Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/25/2004 Env Bd PacketCity of Lino Lakes Environmental Board Meeting August 25, 2004 6:30 p.m. AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. OPEN MIKE 5. ACTION ITEMS A. Speiser Acres, Preliminary Plat B. Parks, Natural Open Space /Greenways and Trail System Plan • 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Environmental Board Search B. Solid Waste Reports / County Advisory Committee Updates C. Goals /2004 and 2005 D. Other reports from Staff and Environmental Board 7. ADJOURN • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JULY 28, 2004 • DATE TIME STARTED TIME ENDED MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. • CITY OF LINO LAKES DRAFT MINUTES : July 28, 2004 . 6:31 P.M. . 9:19 P.M. : Barbara Bor, Barbara Bauman, Constance Grundhofer, Rod Kukonen, Teresa O'Connell, Mary Jo O'Dea, and Dennis Smith (arrived at 6:33 p.m.) : None : Environmental Coordinator Marty Asleson CALL TO ORDER Chair Kukonen called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES This item was postponed to the August 25, 2004 meeting. APPROVAL OF AGENDA • Discuss 6B after 7C. The Board approved the agenda as amended. OPEN MIKE No citizen comments were made. ACTION ITEMS A. Fox Den Acres/Royal Oaks Realty, Preliminary Plat Asleson reviewed the staff background and analysis. The Comprehensive Wetland Plan was mentioned to the developer. The wetlands would be evaluated, and the water treatment trains would be addressed. The soil boring infoiruation had become available, but only briefly reviewed by staff. The seasonally high water table in the Isanti Wet Soils would be determined by the engineers. Staff did note there was evidence of soil seepage, and Rice Creek Watershed District would be evaluating it. Asleson introduced Mike Black. Mr. Black indicated in the first plan he was asking for an extension of the MUSA line. The present plan was similar to the first plan, with 56 lots almost .5 acres 1 DRAFT MINUTES • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JULY 28, 2004 each instead of the previous 62 lots. The present plan met the City standards. He noted that Rice Creek Watershed District had a staffing shortage, so the process had slowed. Mr. Black inquired about the rationale for filling wetlands for lots. He explained the developer typically tried to avoid, minimize and then mitigate and admitted he was not rejecting the idea, but that he did not understand. He referred to the layout of staff recommendations of the site. The pink areas would be filled. With the recommended layout, Lot 4 would not be buildable due to setbacks. Chair Kukonen recommended buffering between the established neighborhoods and the new development. Bor indicated that Rice Creek was a piece, but in order to make the plan a win - win situation, it was worth the dialogue to form a better plan. Mr. Black responded that the present plan worked, and his concern had become the process. He assured the Board it would be a nice neighborhood, but for him time was very important. He expressed frustration with the controlled growth in the City. He inquired if the trail was a big issue. Asleson stated it was a co -issue with the greenway. Mr. Black questioned how he was going to reach consensus with the Army Corps of Engineers after the process with the City. Asleson explained all wetlands were not the same, because some could not be restored due to hydrologic changes. The goal was to protect the higher value wetlands and to expand open space that slated some lower value wetlands to be filled. He admitted that the plan was smaller scale than an example in Blaine, but there were similar issues. He assured Mr. Black that in that case they received approval from all agencies. Asleson further clarified that there was a need for the separation between the seasonal high water level and the water table. Conservation Development was a mechanism to restore certain areas. If water quality could be improved, he would make the recommendation. Mr. Black responded it could be possible to address those issues after the Rice Creek Watershed District meeting. He reiterated that all the recommendations the Board previously made were addressed. O'Connell inquired about an attempt to work with Saddle Club. Mr. Black answered that they had not looked at Saddle Club. Chair Kukonen questioned if there was a parks designation. Mr. Black responded that the City did not want a park. Asleson inquired about a greenway. Mr. Black stated they did not want an active recreation area. He had proposed an outlot for that use for the City. 2 DRAFT MINUTES • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JULY 28, 2004 Asleson stated the concern was the management of those areas. He admitted that the City was obtaining the greenways, but noted the trail would be public. An advantage would be the association would know they would continue to have the scenery. A second advantage would be that it would reduce the amount of stoim sewers for the developer. Grundhofer requested that both plans be held up side by side for the Board. The Board briefly discussed the contrasts. O'Connell noted that with the Conservation District, not all the lots would be the same size. Mr. Black responded he was not rejecting the entire idea, and that some ideas could be incorporated. He expressed concern about the homeowners' association managing the open space. He applauded the City's intention, but was concerned about the City testing their idea on him. He had intended to build on the upland areas and to create a quality neighborhood. The things that were suggested went against what he knew. The City could not merely take land. They had to consider the implementation. He stated the City was on to something, but that it had to be within the City requirements. Bor stated that the value of the property would be expressed as the City became more developed. As it went forth, it would bring change to the coding and other areas. Asleson agreed. He was concerned with the plans in terms of the high water table. People say there needed to be a separation between the water table and the bottom of the NURP ponds. He cautioned that in five years the ponds between the houses would not function properly. Staff noted the State considered the Southern portion of the site to be of outstanding value with unique resources. They had high ecological value. A goal in the 2020 Vision was that "no unique resources should be lost." He recommended more of a buffer for that area. Mr. Black stated that he had a 50 acre parcel, and had done the appropriate work. He agreed to attend the meetings. Asleson indicated he believed that the plan would not work. Mr. Black responded that his engineers assured him the plan would work. Asleson noted that the plan was going to go to Planning and Zoning Board. He reminded the Board that they had received incomplete information. He gave the example of Mr. Quigley's Clearwater Creek with all the meetings he attended, and the lots became more valuable. Staff stated only the landowner knew the value of his own work. Mr. Black indicated he needed specific recommendations, and believed he was being used for new ideas. Bor answered that what the Board was recommending was not far off from his own plan. The example of buffering was worth trying, given the value of the land. 3 DRAFT MINUTES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JULY 28, 2004 • Asleson stated that a recommendation was necessary from the Board tonight. • • Mr. Black indicated the MUSA line was a big hurdle that was not possible. The present plan was closer to approval without the request for MUSA. He recommended the City requirements be amended so the rules would be known to all and followed. The City needed reasons for its denial. He assured the Board he would continue to work with staff. Grundhofer answered that the Board was not doubting his effort. Asleson stated that Mr. Black was not the first to use these principles in their development. O'Connell noted that if Mr. Black visited the Clearwater Creek site, he would obtain an idea of what the Board was recommending. Chair Kukonen acknowledged Mr. Black was willing to work with staff, however staff wanted more open space. Mr. Black answered his concern was about conservation easements on the lots. Bor stated that it was a stewardship agreement and it needed to be maintained and improved. She did not know how to get there, but that was the goal. Mr. Black answered that encroachment into the yard was a concern. The recommended plan had the open space consist of a mixture of low and upland, but he had not seen the details. Grundhofer mentioned that just because someone owned a piece of land, did not mean they could do whatever they wanted with it. Asleson responded then it was the regulatory bodies to enforce standards. Smith inquired about prior recommendations. The first was to specifically work with Jeff Schoenbauer. The others came from staff recommendations in the analysis section. Chair Kukonen suggested an addition was to provide buffering on the West side of the property, because the tree removal was aggressive there. Mr. Black assured the Board that he was keeping trees on property lines. Lot 4 would be built in the trees and had only proposed tree removal for the pad. He had concerns about its success to remove upland lots and fill wetlands for lots. Chair Kukonen reiterated the desire of the City to have contiguous open space with wildlife diversity. Mr. Black answered his plan had an open space corridor. Chair Kukonen recommended merely placing a buffer around the open space. Bauman clarified that it would provide proper screening and a natural infrastructure. Chair Kukonen added that he could minimize the tree removal. 4 DRAFT MINUTES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JULY 28, 2004 • Bor inquired if the recommendations from the consultant would work. Asleson responded that it would work. • • Chair Kukonen explained that the Board was trying to meet with people at the conceptual stage, and noted that if he was choosing a lot, he would want Lot 4. Mr. Black answered that it was one of the best. A neighbor requested it be eliminated, because he had a deer stand on that lot. The neighbors knew the development would come someday. Chair Kukonen indicated the Board knew he was trying. He inquired of Asleson if there was any quality on the East. Asleson responded that there was no fen present. The rare plant indicators were around the development on the East and South end. He noted there were documented parallel species, that if they were found, the rare plants were also present. Chair Kukonen inquired about bufferings or soil borings. Asleson added that he could check with Barr Engineering on the infiltration issues. If there was not enough separation, he should not do it based on a published paper. The Rice Creek Watershed District engineers still needed to evaluate it. Grundhofer noted the wetland delineation would not tell the value of the land. Asleson added you have to go to MNRAM for wildlife. The process had been approved in Blaine. Greenways could be created from higher value areas. Chair Kukonen called for a motion. He mentioned he hoped that open communications could continue. Grundhofer added that she hoped he would not take the comments from the Board personally, because the motive was to make the City a beautiful ecosystem. Chair Kukonen stated that here was a chance to make Mr. Black a good example with a conservation development. Grundhofer added that open space would increase the value of the whole development. She made a motion for conditional approval with staff and Environmental Board recommendations: • Work with the City (and Jeff Schoenbauer of Brauer and Associates) on investigating the Conservation Development approach as an alternative to his Preliminary Plat. • Rice Creek Watershed District's approval of plan. • Proof that surface water ponds and infiltration areas would safely work. • Previous recommendations of the Environmental Board from March 28, 2004 meeting. • Provide buffering on the West side of the property. 5 DRAFT MINUTES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JULY 28, 2004 0 Smith requested that if the decision was denial, the reasons should be identified. He did not believe it was necessary to state denial as a possibility. • • After discussion, Bauman made a motion for conditional approval with staff and Board recommendations. Smith seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Chair Kukonen mentioned that he hoped it would be a proactive venue. Grundhofer added that it was possible that the buffer could be paid for by the increased value of the lots. 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Peltier Island/Heron Update It was noted the herons abandoned their nests and raccoon predation was possible. It began June 1 and by June 10 it was all over. The graduate student was busy, and the battery packs weighed 80 pounds each. He did not have a chance to review the films at the time. A decision was made to trap the raccoons. Another possibility was to put flashing around the trees. An owl predation was caught on film once. There were also questions about the weather. On June 8, 2004 a pilot documented no activity on the island. Some money was left from the funding. Bauman stated it was about $10,000. Asleson stated that they would try to renew old grants. O'Dea inquired was there any consensus of opinion. Asleson answered that there was a lot if information to consider. Smith stated that the raccoon population paralleled the human population. Asleson added that they were good swimmers. Bor mentioned there used to be raccoon hunters with hounds in the area. Bauman inquired how long it had been since they had hunted. Bor responded it had been probably 10 years. Grundhofer commented that nearby pelicans had abandoned their nests. Asleson indicated he was aware of that and someone from Forest Lake said that they found a disease was wiping out the young birds. Bauman stated that people were looking for the raccoon dens today. Grundhofer inquired if 4 -H or the Boy Scouts could help with putting up the flashing on the trees. O'Connell questioned the reason for not doing it in the Fall. 6 DRAFT MINUTES • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JULY 28, 2004 Bor stated that if the Heron issue was going to be in the Newsletter, it would be important to state that other factors were also important. Asleson agreed and noted that the water quality issue was still very important. O'Dea noted that last year staff indicted that he did not see evidence of predation on the nests. Asleson answered that there were no cameras on the nests. B. Information Kiosk This item was addressed later in the meeting. C. New Park/Open Space Plan Asleson stated the Plan was in the preliminary draft form. When it is in draft form, it would come to the Board for review. They were trying to get the greenways. D. Other Environmental Board Discussion O'Dea indicated that the document was in process. Any updates could be E- Mailed to O'Dea. Chair Kukonen stated he stopped in at the office of Environmental Assistance. He heard Maplewood was forming a board. Grundhofer agreed and stated she was gathering information on it. O'Dea mentioned the Champlin group was going on a road trip for areas of concern. Asleson added that the indicators probably extended into those areas. 7. OTHER DEPARTMENT REPORTS A. Forestry/Firewise Update Asleson stated he still needed to contact a few property owners for the program. The correction facility had expressed interest in working on the project. They were in the process of obtaining volume estimates and bid specifications to loggers, but it was taking longer than he first thought. He noted neighbors' responses. There was still some GIS analysis to finish. He also mentioned that Oak Wilt was up all over the City. There were two methods to control the spread of the disease. Some trees could be injected, while others need the use of a plow to cut the roots. The plow would cut the root system between trees. The City had the plow that was cooperatively purchased, because it was very expensive and had high maintenance costs. He noted the effectiveness lasted for 7 years. White Oak trees died slower than Red Oaks that died within 2 weeks from Oak Wilt. 7 DRAFT MINUTES • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JULY 28, 2004 O'Dea inquired about Northern Pin Oak. Asleson answered they died quickly, and the City had 127 trees marked. Chair Kukonen inquired about the plow. Asleson responded that it resembled a skidder and described it in detail. B. Solid Waste/Introduce Mary Ayde and discuss Anoka County Master Plan Project This item was tabled to the August 25, 2004 meeting. The recommendations were awaiting approval. C. EnvironmentaURCWD Comprehensive Wetland Management Planning Asleson indicated he included a map. Blaine had approved the plan. Columbus Township expressed concern because of its commercial development. The wetlands could be improved and buffers could be created. Everything was dependent on the hydrological factors. Bauman inquired about the role of the City. Asleson answered there were stake holder meetings, with Jeff Schoenbauer attending. He explained that the 200 -foot buffers would not work. Columbus Township was at all the meetings and he believed the process was a good one. 6. B. Information Kiosk The Board went into the entry to organize the kiosk, then resumed the meeting. Asleson stated that there was money for copies. Chair Kukonen inquired where the copying would take place. Asleson responded either at City Hall or at a copy center. Chair Kukonen mentioned it might be good to have a master book. Asleson agreed. O'Connell asked if they should take turns monitoring the kiosk. Asleson indicated he wanted information from the Extension Office. Grundhofer mentioned she ran into Kim Sullivan. Asleson noted that they were planning to hold three classes in Lino Lakes. 8 DRAFT MINUTES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JULY 28, 2004 • O'Connell inquired where they were announced. Asleson answered it was in the City newsletter and on cable. • • O'Connell recommended also putting a notice in the Quad. Asleson responded he would pass that on. Chair Kukonen inquired about maintaining the kiosk. Asleson stated that people could keep track of their own information and any new information could be brought to the next meeting. A notice of the kiosk will be published in the next newsletter. 8. ADJOURN It was noted that the next meeting of the Environmental Board will be on August 25, 2004. There being no further business, Bor moved to adjourn at 9:19 p.m. O'Connell seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Brigette Blesi TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 9 DRAFT MINUTES • • Agenda Item 5A Environmental Board Meeting Date: August 25, 2004 Topic: Speiser Acres Background: This review is for a Preliminary Plat proposal submitted by Lois and James Speiser. The proposed plan subdivides a larger parcel to allow for one single family lot, and house. The Speiser property is located at 453 Birch Street (Attachment 1). This proposal does not create an additional parcel, but subdivides 3 existing parcels to maintain 3 parcels. Analysis: The Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Plat Detail for Speiser Acres (Attachments 2 and 3) depicts the location of Lot 2, Wetland delineation, surface water flow patterns, and proposed 10 foot buffer along the wetland. This proposed parcel appears to be more than 1000 feet from Rice Lake. (Attachments 4, 5). The proposed new house would hook -up to the sewer /water that is in Birch Street. Surface Water: There is a private ditch (Attachments 4, 5) that is located on the western side of Lot 2. This ditch drains treated surface water from subdivisions from the South and empties into Rice Lake. Surface water from Birch Street, flowing from the East empties into a small depression area on the SW corner of Lot 2. Water flowing off the lot would go into the Birch Street ditch, or to the west. There is a small depressional swale on the West Side of an existing Aspen stand (west of the proposed house) between the private ditch and the proposed house. The depressional swale is separated from the depressional area on the SW lot corner by an elevation change. It might be suggested to connect the depressional area with the swale area to allow for capturing impervious water runoff from the new proposed house. These areas appear to be in the wetland, however the depressions may allow more time for water to settle out materials and filtrate through some organic soil before reaching the ditch. The Aspen stand (Attachment to the west of the proposed house acts as a nice buffer /infiltration area before this ditch as well. Flood plane seems to cover most of the site. Vegetation: The MLCCS (Attachment 5) describes native dominated temporarily flooded wetland and long grasses and mixed trees with 4 -10% impervious cover. Long grasses, particularly in the wetland transition area means reed canary grass. In addition, Attachment 5 shows aspen stand areas that exist on the property. As previously discussed, these aspen provide an excellent buffer /infiltration area for surface water. The problem is, the proposed house will remove a good part of the Aspen. My suggestion is to look at ways to save as much of these aspen as possible. For example, could the house be • shifted to provide minimum impact? One further note, there are no rare vegetation species indicators on the site. My field survey verified this. Wildlife: The Blandings Turtle Model shows an activity area for Blandings Turtle just off the proposed construction site. There are no Blandings Turtle breeding area on the site according to our model. Soils: For the most part, soils on the proposed lot 2 are hydric, with the exception of the location of the house (Attachment 6). It appears that a retaining wall of some sort is shown on the grading plan separating the building site from the wet soils, i.e. Wetland. There was no information received on the percentage of upland and wetland on lot 2. Options: 1. Approve with suggested recommendations of staff and Environmental Board. 2. Recommend not approving. Recommendation: Option 1 Attachments: 1. Speiser Acres Location Map 2. Preliminary Plat 3. Preliminary Plat Detail 4. Speiser Acres Photo 5. Speiser Acres MLCCS 6. Speiser Acres Flood Plane and Soils 4 MARSHAN LAKE �l� i11:10aaonu000 ='�ncsWoeo raVeri ORE= mmammom rourMatiatit DOM OEM Ocm o �x� MINIM NEI 11112•01M11111112 azirOnama ormsralmEnes as ai EMMCN � Ft. "pnf9 RESHANAU o& • 0409.13 293i22 .S.•{ IIYER. M.4RNI ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENG/NEERING CO 5300 .S: lows. No. 10/ Minnetonka. MN 5534S Phone (6/ 2) 4747961 Fax (6/') 474 S267 SURVEY FOR: MAIM SAK'YER Sl /RI F)•F.1h August 2004 1)1L1b7E1)• August 9. 004 L131A1 DE;S 'RIP77ON 77at pan o /•(iotenummi Lot 6 lying Easterly o1:Shenamk ah.3n1 Addition, anrllying Similarly of the !Whom'!" dcwctihcxl1the Bca/nting at Northeast comer of hlo ck S. Shen niMah .(rd Addianm tare Southeasterly no Southeast tamer of said Govayninca Lot 6.nnd there terminating: arnica to easement ofre YInI and The South 229.74 feet of the East 104.35 het oftm Wert 744 ken nfthe Northwest cleaner of the Southwest guano * ofSection 29, Township 31. Range 22 Anoka Conn: Mth n aua mid distance fining nnasund parable / to the South and Wert /roes o /:vied Nmthwma quieter M't e Southhnvvt quartet: (Suhj'c1 to an cartoon! for naad pntpaves olcr the Southerly 33 fret theteolkExceptpan plated asAnoka County Highway Right -Ol :Was P /a! Number I /) and The Mirthwtwl qua o!&wthv.vstqiiwWro!Sc1ion 29. Tom9avhip 31. Anoka County. M/ nevotm Except the South 22974 het ufEaw 10435 let of Wet 744 ken thereof aGn except East 208..71 I of West 952.7 het of the South 208.7 km of said id quattcrquarter. also except that pan of said quarter quarter deccribed as hollowing: Beginning at a phinl on South lie of :mhkl wear 1145 feet East ofSouthway! Corner thereof thence North parallel with West line ofwrd guanrrgtarter615ke4 theme East phmlkl with mid South line 169.75 feet pan or minter to East of mid quieter quarter. thence South along mu! Last hoe 615 feet plus or minas to.Southenw canner ol:aid quarter quarto: them Welt ahem. said South lime 169.6 5 /hart plus or to point of beginning. also except that pan of.wk/ quarar quarter tkwcribet1 as hlkwm1r Beginning at &ma ma comer ofSbenamboah 3n1 Ao 1itiom thence South IN dgnt s 17 minutes 25seam h East :Lammed bearing, along South line Magid quarter quarter /4031'2 her thence North 07 degrees 43 minutes 14 seconds East 314.2? feet. Ihencc North 03 demnuer 20 minmev Ill second Wart /3458 he4 tlmnne North: IN &pees 17 minutes 35 wxrmdv Watt /31.0') kart m Ear line of mid Addition. theme South along mid Ear mine to point of beginning. also except that pan platted as Shenandoah Std Addition. except sad .subject to easements °frecord LIMITATIONS& NOTES: 1. Showing the length and direction of boundary lacy °film above kga/ ckwcrilumn The same ofourArnic .' does not include detumining what you own, which is a kcal neater. Pkave cheek the legal dc+rtipacrr with your meads or commit with competent mega /coonseh ifnecxssary. to make sure thatit is CWTeCt and that any matters of mcmtt such as eavemeanc that you wish h shinty on the .survey. have been shown. 2 Slowing the location oferivtiagimpnvementy we deemn/lnqummm. 3. Silting new monuments or vcr(fying of monuments to mark the comers ofthupmpern: 4. Showing the nyographvof the site by spa, e levations. the elevations shown relate only mthe benchmarkpmviaed on this Ann ey. Use that benchmark and elleck at krnt one other harem shown on the nap when dew:mining mherekvatluav we an ihivsite S. .Slowing a twinned division of the ptoperty for your review and lirtc review ofsuch govcromena /agencies as mayhavejunaliaiwr uttrsuch a pmpumil. STANDARD SYMBOLSk CONVENTIONS: '. Del101eV 1/2"ID pipe with plastic phgt beating Sate License Number 9235. set. unlex• otherwise mated 1 hereby certify that this plats. specification, report or survey was prepared by me of under my direct supervision and that 1 ate a licensed Professional Engineer and Professional Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. v 1 11. Parker P.E & P.S. No. 9115 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SPEISER ACRES 1 MIa1 ATTrr� VI W L.n 1 1 LV N 00'•x03' E -- 706029 -- GRAPHIC SCALE a r IMO ( 11'®s ) 1 IA IaI I TTrn VI4, Ln 1 1 LV 3 4� 2004 CITY `gut a` SEE DETAIL ON SHEET 2 OF 2 C E P T I O N 5 00'7000' -- 556.41 i--61500-- DOSED DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT T BLOCK L 0 T 1 1 - 15a13- -- 1000.00 -- S 0043'14' W f1%r..i4ni vVVA11 -- 874.40 -- S 0043'14' W THIRD LOT S 0017000' E - 15a1.3- 3 W, • _ oa N 0320'01 w ° S 0043'14' W y 1 i - - 2 5 6 . 1 4 - - (--134.58--N. • E X C E P T I O N nVVI 1 IV19 1 1 SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SPEISER ACRES „--- x --x- % DETAIL x 02 S 009�OOC GRAPHIC SCALE 20 0 10 20 40 (01 nom ) 4 4 4 a x 1, rn c x 33 0. al m L.1—.1 1 j j o _�T to o x -- g- K 0 x 0 4 .... - - • -! /I / / f ; ,k 40 4 •• tit �{ S 0000'00' E y 200.02 WETLAND AS DELINEATED BY OTHERS PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: Top of Foundation 899.4 Top orLowo$Floor 891.7 Top or(iangm Floor 898.9 r 4 4 1-79Witieitif 3 '4a I r. f,_ j/ �J`j. • �y 28,-r 1 SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS Private DitchDitches 1000 Foot Lake BufferLake Buffer H Y <0 <0 J d A-a 0 O 0 0 0 O O Attachment 5 Rare veg eco- points • • Attachment 6 1000 FT From LakeLake Buffer N d co' a O O O 0 0 0 0 Agenda Item 5B Environmental Board Meeting Date: August 25, 2004 Topic: Parks, Natural Open Space /Greenways and Trail System Plan Background: Jeff Schoenbauer of Brauer and Associates was commissioned by the Park Board to update the 1992 Parks, and Trails Plan. The new plan updates the old plan to reflect the communities desire to preserve the natural open space values and maintain the 20/20 visions of livability, in spite of increasing levels of development. Please take some time to review the draft plan before the next meeting. Jeff Schoenbauer will attend the meeting to go through the document, answer questions, and take comments. Analysis: This document takes the old ideas and evolves them into the progressional conservation methodologies of where we are today. It takes the Handbook for Conservation Development, Wildland Interface, together with many of the Conservation Development/and flexibility issues that have been discussed over the years and lays out processes that can get us to desirable end points. Options: 1. Recommend Approval 2. Recommend Approval with Comments 3. Recommend Not to Approve Recommendation: one or two Attachments: 1. City of Lino Lakes/Draft Parks, Natural Open Space /Greenway and Trail System Plan Agenda Item 6A Department Reports Environmental Board Meeting Date: August 25, 2004 Topic: Environmental Board Inventory Summary: Mary Jo has compiled this list of Environmental Boards. It is suggested that we discuss this to expand the search to other cities. Once this is complete, I would like to get this to Jay Michaels of the Minnesota Erosion Control /Northstar NEMO group. Perhaps we can arrange for a future meeting place. Attachments: 1. List of Environmental Boards /Mary Jo O'Dea • • • Afton Park, Recreation & Open Space Commission • Contact: Loren Hammond (Chair) 651- 436 -7575 Birchwood Park & Open Space Board Committee Blaine Natural Resources Conservation Board Burnsville Parks & Natural Resources Commission Centerville Champlin Environmental Resources Commission Contact is City Clerk Roberta Colotti, 763 - 923 -7111 rcolotti @ci.champlin.mn.us Oversee recycling program, coordinate waste hauling agreement; recently toured area wetlands, review development plans, spring clean up day, award grants to students re: environmental projects. Meetings: 15t Monday of each month, 6:00 p.m. Chanhassen Circle Pines Environmental Commission None Enforcement of environmental ordinances is done by staff. Recycling is also a staff function. Environmental issues are reviewed by Council as part of the development process. Cottage Grove Parks, Rec & Natural Resources Crystal Environmental Quality Advisory Commission Eden Prairie Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission Fridley Environmental Quality and Energy Commission Golden Valley Environmental Commission Ham Lake Hastings Hugo Park and Tree Commission Natural Resources & Recreation Commission Planning Commission provides input re: environmental concerns. Meetings: Fourth Thursday of the month at 7:00 p.m. Inver Grove Heights Lexington Mankato Minneapolis Environmental Commission Environmental Committee Citizen Environmental Advisory Committee Forum for discussion, comment and taking action on environmental issues /projects of concern to the city. Reports to Environmental Coordinating Team which consists of department head who meet on a quarterly basis to discuss, comment and take action on environmental issues /projects of concern to the city Contact: 612-673-5863 Meetings: Monthly. Mound Park and Open Space Advisory Commission New Brighton Parks, Recreation & Environmental Commission • North Oaks North St. Paul Northfield Oak Park Heights Oakdale Plymouth Prior Lake Ramsey Saint Paul Shakopee Shoreview Environmental Advisory Commission Environmental Quality Commission Garden Committee? Environmental Management Commission Environmental Quality Board Lake Advisory Committee Environmental Policy Task Force Environmental Advisory Committee Environmental Quality Committee Contact is City Engineer Jerry Ojea (sp ?), 651- 490 -4652. Mission StatementThe Environmental Quality Committee provides recommendations to theCity Council on issues relating to the environment, water quality, and solidwaste. The Committee's duties include reviewing development proposals forenvironmental concerns, storm water quality, and forestry, providing inputinto the local watershed planning process, studying solid waste disposal andrecycling, and providing educational programs and information to the publicon environmental issues.Meetings: 4th Monday of each month 7:00 p.m.Duties of the Committeeln November 1986, the Shoreview City Council combined itsSolid Waste Committee with its Lake Quality Committee, resulting in anewly formed committee with the following duties: In general, the committee shall follow the previous Storm Water andWater Quality Committee guidelines, a they relate to formation and membersof the committee, etc. The committee shall consider, review and providerecommendations on environmental concerns in the City of Shoreview asrequested by the City Council. Review and considerations shall be made inregard to existing Shoreview codes and Rice Creek Watershed regulations,state, county and federal requirements and regulations where applicable.Specifically, the committee shall provide recommendations on annual lakestudy budgets and educational programs, including recommendations andcomments on City and development projects within the City of Shoreview. The committee shall provide input into the Grass Lake Water Management Organization and Rice Creek Watershed, including, where appropriate, input into local watershed planning process. This committee shall also participate in providingrecommendations and comments on solid waste disposal and recycling withinthe City of Shoreview. The intent of this committee is to provide inputinto the development and enhancement into the City of Shoreview's naturaland man- made environments. The committee from time to time may be requested by the Council to conduct surveys and produce studies and recommend appropriateplans, programs and actions that will enhance the environment and ecology ofthe City. White Bear Lake Planning Commission provides input re: environmental concerns. Meetings: Fourth Monday of the month at 7:00 p.m. • • White Bear Township Planning Commission provides input re: environmental concerns. Meetings: Fourth Thursday of the month at 7:00 p.m. Winona Woodbury Updated 8/15/2004 Citizens Environmental Quality Committee Environmental Education Commission Source: www.statelocalgov.net /state- mn.htm #city TA4)k lob( • G.i0o /k€ S Ek)V%v'aitt(me171,f21 T3 0ttr • On May 24, 2004, the city of Lino Lakes made the protection of northern Peltier Lake permanent! Many people and organizations deserve thanks! Thanks go to the cities of Centerville and Lino Lakes who both had to enact a protection ordinance. Centerville and Lino Lakes passed an ordinance in March 2002, but Lino Lakes needed to remove a sunset clause that would have terminated the no -wake zone protection ordinance and they did. (This no -wake zone ordinance only applies to the northern half of Peltier Lake, which is a part of the lake that is very shallow and filled with aquatic plants. It also helps protect a great blue heron rookery on a large island in the northern part of Peltier Lake.) Special thanks go to Jeff Perry, Natural Resources Specialist for Anoka Parks, Joan Galli, Minnesota DNR Nongame Wildlife Specialist, Marty Asleson, City of Lino Lakes Environmental Coordinator, and Art Hawkins, a biologist working with the DNR. These people provided the detailed expertise and leadership to get the job done. Jeff Perry led a task force on the issue. The outstanding work of these knowledgeable people from 2001 through 2004 was crucial to enact the protection. A total of 556 citizen petition signatures favoring the protection were submitted and was significant to enacting the protection. Thanks to each and every person who signed! It clearly demonstrated the community was in favor of this protection. Special thanks to those who helped gather signatures. Thanks go to the many organizations that supported protection. These include: Minnesota DNR, Anoka County Parks, Rice Creek Watershed District, Anoka County Commissioner Margaret Langfeld, Anoka County Commissioner Rhonda Sivarajah, Minnesota Ornithologist's Union, Director of Bell Museum of Natural History, St Paul Audubon Society, Minnesota Lakes Association, Walter J. Breckenridge Chapter of the Izaak Walton League, and the North American Lake Management Society. The no -wake zone has demonstrated improved water quality and some successful great blue heron nesting. Damaged aquatic vegetation appears to be returning. The no -wake zone formalizes protection for the unique and precious resources of Peltier Lake: the heron rookery, great egrets, eagles, rare plants, and high quality wetlands and shallows and waterfowl of all kinds. This year over 400 white pelicans stopped at northern Peltier Lake before continuing their migration north - without the protection now in place, the pelicans would have been forced out. The permanent protection now granted preserves these incredible resources now and for generations to come. Gratefully yours, 'o-, • Wayne LeBlanc mail@peltierlake.org www.peltierlake.org 651- 426 -0168 1677 Peltier Lake Drive, Centerville, MN 55038