PL PACKETS 01191999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 15, 1998 Page 3 1 broadly based and should require the City to do more to educate residents on reasons for not 2 using phosphorus. 3 4 Wagner stated he believes the section should include a statement to the effect that other 5 educational opportunities will be on-going, suggesting the City's efforts are not limited to a 6 quarterly newsletter article. 7 8 Gondorchin stated he believes the section should reflect that it is not simply fertilizer which is 9 the source of the problem, but more accurately, improperly applied fertilizer. He added the 10 greatest impact to lakes is lawn clippings which are washed into the streets and sewers. Horst 11 agreed that misuse of yard debris should be addressed. 12 13 Horst stated he believes there is not sufficient need for this section, and whether or not the City 14 supports on-going education, the implication should not be that phosphorus is bad. He added the 15 section implies the City is not considering both sides of the issue, and the section should be 16 stricken from the ordinance. He reiterated the City should work towards education, and support 17 residents who feel this is a critical issue, but it should not be the law of the City. 18 19 Gondorchin agreed, stating specific comments could be inserted which specify to what extent the 20 application of fertilizer is improper. He added further discussion with the Council is necessary. 21 22 Makowske asked whether Horst recommends the elimination of the subdivision. Horst stated the 23 section could be amended to stress lawn debris education. Makowske asked whether the City 24 should still publish a quarterly newsletter article. Gondorchin stated he believes the section 25 should be amended to reflect that the City will sponsor and distribute lawn care information as 26 applicable. He added, more specifically, residents should be made aware that the greatest impact 27 they can have is to ensure clippings do not fall into storm drainage or natural drainage areas. 28 29 Gondorchin drew the Commission's attention to Section 1675.05, Subd.1, asking whether it is 30 necessary to apply this to small developments, based on the cost impact to developers of under 3 31 acres of land. 32 33 Horst expressed his agreement, stating a 3-acre development site would eliminate smaller home 34 sites. He cited as an example the development of.Northgate which is not 10 acres but is over 3 35 acres, adding it would be necessary for a potential developer to complete an impact study. 36 37 Gondorchin asked whether the subdivision relates strictly to commercial and high density 38 development, and asked for clarification with regard to the basis for selecting the limitation of 3 39 acres. Ms. Moore-Sykes stated these limitations were included in the Metropolitan Council's 40 proposed ordinance. 41 3. Planning Commission Applicants' Letters of Interest.