via storm sewer pipe to a proposed ponding area adjacent to Rice Creek. There are no zone - one /zone two areas on the site. There are no significant ecological delineations on the site. Soils are classified as BD (moderate infiltration rate [drained]/ high runoff potential [undrained]) and B (moderate infiltration rate). The LW soil classification to the south is a loamy soil type. Site elevations gradually slope to Clearwater Creek. Davidson asked if the revised landscape plan has been submitted. Asleson stated it has not and that could be placed as a condition of approval, if desired. Wessell noted this project will be considered by the Planning C ion on April 12, 2000 and the City Council on May 8, 2000 so it is not possib to dela onsideration. He suggested that a contingency approval be considered, if de' Asleson presented the proposed ponding plan for th explained how drainage will be accommodated. C will get from one pond to the next. Asleson e advised that something similar in nature is being p e freeway and asked how the water here "i' e culverts in place and d for the Dairy Queen site. Donlin stated she would like a more cle advised that the Watershed Distric Dairy Queen site. Donlin stated her concern advised that the Dairy stated her support f ion of the drainage pattern. Asleson approve the proposed drainage for the re due to the intensity of lighting. Lessard opose ' to use shoebox lighting in the parking lot. Donlin hoebox lighting. Lanyon concurred. Davidson mod to app the revised Dairy Queen site plan subject to the applicant's continued wor on the landscape plan and lighting plan and subject to input from City staff • of r groups as applicable. Lanyon seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimou CITIZEN COMMENTS No citizens were present for comment. Wessell noted the presence of Julie Farnum who is present to address item 5F. Chair Houchins asked that item 5F be considered next. The Commission agreed. 2 • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MARCH 29, 2000 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD BUSINESS F. Draft Tree Preservation Ordinance — Asleson presented the draft Tree Preservation Ordinance, noting a consultant was hired to assist staff with this ordinance. This ordinance would replace the tree protection language in the Shade Tree Ordinance which implied the need to conformity with the Tree Preservation Policy that was approved some time ago. He explained the new ordinance would provide for a tree replacement schedule and includes language that would integrate with the City's Environmental Management Handbook. Julie Farnum, TKDA, presented an overview and background of the City's desire to update the tree preservation ordinance to provide clarity and organization. She reviewed her effort on this task as well as to address the landscape issues. Farnum stated the initial process is to start with the ordinance currently in place to assure She noted this proposed ordinance would address developme public property, and address how to deal with a developer the City has already done a lot of work on the Environ that she would like to integrate that into this docum the ordinance is straight forward and offered to ans s no duplication. e property, not erty. She stated and explained ed the organization of After a page by page review, the following change made to the Tree Preservation and Replacement Ordinance: • Page 1, Section I, third bul from "Enhance Development" to "Enhanced Quality of D • Page 2, Section II ion of "critical damage" • Page 4, Sec II A, E .tain legal opinion regarding tree preservation on individual sin amily ots • Page 4, , B, 3, add words "and reviewed by the Environmental Board, advisory '°oard and the City Council" • Page 5, Section III, C, 1, c), address leverage the City has with a builder of single - family units in violation with their Tree Preservation Plan • Page 8, Section IV, C, 3, add language indicating the Tree Fund will be used for "acquisition of plant materials or environmental restoration" • Page 9, Section V, A, 3, add language to indicate: "permission of the City or sustains critical damage, as determined by the City Forester, the applicant shall replace each tree..." 3 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MARCH 29, 2000 • Page 10, Section V, B, 4, change "reasonable timeframe" to indicate "within 60 calendar days" Consensus was reached to direct staff to make the above noted revisions which the Environmental Board will review and consider at their next meeting. A. Land Use Planning Workshop — Asleson noted the conference information contained in the meeting packet and asked members to let him know if they are interested in attending. Kukonen advised of what this workshop will entail and volunteered to attend. O'Connell stated she is also interested and will notify staff if her schedule will permit her to attend. B. GIS Agreement — Asleson presented the draft GIS agreement and draft joint powers agreement for use of Digital Parcel Base Map Database. He ex agreement is to give Anoka County public agency GIS users and street GIS database. He stated this is being provided the purpose of the pgrade of parcel onal item. In response to Chair Houchins, Asleson explained t i atio an only be used in- house and not sold or shared with other agencies. Wessell stated Asleson has provided leader City's engineering staff is interested in t GIS Technician staff position for Year requested a consulting budget to c incorporate GIS capability into will be in place to research t consideration. ea of GIS information and the e explained that he had requested a was cut from the budget so he ssessment and determine how to best e advised that by May 1, 2000, a task force pare a recommendation for City Council Donlin stated her c :; =hatR atershed issues in neighboring communities also be addressed. C. DNR Project �: �'sleson reported that the DNR Smart Growth project went to the City Council wi ' a re ommendation that the Planning & Zoning Commission review it which will occur 4R April 12, 2000. He noted the recently published newspaper article about Hugo. D. Earth Day — O'Connell stated she has been collecting a lot of information for Earth Day which will be held on April 22, 2000. Asleson advised of the planned events including efforts by Anoka County, Mn/DOT, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, and residents. Chair Houchins suggested the Environmental Board offer GIS demonstrations, show the Management Plan, and related maps including an ecological map. Lanyon asked if the Earth Day event should also be used for education of property owners about environmental issues such as the ecological impact of mowing down to the water's 4 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MARCH 29, 2000 • edge. Asleson advised that the topic of preservation will occur. Chair Houchins stated he • • will ask the Watershed District to also address that aspect as part of their presentation. E. Arbor Day — Asleson announced that Arbor Day is scheduled for Friday, May 5, 2000 at Lino Lakes Elementary School and advised of activities during that event. He urged members to attend and participate, if possible. F. Draft Tree Preservation Ordinance — This item was considered earlier in the meeting. G. Environmental Education / Draft Resident Information — Asleson noted the rough draft environmental education / information handout for residents moving into the Clearwater Creek III development. He noted there were many buffers and open spaces designed into the third phase of the Clearwater Creek development. One of the development requirements was that the developer would draft . �..% . onmental education and informational handout for residents. Asleson ed for' Board's input. Following review of the draft, members requested the f ns: • Include comment in opening paragraph to indica the t is being guaranteed open space similar to a golf course except he olf c rse is replaced by high quality natural areas • Advise resident that they can't impa. $'into • lic places • Encourage resident to be a good ste • Page 1, 4th paragraph, last se state: "Preservation of mature wooded sites will benefit wildlife • • g isual diversity to the development." • Page 2, 3rd paragraph, 3 vis " o state "Water running off lawns may carry nutrients and pestici• ay adjacent or natural communities located..." • Create a separate •, � i "Dos" and "Don'ts" in bullet format including information on _ • epos :� of fertilizer and comment about environmental impact of mowing ns down to the water's edge • Create sep and 9 addressing how to create a healthy lawn Consensus was r ched to hold a future discussion regarding what should be included in an informational cket for new homeowners. PROJECT REVIEW - continued A. Lino Lakes Bank — Asleson reported the proposal is to locate the Lino Lakes bank in the Lino Lakes Business Center on the east side of I -35E. The survey indicates a 1.43 acre parcel. He advised the surface water from this area is diverted to the retention / greenway area to the south. Soils classifications include B (moderate infiltration rate), a hydric soil classification including MU (muck), and a CU (cut and fill) area to the south. Asleson stated his understanding that wetland mitigation is considered in the ponding area to the south and there is no significant ecological delineations on this site. He recommended approval of the plan with landscape plan materials review. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MARCH 29, 2000 Lanyon asked who is responsible for assuring conditions of the landscape plan are met. Asleson stated staff is responsible. With regard to the east side of Lino Lakes, Chair Houchins commented on the importance of the Chain Of Lakes as a natural resource. He noted the community is relying on sending drainage from this site to a detention pond which would typically remove 50% of the nutrients. He stated if a detention pond is located next to Clearwater Creek, it would mean there would be infiltration of some materials into the Creek. He urged the City to assure appropriate measures to better protect Clearwater Creek. Wessell concurred with Chair Houchins and stated staff will further address this issue during their staff meeting. Lanyon moved to approve the Lino Lakes Bank plan subject review (standard and appropriate site materials), irrigation conditions as established by City staff. Davidson seco unanimously. B. Dairy Queen — This item was considered earl OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Comments on Sustainable Co outdoor lighting and alternative be invited to make a present Davidson advised that Association will be about the publication. plan materials as, and standard Motion carried son advised of a presentation related to " the Board is interested, this person could meeting. able Lakes Workbook by the Minnesota Lakes Asleson stated staff will contact them to learn more B. Review of Go - ouchins stated he would like the Environmental Board to periodically revi th r identified goals. He advised of a comment he heard about the DNR planting Re Canary Grass. Discussion occurred about the best process to undertake short and long -term projects. Staff was asked to review maps of City property and identify a possible short-term project, including the one mentioned by Chair Houchins. Chair Houchins noted the goal to continue efforts of public education which will be discussed at the next meeting regarding a new resident handout. Chair Houchins noted the goal related to the green infrastructure within the City will be further defined by the DNR project. 6 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING MARCH 29, 2000 C. Environmental Board Vacancies - Chair Houchins noted a Environmental Board vacancy was created with Lori Frisk- Thompson's resignation. He advised that he will also be resigning from the Environmental Board which will create a second vacancy. He stated he will officially submit his resignation to the City Council at their next meeting. Discussion occurred regarding possible candidates. D. Elect Chair and Vice Chair - Following a brief discussion, Lanyon was nominated for the position of Chair and Davidson for the position of Vice Chair. The nomination carried unanimously. CLOSE MEETING AND CONFIRM NEXT MEETING DATE Chair Houchins adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m. The next meeting date will be April 26, 2000 Transcribed by: Carla Wirth TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 7 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 26, 2000 DATE TIME STARTED TIME ENDED MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT CITY OF LINO LAKES MINUTES : April 26, 2000 . 6:33 P.M. . 8:19 P.M. : Maurine Davidson, Amy Donlin, Rod Kukonen, Scott Lanyon, and Teresa O'Connell (arrived at 7:05 p.m.) : J.P. Houchins Staff Members Present: Environmental Coordinator Marty Asleson. CALL TO ORDER Acting Chair Lanyon called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Consensus was reached to table the approval of the min scheduled, Environmental Board Meeting. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Donlin added item 7E, Testing of Reside Davidson added item 7F, Letter of Acting Chair Lanyon added ite The agenda was approved as revised . ove. CITIZEN COMMENTS No citizens were present for comment. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD BUSINESS inki Water. n for Brower ADS. ng on New Members. , 2000 to the next A. Tree Preservation Ordinance — Asleson presented the second draft Tree Preservation Ordinance, which had been modified after the Board's review in March. He noted the City Attorney's response to legal questions and presented Julie Farnum to review changes that were made. Julie Farnum, TKDA, reviewed the following changes made to the Tree Preservation Ordinance: 1 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 26, 2000 ■ Addition of the definition of "critical damage" • Addition of the definition of "plantation" and replacement of "Schedule and Management of Plantation" as suggested by the DNR. • Addition of language to clarify the process and requirements for single - family versus larger developments. Regarding "Amount of security for single - family" on page 7, Farnum suggested if the Board desired some security they could initiate a performance security account as an incentive to single - family builders to comply. She noted she did not know if this suggestion was brought to the City Attorney's attention. Acting Chair Lanyon asked if Jeff Smyser had commented on this account. Asleson responded he had not, however, there are penalties if a tree is taken down or damaged as part of the building process. Donlin asked how this is policed. Asleson responded the operty is checked and if anything is seen it is enforced. Acting Chair Lanyon asked if Asleson would rec security. Farnum noted this would require Sta inspection, and return the money, and this could re Asleson responded Staff presently holds building inspections for new construction si this. Farnum reviewed page 9, sec Eagan applicants are info nothing is in writing. lection of a performance t th-'money, perform the a process that is not in place yet. dscaping and sodding, and for oted there is a process in place for cam on of Replacement Trees. She noted in h mitigation they are responsible for, however, Donlin asked what the option n° ould be to a developer that bought two acres for a Commercial Development and would want to clear the trees for tree replacement. Farnum responded the developer would be required to do landscaping. She advised that if this ordinance was to be taken literally, and the developer could not satisfy the mitigation, the City could waive the mitigation requirements. Donlin stated she would not want to waive mitigation requirements. She expressed concern that someone might pay the fine rather than replace trees. She stated she would like to have strong requirements for mitigation. Acting Chair Lanyon noted the flexibility has been removed from this ordinance and the way this is written now, mitigation must be done on site. Farnum responded that is what she understands from the City Attorney. She noted there are times when mitigation on a large development is quite substantial, and there is not enough space left to mitigate on site. 2 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 26, 2000 Asleson stated many things could be negotiated in the contract with the developer in regards to mitigation. Acting Chair Lanyon suggested the text on page 9, section B2 be changed to state if it is not possible to replace trees on site, the developer can negotiate with the City to complete that mitigation requirement. He suggested the Board come up with a recommendation for City Staff on what they would like considered for negotiation, and suggested these guidelines not be included in the ordinance, but act as a guideline for Staff. Farnum responded she is not comfortable speaking to the legality, and will consult the City Attorney. Farnum noted when developments come for review the Board will be seeing the developments as it goes through the process. At that point they can make a recommendation on the tree mitigation. She clarified mitigation on site is the first choice, however, there is some allowable removal of trees and some removal will not be considered significant. Donlin expressed concern with ws. might determine "significant ". Acting Chair Lanyon noted tree types ar spelled out on page 3. Acting Chair Lanyon asked if Section B, Page 9 noted if there is trouble with something, it wo negotiate. Farnum responded this would be aske the things this ordinance will hopefully do more careful site planning. Donlin expressed concern that developer might quickly eli Asleson responded this is time. refer to mitigation on site. He om -' ' ack to the City to he City Attorney. She noted one of e further negotiation and some were to be rigid rather than flexible, a cover stumps to hide the fact they existed. ce, happening only about one percent of the Donlin asked if this ordinance ould coincide with the Shade Tree Ordinance. Asleson responded it would be separate from the Shade Tree Ordinance. Farnum explained the ordinances address two different things. The Shade Tree Ordinance relates to public development, and this ordinance is specific to private property development. There is a clause, however, that talks about the relation to the other ordinance. Farnum reviewed page 10, item A3, additional language was included regarding tree removal to state "or sustains critical damage resulting in tree removal as defined herein, ". O'Connell arrived at 7:05 p.m. Donlin asked if they could add another species to the list of trees that should not be used as replacements listed at the top of page 10. Acting Chair Lanyon requested that boxelder be added to the list. 3 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 26, 2000 Acting Chair Lanyon stated after reviewing the draft, the following will be addressed: • Page 9, items B 1, B2, and B3 will be eliminated with the City Attorney to determine if this section could state "If on site mitigation is not possible, the developer to negotiate with City Staff." • Page 10, Boxelder to be added as a tree not to be used as a replacement. Davidson questioned if this should be approved at this time, as they are waiting for feedback from the City Attorney. Farnum questioned if the Board would still approve this if the City Attorney did not approve their changes. Davidson moved to recommend City Council approval of the Draft Tree Preservation Ordinance with the following changes: • Page 9, items Bl, B2, and B3 will be eliminated with the City Attorney to determine if this section could state "If on site mitigation is not possible, the developer to negotiate with City Staff." • Page 10, Boxelder to be added as a tree not to be u as a replacement. Kukonen seconded the motion. Motion carried A. Environmental Education Packet — Asleson pre Education Brochure for Clearwater Creek statement that can be included in the docu Acting Chair Lanyon suggeste the packet and see what ch accomplished at the next purpose statement. He and protects the investment houses moving along the buff the revised Environmental input regarding a purpose and time every year for the Board to revisit e `made. He asked if that could be on agreed and said it will be separate from this s is part of the Conservation Development Project eloper and City made in natural areas. There are some d areas and they are started getting concerned when they saw the buffer fences coming down. Kukonen questioned the statement "Wetland filter surface water runoff prior to discharge into s, protecting water quality." He suggested they recommend non - phosphorus lawn chemicals be used. Acting Chair Lanyon noted the following two points: • The fourth paragraph of the last page only states "Careful use of lawn chemicals will help minimize the potential for contaminants from entering the system ". He noted it does not help the homeowner with the meaning of careful. Careful use of lawn chemicals means not overusing, being careful about where they are applying it, and using the right chemicals, such as non - phosphorus. 4 • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 26, 2000 • The next paragraph states "no mowing or disposal of private yard waste such as leaves, grass clipping, and branches allowed ". He noted it does not say where to dispose of them. Acting Chair Lanyon recommended the information should be more helpful and not buried in the back of the packet. He suggested it be up front and highlighted as their recommendations. Kukonen suggested the brochure recommend composting for yard waste. Asleson stated he would work with Acting Chair Lanyon on refining a purpose statement for the brochure. C. DNR Project — Asleson explained he attended a meeting with the DNR regarding natural resource inventory and assessments to take place with Lino Lakes and the City of Hugo. He distributed the following two handouts from the Local Unit of Government Work Group: • Primary Activities & Products of Project / Schedul • Inventory & Assessment Activities & Products Asleson stated he will copy the Board with inf egarfling four different ways of Ecologial Restoration and noted many cities are st g to use GPS to identify their land. D. Community Service Award — Asleson ex, 'e• b "'e Community Service Award is designed to recognize individuals ade a significant contribution to the community. He reviewed the p ng such a nomination and explained a member of the Board is need sn e Community Service Award Committee. O'Connell volunteered o "on th:: ommittee. PROJECT REVIEW A. Behms/Rice Lakes Estates Park Prairie Projects — Asleson reviewed slides of Behms/Rice Lakes Estates Park Prairie Projects. Acting Chair Lanyon noted he had thought the Board would be expected to act on this project. He requested the Board not be expected to act on anything if they do not have materials by the time the agenda goes out. OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Solid Waste / Recycling Day - Asleson announced the Solid Waste / Recycling Day is scheduled for next weekend. The City could not obtain the Good Will due to the cost of bringing a truck in, however the Vietnam Vets will be present. 5 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 26, 2000 Asleson reviewed a letter and a certificate of appreciation from Anoka County. The County thanked the City for their efforts in reducing waste and recycling. Acting Chair Lanyon suggested the City newsletter publish the certificate. B. Earth Day Summary — Asleson presented slides of Earth Day and noted there were approximately 1,000 people present. Acting Chair Lanyon noted a discussion he had at Earth Day, which resulted in a question if the City has a website. Asleson responded they do not. Acting Chair Lanyon encouraged Staff to look into formulating a website, which would be very beneficial to the residents of the City, and a good way to advertise the City. C. Arbor Day — Asleson announced that Arbor Day is scheduled for May 5, 2000 and said he would inform the Board of the time, which would likely be 1:00 or 1:30. D. City News Letter — Asleson asked if the Board would like to include anything in the newsletter. Kukonen suggested an Earth Day summary. avidson suggested information on good lawn care and the use of low phosphorus lawn emicals. E. Testing of Residential Drinking Water - Donli , a ed sh -k.> concerns about the drinking water in the wells where she lives. S ► k; f the is a procedure to have the water tested. Asleson responded PCA has a volu " -r group study occurring. He will follow up with them and copy Donlin on t orma� he receives. Donlin suggested a test sampling be done from all corners and ©�� part of the City. F. Letter of Referral for Brower for Brower ADS. She reques included in the letter to t n volunteered to write a letter of referral bring any information they would like G. Standing on New Member ng Chair Lanyon asked the time line for new members. Asleson responded '` is would be done as soon as possible. Davidson noted the City Council would welcome letters of recommendation from the Board. O'Connel noted the deadline for applicants is Friday. CLOSE MEETING AND CONFIRM NEXT MEETING DATE Acting Chair Lanyon requested the Board to review the minutes from the March 29, 2000 meeting prior to the next meeting and to bring any comments on Brower ADS to the meeting. He requested Asleson to add Tree Mitigation Negotiations to the next agenda and asked the Board to bring any suggestions for Staff guidelines on this. Davidson suggested the Board review the existing landscaping packet prior to the next meeting. Asleson stated he would supply packets to the Board members that do not currently have one. Acting Chair Lanyon adjourned the meeting at 8:19 p.m. 6 • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING APRIL 26, 2000 The next meeting date will be May 31, 2000. Transcribed by: Carol Hamer TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.