Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-01-27 ENR Packet AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCESCOMMISSION Wednesday, January 27, 2016 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers -Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road B East 1.Call to Order 2.Roll Call 3.Approval of Agenda 4.Approval ofMinutes:December 15, 2015 5.New Business a.Election of Chair and Vice Chair b.Frost/Kennard Spent Lime Stormwater Treatment System for Wakefield Lake c.1958 Rice Street –Community Garden d.2214 Woodlynn Avenue –Wetland Buffer Variance e.2016 Goal Setting 6.Unfinished Business 7.Visitor Presentations 8.Commission Presentations 9.Staff Presentations a.Environmental Commission Appointments b.Community Solar Garden Collaborative Update c.Energize Maplewood!Update d.Environmental Commission Meeting Updates: 1)February Meeting Rescheduled to February 25 2)March Meeting -Proposal to Reschedule to March 30 or 31? e.Nature Center Programs 10.Adjourn Agenda Item 4 MINUTES CITY OF MAPLEWOOD ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION 5:30P.M., TUESDAY,DECEMBER15, 2015 Council Chambers, City Hall 1830 County Road B East 1. CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission was called to order at 5:32 p.m. by Chair Trippler. 2. ROLL CALL Mollie Miller, Vice Chair Present Absent Ann Palzer, Commissioner Ryan Ries, Commissioner Present Tom Sinn, Commissioner Present Dale Trippler, Chair Present Ginny Yingling, Commissioner Present Staff Present Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Yinglingmoved to approve the agenda as submitted. Seconded by Commissioner Miller. Ayes – All The motion passed. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES CommissionerMillermoved to approve the November 16, 2015, Environmental and Natural Resources Commission meeting minutes as submitted. Seconded by CommissionerSinn. Ayes – Chair Trippler Commissioner’s Miller, Ries & Sinn Abstention – Commissioner Yingling The motion passed. 5. NEW BUSINESS a.Fish Creek Master Plan Update i.Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor, gave the update on the Fish Creek Master Plan and addressed and answered questions of the Commission. December 15, 2015 1 Environmental and Natural Resources Commission MeetingMinutes Updates to the Fish Creek Master Plan Include: Addition of parking and a shelter building on the south side of Fish Creek. Amenities near Carver Avenue Programmed camping area on County land to teach camping skills (not open camp rentals). Minor adjusts to the trail based on standards to ensure accessibility. Deed restrictions require 62 acres of the site to remain as conservation land (does not include eight acres near Carver Avenue).The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is open to receiving a proposal that includes a building or shelter for nature programming in the former home site on Henry Lane. CommissionerYinglingmoved toapproveupdates to the Fish Creek Master Plan. Seconded by CommissionerMiller.Ayes –Chair Trippler, Commissioner’s Miller, Sinn & Yingling Abstention –Commissioner Ries Commissioner Ries abstained from voting because he works for Ramsey County Parks. The motion passed. b.Pollinator Resolution i.Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor,gave the report on the pollinator resolution. There are four main actions in the proposed resolution. The City shall undertake its best efforts to become a pollinator-friendly City by undertaking best managementpractices to protect pollinators on public lands within the City. The City shall develop a policy for the use of insecticides and utilize best practices to limit the use of systemic insecticides on city property including insecticides from the neonicotinoid family and will request commercial applications are free of systemic insecticides including neonicotinoids. The City shall undertake its best efforts to plant native plants and plants favorable to bees and other pollinators in the City’s public spaces. The City shall undertake its best efforts to communicate to Maplewood residents the importance of creating and maintaining pollinator-friendly habitat and will encourage residents and businesses to use pollinator-friendly practices. Commissioner Yingling moved torecommend approval of the pollinator resolution. Seconded by Commissioner Miller.Ayes –All The motion passed. 6.UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. December 15, 2015 2 Environmental and Natural Resources Commission MeetingMinutes 7.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None present. 8.COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS None. 9.STAFF PRESENTATIONS a.Tree Ordinance Update The first reading is scheduled for December 14, 2015. The second reading is scheduled for December 21, 2015. b.State of Maplewood Mayoral Address January 14, 2016, 11 a.m. to1 p.m. at the Maplewood Community Center c.Community Solar Garden Collaborative Update The Metropolitan Council is still under negotiations with contractors of the community solar gardens. d.Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Position Update The City has advertised to fill the open positions. e.Nature Center Programs Environmental Planner, ShannFinwall presented the upcoming Nature Center Programs. For more information contact the Maplewood Nature Center at (651) 249-2170. 10.ADJOURNMENT Chair Trippler adjourned the meeting at 6:28p.m. December 15, 2015 3 Environmental and Natural Resources Commission MeetingMinutes Agenda Item 5a MEMORANDUM TO: Environmental and Natural Resources Commission FROM: Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner DATE: January 21, 2016 for the January 27 ENR Commission Meeting SUBJECT: Election of Chair and Vice Chair The Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission ordinance requires that the Commission elect a chair and vice-chair to run the meetings each year. In 2015 the ENR Commission elected Commissioner Trippler to be the chair and Commissioner Miller to be the vice- chair. During the January 27 ENR Commission meeting the Commission should appoint a chair and vice-chair for 2016, and vote on those appointees. Agenda Item 5b MEMORANDUM TO: Environmental andNatural Resources Commission FROM: Steven Love, Civil Engineer SUBJECT:Frost Kennard Spent Lime Stormwater Treatment Systemfor Wakefield Lake ApproveAgreement with the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District DATE: January 19, 2016for the January 27 ENR Commission Meeting Introduction The Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD)is proposing to construct a spent lime storm water runoff treatment basin on unimprovedCity ofMaplewood land at the southwest corner of Frost Avenue and KennardStreet.City staff is requesting feedback for the Environmental & Natural Resources Commission and any residents in attendance who wish to speak on the subject. Discussion Impaired water bodiesin fully developedurban watersheds, such as Wakefield Lake, require innovative ways to remove substantial watershed phosphorus loads (particularly dissolved phosphorus loads) safely and cost-effectively. Spent lime, a common by-product of municipal drinking water treatment, is an effective filtration medium. RWMWDproposes to use this technology in a regional stormwater treatment project at the southwest corner of the intersection of Frost Avenueand Kennard Street. This project will directly benefit Wakefield Lake, which is impaired for excess phosphorus, all while improving a local existing stormwater management filtration basin on City of Maplewood property. The property is owned by the City of Maplewood and is currently a turf lot with a large filtration basin covering the south portion of the property. The proposed spent lime filtration system consists ofa concrete vault, partially buried and capped with a grate. The system will accept diverted stormwater flows from an existing 42” stormwater pipe. The stormwater is then filteredthrough the spent lime media where dissolved phosphorus is chemically retained. The filtration system will be monitored and maintained by the RWMWD in perpetuity. The surrounding filtration basin will be cleaned of sediment and revegetated with hardy perennial plants and shrubs chosen to balance maintenance requirements, screening of the structure, and to provide an aesthetic enhancement to the site(see project renderings attachment). With the help of an approved BWSR Clean Water Legacy Fund Amendment Grant and corresponding matching RWMWD funds the RWMWD is planning on constructing the project in the fall of 2016. Upon City Council approval the City of Maplewood and RWMWD will enter into a Memorandum of Understanding that will document the proposed project, RWMWD funding, and RWMWD maintenance responsibilities. A letter was sent out to residents that surround the City’s property explaining the proposed project and offering to setup meetings to discuss the project and answer any questions. A second letter was sent out to properties within 500 feet of the City’s property explainingthe proposed project and inviting them to 1 attend the Environmental & Natural Resource Commission meeting. City and RWMWD staff will be available to answer any questions and to gather feedback on the proposed project. Budget This project is 100% funded by BWSR Clean Water Legacy Fund Amendment Grant and corresponding matching RWMWD funds. Additionally, the projectincludes the restoration associated with all construction, monitoring and maintenance activities. Recommendation RWMWD and City staff will be available to answer questions and gather feedback about the proposed spent lime treatment BMP for Wakefieldat the southwest corner of Frost Avenue and Kennard Street. Attachments: 1.Project Renderings 2 Kennard St Kennard St Kennard St Kennard St Kennard St Agenda Item 5c MEMORANDUM TO: Melinda Coleman, City Manager FROM: Michael Martin, AICP,Economic Development Coordinator Daniela Lorenz, Planning Technician DATE: January 21, 2016 SUBJECT: Approval of aConditional Use Permit Revision, Galilee Lutheran Church, 1958 Rice Street, former Zittel’s Greenhouse property Introduction Galilee Lutheran Churchlocated at 145 McCarrons Boulevard,is requesting approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) to create a community garden at 1958 Rice Street, the former Zittel’sGreenhouse property.The request includes a 158garden plots which each plot will be 6x 20feet in size. The church would also maintainthe 15 stall, gravel parking lot that is currently on the site. The property is owned by St. Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) but is not currently being used. Galilee Lutheran Church would be leasing the land until the utility needs the property. Discussion Use and Site Plan City code does not specifically state community gardens as a use. But public services, are allowed in all zones with a CUP. In the educational, philanthropic uses and churches past the city has allowed a community garden under similar circumstances. The applicant is proposing to install 8 foothigh fencing around the perimeter of the garden to deter deer and theft. The fencing used would be polypropylene deer fencing. There will also be a small shed and composting area in the center of the property to house tools and materials for the gardeners. Parking To handle parking, the applicant is requesting to maintain the legal, non-conforming 15 stall, gravel parking lot that currently exists on the property. The applicant discussed with other organizations that maintain community gardens and indicated to staff that 15 stalls should be more than enough. There are a few anticipated events that would result in an increased need for parking. The applicant indicated that the extra parking needs could be handled by using the adjacent McCarron’s Bar and Grill parking lot orGalilee Lutheran Church’s parking lot across Rice Street. There are also no specific parking guidelines for this type of use, but there is an existing parking lot on site and staff does not believe there will be a parking shortage for this use. As a condition of approval, staff would recommend the applicant be required to submit documentation confirming alternative parking arrangements are in place. Tree Preservation The applicant indicated that they would not be removing any trees from the property. Lighting The lighting on site will not change as a result of the addition. Environmental There is a Manage A wetland adjacent to the proposed project which requires a 100 foot buffer according to city code. Applicant’s plans indicate that the fencing and planting will happen outside the 100 footwetland barrier. The applicants has also indicated they will be placing hay bales along the perimeter near the wetland to catch storm water run-off. The garden will also have and enforce a rule prohibiting the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides on the plots in order to protect the area from potentially harmful run-off. WaterServices Initially, a series of hoses will be used to water the plots with the intention of eventually installing underground piping. The community garden site willbe served by the water from the McCarron’s Pub and Grill’s well and will have access to aspigot located on the eastern side of McCarron’sproperty. Currently, McCarron’s is not connected to the city’s water supply but they anticipate beingconnectedby April2016. Department Comments Building Department Nick Carver, building official – No comments Fire Department Butch Gervais, fire marshal – No comments Police Department Paul Schnell, police chief – No comments EngineeringDepartment Jon Jarosch, City Engineer—applicant must obtain a grading permit before any disturbances take place on site. Environmental Review See Shann Finwall’s staff report attached to this report. Recommendation This item is before the city’s environmental and natural resources commission for informational purposes and city code does not require a recommendation. Reference Information Site Description Site size: 13.31acres Existing land use: Vacant Property, owned by St. Paul Regional Water Services Surrounding Land Uses North: McCarron’s Pub and Grill South: Carhop Automobile Sales and Finance West: Rice Street/Galilee Lutheran Church East: Soo Line Railroad Planning Land Use Plan designation: C (commercial) Zoning: BC (business commercial) Attachments 1.Location Map 2.Applicant’s Letter, December 28, 2015 3.Proposed Site Plan 4.Environmental Report, Shann Finwall, January 15, 2015 1958 Rice Street- Community Garden Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4 Environmental Review Project: Galilee Lutheran Church Community Garden Dateof Plans: December 28, 2015 Date of Review: January 15, 2016 Location: 1958 Rice Street (former Zittel’s Greenhouse property) Reviewer: Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner (651) 249-2304; shann.finwall@ci.maplewood.mn.us Background Project Background – Galilee Lutheran Church, located at 145 North McCarrons Boulevard in Roseville, is proposing a community garden in the vacant property located at 1958 Rice Street. The property is owned by St. Paul Regional Water Services. The Church will lease the property and construct a community garden to serve about 150 families in the area. Environmental Issues -There is a Manage A wetland and significant trees located on the property. The community garden must comply with the City’s wetland and tree preservation ordinances.The addition of a community garden in this neighborhood will assist with the promotion of urban agriculture and access to local food. Discussion 1.Wetland : The wetland ordinance requires a 100-foot buffer for aManage A wetland.No building, grading, or stormwater structures can be located within the buffer. Wetland Impacts: The community garden construction and activities will take place outside of the wetland buffer. Wetland Recommendations: To ensure no impacts to the wetland and wetland buffer, the applicants should maintain stormwater best practices as needed and required in the City’s grading permit process. Trees: 2.Maplewood’s tree preservation ordinance describes a significant tree as a hardwood tree with a minimum of 6 inches in diameter, an evergreen tree with a minimum of 8 inches in diameter, and a softwood tree with a minimum of 12 inches in diameter. The ordinance requires any significant tree removed to be replaced based on a tree mitigation calculation. The calculation takes into account the size of a tree and bases replacement on that size. Tree Impacts: The applicants state that no significant trees will be removed with the construction of the community garden. 1 Attachment 4 Tree Recommendations: The significant trees will be protected from community garden construction and daily gardening impacts with the installation of the proposed fencing around the community garden. Urban Agriculture: 3.One of theEnvironmental and Natural Resources goals is the promotion of urban agriculture and access to local foods. Last year the Commission began a study of the City’s ordinances and policies to make recommendations that will remove barriers and promote urban agriculture, while ensuring no negative impacts to surrounding properties. The recommendations will go before the Planning Commission and City Councilfor reviewonce complete. Urban Agriculture Issues: The Galilee Lutheran Church Community Garden proposal represents one of the barriers in the City’s zoning code to urban agriculture. The barriers include the lack of clear language in the City’s zoning code that specifically permits a community garden, and the cost of a conditional use permit and hard surface parking requirements which can prove prohibitive to a non-profit organization proposing a community garden. Urban Agriculture Recommendations: The City should continue to work towards removing barriers to urban agriculture and local foods. 2 Agenda Item 5d MEMORANDUM TO: Environmental and Natural Resources Commission FROM: Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner DATE: January 21, 2016, for the January 27, 2016 SUBJECT: 2214 Woodlynn Avenue – Wetland Buffer Variance Introduction Ryan and Sarah Buhl are proposing to construct a new single family house on a vacant lot located at 2214 Woodlynn Avenue East. There is a Manage C wetland located on the lot. The City’s wetland ordinance requires a 50-foot wetland buffer be maintained around a Manage C wetland.There is no building, grading, or mowing allowed within the wetland buffer. The applicant’s single family house is proposed to be constructed within 36 feet of the wetland edge, with grading to within 20 feet of the wetland. In order to construct the single family house as proposed, the applicants must receive approval of a 30-foot wetland buffer variance from the CityCouncil. Background In 2013 the City of Maplewood approved a lot division to create two lots with frontage on Woodlynn Avenue. In July 2014 the applicant’s purchased one of the vacant lots at 2214 Woodlynn Avenue East. In December 2015 the applicant’s submitted a building permit for the construction of a single family house at 2214 Woodlynn Avenue East. The survey submitted with the building permit reflected that the house would be constructed within 36 feet of the wetlandand that grading for the house would take place within 20 feet of the wetland. The City notified the applicants that the house plans had to be modified to ensure no impacts to the wetland buffer, or the applicants must obtain approval of a wetland buffervariance from the City Council. The applicants have chosen to apply for a wetland buffer variance to construct the single family house as proposed. Discussion State Law State law requires that variances shall only be permitted when they are found tobe: 1.In harmony with the general purposes and intent of the official control; 2.Consistent with the comprehensive plan; 3.When there are practical difficulties in complying with the official control. “Practical difficulties” means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. City staff finds that the construction of a single family house on the vacant lot at 2214 Woodlynn Avenue East is in harmony with the City’s zoning code and comprehensive plan. The location of a Manage C wetland on the vacant lot creates a unique circumstance which was not created by the landowner. The proposed wetland buffer variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Watershed District Review The Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District requires a 25-foot average buffer, and a 12.5 foot minimum buffer around aManage C wetland. Maplewood’s wetland ordinance is more restrictive with a 50-foot buffer required around Manage C wetlands. PaigeAhlborg, Watershed Project Manager with the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District, reviewed the proposal and states that a watershed district permit is not required for a single family house, but she does point out that this proposal would be in compliance with their buffer requirements. Ms. Ahlborg encourages restoration of the remaining wetland buffer and has offered technical assistance on the creation of the restoration plan. Plant material and labor costs for the wetland buffer restoration project do not qualify for the watershed district’s cost share grant as the restoration is a City condition of approval of the wetland buffer variance. Maplewood Wetland Ordinance The City’s wetland ordinance states that the City may require that the applicant mitigate impacts to a wetland when approving a variance.Mitigation can include: 1.Reducing or avoiding the impact by limiting the degree or amount of the action, such as by using appropriate technology. 2.Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the buffer. 3.Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by prevention and maintenance operations during the life of the actions. 4.Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute buffer land at a two-to-one ratio. 5.Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. 6.Where the city requires restoration or replacement of a buffer, the owner or contractor shall replant the buffer with native vegetation. A restoration plan must be approved by the city before planting. 7.Any additional conditions required by the applicable watershed district and/or the soil and water conservation district shall apply. 8.A wetland or buffer mitigation surety, such as a cash deposit or letter of credit, of 150% of estimated cost for mitigation. The surety will be required based on the size of the project as deemed necessary by the administrator. Funds will be held by the city until successful completion of restoration as determined by the city after a final inspection. Wetland or buffer mitigation surety does not include other sureties required pursuant to any other provision of city ordinance or city directive. Neighborhood Comments TheCity of Maplewood mailed notices to all property owners within 500 feet of the property, requesting feedback on the proposed wetland variance buffer. The following four e-mail 2 comments supporting the construction of the single family house and wetland buffer variance were received: 1.Mike Miller, 2221 Woodlynn AvenueEast: “I live at 2221 Woodlynn Avenue, across the street from the proposed construction site. I have noobjection to the request for a variance by the owners of the lot at 2214 Woodlynn.” 2.Ken and Joy Hutchinson, 2212 Lydia Avenue: “We received a letter in the mail requesting our opinion on a proposal by Ryan and Sarah Buhl for new construction. Our home address is 2212 Lydia Avenue. Neither my husband or I have any objections if the proposed construction improves the area which we live in or would not harm any wildlife that may hide on the site.” 3.Charlotte Nelson, 2187 Woodlynn Avenue East:“I feel that the proposal by Ryan and Sarah Buhl to build on 2214 Woodlynn Avenue East, Maplewood should be approved. I realize the importance of wetlands but feel this distance is feasible. This property has been for sale for many years and not always kept in good condition (never mowed or weeded, for sale sign hanging haphazardly). A new home would be a plus.” 4.Chuck Regal, 2206 Woodlynn Avenue East: I have owned and occupied the property next to 2214 (2206) for 32 years. Back then, development to the west, mainly 2164, 2154, and 2144 caused excess water to flow past my property and nearly flood me out. Some modification helped but it was something the city was not watching too closely. The “Manage C” wetland was not designated in those years. In fact there was a cul-de-sac on the east side of the two properties (2214, 2224) that was designated to support maybe 5 houses (properties) on top of the now designated wetland. That all changed a few short years ago, thanks to me and the watchful eye and cooperation of the city engineering department. The previous owner of those properties attempted to fill in the “Manage C” area without the proper permits and I stopped it. The city then took over and directed the grading you now see and actually enlarged the wetland to accommodate more volume (thank you). Two years ago that area filled up half way during the spring thaw. Back in 1986, during a two day summer rain, my back yard was completely flooded with water lapping up to my sliding glass doors. I think now you get my point that the “Manage C” wetland is prominent in the security and well-being of the property at 2206. My wish and request is that if you grant the variance to that wetland, you diligently and faithfully monitor its development to specifications to ensure it complies. Additionally, if there is some way (mechanism) to insure that accidental or incidental fill-inscannot happen around its perimeter, now, and in the future, that would be a plus. May I make suggestions?I am not all that good reading survey plots but wondering about a couple of items: a.It appears that the building is not centered on the plot. Could that be changed? It would put the west side further away from east side of my house. 3 b.I see front stakesout there now. They don’t appear to be in line with the front of my garage (closest point to the blvd line). It would seem that the front setback is not as close to the front property line (blvd) as it could be. If that were possible, more space between the wetland and the back of the house could be realized. Even permission to be a few feet further towards the front would be a positive move, I would think (5 or 10ft??). c.Sometimes further development takes place after the initial building projectis completed. My observation that a patio might be envisioned in front of the rear glass sliding doors at a later time and the dimensions or the construction process might encroach the perimeter of the wetland. Could that be addressed? I am encouragedthat the city has taken this pro-active interest in this project and preserving this wetland, not only for aesthetic and water control reasons but for an interest in protecting my property. I will miss sitting on my deck overlooking that vacant property but always knowing that someday it could be developed. I have met Mr. Buhl and wish him and his family well in their hopes for the project they are planning. Please feel free to contact me with any other questions or observations you may have on this matter. Mitigation Strategies Based on the findings above, staff recommends approval of the variance with mitigation strategies as outlined below: 1.House Location:The proposed single family house has a 30-foot-front yard setback as measured from the foundation of the front porch, and a 34-foot front yard setback as measured from the foundation of the house.City code requires that a single family house maintain a 30-foot front yard setback, or the predominant setback of the existing houses on the same street.The predominant setback along Woodlynn Avenue appears to be 30 feet. The City can approve a reduced front yard setback as long as the setback:a) would not adversely affect the drainage of surrounding properties; b) would not affect the privacy of adjacent homes; would save significant natural features; c) is necessary to meet city, state, or federal regulations, such as pipelinesetback or noise regulations; or d) is necessary for energy saving, health or safety reasons. To reduce the impacts to the wetland (natural feature), staff recommends the applicants shift the house at least four feet to the north, toward the road. The house will then maintain a 26-foot-front yard setback to the foundation of the porch, and a 30-foot front yard setback to the foundation of the house. 2.Retaining Wall:To reduce the impacts to the wetland, staff recommends the applicants construct a retaining wall 8 to 10 feet away from the south side of the house, adjacent the wetland. The retaining wall will help create a flat lawn area and reduce the amount of grading and impacts to the wetland. 3.Wetland Buffer Restoration:To improve the remaining wetland buffer, staff recommends the applicants restore the buffer to native plants. 4 Recommendation Recommend approval of a wetland buffer variance to construct a new single family house at 2214 Woodlynn Avenue East. Approval is based on the following reasons: 1.Strict enforcement of the ordinance would cause the applicant practical difficulties because complying with the wetland buffer requirement stipulated by the ordinance would prohibit the building of any permanent structures, substantially diminishing the potential of this lot. 2.Approval of the wetland buffer variance will include the restoration of the remaining wetland buffer, which will improve the water quality and wildlife habitat of the wetland. 3.Approval would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance with the construction of a new single family house on a vacant lot that is zoned and guided in the City’s comprehensive plan as residential. Approval of the wetland buffer variance shall be subject to the following: 1.Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the new single family house the applicantsmust submit: a.A tree plan which shows the location, size, and species of all significant trees located on the lot, and the trees that will be removed with the construction of the new single family house.Removal of significant trees with the construction of the single family house must comply with the City’s tree preservation ordinance and tree replacement requirements. b.A revised survey which shows the house shifted four feet to the north, toward the road. This will decrease the impacts to the wetland. c.A revised survey which shows the location of the proposed deck on the first floor. The deck footings must not encroach past the proposed retaining wall to ensure no additional impacts to the wetland. d.A revised survey which shows the house shifted 14 feet to the east side of the lot if feasible. This will minimize impacts of the new single family house and wetland buffer variance to the existing single family house located at 2206 Woodlynn Avenue East. e.A revised grading plan which shows the location of a retaining wall to be constructed approximately 8 to 10 feet from the south side of the house, adjacent the wetland.This will create a flat yard area and reduce the amount of grading and impacts to the wetland. f.A wetland buffer restoration plan to be approved by City staff.This will improve the water quality and wildlife habitat of the wetland. g.An escrow to cover up to 150 percent of the cost of the wetland buffer restoration. 2.Prior to release of the escrow, the wetland buffer plantings must be established. Attachments 1.Applicant’s Letter Dated January 7, 2016 2.Site Plan 3.Wetland Map 4.Original Lot Split 5.New House Survey 6.House Elevations 7.Variance Resolution 5 Attachment 1 Attachment 3 2214 Woodlynn Avenue Wetland Map North ^ Blue = Manage C Wetland Attachment 4 Attachment 5 Attachment 6 Attachment 7 VARIANCE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Ryan and Sarah Buhl applied for a variance from the wetland ordinance. WHEREAS, this variance applies to the property located at 2411 Woodlynn Avenue East, Maplewood, MN. The property identification number is 02-29-22-11-0101. The legal description is the Westerly 94.98 Feet of Lots 18 and 19, Block 1, Netnorlin, Ramsey County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, Section 12-310 of the City’s ordinances (Wetlands and Streams) requires a wetland buffer of 50feet adjacent to Manage C wetlands. WHEREAS, the applicants are proposing to construct a single family house and grading for the house to within 20 feet of a Manage C wetland, requiring a 30-foot wetland buffer variance. WHEREAS, the history of this variance is as follows: 1.On January 27, 2016, the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the variance and recommended approval of the wetland buffer variance to the Planning Commission and City Council. 2.On February 2, 2016, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review this proposal. City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The Planning Commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The Planning Commission also considered the report and recommendation of the city staff and Environmental and Natural Resources Commission. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the wetland buffer variance to the City Council. 3.The City Council held a public meeting on February 22, 2016, to review this proposal. The City Council considered the report and recommendations of the city staff, the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission, and the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approved the above- described variance based on the following reasons: 1.Strict enforcement of the ordinance would cause the applicant practical difficulties because complying with the wetland buffer requirement stipulated by the ordinance would prohibit the building of any permanent structures, substantially diminishing the potential of this lot. 2.Approval of the wetland buffer variance will include the restoration of the remaining wetland buffer, which will improve the water quality and wildlife habitat of the wetland. 3.Approval would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance with the construction of a new single family house on a vacant lot that is zoned and guided in the City’s comprehensive plan as residential. Approval of the wetland buffer variance shall be subject to the following: 1.Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the new single family house the applicants must submit: a.A tree plan which shows the location, size, and species of all significant trees located on the lot, and the trees that will be removed with the construction of the new single family house. Removal of significant trees with the construction of the single family house must comply with the City’s tree preservation ordinance and tree replacement requirements. b.A revised survey which shows the house shifted four feet to the north, toward the road. This will decrease the impacts to the wetland. c. Arevised survey which shows the location of the proposed deck on the first floor. The deck footings must not encroach past the proposed retaining wall to ensure no additional impacts to the wetland. d.A revised survey which shows the house shifted 14 feet to the east side of the lot if feasible. This will minimize impacts of the new single family house and wetland buffer variance to the existing single family house located at 2206 Woodlynn Avenue East. e.A revised grading plan which shows the location of a retaining wall to be constructed approximately 8 to 10 feet from the south side of the house, adjacent the wetland. This will create a flat yard area and reduce the amount of grading and impacts to the wetland. f.A wetland buffer restoration plan to be approved by City staff. This will improve the water quality and wildlife habitat of the wetland. g.An escrow to cover up to 150 percent of the cost of the wetland buffer restoration. 2.Prior to release of the escrow, the wetland buffer plantings must be established. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on February 22, 2016. 2 Agenda Item 5e MEMORANDUM TO: Environmental and Natural Resources Commission FROM: Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner DATE: 2016 GoalSetting SUBJECT: January 21, 2016 for the January 27 ENRCommission Meeting Introduction The Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission’s2015 goals included: 1.Urban Agriculture – Review the City’s ordinances and recommend amendments or a new ordinance that will remove barriers and promote urban agriculture, while ensuring no negative impacts to surroundingproperties. 2.Environmental Education – Appoint three members of the Commission to an education subcommittee. The subcommittee will organize an outreach plan to identify key environmental messages to be shared during events and public service announcements throughout the year. Examples of environmental education include increased recycling and reduction of plastic bag use. 3.Stormwater Management – Assist businesses and organizations with stormwater management. The ENR Commissionshould review the 2015 goals and consider updating or setting new goals for 2016. Discussion Status of 2015 Goals 1.Urban Agriculture – In 2015 the urban agriculture subcommittee took a tour called the Urban Agriculture Nooks and Crannies tour. The subcommittee visited several community garden sites in Maplewood and discussed the challenges and successes, especially as they relate to the City’s zoning code. In October and November the ENR Commission reviewed language in the City’s zoning code where urban agriculture is allowed or could be interpreted for such uses. From this information, the subcommittee met to discuss moving forward with the Urban Agriculture study. The subcommittee report to the ENR Commission is pending. 2.Environmental Education– In 2015 the environmental education subcommittee met once to plan the educational focus for the Waterfest booth. The subcommittee participated in Waterfest, National Night Out, and the Strategic Materials and the RRT Facility tour. 3.Stormwater Management – In 2015 the ENR Commission reviewed and recommended approval of new stormwater ordinance updates. The updates were required as part of the City’s Municipal Separate Storm System (MS4) permit. Action Items In addition to the unfinished goals listed above, following is a list of items which may need review by the Commission in 2016: 1.Mississippi River Critical AreaOrdinance:In 2013, the Legislature restored the Department of Natural Resource’s (DNR) rulemaking authority for the Mississippi Critical Area after it was put on hold in 2011. Since then the DNR has analyzed the issues raised, held additional stakeholder meetings to clarify comments, and released the draft rules in 2015. The final phase of the rulemaking process will begin in 2016 with the publication of notice of intent to adopt the rules with a public hearing. Once the rules are adopted, the City will need to update our Mississippi Critical Area ordinanceto meet the new rules. 2.Partners in Energy: The City of Maplewood adopted the Energize Maplewood!Energy Action Plan in April 2015. The plan outlines energy actions that will be implemented over a two-year period. The Commission should continue to play a supporting role in implementation of the energy actions. Specifically in 2016 is the energy awareness and outreach to Auto Dealerships, Restaurants, and Churches. Nature Center Goals The Maplewood Nature Center sets annual goals. The ENR Commission and the Nature Center partner in many environmental initiatives. Therefore, the Commission should refer to the Nature Center’s 2016goals listed below prior to setting Commission goals. 1.Complete materials for Park’s accreditation. 2.Conduct pollinator programs at Fish Creek including: a.One adult training session for monitoring bees. b.Monthly bee monitoring with volunteers. c.Bring 300 to 400 school children to the site for pollinator education and activities. d.Plant plugs at site with volunteers and Great River Greening. 3.In coordination with the Maplewood Community Center, put on the Outdoor Family Expo event on April 16. 4.Develop a partnership with area Girl Scouts. 5.Increase the number of volunteers for citizen science monitoring. 6.Support the City’s Energy Challenge including solar program on March 1. 7.Repair the Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning ductwork. 2 Natural Resources Projects Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator, submitted the following list of natural resource projects preliminarily scheduled for 2016for the Commission’s review: 1.Complete materials for Park’s Accreditation. 2.Submit Pollinator Resolution to City Council and work staff to develop pollinator best management practices guidelines and policies for city operations. Make pollinator materials available to the publicon the website and at city facilities. 3.Work with a beekeeper to setup a beehive on one city site. 4.Help develop interpretive signage for natural resource projects at City Hall. 5.Install trail at Fish Creek. 6.Install boardwalk and improve entrance and entry trail at the Priory Neighborhood Preserve. Begin more intensive restoration including development of three key demonstration areas. 7.Continue restoration work and complete landscaping at Gladstone Savanna. Begin Phase III improvements to include additional landscaping features, interpretation, and playground. 8.Work with staff and Angie Hong on watershed and site interpretive signagefor Joy Park. 9.Launch anew Rain Garden Maintenance Education program. 3 Events Following is a list of events in 2016which will help coordinate the ENR Commission calendarsand assist in this year’s goal setting: Calendar Year –2016 JanuaryJune 26(Tuesday): BizWise Expo-MCC4(Saturday):Waterfest 27(Wednesday): ENR Meeting20 (Monday): ENR Meeting 30 (Saturday): Energize Maplewood! Team Energy Challenge Launch PartyJuly 4 (Monday): Fourth of July Event February18(Monday): ENR Meeting 17 to March 8: Registration for 2016 13to17(Wed. –Sun.): Ramsey Co. Fair Community Garden Plots at Edgerton 25(Thursday): ENR MeetingAugust 2(Tuesday): National Night Out March15(Monday): ENR Meeting 1 (Tuesday): Solar Power Hour 19(Saturday): Earth HourSeptember 30 or 31 (Wed/Thurs):ENR Meeting 19(Monday): ENR Meeting October April 16 (Saturday): Outdoor Expo Throughout October: Fall Clean Up 18(Monday): ENR MeetingCampaign 17(Monday): ENR Meeting 22 (Friday): Earth Day 23(Saturday): Spring Clean Up 23 (Saturday): All Park Clean UpNovember 1(Tuesday): Elections 23 (Saturday): Fix-It Clinic 15(Tuesday): America Recycles Day May21(Monday): ENR Meeting 7 (Saturday): Arbor Day Event December 16 (Monday): ENR Meeting 19(Monday): ENR Meeting Recommendation During the goal-setting session, the Environmental and NaturalResources Commission should: 1.Review the status of the 2015goals and determine if any of these goals should be carried over to 2016; 2.Determine if the Commission should set new goalsfor 2016; and 3.Discuss implementation strategies for the goals. 4