Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/11/2007 AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, December 11, 2007 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road BEast 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes: November 27, 2007 5. Unfinished Business: 6. Design Review: None Scheduled 6. Visitor Presentations: 7. Board Presentations: a. December 4, 2007, Planning Commission Meeting: Dynamic Display Sign Code Amendment b. December 10, 2007, City Council Meeting: Dynamic Display Sign Code Amendment 8. Staff Presentations: a. Wetland Ordinance Discussion b. Cancellation of Second CDRB Meeting in December (December 25) 9. Adjourn DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 27,2007 I. CALL TO ORDER Vice-Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Board mernber John Dernko Vice-Chairperson Matt Ledvina Chairperson Linda Olson Board mernber Ananth Shankar Board member Matt Wise Present Present Absent Present Present Staff Present: Shann Finwall, Planner Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board member Demko moved to approve the agenda as presented. Board member Wise seconded. The motion passed. Ayes - all IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. October 23, 2007 Board member Shankar moved approval of the amended minutes of October 23, 2007, changing the name frorn Board member Wise to Ledvina as the motion second under Item X on page 3. Board member Demko seconded Ayes - Demko, Ledvina, Shankar Abstention - Wise The motion passed. b. November 13, 2007 Board member Wise moved approval of the minutes of November 13, 2007 as submitted Board member Demko seconded Ayes - Demko, Wise Abstentions - Ledvina, Shankar The motion passed. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Sign Code Amendments: 1) Dynamic Display Signs Community Design Review Board Minutes 11-27-2007 2 Senior planner Tom Ekstrand explained past actions and considerations regarding the dynamic display sign code amendment. Planner Shann Finwall presented the staff report, which included the additional information requested by the board at its last meeting. Ms. Finwall explained St. Paul's proposed dynamic sign code amendment. Ms. Finwall also explained Maplewood's current billboard ordinance and Maplewood's existing five billboards that were all constructed prior to the city's billboard ordinance. Board member Wise said he researched a few cities outside of Minnesota and found that some declared acceptable light requirements of specific levels of nits and asked whether staff had looked at any cities outside of Minnesota. Planner Finwall responded the staff reviewed the dynamic display sign ordinance for cities in Minnesota only. Those ordinances have lighting standards based on the Wisconsin Department of Transportation standards only. Board member Ledvina questioned whether our current practice of using lumens to measure brightness could be used. Planner Finwall responded that staff is recommending the city's current lighting standard of measuring the amount of lumens be included in the proposed sign ordinance which would require the applicant to subrnit a photornetrics plan. Board member Demko suggested that Maplewood look at St. Paul's proposed sign code amendment regarding trade downs of six to eight square feet of traditional sign age for each square foot of digital billboard space. Vice-chairperson Ledvina asked representatives of Clear Channel to respond to questions from the board. Tom McCarver of Clear Channel explained that the light study done by Clear Channel was conducted by light technicians who monitored various effects of the signage. Mr. McCarver said there are several means to measure brightness of signs, such as lumens or nits, so that a sign is easy to read but is not overly bright. Mr. McCarver said that using as minimal a light level as possible provides benefits such as using less electricity which makes it less costly and a minimal light level would also extend the life of the sign. The board discussed definitions and verbiage to be included in the dynamic display sign code amendment as compared with on-premise signage. The board agreed additional time and study was needed for the on-site dynamic display sign code. The board also agreed that the proposed Incentive Option B provision for community messaging is poor public policy and that since the city will own and control a public messaging sign on White Bear Avenue, they do not favor including this option as part of the code amendment proposal and believe that the sign code should stand on its own, regardless of the settlement agreement. Board member Ledvina moved the community design review board recommend approval of the amendments and additions to the Maplewood Sign Code as follows: 1. Section 44-737(3): (Additions are underlined) "On-premise signs that have blinking, flashing or fluttering lights or that change in brightness or color. Signs that give public service information, such as time and temperature are exempt." 2. Section 44-735: (Additions are underlined) "On-premise siqn means anv siqn identifvinq or advertisinq a business, person, activitv, qoods, products, or services, located on the premises where the siqn is installed and maintained." Community Design Review Board Minutes 11-27-2007 3 3. Adopt dynamic display sign code language modeled after the Eagan code amendment as follows (text added to the Eagan ordinance are underlined and text deleted are stricken; text changed by the community design review board at their November 27,2007, meeting is in bold): a. Findings. Studies show that there is a correlation between dynamic displays on signs and the distraction of highway drivers. Distraction can lead to traffic accidents. Drivers can be distracted not only by a changing message, but also by knowing that the sign has a changing message. Drivers may watch a sign waiting for the next change to occur. Drivers are also distracted by messages that do not tell the full story in one look. People have a natural desire to see the end of the story and will continue to look at the sign in order to wait for the end. Additionally, drivers are more distracted by special effects used to change the message, such as fade-ins and fade-outs. Finally, drivers are generally more distracted by messages that are too small to be clearly seen or that contain more than a simple message. Time and temperature signs appear to be an exception to these concerns because the messages are short, easily absorbed, and become inaccurate without frequent changes. Despite these public safety concerns, there is merit to allowing new technologies to easily update messages. Except as prohibited by state or federal law, sign owners should have the opportunity to use these technologies with certain restrictions. The restrictions are intended to minimize potential driver distraction and to minimize proliferation in residential districts where signs can adversely impact residential character. Local spacing requirements could in'terfere with the equal opportunity to use such technologies and are not included. Without those requirements, however, there is the potential for numerous dynamic displays to exist along any roadway. If more than one dynamic display can be seen from a given location on a road, the minimum display time becomes critical. If the display time is too short, a driver could be subjected to a view that appears to have constant movement. This impact would obviously be compounded in a corridor with multiple signs. If dynamic displays become pervasive and there are no meaningful limitations on each sign's ability to change frequently, drivers may be subjected to an unsafe degree of distraction and sensory overload. Therefore, a longer display time is appropriate. A constant message is typically needed on a sign so that the public can use it to identify and find an intended destination. Changing messages detract from this way-finding purpose and could adversely affect driving conduct through last- second lane changes, stops, or turns, which could result in traffic accidents. Acc9rdingly, dynamic displays generally should n9t be all9wed to occupy tile entire copy and graphic area of a sign. In conclusion, the city finds that dynamic displays should be allowed on off- premise signs but with significant controls to minimize their proliferation and their potential threats to public health, safety, and welfare. b. Dynamic display sign means any sign desiqned for outdoor use that is capable of displavinq a video siqnal. includinq, but not limited to, cathode-rav tubes (CRTs), Community Design Review Board Minutes 11-27-2007 4 Iiqht-emittina diode (LED) displavs, plasma displavs, Iiquid-crvstal displavs (LCDs), or other technoloaies used in commerciallv available televisions or computer monitors. Q)(Cept gO'/ernmental eigne, 'Nith dynamic dieplay choracterietice that appeelr to helve movoment or thelt elppoelr to chelngo, celueod by any method other than physically romoving and replacing the E:ign or ite compononte, whethor the elpparont movement or chelngo ie in tho dispby, tho eign structuro itcolf, or any other componont of the sign. This includes a diepby that incorporates el tochnology or method allowing the eign eurklco to change the image 'Nithout helving to phyeically or mechelnicellly ropbce tho cign surface or its components. This also includos any rotating, revolving, moving, flashing, blinking, or animates sieplay and any dispby that incorporatos rotating panels, LED lights melnipulates through digital input, "digital ink" or any other method or technology that allowc the sign surface to preeent el sories of images or dispbys. c. Dynamic display signs are allowed subject to the following conditions: (a) Dynamic display signs are allowed on euborsinato to off-premises signs onlv, monument ans pylon signs, elnd business signe. Dynelmic displelYs muet not bo tho presominnnt featuro of the sign eurklco. The romelinder of tho eign must not helve the capability to have synamic sieplays even if not used. Dynamic dieplay signe aFO allo'Ned only on monument and pylon eigns for conditionally permittod u(;Qe in reeidontiul dietricts and f<Jr all uses in other sietricts, subject to the requirements of this Section 11.70. Only one, contiguoue dynelmic display aroel ie allowes on a sign surf{lce; (b) A dynamic display sian is permitted bv conditional use permit onlv.may not change or mo'/o moro ofton than once ovory 20 minutes, oxcopt one fDr which chelngoe are nocosselry to corroct hour and minuto, date, or tomporaturo information. Timo, date, or tomporaturo inf<Jrmeltion Ie considorod one dynamic display ans may not bo incluses as a componont of elny othor dynamic dieplay. .II. sispby of time, sato, or tomporelturo must romain for at loaet 20 minutes bofDro changing to el different sieplay, but tho timo, delto, or temporelture informeltion itsolf melY change no moro ofton than once overy throo soconse: (c) The images and messages displayed must be static and each displav must be maintained for a minimum of 12 seconds, and the transition from one static display to another must be instantaneous without any special effects; (d) The images and messages displayed must be complete in themselves, without continuation in content to the next image or message or to any other sign: (e) Every line of copy and graphics in a dynamic display must be at least seven inches in height on a road with a speed limit of 25 to 34 miles per hour, nine inches on a road with a speed limit of 35 to 44 miles per hour, 12 inches on a road with a speed limit of 45 to 54 miles per hour, and 15 inches on a road with a speed limit of 55 miles per hour or more. If thoro is ineufficient room f<Jr copy and graphicc of thie eizo in tho area allowed unser clauso (a) abovo, thon no synamic sisplay ie allo'IJos; Community Design Review Board Minutes 11-27-2007 5 (f) Dynamic display signs must be designed and equipped to freeze the device in one position if a malfunction occurs. The displays must also be equipped with a means to immediately discontinue the display if it malfunctions, and the sign owner must immediately stop the dynamic display when notified by the city that it is not complying with the standards of this ordinance; (g) Dynamic display signs must comply with the brightness standards contained in subdivision e. below; (h) Dynamic display signs existing on (insert the effective date of this ordinance) must comply with the operational standards listed above. /\n oxisting sYnGmic dicpby that soes not meet the etructural roquiromente in cl:Juso (b) may continue as a nonconforming sevelopmont subjoct to section (ineert ordinanco section number). /\n existing dyn:Jmic dispby th:Jt c:Jnnot meet tho minimum eize requirement in clause (e) muet uee the largeet size possible for one Iino of copy to fit in tho available sp:Jce. {if Excoptione. Recognizing that come dyn:Jmic dieplays, such ae those used in point of eale sispensQFe, inter:Jctivo vonsing machines :Jnd /\TMs, often nood to ch:Jngo images moro froquently th:Jn dofinos by this ordinance in order to porform their intendes function ans that such image ch:Jnges can occur in a m:Jnnor in which they do not cro:Jte dietractione for drivers, dynamic dispbye with :J tot:J1 orea of less th:Jn 160 squ:Jro inchoe at any point of s:Jlo dispenser, interactive vonding machines or /\TM may be fully :Jnimatos, providos they do not fbeh or blink in a m:Jnnor cloarly vieiblo from the roadway and provided they either meet or excood the builsing setbacks for tho zoning sietrict in which thoy :Jro locatos or are :Jt loaet 30' from the public right of 'N:JY, .....hichevor is groator. d. Incentives. Off-premises signs do not need to serve the same way-finding function as do on-premises signs; thoy aro restricted in numbor by tho city; and they are in thomsolvoe distracting and their removal serves public safety. This clause is intended to provide an incentive option for the voluntary and uncompensated removal of off-premise signs in certain settings. This removal results in an overall advancement of one or more of the goals set forth in this section that should more than offset any additional burden caused by the incentives. These provisions are also based on the recognition that the incentives create an opportunity to consolidate outdoor advertising services that would otherwise remain distributed throughout the community and expand the function of off-premises signs to serve a public purpose by providing community and public service messages. (1) IRGeRti'le Option i\ Reduction of Sign Surfaces (a) A person or siqn operator may obtain a conditional use permit for an onhances dynamic display sign on one surface of an existing off-premises sign if the following requirements are met: 1) The applicant agrees in writing to reduce its off-premise sign surfaces by one by permanently removing, within 15 days after issuance of the permit, one surface of an off- premises sign in the city that is owned or leased by the applicant and ie sopictod in tablo .^, (which followe thie soction), which sign surface must satisfy the criteria of parts (2) and (3) of this subsection. This removal must Community Design Review Board Minutes 11-27-2007 6 include the complete removal of the structure and foundation supporting each removed sign surface. The applicant must agree that the city may remove the sign surface if the applicant does not timely do so, and the application must identify the sign surface to be removed and be accompanied by a cash deposit or letter of credit acceptable to the city attorney sufficient to pay the city's costs for that removal. The applicant must also agree that it is removing the sign surface voluntarily and that it has no right to compensation for the removed sign surface under any law. Replacement of an existing sign surface of an off- premises sign with an onh:Jncos dynamic display sign does not constitute a removal of a sign surface. 2) The city has not previously issued a dynamic display sign permit based on the removal of the particular sign surface relied upon in this permit application. 3) If the removed sign surface is one for which a state permit is required by state law, the applicant must surrendered its permit to the state upon removal of the sign surface. The sign that is the subject of the dynamic display sign permit cannot begin to operate until proof is provided to the city that the state permit has been surrendered. (b) If the applicant meets compliee 'Nith the permit requirements noted above, the city will issue an onhancos dynamic display sign permit for the designated off-premises sign. This permit will allow a dynamic display to occupy 100 percent of the potential copy and graphic area and to change no more frequently than once every 1l..eight-seconds. The designated sign must meet all other requirements of this ordinance. (2) Incentive Optien B Pro'J,ision ef CemmuFlity and Public Service Messaging (a) A persen er sign operator may ebtain a cenditionaluse permit fer an enhanced dynamic display sign en one surface ef an existing off premise sign if the follewing requirements are met: 1) The enllanced dynamic display sign replaces an existing surface of an existing eff premise sign; 2) Tile city lias not previously issued a dynamic display sign permit based en tile replacement ef the particular sign surface relied upen in tllis permit application. 3) Tile applicant sllall enter into an agreement with the city te pre\'ide te tile city no less than 5 Ileurs (2250 eigllt second spots) per mentll per enllanced dynamic display sign ~ in tile city fer community and public service messages at such times as shall be determined by tile city. Community Design Review Board Minutes 11-27-2007 7 (b) If the applicant meetscemplies witll the permit requirements neted above, the city will issue an enllanced dynamic display sign permit for tile designated eft premise silln. This permit .....ill all9\'J a dynamic display to occupy 1 gg percent ef the petential cepy and llrapllic area of an existinq siqn face and to change ne mere frequently tllan ence every eillllt seconds. Tile designated sign must meet all etller requirements of this ordinance. e. Brightness Standards. (1) All signs must meet the following brightness standards: (a) No sign may be brighter than is necessary for clear and adequate visibility. (b) No sign may be of such intensity or brilliance as to impair the vision of a motor vehicle driver with average eyesight or to otherwise interfere with the driver's operation of a motor vehicle. (c) No sign may be of such intensity or brilliance that it interferes with the effectiveness of an official traffic sign, device or signal. (2) The person owning or controlling the sign must adjust the sign to meet the brightness standards in accordance with the city's instructions. The adjustment must be made immediately upon notice of non-compliance from the city. The porson owning or controlling tho sign may :Jppoal tho city'e setormination through the following :Jppo:J1 procoduro: (a) Nter making tho :Jdjustmont roquiros by tho city, tho porson owning or controlling tho sign m:JY appeal tho city's dotormination by dolivoring a \witton appeal to tho city clerl< within 10 d:JYs aftor tho city's non compli:Jnco notico. Tho writton :Jppeal muet includo tho name of a porson unrolatod to tho percon :Jns buE:inoee making tho :JPPo:Jl, who will eorve on tho :Jppoal panel. (b) Within five businoss days :Jftor rocoiving tho appeal, tho city must namo :J poreon who ie not an official or omployeo of the city to sorvo on tho appeal panel. Within fivo business daye after tho city namoe its roprosont:Jtivo, tho city'e ropreeonbtive must contact the sign o.....nor'e roprosont:Jtivo, and tho two of thom muet appoint a third mombor to tho p:Jnol, 'Nho h:Je no rolationehip to oithor J38flf- (c) Tho appo:J1 panel may sovelop ite own rulos of procoduro, but it muet hold a hoaring 'Nithin fivo busineee says after tho third mombor ie appointos. The city ans tho sign owner muet be givon tho opportunity to prosentteetimony, and tho panel m:JY hold tho hoaring, or a portion of it, at the sign location. Tho p:Jnel must issuo ite socieion on \',hatlovol of brightnese ie needod to moet tho brightneee standarde within five bucinose d:JYs aftor tho hO:Jring commoncos. Tho docision will bo binding on both p:Jrtioc. Community Design Review Board Minutes 11-27-2007 8 (3) All dynamic displav signs installed after (insert the effective date of this ordinance) that will have illumination by a means other than natural light must be equipped with a mechanism that automatically adjusts the brightness in response to ambient conditions. These signs must also be equipped with a means to immediately turn off the display or lighting if it malfunctions, and the sign owner or operator must immediately turn off the sign or lighting when notified by the city that it is not complying with the standards in this section. (4) In addition to the briqhtness standards required above, dvnamic displav siqns must meet with the citv's outdoor Iiqhtinq requirements (section 44- 20( 1)). Board member Demko seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all 2) March 1, 2006, Draft Sign Code The board discussed the need for more time to review the draft sign code, especially in light of the review needed for on-site dynamic display signs. Board member Shankar moved to continue discussion of the March 1, 2006 draft sign code review at a future meeting. Board member Wise seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all VI. DESIGN REVIEW None VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS None IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Staff asked for a board representative to attend the December 4 planning commission meeting and the December 10 city council meeting to discuss the dynamic display sign board recommendation. Board member Ledvina volunteered. Board member Demko volunteered as an alternate. Staff notified the board that the wetland ordinance will be on the agenda for consideration at the next board meeting on December 11. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: Community Design Review Board FROM: Ginny Gaynor, Open Space Naturalist and Shann Finwall, Planner DATE: December 5, 2007 RE: Wetland Ordinance Background In 2006, a wetland ordinance committee made up of members of the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission and city staff was appointed to: 1. Recommend changes in Maplewood code to accommodate Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District's (RWMWD) new wetland classifications, adopted by RWMWD in November 2005. 2. Recommend buffer widths for the new classifications. 3. Recommend other changes to ensure that the ordinance is effective in protecting Maplewood wetlands. 2006 Wetland Ordinance Committee included: City Staff: Shann Finwall- Planner Virginia Gaynor - Open Space Coordinator & Rain Garden Horticulturalist Env Committee: Cammie Johnson - Metropolitan Council, Waste Water Treatment Dale Trippler - retired MPCA, Principle Planner, Closed Landfill Program Jim Beardsley - 3M Company, Senior Environmental Health, Safety & Regulatory Specialist Resident: Mark Gernes - MPCA, Research Scientist R WMWD staff provided information and participated in several meetings. The wetland committee had several meetings in 2006 and made recommendations for wetland ordinance modification on November 15,2006. In 2007, the full Environmental and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the recommendations and discussed selected topics. The Commission submits the attached draft ordinance dated November 20, 2007, for review and comment. 1 Recommendations The wetland committee and the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission studied the issues, reviewed wetland ordinances from cities in the metropolitan area, and developed recommendations. This document presents the recommendations for major content changes. 1. Wetland Purpose Recommendation. Keep the content of the existing ordinance regarding purpose of wetlands and ordinance. Discussion. The Commission reviewed purpose statements from many other communities and found Maplewood's current statement is well stated and comprehensive. 2. Wetland Classification System Recommendation. The Commission recommends adopting the new R WMWD classification system. Discussion. a. R WMWD has adopted the Minnesota Routine Assessment Method (MnRAM) classification system. MnRAM classifies wetlands Manage A, Manage B, Manage C, with Manage A being the highest quality. This system has become a standard in our region. If classification is ever questioned, wetland consultants are experienced with this system. b. In 2003-2005, RWMWD staff visited the 243 wetlands in Maplewood located in their watershed district, used MnRAM to conduct assessments, and determined a classification for each wetland. c. The old classification system used by RWMWD was much more subjective than MnRAM. d. In changing from the old system to the new system: 128 Maplewood wetlands were upgraded, 55 were downgraded, and 60 remained the same. The main reasons wetlands were downgraded were: 1 ) Wetland degraded since 1995. 2) The 1995 classification was more subjective than the new system. In addition, the inventory work in 1995 was done by one staff person and five interns and thus may not have been as accurate. 2 3) In the 1995 classification, forested wetlands were automatically placed in PROTECT Class (highest class), regardless of quality. 4) In the 1995 classification, many wetlands at schools or in natural areas received a PROTECT class, regardless of quality. 5) If the City does not adopt the new RWMWD classifications we have the responsibility of classifying wetlands. This is not good use of city resources since RWMWD performs this service. 3. Addition of Wetland Class A+ Recommendations. Create an additional A+ classification for special wetlands that meet the following criteria: a. Must be a Class A wetland as defined by RWMWD classification system. b. Is one of the following unique and special types of wetlands in Maplewood: I) oligotrophic acid marsh (low pH, high dissolved oxygen, low nutrients) 2) fen (rich fen, poor fen, calcareous fen) 3) wet prairie 4) sedge meadow 5) forested seasonal wetland (wooded wetlands that may dry up in summer) Discussion. Currently Maplewood has one more wetland class than RWMWD. The Commission believes there are a handful of very special wetlands that merit extra protection. These are wetland types that are rare in our community or types that are particularly sensitive to impacts from development. a. Commission discussed the wetland at Woodhill development. This was one of Maplewood's 50 wetlands that are currently rated Class I (highest class) in our current rating system. Despite rigorous erosion control measures and nearly daily monitoring by staff, this unique wetland was negatively impacted by development in 2006. Staff, RWMWD, and council knew this was a very unique wetland. But our classification structure did not single out those one to two dozen wetlands that were most precious and our ordinance did not give them extra protection. Class A+ will help insure that most unique wetlands have the extra protection they deserve. b. Commission discussed other high quality or unique wetlands in Maplewood that have the potential of being impacted by new development or re-development in 3 the future. We strongly believe these are deserving of the highest level of protection possible so they are not degraded due to development activities or new adjacent uses. c. In addition, the Commission strongly believes that some wetlands in Maplewood should provide adequate habitat for wildlife. Many reptiles, amphibians, and mammals that depend on wetlands require a very large buffer of upland adj acent to the wetland. (See discussion below on buffer width requirements for wildlife.) It is not feasible to have adequate buffers for wildlife around all our wetlands, so the Commission recommends that Class A+ wetlands, our highest quality wetlands, serve the function of providing habitat for wildlife. d. MnRAM does not identifY Class A+ wetlands so the City will need to identifY these. Information on wetland type is available in the MnRAM data collected by RWMWD but it is limited. For example, large wetland complexes may be identified as shallow marshes if that is the dominant wetland type at the site, but the wetland may include portions of sedge meadow, wet prairie, etc. Staff and R WMWD are aware of some of our unique wetlands. As we learn of more, those would be added to Maplewood's list of Class A+ wetlands. The City hopes to initiate a volunteer wetland monitoring program with Nature Center Staff in 2007 targeting several south Maplewood wetlands to determine if there are more oligotrophic wetlands in that area. e. RWMWD has identified 42 Class A wetlands in Maplewood. These wetlands require further study to determine which would be classified as a Class A + as described above. With the information we have from wetlands located within the Maplewood Neighborhood Preserves the following wetlands would meet the criteria for Class A+. 1) Jim's Prairie 2) Priory Preserve wet prairie 3) Priory Preserve sedge meadow 4) Priory Preserve fen 5) Priory Preserve forested seasonal wetlands 6) Applewood Preserve pond 7) Joy Park forested seasonal wetlands Some of these are on the interior ofthe park and would not likely affect development. 4 In addition, there are three other sites in the city which staff believes may quality: I) wetland north of Schaller Drive 2) wetland located in the Ponds golf course 3) wetland located in Battle Creek Park A map showing the location of known Class A+ wetlands will be available for review at the meeting. City staff estimates that one-third to one-half of the Class A wetlands would be found to fall within the Class A+ unique classification described above. In 2008 city staff will conduct a brief plant survey and water quality testing of several Class A wetlands in south Maplewood. This work should identity additional A+ wetlands. As more information on city wetlands becomes available, additional wetlands will be added to the A + list. f. During the Planning Commission's review of the draft wetland ordinance on November 20, 2007, concern was expressed about approving an A+ classification without knowing how many wetlands this will entail. Following is some rationale for approving the wetland ordinance this way: I) Adopting an A + classification makes a statement that some of our wetlands are rare or unique, that we value having these wetlands in Maplewood and that we are willing to take extra measures to protect and preserve them. 2) If Maplewood is committed to the idea of an A+ classification, the individual wetlands selected should not be a factor in the decision. 3) One way of dealing with the unknown Class A+ wetlands is to adopt the seven wetlands mentioned above officially as Class A+ with the adoption ofthe new ordinance. When new Class A+ wetlands are identified they would need to be added to the system officially. In the future, if we find there are so many A+ wetlands it creates undue hardship, we could consider ordinance changes. 5 4. Buffer Widths Recommendations. The Commission recommends the following buffer widths: Recommended Buffer Class A+ 200' Class A 100' Class B 75' Class C 50' Utility 10' Current Ordinance Class 1: 100' avg, 100' min Class 2: 100' avg, 50' min Class 3: 50' avg, 25' min Class 4: 25' avg, 20' min Class 5: 0' New RWMWD rules 75' avg, 37.5' min 50' avg, 25' min 25' avg, 12.5' min 10' a. The buffer shall be measured horizontally from wetland edge, not across the landscape. b. On slopes> 18% the buffer width shall be increased to 10' beyond the apex of the slope. Extension of the buffer for steep slopes shall apply to all wetland classes. c. Setback. There shall be a 10' structure setback from the buffer edge for all wetland classes. Apex , Buffer extends 10' beyond slope apex Slope> 18% 75' Example: 75' buffer for Manage B wetlands. Slope> 18% so must extend buffer 10' beyond top of slope. In addition, the Commission recommends that averaging be allowed for Class A and B wetlands, on no more than 10 percent of the buffer area, as follows: Recommended Buffer New RWMWD rules 75' avg, 37.5' min 50' avg, 25' min 25' avg, 12.5' min 10' 6 Commission recommends averaging be allowed only when necessary (see 6- f-1 in the attached ordinance). In addition, if averaging is used other requirements must be met such as restoration of buffer to native plantings, managing weeds in buffer, reduction in stormwater runoff. Discussion. The Commission reviewed literature on the buffer width necessary to reduce sediments and solids, phosphorus, nitrogen, pesticides and metals, organic matter and biological contaminants. a. Commission agreed that based on the scientific information available today, a 50' buffer is the minimum buffer needed to adequately reduce the sediments and pollutants entering wetlands. This was also the conclusion and recommendation ofEOR for Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. b. To protect Maplewood wetlands, buffers must be wide enough to adequately capture sediments and pollutants. The Commission believes that all Maplewood wetlands deserve a buffer that provides the function of capturing pollutants ~ a minimum of 50'. c. Wetlands that are less disturbed, higher quality, or more sensitive to pollutants require and deserve wider buffers. Our current ordinance uses this approach, as do RWMWD and most cities in our area. With a minimum 50' buffer set for Class C wetlands (lowest quality), the Commission believes a 75' buffer for Class B wetlands and a 100' buffer for Class A wetlands is appropriate. d. Wetland Committee encouraged RWMWD to increase their buffer widths so we would have the same buffer width requirements. They were not willing to increase the widths. Commission feels strongly that RWMWD requirements are not adequate and Maplewood should set its own. e. Wetland Committee member Mark Gemes (Wetland Biologist, MPCA) prepared a review of buffer widths necessary to provide habitat for wildlife. Many species of wildlife need a very wide buffer for habitat. For example, the Common Snapping Turtle nests a mean distance of 1000 m from the wetland. The Painted Turtle's mean nesting distance is 60 m from the wetland. The Commission believes strongly that some of our wetlands need to provide habitat for wildlife. We agreed that 200' is a minimum buffer width for this function. Though not adequate for many species, a buffer larger than this would create undo hardship for property owners. f. Commission realized a 200' buffer on all wetlands was not feasible and decided that this buffer width should apply to our highest quality wetlands only, Class A+ wetlands. 7 g. Current Maplewood ordinance and RWMWD rules allow for averaging. The Commission believes a minimum of 50' is needed to capture pollutants, so buffers should never be less than 50'. Thus, the Commission does not support averaging on Class C wetlands. In addition, the Commission believes Class A+ wetlands are intended primarily for wildlife habitat and averaging should not be allowed on those. h. Commission believes that averaging should be allowed only when necessary (see 6- f-I in the attached ordinance), and only if the applicant meets other requirements to improve the buffer or reduce the impacts of stormwater on the wetland. 1. In discussing the issue of slope, the Commission reviewed the project at W oodhill development. Here the slopes were steep, the buffer stopped midslope in areas, and erosion control measures were not able to protect the wetland. We believe that steep slopes adjacent to wetlands should not be disturbed at all. Scientific literature indicates that steeper slopes reduce effectiveness of buffers because runoff moves too quickly for filtration and infiltration. Thus a wider buffer is needed on slopes to capture pollutants. Researchers' opinions vary on what should be considered steep, from 10% to 40% slopes. The Commission decided 18% slope should be our cutoff. Our current ordinance (article V, Section 12-308 Slopes) prohibits development on slopes of 18% or greater which are in direct drainage to a protected water. 4. Activities in Buffer Recommendations. a. Keep existing ordinance content regarding activity in buffers. Current ordinance prohibits alteration of buffer. "Alteration means any human action that adversely affects a buffer. Alterations include but are not limited to the following: grading, filling, dumping, dredging, draining, cutting, pruning, topping, clearing, relocating or removing vegetation, applying herbicides or pesticides or any hazardous or toxic substance...." b. Structures, fire pits, patios, and decks shall not be permitted in the buffer. c. Vegetation. Keep existing content: "Any planting in a buffer shall be from native vegetation." In addition, expand upon this section of ordinance to clarify that areas of the buffer that are naturalized shall remain so and residents are encouraged to restore buffer areas to native vegetation. d. Applicability. Keep current ordinance's approach to applicability. Applicability shall apply to anyone altering the buffer after the adoption of the ordinance. In current ordinance applicability applies to anyone that would alter wetland or 8 buffer after April 24, 1995. This means vegetation and structures in place before adoption could remain. Discussion. The Commission is not recommending substantial content changes in activities. However, we do want to make this section of the ordinance clearer. We also want to add language in this section encouraging residents to improve their buffers by establishing native vegetation and lessening impact of passive recreation in the buffer. The Commission believes the ordinance should not only protect wetlands but encourage enhancement of wetlands. 5. Exemptions Recommendations. The Commission recommends changes in exemption section, including allowing exemptions for: a. Additions to a house, garage, deck, or driveway using the existing straight-edge setbacks to a wetland for single family homes, if minimum of25' from wetland edge, and if mitigation actions performed (such as restoration of buffer). b. Trails allowed in the buffer on public and semi-public land if certain conditions are met. Current ordinance allows trails on public land. Semi-public land is land that neighborhood or general public can access. Discussion. Commission believes homeowners need ability to make improvements to their home, within reason. 6. Variances Recommendation. The Commission recommends that the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission review and make recommendations on all wetland ordinance variances, in addition to the Planning Commission. Discussion. Since the City Council changed the Environmental and Natural Resources Committee to a full-fledged Commission earlier this year, the ordinance gives the Commission authority to review and make recommendation on these matters. State statute requires that the Planning Commission hold the public hearing on the variance, but it only makes sense for the environmental experts to review and make a recommendation on the proposal as well. Scientific Support for Proposed Ordinance Changes Much research on wetland and stream buffers was done in the 1980's and 1990's. The Wetland Ordinance Committee studied literature reviews of buffer research, rather than reading the actual scientific papers. In particular, we reviewed: 9 1. Benefits of Wetland Buffers: A Study of Functions, Values and Size, Prepared for the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, by Emmons and Olivier Resources, Inc. (EaR), December 2001. 2. Wetland and Stream Buffer Size Requirements - A Review, A.J. Castelle, A.W. Johnson, and C. Conolly, published in Journal of Environmental Quality 23:878-882,1994. 3. Use of Best Available Science in City of Everett (W A) Buffer Regulations, prepared by Pentec Environmental, 2001. 4. Buffer Zones and Beyond, Lynn Boyd, University ofMA, 2001. 5. A Review of the Scientific Literature on Riparian Buffer Width, Extent and Vegetation, Seth Wenger, for the University of Georgia, 1999. There are several limitations to the scientific studies: 1. Many of the studies were for agricultural areas with runoff from fields, not urban areas. 2. Many buffer variables are not reported. For example, the summaries do not always distinguish between type of vegetation in the buffer or activities adjacent to the buffer. 3. Many of the studies were for streams and riparian systems. However, as the report for Minnehaha Creek Watershed District points out, this information should be applicable to wetlands. 4. Most scientific studies study a single buffer width. Those that compared widths only compared a few widths. The report prepared by EaR for Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was of special interest to the Wetland Ordinance Committee since their recommendations are for an urban watershed in our region. 10 Review of Ordinance The Planning Commission reviewed and gave comment on the draft wetland ordinance at the November 20,2007, Planning Commission meeting. Several questions were asked regarding the changes. The one area of concern one or two planning Commissioners expressed was the Class A+ wetlands as described above. The Community Design Review Board should also review and give comment on the draft wetland ordinance at the December 11, 2007, CDRB meeting. The Environmental and Natural Resources Commission will review the Planning Commission and Community Design Review Board comments and make modifications as needed. The draft ordinance will then proceed to the City Conncil for review during a workshop in early 2008 as the schedule permits, and staff will begin a public comment period. Comments received by the City Council and the public will be presented to the Environmental and Natural Resources, Commission for possible modifications. The draft wetland ordinance should have its first reading by the City Council early 2008 if we are able to maintain this schedule. Attachment: Draft November 20, 2007, Wetland Ordinance 11 MAPLEWOOD WETLAND ORDINANCE DRAFT 11-20-07 (Changes to the city's current wetland ordinance are underlined if added and stricken if deleted.) 1. Findings and purposes. The findings and purposes of this section are as follows: a. Wetlands serve a variety of beneficial functions. Wetlands maintain water quality !IT. filtering pollutants, reduce flooding and erosion, They provide food and habitat for wildlife, provide open space for human interaction and are an integral part ofthe city's environment. Wetlands are an important physical, educational, ecological, aesthetic, recreational and economic asset to the city. They are critical to the city's health, safety, and general welfare. Surrounding development may degrade, pollute, accelerate the aging of or eliminate wetlands. Regulating land use around wetlands is therefore in the public interest. b. Streams are also significant elements of the city's hydrologic system. Streams flow into wetlands and lakes, provide food and habitat for wildlife, provide open space, and are an integral part of the city's environment. Like wetlands, streams are an important physical, educational, ecological, aesthetic, recreational and economic asset. Surrounding development may degrade, pollute or damage streams and, in turn, degrade other surface waters downstream. Requiring buffers recognizes that the surrounding uplands relate to the woodland and stream quality and function and, therefore, are in the public interest. c. Buffers are the lands that surround wetlands and streams. They are integral to maintaining the valuable functions many wetlands and streams perform and to maintaining a wetland or stream's health. Requiring wetland buffers recognizes that the surrounding uplands relate to the wetland and stream's quality and function and, therefore, are in the public interest. Buffers have the following functions: ill Rreduce the impacts of surrounding land use on wetlands and streams by stabilizing soil to prevent erosion by stormwater; and filtering suspended solids, nutrients, pollutants. and harmful substances. ill Moderating water level fluctuations during storms. ill BHffcrs also pfrovide essential wildlife habitat. ill aml Provide shade to reduce the temperature of both stormwater runoff and the wetland. (Water temperature is one of the factors controlling the ability of water to hold dissolved oxygen. This ability decreases with increasing water temperatures. The dissolved oxygen level must be maintained at a minimum level to maintain healthy aquatic life.) ill Fiaally, buffers rReduce the adverse impacts of human activities on wetlands and streams. I WThe purposes of this section are to: a. Preserve wetlands and streams in a natural state. ab. Preserve the beneficial functions of wetlands and streams by regulating the surrounding land use. 9". Stabilize the soil around wetlands and streams to prevent storm-water erosion. ego Enhance and preserve water quality bv Ffilterillg suspended solids, nutrients and harmful substances before thev ffem reaching wetlands, streams and public waters. d~. Reduce human disturbances of wetlands and streams by '/isually separating wetlands from yards. ef. Prevent flooding and the costs of reclaiming water quality. g. Protect propertv. th. Protect beneficial plant and wildlife habitat. g~ Educate the public, including appraisers, owners, potential buyers or developers, to the development limitations of wetlands, streams and associated buffers. .1 Encourage property owners who live adiacent to and/or near wetlands and streams to be responsible stewards including managing and enhancing the quality of buffers and restoring the buffer to a diverse planting of deep-rooted native plants. 2. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this section, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this subsection, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Alteration means any human action that adversely affects a buffer. Alterations include but are not limited to the following: grading, filling, dumping, dredging, draining, cutting, pruning, topping, clearing, relocating or removing vegetation, applying herbicides or pesticides or any hazardous or toxic substance, dischargiag pollutants eJlCcpt stormvffiter, paving, construction, application of gravel. discharging pollutants except stormwater or any other human activity that adversely affects the vegetation, hydrology, wildlife or wildlife habitat. Alteration does not include the following: a. Walking, passive recreation, fishing or other similar low impact activities. b. Planting that enhances native vegetation. c. The selective clearing, pruning or control oftrees or vegetation that are dead, diseased, noxious weeds or hazardous. j','epage huffer ',,'idfh means the ayemge width of a buffer within a single development, lot or phase. 2 Best manaf!ement vractices (BMF's) mean measures taken to minimize negative effects of stormwater runoff on the environment including, but not limited to, installation of rain gardens, infiltration basins, infiltration trenches, retention basins. filters. sediment traps, swales, reduction of impervious surfaces. planting of deep-rooted native plants. landscape and pavement maintenance. BOf! means a peatland with acidic pH as described in the Minnesota Land Cover Classification Svstem. Buffer means a stream or wetlancl bHff-er or the protective zone of vegetation along a stream or around a wetland. Clearing means the cutting or removal of vegetation. Enhancement means an action that increases the functions and values of a wetland, stream or wetland buffer. Erosion means the movement of soil or rock fragments. or the wearing awav of the land surface bv water. wind. ice. and gravitv. Fen means a peatland fed bv ground water as described in the Minnesota Land Cover Classification Svstem, including but not limited to. calcareous fens. rich fens. and poor fens. Forested seasonal wetland means a wooded wetland with hvdric soils that mav have standing water vear round or mav dry UP seasonallv. Infiltration basin means a pond or basin that captures stormwater and allows it to soak into the ground. An infiltration basin will tvpicallv drain within 48 hours of a storm event. Mitigation means an action that reduces, rectifies, eliminates or compensates for the alteration of a buffer, wetland or stream. Native vegetation means tree, shrub, grass or other plant species that are is indigenous to the Twin Cities metropolitan area that could have been expected to naturally occur on the site. Native vegetation does not include noxious weeds. Naturalized vef!etation means tree. shrub. grass or other plant species that exists on a site naturallv, without having been planted. It mav be a native or non-native species. Some naturalized species are appropriate in a buffer and some are considered weeds. Olif!otrovhic acid marsh means a shallow or deep marsh with low pH, high dissolved oxvgen. and low levels of nutrients. Ordinary high water mark (OHWM) means a mark delineating the highest water level maintained for enough time to leave evidence upon the landscape. The ordinary high water mark is commonly that point where the natural vegetation changes from predominantly aquatic to predominantly terrestrial. Rain f!arden means an infiltration basin that is planted as a garden and allows water to infiltrate within 48 hours of a storm event. 3 Restoration means returning a wetland, stream or buffer to a condition that is similar to that before development of the surrounding area. Sedf!'e meadow means a wetland with saturated soils or standing water that contains a significant number of plant species associated with sedge meadow, defined as wet meadow in the Minnesota Land Cover Classification Svstem. Semipublic means land that is maintained bv a private organization for public use. Setback means the minimal horizontal distance between a structure and the nearest edge of the buffer,wetland,orstream. Straight-edge setback is a means of determining the allowable setback of an addition to an existing house, garage, deck, or driveway which is located closer to or within the required buffer setback as specified in item 6.e. (minimum buffers). Straight-edge setback additions are measured by using the existing edge of the house, garage, deck, or driveway located nearest to the edge of a buffer, wetland, or stream, and extending that line in a parallel direction. No portion of the addition can encroach closer to the edge of a buffer, wetland, or stream than the existing. Stream means those areas where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed. A defined channel or bed is land that clearly contains the constant passage of water under normal summer conditions. This definition does not include drainage swales or ditches that channel intermittent stormwater runoff. Stream huffir means land that is in direct dfaiRage to a stream and withiH the bOllfldary desc-ribed by this article. /\ perSOH shall mcasW'e all buff-c-rs from the ordiHary high water mark (OHWM) as identified in the field. If a person cannot determine the OHWM, the stream bllffer shall be from the tap aithe stream banJe Structure means anything constructed or erected that requires location on the ground or attached to something having location on the ground. Sustainable desif!'n means a development that is designed to protect and/or restore the natural environment of the land on which it is developed. Temporarv erosion control is a method of keeping soil in its original location during construction or grading. Temporary erosion control measures include. but are not limited to. silt fencing. erosion control blankets. bale slope barriers, or other best management erosion control methods approved by the city. Variance means a deviation from the standards of this section that is not specifically allowed. Vegetation means any organic plant life growing at, below or above the soil surface. Water C/ualitv pond means a pond that that has been created to capture stormwater runoff. These are not natural wetlands. Stormwater is often piped into these ponds but may also enter through sheet runoff. Water C/ualitv pond edf!'e means the normal high water level for a utility pond. 4 Wet!and buffer means land that is in direct drainage te a wetland within the bOllBdary desoribed by this seotion. fJI buffcrs shall be measrned outward :from the wetland cdge. Weed means a plant which is causing damage in some way to natiye vegetation or ecosvstems. Wetland classes. The city defines the wetland classes used in this section as follows: (a) Cklss 1 wetlands means wetlands assigned the lffiique/olltstanding rating in the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed Distriot Wetlands Inyentory, 1995. Class 1 wetlands ar-e those with oonditions and funotions most suso0j3tible to human impaots, are most lffiique, ha'/c thc highest OOll'llllilnity resouroe sigaifioanoe and similar o-haracteristics. (b) Class 2 wet.fends mean high value (definition bascd on Watershed wctlands in'ielliory reSMS ). (0) Class 3 ',mt!-ends mean wildlifc habitat value. (d) Class 1 wetlands mean moderatc value impaots. (e) Class 5 weUtmds moans wetlands assigned the highly impaoted rating in the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed Distriot Wotlands IIl'IeIliory, 1995. Class 5 '.vetlands are thase '.vith oonditions and funotians most affceted by lmman activities, with the least diverse vegctation eOBllRlInities, least oaB1l1lUnity resarnoe signifioanoe and similar charaoteristios. Far the pllIfloses of this scction, the U.S. Fish and Wildlif-c Serviee's Classifioatian ofWotlands and De0j3water Habitats of the Unitcd States, FWS/OBS 79/31 (Cov_din et al, 19(9) oalliains the desccriptians and photagraphs of wetland classes and subelasses. a. Class A+ means wetland types that are very rare in our community, are particularlv sensitive to impacts from development, and provide much needed habitat for wildlife. These wetlands are special wetlands and deserve additional protection to ensure that they remain in that status. These wetlands will provide much needed habitat for wildlife. Class A+ wetlands are Class A wetlands utilizing Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District classification svstem plus wetlands that follow unique and special types of wetlands in Maplewood: D oligotrophic acid marsh. 2) wet prairie 3) sedge meadow 4) forested seasonal wetland 5) bog b. Class A - Defined as a Class A wetland utilizing Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District classification system. All streams in the City of Maplewood are also defined as Class A. These wetlands and streams are exceptional and the highest-functioning 5 wetlands in Maplewood. These wetlands and streams should be preserved and in some cases enhanced to achieve the highest functioning value. c. Class B - Defined as a Class B wetland utilizing Ramsev Washington Metro Watershed District classification svstem. These wetlands are high-qualitv wetlands that should be protected from development and other pressures of increased use. including indirect effects. Maintaining natural buffers will help retain the significant function these wetlands provide. These wetlands also provide optimal restoration opportunities. d. Class C - Defined as a Class C wetland utilizing Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District classification system. These wetlands provide medium functional levels and the wetland extent should be maintained. Maintaining natural buffers will help retain the significant function these wetlands provide. These wetlands also provide optimal restoration opportunities. e. Utility Class - Defined as water quality ponds. Wet vrairie means a wetland with saturated soils. containing a significant number of plant species found in wet prairie communities as defined in the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System. Wetland easement means a designated area that includes the wetland or buffer where disturbance from mowing, cutting or similar activities is excluded. Wetland and stream edge means the line delineating the outer edge of a wetland. One shall establish this line by using the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands dated Jarmary 10, 1989, anEljointly published by the U.S. En'/ironmentaJ Protee-tion !.geney, the U.S. Pinn and Wildlife Serviee, the U.S. Army COfj'lS of Engineers and the U.S. Seil Conservation Serviee. The applicable watershed board must verify this line. Wetlandfunctions means the natural processes performed by wetlands, such as helping food chain production, providing wildlife habitat, maintaining the availability and quality of water such as purifying water, acting as a recharge and discharge area for groundwater aquifers and moderating surface water and stormwater flows and performing other functions, including but not limited to those set out in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulations at 33 CPR 320. 4(b )(2)(1988). Wetlands means those areas of the eity inundated or saturated by groundwater or surface water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and that under normal circumstances do support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas as defined in the fArmy Corps of Engineers Regulation 33 CPR 328.3 1988). Where a person has removed or mostly changed the vegetation, one shall determine a wetland by the presence or evidence of hydric or organic soil and other documentation ofthe previous existence of wetland vegetation such as aerial photographs. 3. Applicability. This section shall apply as follows: a. This section shall apply to any person or use that would alter a wetland, stream or wetland buffer after ,^cpriI24, 1995 add date of adoption of new ordinance. 6 b. When any provision of any ordinance conflicts with this section, the provision that provides more protection for buffers, wetlands or streams shall apply unless specifically provided otherwise in this section. This also applies to the appropriate Watershed District. c. Public and semipublic streets, utilities or trails, whether built by a public agency or private developer, shall be subject to this section. 4. General exemptions. This section shall not apply to the following: a. The construction or mttintenancc of p!'.ublic or semi-public drainage faeilities, sedimentation pimaS, or erosiim control facilities streets, utilities, and trails. b. The maintenance of public or semipublic faeilities ineluding streets, atilities and trails. c. \Vhere the city eouncil v!ai'/es these requirements for the censtruction of public ana semi pu81ic utilities or trails, '.vhether built by a public agOllCY or private developer, tIhe city cOUlleil may waive the requirements for these facilities where there would be a greater public need for the project than to meet the requirement of this section. The city cooocil shoJI hola a public hcaring before declaring such a w-ai'/er. The city shall notify the propcrty o',yners within 3 50 ~ foet ofthe buffer at least ten days bef-ore the hearing. In waiving these requirements, the city co_cil shall follow the following standards~ in subsection (e) of this sectioR. (1) The city may only allow the construction of public or semi-public utilities and streets through buffers where there is no other practical alternative and the following requirements are met: (a) The citv council must approve the waiver to allow public or semi-public utilities or streets to be located within a wetland buffer. Before the city council acts on the waiver the planning commission and the environmental and natural resources commission shall make a recommendation to the city council. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing for the waiver. The city staff shall notify the properly owners within five hundred (500) feet of the buffer at least ten days before the hearing. (b) Utility or street corridors shall not be allowed when endangered or threatened species are found in the buffer. (c) Utility or street corridors, including any allowed maintenance roads, shall be as far from the wetland or stream as possible. (d) Utility or street corridor construction and maintenance shall protect the wetland, stream or buffer and avoid large trees as much as possible. The city shall not allow the use of pesticides, herbicides or other hazardous or toxic substances in buffers, streams or wetlands. In some situations the use of herbicides may be used if prior approval is obtained from staff. ( e) The owner or contractor shall replant utility or street corridors with appropriate native vegetation, except trees, at preconstruction densities or 7 greater after construction ends. Trees shall be replaced as required bv city code. (f) Any additional corridor access for maintenance shall be provided as much as possible at specific points rather than by parallel roads. If parallel roads are necessary they shall be no greater than fifteen (15) feet wide. (g) Mitigation actions must be met as specified in item 8 below (mitigation and restoration of buffers). (2) The city may allow public or semi-public pri'/ate trails in buffers. Trails must be approved bv staff and are subject to the following guidelines: lli2 Trails shall not be installed when endangered or threatened species are found to be present in the buffer. (b) The trail shall net be constructed of impervious materials. f,fl elevated boardvlalk shallllot be considered an impervious srnface. (c) Buffers shall be expanded, 'shere possible, equal to the width of the trail corridor. (d) The owner or contractor shall replant all disturbed areas next to the trail in a timeframe approved bv staff. after completing tile trail. W All necessary erosion control measures must be in place prior to developing the trail. The erosion control measures must also be maintained and inspected to ensure that the wetland is not compromised bv trail construction activities. ill Trail must be constructed with sustainable design methods. (g) Trail may provide one access point to the wetland but should be no more than four four (4) feet wide. (h) Boardwalks are allowed within the buffer and shall be a maximum of six (6) feet in width for semi-public use and twelve (12) feet in width for public use. ill Trails or boardwalks shall not be constructed entirely around the wetland. ill Mitigation actions must be met as specified in item 8 below (mitigation and restoration of buffers). IT. Structures, vegetation and maintenance activities and practiccs ill existellce Oil the cff-cctive date of tile ordinanee from which this sectioll deriyeG. f. cOlltractor or OWfler may remodel, recollGtrnct or replace aff-ccted stmctrnes iftlle Ilew cOllstruction does IlOt take ap more buffer land than tile straeture aGed before the remodelillg, reeollStructioll or replacemellt. 8 e. 'Nhm'e this sectien weuld deny all reasonable use ef a let ef recerd. In such ease, the ewner er centraeter shall censtruct mry building te maximize the setback frem a buffer. Federal, state er '.vaterGhed district rules and regulatiens shall apply. .^Jteratiens te a buff-cr shall be the miniHllliR necessary te aile.".. f-or the reasenable UGe efthe preperty. Where f-easible, the city may require thc mitigatien ef mry alteratien of a buff-cr. c. Additions to a house. garage. deck. driveway using the existing straight-edge setbacks to a wetland if the fellowing applv: ill Property is zened or currentlv being used as single familv residential. ill There is ne ether reasonable alternative than encroachment teward the wetland with the additien. ill The house. garage. deck. or driveway is a minimum eftwentv-five (25) feet frem the wetland edge. ffi Addition does not cause degradation ef the wetland. stream. or the existing buffer. ill Mitigation actions must be met as specified in item 8 below (mitigation and restoration of buffers). d. Nen-chemical control and removal ef noxious weeds within the buffer. Remeval plan to be approved bv staff. e. Planting native plants within the wetland buffer; planting plan te be approved bv staff. f. Removal of trees. limbs. brush or branches that are dead. diseased. or pese safety hazards. 5. Variances. Procedures for granting variances from this section are as fellows: a. The city council may approve variances te the requirements in this section. All variances must fellow Minnesota state law governing variances. b. Before the city council acts on a variance the planning commissien and the environmental and natural resources commission shall make a recommendation to the city ceuncil. The planning commissien city ceuncil shall hold a public hearing for the variance. before approving a variance. The city staff shall notify the property owners within five hundred 500 ~ feet of the buffer at least ten days before the hearing. c. The city may require the applicant te mitigate any buffer alter-atien with the approval of a variance. including but not limited to. implementing ene or more of the strategies as listed in item f.d.. (alternative average buffer). &. Te approve a variance, the c81fficil Hllist make the fonewing findings: B Strict enf{)rcem.ent '.veuld cause UI1f!ae hardship because ef cireumstances unique te the preperty llilder censideratien. The term. "undue hardship" as used in granting a variance lReans the ewner ef the prepcrty in questien car.net put it te a rcasenable use if used llilder cenditiens a1lewed by the efficial centrels; the plight 9 ofthc landowner is Elue to circumstanccs unique to his property, Rot created by the lalldo'.vner; and thc variallce, if granted, will not altcr the essential charac-ter of thc locality. Economic considcrations alonc arc not all oodue hardship if reasonaBle use for the property Olliots under the terms of this sectioR. 2t The '<,ariance would be iR kceping with the spirit and intent of this section. 6. Buffcr ~standards. Standards for this section buffcrs are as follows: a. Wetland or stream easement. The property owner of any property affected by this section shall record wetland or stream easements with the county. The easements shall cover any wetlands, streams or wetland buffers. These easements shall describe the boundaries of the buffer and prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer, stream or wetland. The owner or developer shall record such easements with a final plat, with deeds from a lot division or before the city issues a building permit for an affected property. The applicant shall submit proof that the owner or developer has filed the notice. b. Treatment of stormwater: ill All stormwater must be treated to the following water quality standards prior to discharge to a Class A+, Class A. Class B and Class C wetlands: 90% sediment removal and 60% phosphorus removal. ill Stormwater must not infiltrate into a wetland at a rate greater than one (1 ) inch. ill Stormwater must be treated before being discharged into a wetland. c. An affected property owner shall maintain a buffer. Any planting in a buffer shall be from native vegetation. d. The city prohibits the alteration of buffers. The city may waive this requirement where the watershed district has approved a permit for filling all or part of a wetland. e. Minimum buffers. The following are the minimum required buffer widths and structure building foundatioR setbacks: Buffer Wetland Classes Class ,iJ Class A +-+ & Streams Class ll.3 Class C-4- Utility CI-as-s5 .\'/erage buffer width"- +OO-ft. -1-00 ft. W4 ~. (}..ft. Minimum Buffer Width 200-1-00 ft. lOOW ft. 75~ ft. 50~ft. 100 ft. Building FoundatioR Structure Setback From 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. lO ft. Outer Edge of Buffer lO f. Alternative average buffers. Recognizing that there are instances where, because of the unique phvsical characteristics of a specific parcel of land. alternative buffers mav be necessary to allow for the reasonable use ofthe land. Q) The alternative average buffer standards set forth below mav be applied based on an assessment of the following: ill Undue hardship would arise from not allowing the alternative, or would otherwise not be in the public interest. (Jil Size of parcel. (fl Configuration of existing roads and utilities. (41 Percentage of parcel covered bv wetland. (>)) Configuration of wetlands on the parcel. (fl Will not cause degradation of the wetland or stream. {g} Will ensure the protection or enhancement of portions of the buffer which are found to be the most ecologicallv beneficial to the wetland or stream. ill The following are the alternative average buffer widths and structure building foHlldatioll setbacks: Buffer Wetland Classes Class A & Streams Class B Minimum Buffer Width 75 ft. 50 ft. Alternative Avg. Buffer Width* 100 ft. 75 ft. Structure Setback From 10 ft. 10 ft. Outer Edge of Buffer *No more than 10 percent ofthe wetland buffer area mav be used for averaging. ill The appropriateness of using the alternative average buffers will be evaluated as part of the review of the contractor or owner's development application. The alternative average buffer used must be within the spirit and intent of this code and must meet requirements set forth bv the citv to include. but are not limited to, the following strategies: ill Restoration of buffer to native plantings. Submittal of a buffer restoration plan drafted bv a professional experienced in wetland restoration including: 11 L Existing vegetation. 2. Restoration methods. 1. Maintenance procedures proposed during frrst three years of establishment. 4. Erosion control measures. ~ List of plants to be planted. 6. Oualifications of contractor. Only contractors with experience and success restoring wetland buffers or natural vegetation shall be approved. 7. Maintenance agreement which states that the owner will maintain the buffer to its improved state. 8. Cash escrow or letter of credit to cover 150 percent ofthe required work. ill Manage weeds in buffer. All weeds listed on the Minnesota noxious weed list must be controlled. Other problematic weeds which are not on the noxious weed list but can threaten the health of a wetland must also be controlled. Submittal of a weed management plan drafted bv a professional experienced in wetland restoration including: L Target weeds. 2. Appropriate management techniques. 3. Management schedule. " 4. Potential erosion and reseeding if management will create large areas of dead vegetation. ~ Cash escrow or letter of credit to cover 150 percent of the required work. ill Reduction in stormwater runoff and/or improvement of quality of stormwater runoff entering wetland or stream. This may be achieved through the following strategies or other staff approved best management practices for dealing with stormwater. These practices to be located outside of the wetland buffer. L Reduce amount of pavement on site (i.e. fewer parking stalls, narrower driveways, shared parking with other businesses), 2. Use pervious pavement such as pavers or porous asphalt. 12 .1. Use turf pavers or modified turf areas for overflow parking. 4. Install rain garden or infiltration basin. 2, Install rock trench or rock pit. 6. Install filter strip of grass or native vegetation. 7. Install surface sand filter or underground filter. .!L. Install native plantings on site to reduce fertilizer use and improve infiltration. 9. Install green roof on building. ill Install grit chambers. sediment traps. or forebavs. &. Special construction practices shall be required on proiects adiacent to wetlands. Practices to be approved bv staff prior to issuance of a grading or building permit including, but not limited to. the following: ill Grading. ill Sequencing. ill Vehicle tracking platforms. ill Additional silt fences. ill Additional sediment control. h. Buffer measurement. Buffers shall be measured horizontallv from wetland edge, not across the buffer landscape. On slopes greater than 18% the buffer width shall be increased to 10 feet bevond the apex of the slope. Extension of the buffer for steep slopes shall applv to all wetland classes. The city may require a variable buffer width to protect adjacent habitat that the city determines is valuable to the wetland, stream, wildlife or vegetation. 1, The city does not allow the construction of stormwater drainage facilities, sedimentation ponds. infiltration basins. and rain water gardens within the buffer. except as allowed in general exceptions. J. The minimum buffer widths shall apply to all wetlands, including those created, restored, relocated, replaced or enhanced. k. Buffer shall remain in natural state with naturalized or native vegetation. 1. Where the watershed district has approved a wetland filling permit. The city shall require mitigation for any disturbed buffer land. 13 m.. Landowners interested in restoring their buffer to native plants should submit a restoration plan as specified in item 6.f.3.a. (restoration of buffer to native plantings) to city staff for approvaL 7. Fencing Erosion controL sign, and platting standards: a. Before grading or construction, the owner or contractor shall put into place erosion control measures around the borders of buffers. Such erosion control measures must remain in place until the owner and contractors have finished all development activities that may affect the buffer. b. Before gracling or startillg construction, the boundary between a buffer and adjacent land shall be identified using permanent signs. These signs shall mark the edge of the buffer and shall state there shall be no mowing, cutting, filling or dumping beyond this point. These signs shall be installed at each lot line where it crosses a wetland buffer. and where needed to indicate the contour of the buffer. with a maximum spacing of 100' feet of wetland edge. c. All erosion control measures must be maintained and inspected to ensure compliance and protection of wetlands. streams, and buffers. The contractor or owner shall be responsible for all erosion/sedimentation breaches within the buffer and shall restore impacted areas to conditions present prior to grading or construction activities. d. When platting or subdividing property, the plat or subdivision must show the wetland boundaries as approved by the watershed district. e. After completion of grading or construction the contractor or owner may remove the erosion control measures only after inspection and approval by the city and watershed district to ensure the areas affected have been established per requirements. [, It is the responsibility of the owner to alleviate any erosion occurring after completion of grading or construction. inspection by the city and watershed district, and removal of erosion control measures. 8. Mitigation and restoration of buffers. The city requires mitigation when a property owner or contractor has altered or will alter a buffer. The property owner or contractor shall submit a mitigation plan to the city staff for their approval. In reviewing the plan, the city may require the f{)llowing actions below ill descending order of preference. a. Reducing or avoiding the impact by limiting the degree or amount ofthe action, such as by using appropriate technology. b. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating or restoring the w{)odland buffer. c. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by prevention and maintenance operations during the life of the actions. d. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing or providing substitute buffer land at up to a twoene-to-one ratio. e. Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. 14 f. Where the city requires restoration or replacement, the owner or contractor shall replant the buffer with native vegetation. at a similar denaity to the amoHflt before alteration A replanting plan must be approved by the city prior to planting. & Any additional requirements by the appropriate watershed district as well as the soil and water conservation shall apply. h. All strategies as listed in item f.3. (alternative average buffer) 9. Wetland buffer mitigation surety required. The applicant shall post a wetland buffer mitigation surety with the city. such as a cash deposit or letter of credit. of one hundred and fifty (150) percent of estimated cost for mitigation. Funds will be held by the city until successful completion of restoration. Wetland buffer mitigation surety does not include other sureties required pursuant to any other provision of city code or city directive. 10. Enforcement. The city reserves the right to inspect the site at any time for compliance with this ordinance. lL The city shall be responsible for the enforcement of this ordinance. Any person who fails to comply with or violates any section of this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and. upon conviction. shall be subiect to punishment in accordance with section 1-15. Allland use building and grading permits shall be suspended until the developer has corrected the violation. Each day that a separate violation exists shall constitute a separate offense. 15