Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-06-24 ENR Packet AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCE COMMISSION Tuesday, June 24, 2008 5:15 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: a. May 20, 2008 5. Unfinished Business: a. Wetland Ordinance - Tabled by City Council on April 28, 2008, and Sent Back to ENR Commission for Review b. Comprehensive Plan (Sustainabilily Chapter) - Tabled from June 3, 2008, ENR Commission Meeting 6. New Business 7. Visitor Presentations 8. Commission Presentations 9. Staff Presentations a. New Member Orientation - Welcome Bill Schreiner b. U of M College of Natural Resources Environmental Capstone Project Update c. Newsletter Updates: Maplewood Seasons and Maplewood News d. Maplewood Nature Center Programs 10. Adjourn Agenda Item 4.8. ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, MAY 20, 2008 COUNCIL CHAMBERS - MAPLEWOOD CITY HALL 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST Chairperson Yingling called the meeting to order at 5:20 p.m. ATTENDANCE: Commissioner Carole Lynne Commissioner Carol Mason Sherrill Commissioner Frederica Musgrave Commissioner Dale Trippler Chair Ginny Yingling Excused Present Present Present Present STAFF PRESENT Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner VISITORS PRESENT Dr. Mike Manthei, President of Silver Lake Improvement Association Wendy Crowel, Department of Natural Resources - Invasive Species Program Lincoln Fetcher, President of Valley Branch Watershed District APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chair Yingling made a motion to approve the agenda, seconded by Commissioner Trippler. The motion carried by a vote of 4 to 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 21 ,2008: A motion to adopt the April 21,2008, minutes was made by Commissioner Musgrave, seconded by Chair Yingling. The motion carried by a vote of 4 to O. NEW BUSINESS: Silver Lake Improvement Association - Request for Herbicide Treatment Funding for the Control of Curly/eat Pondweed and Eurasian Watermilloi/ in Silver Lake Commissioner Tf"ippler ~ He is wondering why the city rejected the request last year? Pianner Finwail ~ The EN~, and Parks Commission recommended funding the treatment, but the city council ultimately denied the request 1 Planner Finwall ~ Regarding boat ramp, the Parks Commission has applied for a grant from the Department of Natural Resources to help fund a fishing pier which is part of the Joy Park master plan. Additionai signage has been installed near the boat ramp to help alleviate concerns about boats coming into the lake or exiting the lake with invasive species. Commissioner Musgrave - The recommendation by city staff last year included additional studies and shoreline improvement by the residents. Commissioner Mason Sherrill - What are homeowners on the lake doing regarding mitigation for this? What is their stake in this? Dr. Mike Manthei, President of Silver Lake Improvement Association - When we came to the city council for funding the city council denied our request. The mayor told him he should have gone to the ENR commission first which he then did. He remembered a staff person making the recommendations. Chair Yingling - Recalled the ENR Commission meeting where they discussed the item last year. Chair Yingling stated that the ENR Commission ultimately recommended approval. Dr. Manthei ~ Many Silver Lake residents attended the Nature Center's shoreline restoration session and one of the residents subsequently undertook planted native plantings of their shoreline. In addition, several residents have installed rip-rap for erosion control. Dr. Manthei stated that this is an opportunity to help the quality of a lake before it becomes impaired. Chair Yingling ~ Wants to make sure that if the city assists in funding the treatment of the lake that there is a plan and commitment by all lake owners for improving the water quality by restoring the shoreline. Commissioner Mason Sherrill - Concerned that chemical treatment is also killing native plants and wondered what kind of an impact that will have on aquatic animals? Can the killed natives be reintroduced at a later point? Dr. Manthei - Only a very small percentage of the native Northern milfoil was killed off last year by the treatment. Wendy Crowel, DNR - there were several native species that were reduced or killed following treatment, which was unexpected. The DNR will be doing the same plant survey again next year. We wanl so see the abundance and frequency of the plants. There is pienty ot coontail in the lake, which offers excellent habitat for many invertebrates. She thinks that the seed bank for Northern milfoil is aiready in the sediment of Silver Lake. If there are favorable conditions this yoar the plants wili reappear and It won't be necessary to reintroduce them. Commissioner Tripplel'" He didn't get a sense from tho DNF< report to tile legislature that the treatment grant program was providinCI great benefit to tile dollar. Ms. Crowe I ~ The intent of the grant is to take iakes with high amounts of invasive plants and be able to reduce the plants significantly. Their aim is not to eradicate the plant 2 completely. In regards to ecological benefits, many of these projects have just started. We do not have the data yet to determine whether these ecological benefits can be achieved. Commissioner Trippler - Is anybody at the DNR looking at the comparative benefit of limiting nutrient input to the lake versus adding chemicals? Ms. Crowel ~ She does not know of any single person at the DNR trying to pull that data together. In many cases both will need to be done. Commissioner Musgrave - Concerned about the long term use of these products. Ms. Crowel ~ Part of what we are doing is monitoring the plant community. It is adaptive management. We are very cautious of how we put the herbicides in the water. Chair Yingling ~ You mentioned that the treatment has already been done this year. The ENR is therefore not voting on whether this should happen or not, we are voting on whether the city participates and has some say in how it is done. As such, what does this mean for the city's overall budget? Planner Finwall ~ does not know overall scheme of the budget except to say that this item was not included in the 2008 budget. If approved, the funds would have to come from future EUF and PAC funds or be pulled from another project. Commissioner Trippler - Why is city staff recommending funding one-half of the treatment? Planner Finwall - The ENR and Parks Commission recommended that amount last year in order to show the city's initial support. City staff has followed suit this year since it is a tight budget year. Chair Yingling - Asked the question to the commissioners "Given all the other constraints, is this something we should be spending our funds on? What are our highest needs and priorities?" Commissioner Trippler - Feels that our first priority is to recommend to the city council whether we think doing lake treatment is worthwhile. The question of money is a policy decision for the city council. He was looking at this from the standpoint of what the request was, what the results show, and whether or not it was showing a benefit or causing damage. He would like to know what the association is doing in terms of phosplmrus limits on their shoreiines. Ms. Crowel ~ found less Eurasian watermilfoil this spring than last spring. She did not know whether it is a phosphorus or nitrogen limiting lake and is not aware of the association's efforts to restore shoreline. Commissioner Musgrave ~ She received three e~mail questions: "Who is cleaning up the back waters? There may be run.off from iilegai compost sites. Has a comparison been done to find Ollt what neighboring cities are spending on preventing pollution? When we talk about money and contributing money what is the big picture?" Lincoln Fetcher, President of Valley Branch Watershed District - 3 . Silver lake is one of the cleanest and most pristine bodies of water in the watershed district. It is also one of the most heavily used recreation lakes in the metro area. It is a high priority area for the watershed district. The watershed district has put a lot of focus and energy in that lake in a number of ways including restoring part of the southeast shoreline and adding a bio retention site on the southwest comer that captures a significant amount of the run off. . Silver Lake has a lot of the storm water run off going directly in the lake from the street which is a challenge. The surrounding wetlands clean the water before it goes into the lake. The phosphorus loading is believed to be internal. . We have instigated a number of projects to improve run-off. We did a study on the water quality coming in from the north end. We will need to eventually do some restoration of that channel. . The biggest issue around the lake is the direct storm water runoff, which we are working with the City of North St. Paul to alleviate and also to get them to stop mowing down to the edge of the lake in their park. . The boat ramp should not be associated with this funding issue as it is Ramsey County's. . With the 1.5 million dollar plan to do work within Joy Park on the north side it seems like the focus on that would have to do with recreation. . It would make sense that part of that funding would be related to the water. Since the City of Maplewood owns the largest amount of shoreline on the lake, it is appropriate that the city be involved. Commissioner Musgrave -- Looking at runoff, maintenance, and protection of shoreline-- is there some way of saying Maplewood is doing a better job in terms of stormwater runoff in spite of our having a larger proportion of Shoreline. Mr. Fetcher - It appears that Maplewood's participation in this matter is needed. There is a serious shoreline erosion problem on the north side and elsewhere around the lake which is contributing to the problem. Geese population is reduced when there is a large amount of vegetation around the lake. Shoreline restoration within the park will provide a good demonstration and education for the public. Commissioner Yingling ~ Is this something we want to recommend to the city council, that lake treatment is a good thing and that we support it? If so, do we want to make any recommendation about what kind of support they should be giving to it? Commissioner Mason Sherrill - A positive recommendation to the city council is telling them yes, we think that water IS important and that the city needs to be doing sometlling. We can put it into words that are more explicit. We need to be proactive and aggressive in taking care of our water. One thing that stands out to her regarding Silver lake is that we could get some very good data and information in treating our other impaired waters. Commissioner Musgrave ~ Agreed with sending a message in regards to being proactive about water quality. How are we goin9 to 90 about it, how are we going to prioritize and where do we wallt to put Out. funding in the first step effort? Commissioner Mason Sherrill - VVhere the funding IS coming from is not the ENR's responsibility to debate. 4 Chair Yingling - The Joy Pal'k Master Plan cails for some shoreline restoration on the park's shoreline, which would mean more native species and reducing erosion. Dr. Manthei ~ On the east side on the Joy Park shoreline there is a stormwater pipe. When the city is discussing storm water this should be addressed. He also mentioned that it is a spring fed lake. Commissioner Musgrave ~ I would like to have two motions from the ENR Commission, one that we are concerned about water quality and one that we do or don't support funding for the treatment of the lake. Chair Yingling - Do we have a consensus from the commission that we do support moving forward with these treatments? Commissioner Trippler - He does not like the general concept of poisoning something to make it better. He would recommend that the city provide some support to see if this is a way of dealing with these invasive species. He would also recommend that the city look into doing everything it possibly can to limit the amount of nutrients getting into the lake in the first place, monitoring the people who use the lake to make sure they don't keep bringing the invasive species in, and having a strong enforcement component so people get fined heavily for bringing in the invasive species on their boats. Commissioner Trippler - Would like to move the staff recommendation to support this study for this year at this level. Chair Yingling - With the caveat that the city needs to be looking at the input end both in terms of additional inputs from recreational users and getting our own house in order on storm water and other shoreline protection. Commissioner Trippler ~ four years from now when the study is over we can take a look at the invasive species section of the DNR to find out what their recommendations are and what they learned from this study. We won't want to put any more money into it if it is not working. A motion was made by Commissioner Trippler, seconded by Commissioner Mason Sherrill to fund the treatment of Silver Lake with herbicide to treat curly leaf pondweed and Eurasian watermilfoil. Funding of the treatment would be $8,250, one-half to come from the EUF fund and the other half from PAC. The motion passed by a vote of three to one, with Commissioner Musgrave voting against the motion. Commissioner Musgrave stated that she didn't support funding the treatment during a tight budget year, but did support improvement of water quality in the city's lakes. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Rules of Procedure Commissioner Musgrave had a question regarding section G - does it need to specify that If the chair can't attend the city council meeting then the vice chair should attend, and If the vice chair can't attend the chair will appoint someone to attend? 5 Chair Yingling suggested that the language suggested by Commissioner Musgrave be added. The Commission discussed the final remaining section of the Rules of Procedure which included election of chair and vice chair. A motion was made by Commissioner Yingling, seconded by Commissioner Mason Sherrill to approve the election of chair and vice chair section of the ENR rules. The motion was carried by a vote of 4 to O. Following is the rules of procedure language previously adopted by the commission as well as the new language added during the May 20 meeting for the rules of procedure: ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION RULES OF PROCEDURE We, the members of the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, created pursuant to Division 4, Sections 18.180 to 18.189 of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances, hereby adopt the following "Rules of Procedure," subject to the provisions of said Article, which is hereby made a part of these Rules: A. APPOINTMENTS The city council shall make appointments to the environmental and natural resources commission by following the current city appointment policy. B. MEETINGS 1. All meetings shall beheld in the council chambers in Maplewood City Hall, 1830 E. County Road B, unless otherwise directed by the chairperson or staff, in which case at least 24 hours notice will be given to all commissioners. 2. Regular meetings shall be held at 5:15 p.m on the first Tuesday of each calendar month, provided that when the meeting falls on a legal holiday or voting day, such meeting shall be rescheduled. 3. Special meetings may be held upon call by the chairperson or in his/her absence, by the vice chairperson, or by any other commissioner with the concurrence of a majority of the commissioners with at least 48 hours notice to all commissioners. C. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT In addition to carrying out tile duties pl"escribed in city ordinance the environmental planner or a designated repiacement shall: 1. Prepare the agenda for each meeting. 2. Act as technical advisor on any matter which comes before the commission. 6 3. Make written recommendations to the commission on matters referred to the commission. 4. Schedule any matter with the city council that has been reviewed by the commission that requires city council approval. D. AGENDA 1. Copies of the agenda, together with pertinent staff reports and copies of the minutes of the previous meeting shall be made available to each member of the commission no later than three days prior to the next scheduled meeting. 2. The agenda format shall generally read as follows: a. Call to Order b Roll Call c. Approval of Agenda d. Approval of Minutes e. Unfinished Business f. New Business g. Visitor Presentations h. Commissioner Presentations i. Staff Presentations j. Adjournment E. QUORUM 1. A simple majority of the current membership of the commissioners shall constitute a quorum. 2. Any commissioner who abstains from voting on a particular question because of possible conflict of interest or other reason shall not be considered a member of the commission for the purpose of determining a quorum for the consideration of the issue. 3. Any action by the commission shall require a majority vote of the members present. F. ELECTION OF OFFICERS A chairperson and vice chairperson shall be elected at the first environmental and naturai resources comllllssion in danuary of each year and will serve until their successors have been elected. Ncminations and members interested in serving as the chairperson or vice~chairperson shall be announced at the last meeting of the year. The chairperson will call for further nominations at the first meeting in January each year prior to the election. DUTIES OF THE CHAIRPERSON 1. In addition to the duties prescribed in the ordinance, the chair shall represent the commission at each city council meeting where a commission item is on 7 the agenda, to present the commission's recommendations and to answer questions from the city council regarding the decision. If the chair is unavailable to attend the city council meeting, the chair will appoint a representative from the commission. H. CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON 1. The chairperson. vice chairperson, and such officers as the commission may decide shall be elected and assume duties according to the current ordinance. 2. In the absence of the chairperson, the vice chairperson shall perform all duties required of the chairperson. When both the chairperson and the vice chairperson are absent, the attending members shall elect a chairperson pro tem. 3. If the chairperson resigns from or is otherwise no longer on the commission, the vice chairperson shall become the acting chairperson until the commission can hold an election for new officers. If the vice chairperson resigns or is otherwise no longer on the commission, the commission will elect a new vice chairperson at the next possible commission meeting. I. TEMPORARY COMMITTEES 1. The commission shall elect by a majority vote such standing committees and temporary committees as may be required and such committees will be charged with the duties, examinations, investigations, and inquiries relative to subjects assigned by the chair. 2. No standing or temporary committee shall have the power to commit the commission to the endorsement of any plan or program without the express approval of the commission. J. VACANCIES The environmental and natural resources commission positions shall be vacated or recommended to the city council for vacation according to the current environmental and natural resources ordinances. K. AMENDMENT OR SUSPENSION OF RULES 1. Any of the foregoing rules may be temporarily suspended by a majority vote of the commissioners present. 2. The "Rules of Procedure' may be amended at any reguiar meeting by a majority vote. L RULES OF ORDER In all points not covered by these rules, the commission shall be governed in its procedures by Robert's Rules of Order, Revised. 8 STAFF PRESENTATIONS: Items a. and c were tabled until the next meeting. b. Comprehensive Plan Open House (May 22): Planner Finwall reminded the Commission of the city's open house for the comprehensive plan to be held May 22 at the community center. ADJOURNMENT: 6:50 9 Agenda Item 5.a. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner Wetland Ordinance Review June 18, 2008 for the June 24 ENR Commission Meeting INTRODUCTION The city council approved the first reading of the proposed wetland ordinance on March 24, 2008. During the meeting they requested that staff look into several issues prior to the second reading as well as notify all property owners within 500 feet of a proposed Manage A wetland of the second reading of the ordinance. The attached April 21 staff report outlines the city council's concerns and staff's recommendations (Attachment 1). Of the 757 wetland notices mailed, 12 residents attended and spoke at the April 28 city council meeting (Attachment 2). Due to these resident's concerns, the city council tabled the wetland ordinance and sent it back to the environmental and natural resources (ENR) commission for review. DISCUSSION Following is a list of resident concerns and city staff response/recommendations: 1. Concern: If a developer fills a wetland and has to replace it, will the wetland buffers apply to the new wetlands? Response: Section 5.a. (standards) of the ordinance prohibits wetland filling, unless approved as a variance from the code. If a variance is approved federal law requires the wetland be replaced at a two-to-one ratio. Any newly created wetland is automatically classified as a Manage A wetland by the watershed district. This is the highest quality wetland with the most protection. Recommendation: No changes recommended. 2. Concern: If a yard is maintained as turf grass adjacent a IJvetiand and the ordinance is adopted with increased buffers, can a resident still maintain this area as turf grass? Also, what other activities can take place ill this area of the buffe(? Response: Section 7 (nonconforming uses) of the ordinance would grandfather in the use of a property as turf grass within a newly established buffer. According to the city's nonconforming ordinance and state statute this means that the propet~(y's use would be considored a pre-existing leg81 nonconforming use and wouid be able to continue to be maintained as turf grass. However, if an area of turf glaSS within a buffer is ever re- established with native plantings, and tha plantings were established for one year or longer, the legai nonconforming use status is removed and the property owner would need a variance to mow or alter the buffer. Regarding other activities that can take place on turf grass within a buffer, the property owner can maintain this area as they wouid their yard and are able to place temporary structures including swing sets, benches, lawn equipment, or portable fire pits in this location. No permanent structures would be allowed such as a permanent fire pit, a poured concrete patio, garage, etc., without a variance to the ordinance. Recommendation: Define temporary versus permanent structure in the definitions and ensure this is clarified in the nonconforming use section. 3. Concern: The city should ensure that there is a balance between the protection of the wetlands and residential property owner rights. Response: Section 4 (exemptions) allow residential property owners to build additions onto existing structures within the wetland buffer, as long as the addition is built on the straight edge of the existing house and is located at least 25 feet from the wetland. In addition, a property owner can plant native plantings within the buffer, after approval of the planting plan by city staff. Section 7 (nonconforming uses) allows any property owner to maintain their existing turf grass within the buffer and place temporary structures within that area. These exemptions and noncoconforming allowances balance the protection of the wetland and residential property owner rights. Recommendation: The ENR commission may want to consider additional exemptions. Bruce Olsen, a resident at 2444 Larpenteur Avenue, submitted his review and recommendations of the proposed ordinance in writing after the city council meeting (Attachment 3). Mr. Olsen brings up useful information for the commission's review and discussion including allowing benches and footpaths within an established buffer (one that is not existing turf grass) as an exemption. 4. Concern: Several Wakefield Lake residents attended the city council meeting and expressed concern over the proposed ordinance. One of the concerns expressed had to do with the watershed district's regulations versus the city's wetland and shoreland regulations. Response: The edges of Wakefield Lake are currently classified as a Class 4 wetland with a minimum buffer of 20 feet. Wakefield Lake is also covered by the city's shoreland ordinance with a 50~foot building structure setback requirement to the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The watershed district's new classification system upgraded the wetland edges surrounding the lake to a Manage B wetland. The watershed district currently requires a 25~foot minimum and a 50~foot average buffer to this wetland The city's proposed wetland ordinance would require a 75~foot buffer. Since the city's new wetland bulier would be more restrictive than the existing shmeland structure setback and the watershed district's wetland buffer, the new 75~foot wetland buffer would apply. Recommendation' i\lo changes recommended. 5. Concern: Sharon Sandeen, 1i'4e Guiden Place, is one of the Wakefield Lake residents who spoke at the city council meeting. Ms. Sandeen will be present at the ENR commission meeting to present her concerns and recommendations. One of the 2 concerns staff would like to discuss here is the Department of Naturai Resources' (DNR) permitting process for access to lakes. Response: In addition to the watershed district and city regulations, the DNR regulates aquatic plants and the water ways beyond the OHWM of the lake. Removal of emergent plants within Wakefield Lake and other lakes requires a DNR permit. The permit would allow a property owner to cut a 15~foot path through the emergent plant material for a dock or beach access. According to state law, DNR emergent plant permits cannot supersede other ordinances or regulations. Ms. Sandeen was issued a permit to cut a 15~foot path of emergent plant material to gain access to the lake. During the permitting process it appears that the DNR did not recommend that she review the city or watershed district regulations, which would have prohibited the path through the buffer. Based on the DNR permit Ms. Sandeen has since cut the path through the existing wetland buffer into the emergent plant material for access to the lake. Ms. Sandeen has requested that the ENR commission consider allowing DNR permits for access to a lake as an exemption. Recommendation: Consider adding language in the exemptions which would allow cutting within the wetland buffer to gain access to a lake. 6. Concern: The city has four manufactured home parks; three of those parks are adjacent wetlands. Gary Pearson, manager of the Beaver Lake Manufactured Home Park on Maryland Avenue and a Maplewood Planning Commissioner has concerns regarding how the existing and proposed ordinance would affect the park's property. Mr. Pearson recommends that the replacement of manufactured homes within a buffer be allowed as an exemption, similar to an addition on a single-family home. Response: There are two wetlands located to the east and north of the Beaver Lake Manufactured Home Park. These wetlands are both currently classified as Class 1 wetlands, the city's highest quality wetland classification. The watershed district's new classification would downgrade the wetland on the east side of the property to a Manage B and maintain the wetland on the north side as the highest classification, a Manage A in the watershed district system. The proposed wetland ordinance would require a 75-foot buffer from the Manage Band a 100~foot buffer from the Manage A, which is the current buffer requirement for a Class 1 wetland. The proposed ordinance would have less of an impact on this property. However, if the Manage A wetland is found to be a Class A+ wetland in the future the required buffer for the wetiand to the north would increase to 200 feet Based on measurements from the watershed district's wetland maps, there are 9 manufactured homes located within the existing buffer. If the wetland to the north is reclassified as a Ciass A+ in the future, there would be 12 manufactured homes located within the buffer. Ail of these manufactured homes will be removed and replaced with newer hornes in the upcoming years. Replacement of the homes requires removing the existing slab and pouring a new slab for the larger home. According to tile city's nonconforrnlng ordinance and state statute, once those structures are ,'emoved completely their status as a legal nonconforming use within the buffer is removed and a new structure would require a variance to be placed in thiS area. 3 Recommendation: Consider adding language in the exemptions which would allow manufactured homes to be replaced within the buffer. 7. Concern: Should the wetland buffer be a contiguous distance from a wetland, or should drainage areas, bluffs, and other barriers be taken into account? Response: Wetland buffers not only provide for cleansing of storm water runoff prior to entering the wetland, they also provide wildlife habitat and separation of a wetland from human impacts. In addition, in order to enforce a wetland ordinance there needs to be a standardized buffer width. It would be too difficult to enforce and plan for development or other impacts to a wetland when the buffers are subjected to individual topography variables such as bluffs. Recommendation: No changes recommended. 8. Concern: Storm sewers located within the wetland buffers. Response: The existing wetland ordinance allowed for storm structures such as storm sewers or infiltration basins to be located within a required buffer. Section 4.e. of the proposed ordinance (general exemptions) only allows these structures if associated with a public or semi-public project where no other practical alternative is found for these structures. The ordinance requires the disturbed buffer area to be mitigated. Recommendation: No changes recommended. RECOMMENDATION The ENR commission should review and comment on the resident's concerns regarding the proposed wetland ordinance. The ENR commission's comments and recommendations will be forwarded to the city council for final action. P:\com-devlord\environmental\wetland\6-24-08 ENR Meeting Attachments: 1. April 21, 2008, City Council Wetland Ordinance Staff Report 2. April 2S, 200S, City Council Minutes 3. WeUand Ol-dinance Review Submitted by Bruce Olsen 4. Wetland Ordinance (Redlinecl Version) 5. Wetland Ordinance (Clean Copy) 4 Attachment 1 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Charles Ahl, Acting City Manager Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner and Ginny Gaynor, Open Space Naturalist Wetland Ordinance (Second Reading) April 21, 2008 for the April 28 City Council Meeting INTRODUCTION The city council held the first reading of the proposed wetland ordinance on March 24, 2008. The wetland ordinance was drafted by the Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission after two years of research and study. The ENR Commission recommended approval of the wetland ordinance on January 29, 2008. DISCUSSION City Council Review The city council approved the first reading of the wetland ordinance by a vote of 5 to 0 with comments and concerns to be addressed prior to the second reading. Following are those comments/concerns and how they have been addressed: 1. Section 2 (Definitions): a. Issue: The term clearing is used in the ordinance. Retain the definition of clearing. Resolution: The definition of clearing has been added to the ordinance. b. Issue: Should the definition of a stream include drainage swales or ditches that channel intermittent stormwater runoff, or should these be exempt from the ordinance? Resolution: The proposed definition for a stream is "an area where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed. A defined channel or bed is land that clearly contains passage of water under normal summer conditions. This definition does not include drainage swales or ditches that channel intermittent stormwater runoff." A swale or a ditch is human-made intermittent storm water conveyance system which is designed to rOLlte the appropriate hydraulic capacity of stormwater runoff from an area. Concern was expressed that the city would not be protecting some watercourse systems if we excluded drainage swales and ditches. The Rams8y~V\lashington Metro Watcrshed Distl'ict's (RVIIMWD) 2006 Management Plan states that thcy manage three streams in Maplewood including Fish Creek (located in south Maplewood), Battle Creek (iocated in Battle Creek Regional Park), and Kohlman Creek (located in north Maplewood). The plan states that Fish and Battle Creek are perennial streams and have always been managed as natural streams. Kohlman Creek is an intermittent stream which was previously considered a county ditch by the watershed district, and is actually recorded as County Ditch 18S with the county. In 2002 the RWMWD issued a permit for a 215-foot-long section of Kohlman Creek to be piped within the Markham Pond Office Building site (1570 Beam Avenue). The pipe was required to accommodate a parking lot and driveway. Due to the fact that the watershed district classified that portion of Kohlman Creek as a ditch with intermittent water flow, the city did not require the owner to comply with the stream setback requirements of the city's existing wetland ordinance (50-feet). The watershed district's rationale for the classification at that time was that Markham Pond, which is where the Kohlman Creek begins, has a human-made control structure that restricts flow to the waterway in dry weather conditions making the water flow intermittent. In 2002 there was opposition to the watershed district's classification of that portion of Kohlman Creek as a ditch. However, since the city did not have their own wetland expert on staff, they depended on the watershed district to accurately classify the waterway. According to the watershed district's 2006 Management Plan, it now appears that they would manage Kohlman Creek differently. Regardless, the question still remains should a stream include a drainage swale or ditch and should they be given the same protections as a stream, which is proposed to include a 100-foot buffer? Minnesota Statutes, at Chapter 1 03E (Drainage) defines a drainage system as "a system of ditch or tile, or both, to drain property, including laterals, improvements, and improvements of outlets, established and constructed by a drainage authority." These are large waterways which are designed to accommodate stormwater flow for large tracts of land and had historically been recorded with the county. Maplewood has four officially recorded ditches in its borders: County Ditch 18 (Kohlman Creek) - flows from Casey Lake to Kohlman Lake; County Ditch 17 - flows from Wicklander to Wakefield and then to Phalen (some areas are piped); County Ditch 6 - flows to Gerten Pond and flows along Maplewood Drive (mostly piped); and the St. Paul Beltline (Trout Brook) -located within the St. Paul Regional Water Service's (SPRWS) site. A ditch or drainage swale needs to be cleaned on occasion to ensure appropriate hydraulic capacity. It wouldn't seem warranted to require a 1 OO~foot setback to a ditch or drainage swaie. However, there are areas of ditches which warrant that protection. An example of this is the city's approval of the SPRWS campus expansion in 2004 in which the city required SPRWS to maintain the required 50- foot buffer from the Sf. Paul Beltline (Trout Brook). That portion of the designated ditch was deemed worthy of protection at that time Because of the var'ious drainage swales and ditches found in Maplewood, staff recommends that we remove the exclusion of drainage swales and ditches from the stream definition as follows; "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 dofinition doos nEJt..iflG!udo dr3in3go 8w310s or ditchos th3t ch3nnol 2 intermittent ctormW:ltor runeff. " This change wouid aliow the city to review each stream, drainage swale, or ditch individually for protection requirements based on ecologicai need. 2. Section 4 (General Exemptions): a. Issue: The removal of trees that are dead or diseased is allowed within the wetland buffer as an exemption. Who decides if a tree is dead or diseased, the property owner or the city? Resolution: The city's diseased tree program requires that property owners work with the city on the removal of diseased trees. For this reason it is appropriate to add language to the general exemption which states that the property owner can remove trees that are dead or diseased within the buffer after city staff approval. b. Public or semipublic trails are allowed within the wetland buffer as an exemption. 1) Issue: Trails are allowed only if constructed of pervious material - should we allow public and semipublic impervious trails with the requirement for additional infiltration? Resolution: There is an additional requirement in the traii exemption which states that city staff may require additional mitigation actions for restoration of buffers with the construction of a trail. For this reason city staff would have adequate opportunity to review public or semipublic trails prior to construction to determine whether pervious or impervious material is appropriate, and if impervious what additional mitigation might be required to alleviate the impacts of the water runoff from the trail. For this reason, staff recommends removing the requirement that a trail must be constructed of pervious material only. 2) Issue: Trails are allowed only if not constructed entirely around a wetland - should we allow public or semipublic trails entirely around a wetland? Resolution.' Not allowing trails entirely around a wetland buffer was intended to avoid cutting off critical wildlife habitat entirely by a trail. There is an additional requirement in this exemption which states that city staff may require additional mitigation actions for restoration of buffers with the construction of a trail. For this reason city staff would have adequate opportunity to review public or semipublic trails prior to construction to determine whether the trail is appropriate around the entire wetland or whether there is habitat which should be protected. For this reason, staff recommends removing the requirement that a trail cannot be constructed entirely around the wetland. C. Issue: landowners interested in constructing an addition onto a nonconforming str.ucture may be required to restore wetland buffers. The restoration plan rnust be drafted by a professional experienced in wetland restoration. Should we require reSidential iandowners to supply the same type of restoration plan as a commercial landowner? 1 " Resolution: The professional restoration plan should be required for any large- scale wetland buffer restoration. These types of restorations would usually be completed on commercial land. However, there may be instances where a residential landowner wants to restore a large tract of wetland buffer. To ensure large tracts of wetland buffers are restored appropriately, staff recommends adding flexible language with the restoration plan requirements which states that the plan must be drafted by a professional experienced in wetland or stream restoration based on the size of the restoration project as deemed necessary by city staff. 3. Section 9 (Wetland or Buffer Surety): Issue: Would we require residential landowners to submit a letter of credit or escrow (surety) for alterations to their wetlands? Resolution: If the residential landowner was restoring large tracts of wetland buffer the requirement for a letter of credit or escrow would be warranted, but not for small projects. For this reason staff recommends adding flexible language with the surety requirement which states that the applicant shall post a wetland buffer mitigation surety based on the size of the restoration project as deemed necessary by city staff. 4. Section 10 (Enforcement): Issue: This section states that it is a misdemeanor to violate the wetland ordinance. Ensure this is consistent with the city's enforcement code. Resolution: The city's enforcement code (Section 1 ~ 15) states that a violation of the city's ordinances can be declared a misdemeanor or a petty misdemeanor. Punishment for a misdemeanor cannot exceed a fine of $1 ,000 or by imprisonment not to exceed 90 days, or both. Punishment for a petty misdemeanor cannot exceed a fine of not more than $300. Since a major violation to the wetland ordinance would more than likely be the result of a commercial development project, the city should have the authority to impose a more severe fine. Staff recommends retaining the misdemeanor language in the code. The city's current practice in regard to a violation of this manner would be to first work with the property owner. If that was not successful city staff would send out one letter notifying the property owner of the violation with a timeline for mitigation. If that was not successful city staff would send a second certified letter notifying the property owner of the violation again with a timeline for mitigation and ultimate citation. And finally with no success the city would ultimately issue a citation which would be brought before the court 5. Miscellaneous comments: a Issue.' Numbering of the sections is hard to follow from page to page. Edit the code so it is e,::;Jsiet to follow, Resolution: Staff has modified the numbering on the ordinance so it is easier to follow. 4 b. Issue: Notify ali property owners within 200 foot of a Manane A wetland of the second reading of the ordinance. Resolution: All property owners within 200 feet of a Manage A wetland located within the RWMWD boundaries in Maplewood and a Class I wetland outside those boundaries were notified of the second reading of the ordinance scheduled for April 28, 2008. The city mailed out 757 notices (Attachment 4) which included information on the wetland ordinance amendments as well as a wetland buffer brochure with educational information on protecting wetlands. Since that time city staff has received several teiephone calls from residents inquiring about possible impacts to their property. One resident, Sharon Sandeen, submitted a statement regarding concerns with the wetland ordinance (Attachment 5). City staff will be meeting with Ms. Sandeen to discuss her concerns and will update the city council during the city council meeting. Watershed District Comments Ramsev Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD): Attached find a letter submitted by the RWMWD in response to Maplewood's proposed wetland ordinance (Attachment 6). RWMWD states that they applaud the city in our continued leadership in the protection and enhancement of wetlands. The correspondence includes some suggestions and questions in regard to the ordinance. The one question staff would like to discuss here is the question about filling of wetlands. The Wetland Conservation Act allows property owners to fill wetlands as long as those wetlands are replaced in the amount of two to one on the property or within the district The proposed ordinance prohibits the filling of wetlands. However, a property owner always has the right to apply for a variance from the city's ordinance in order to fill a wetland. The proposed ordinance would require that variances to any portion of the ordinance, including the filling of wetlands, be reviewed by the ENR commission and planning commission for recommendation to the city council. If approved, the property owner must also comply with the Wetland Conservation Act which requires the replacement of the wetlands. Capitol Region Watershed District: Attached find a letter submitted by the Capitol Region Watershed District (Attachment 7). Capitol Region states that the city's use of existing wetland data from RWMWD shows a commitment to collaboration and cost reduction, and that the buffer widths and setback requirements are an aggressive requirement by the city to provide habitat and much needed protection of the city's wetlands and streams. Capitol Region also poses the question of how Maplewood will classify wetiands wllich are not within the RWMWD boundaries. There are approximateiy 15 Maplewood wetlands located in the Capitol Region Watershed District and 4 Maplewood wetlands located in the Valley Branch Watershed District. With the reclassification of Maplewood's RWMWD wetlands, these two areas of the city located outside of that watershed district will retain the city's old wetland classification until the city, Valley Branch, and Capitol Region have had an opportunity to assess the wetlands using the Minnesota Routine Assessrnent Method (MnRAM). Valley Branch is currently assessing wetlands in their district and should have that information available to the city by this summer. Capitol Region is a smaller watershed district with less staff available to tr,em for such assessments. The city wiil work with RWMWD and Capitol Regions over the summer to assess the wetlands within the Capitol Regions watershed district. Since the ordinance adopts the RWMWD classification system based on MnRAM, any changes 5 made to wetland classes outside of the RWMWD boundaries that are based on that system could be changed on the official map. Vallev Branch Watershed District: Attached find a letter submitted by Valley Branch Watershed District (Attachment 8). Valley Branch states that Maplewood's proposed wetland ordinance will help protect the functions and values of the wetlands within the city. They also have several suggestions for bettering the ordinance, one of which was implemented in the ordinance as reflected on the redlined version attached (Attachment 3) including improving the definition of a buffer. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the proposed wetland ordinance (Attachment 2). This ordinance amends the city's wetland and stream regulations within the environmental protection and critical area ordinance at Article VII. This ordinance adopts the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District's wetland classification system and map by reference Adoption of the proposed ordinance at this time would create the A+ classification definition only. City staff will present all wetlands found to be Class A+ to the city council for adoption into the city's wetland classification map at a later date. If adopted, the ordinance would be effective after publishing of the ordinance on May 7,2008. P :\com-dev\ord\environmental\wetland\4-28-08 CC Attachments: 1. Major Changes to the Wetland Ordinance 2. Wetland Ordinance (Clean Copy) 3. Wetland Ordinance (Red lined Version) 4. Notice to Property Owners within 200 feet of a Manage A Wetland 5. Sharon Sandeen Correspondence 6. Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District Correspondence 7. Capitol Region Watershed District Correspondence 8. Valley Branch Watershed District Correspondence 9. Maplewood's Existing Wetland Classification Map (Separate Handout) 10. Maplewood's Proposed Wetland Classification Map (Based on RWMWD's Classifications) (Separate Handout) 6 Attachment 2 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 p.m., Monday, April 28, 2008 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 11-0S A. CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the City Council was held in the City Hall Council Chambers and was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Mayor Longrie. B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE C. ROLL CALL Diana Longrie, Mayor Erik Hjelle, Council member Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember John Nephew, Council member Will Rossbach, Councilmember Present Present Present Present Present K. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Wetland Ordinance Second Reading a. Environmental Planner, Shann Finwall gave the presentation. b. Maplewood Open Space Naturalist, Ginny Gaynor addressed and answered questions of the council. c. Environmental Manager, DuWayne Konewko answered questions of the council and public. Mayor Longrie opened the discussion to the public. 1. Bob Zick. 2515 White Bear Avenue, Maplewood. He asked if a developer came to the city with a development proposal and decides to create a pond or wetland for visual effects he asked if these requirements would apply since the developer decided to create the pond or wetland. 2. Mike Koopmeiners, 2514 Montana Avenue East, Maplewood. Mr. Koopmeiners supports protecting the wetiands. He has butterfly gardens and has removed buckthorn from his propeliy and has tried to restore the wetlands. His concern is if the city decides to rate the wetlands he has property that is 201 feet deep and 11e is concerned that he may have troubla selling his property to a family if this ordinance has certain limitaticns that could prevent someone from having a swing set on the property. 3. Ralph Sletten, 2747 Clarence Street North, Maplewood. Mr. Sletten commented on the mailing he received regarding this ordinance that did 1 not clearly state what this ordinance was and how it could affect him or his neighborhood. Mr. Sletten presented pictures on display to show the council and described the property where the old compost site is and the history of the surrounding property. 4. Sharon Sandeen, 1748 Gulden Place, Maplewood. Ms. Sandeen said she is a member of Wakefield Watch and she lives on Wakefield Lake. She said she has many issues with the proposed wetland ordinance. The area where she lives will be affected by this proposed wetland ordinance She said she is in favor of wetlands and has two large wetlands on her property. Ms. Sandeen reviewed the document she had previously sent the council that was included in the staff report. 5. Linda Brvan. 1752 Gulden Place, Maplewood. Ms. Bryan spoke regarding the same area Ms. Sandeen spoke of and gave her concerns with the proposed wetland ordinance and concerns for Wakefield Lake. 6. Steve Brvan, 1752 Gulden Place, Maplewood. Mr. Bryan is the husband of Linda Bryan and he spoke about his wetland quality concerns and the Wakefield Lake area. 7. John Stine. 1398 Myrtle Street, Maplewood. Mr. Stine spoke regarding balancing the use of private property and the protection, restoration and improvement of wetlands and native habitats. He said his career is in natural resources so he is very committed to these issues but he has learned that absolutes rarely work very well in terms of balancing interests. 8. Nancv Montpetit, 1742 Gulden Place, Maplewood. Ms. Montpetit said she has lived here for 36 years and she explained the consequences of this proposed wetland ordinance on her property. 9. Garv Pearson, 1209 Antelope Way, Maplewood. Mr. Pearson spoke as a property owner and for the owners of Beaver Lake Estates on Maryland Avenue. He received information about this wetland ordinance and he has been aware of it through Planning Commission meetings. He was concerned about how the wetland ordinance would affect the Beaver Lake Estates area and how this ordinance would affect replacing older manufactured homes and replacing them with new homes in the same place in the proposed wetland buffer areas. 10. Bruce Olson, 2444 Lamenteur Avenue East, Maplewood. Mr. Olson said if you extend a buffer beyond 50 feet you need to take into account that it may extend across a drainage divide and into another wetland area. You need to take into account that YOLl may not be in the drainage area of the wetland you are trying to protect, it might be in another area. 11. Craiq Beske, 2449 Hillwood Drive, Maplewood. Mr. Beske said on his property is a small pond, if you establish the buffer zones to protect the wetland and keep the sediments from flowing into the watershed, he has concerns because he has a storm sewer that dumps directly into the pcnd and there is no fiitration. He is continuously picking cans, bottles and baseballs out of the pond. He doesn't want restrictions put on what he can do on his propeliy. 12. Gin[1V Yingiinq, 673 Dorland Road South. Maple}'voodJvls. Yingling serves as the Chair on the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission and stated that there have been some excellent points made this evening she said. She said she previously spoken with some of the citizens that spoke during the public testimony tonight. If the council 2 wants to send this pmposed wetland ordinance back to the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission the commission wouid be open to looking at the issues and concerns that have been raised this evening and work with staff on the issues that have been discussed. Mayor Longrie moved to table the (Second Readinq) of the Wetland Ordinance and send it back to the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission and staff to incorporate the comments that have been shared durinq the discussion. Seconded by Councilmember Nephew. Ayes - All Council member Juenemann made a friendly amendment to add and staff to the recommendation. The friendly amendment was accepted by both councilmembers. The motion to table passed. 3 Attachment 3 ORDINANCE NO" AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WETLA-ND SECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND CRITICAL AREA ORDINANCE (ARTICLE VII) The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances: Section 1. This amendment revises Section 12-247 through 12~249 and Section l2~3l 0 (wetland section of the environmental protection and critical area ordinance): 1. Findings and purposes. The findings ofthis section are as follows: a. Wetlands serve a variety of beneficial functions. Wetlands maintain water quality by filtering pollutants and reducing flooding and erosion. They provide food and habitat for wildlife, provide open space for human interaction, and are an integral part of the city's environment. Wetlands are an important physical, educational, ecological, aesthetic, rccreational, and economic asset to the city. They are critical to the city's health, safety, and general welfare. Surrounding development may degrade, pollute, or accelerate the aging of or eliminatc wctlands. Regulating land use around wetlands is therefore in the public intcrcst. b. Streams are also signilicant elements of the city's hydrologic system. Streams flow into wetlands and lakes, providc food and habitat for wildlife, provide open space, and are an intcgral part of thc city's environment. Like wetlands, strewns are an important physical, educational, ecological, aesthetic, recreational, and economic asset. Surrounding development may degrade, pollute, or damagc streams and, in tum, degrade other surface waters downstrcam. Rcgulating land use around streams is therefore in the public interest. c. Buffers are the lands that surround wetlands and streams. They are integral to maintaining the valuable functions many wctlands and streams perform and to maintaining a wetland's or streanl'S health. Requiring buffers recognizes that thc sUlTounding uplands impacts the wetland's and stream's quality and function and, therefore, is in the public interest. Buffers have thc following functions: (l) Reduce thc impacts of surrounding land use on wetlands and streams by stabilizing soil to prevent erosion and filtering suspended solids, nutricnts, pollutWltS, and harmful substances. (2) Moderate water level fluctuations dming storms. (3) Provide cssentiai wildlife habitat. (4) Provide shade to redw;e the temperature of both stormwater runoff and the wetbnd or stream. Water temperature is one of the factors controlling thc ability of water to hold dissolvcd oxygen. This ability decreases with increasing water temperatures. The dissolved oxygen level must be maintained at a minimum level to maintain healthy aquatic life. L Firrdings and purposcs (cont.). (5) Reduce the adverse impacts of human activities on wetlands and streams. The purposes of this section arc to: a. Preserve wetlands and strcams in a natural state. b. Preserve the beneficial nmetions of wetlands and streams by regulating the surrounding land use. c. Stabilize the soil around wetlands and streams to prevent erosion. d. Preserve and enhance water quality by filtering suspended solids, nutrients, and harmful substances before they reach wetlands, streams, and public waters. e. Reduce human disturbances of wetlands and streams. f. Prevent Hooding and the costs associated with reclaiming water quality. g. Protect property. h. Protect beneficial plant and wildlife habitat. I. Educate thc public, including appraisers, owners, potential buyers, or developers regarding the development limitations of wetlands, streams, and associated buffers. J. Encourage property owners who live adjacent 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, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning. Alteration means any human action that adverscly affects a buffer. Alterations include, but are not limited to, the following: grading, Iilling, dumping, dredging, draining, cutting, pruning, topping, clearing, rcloeating or removing vegetation, applying herbicides or pesticides or any hazardous or toxic substance, paving, construction, application of gravel, discharging pollutants, compacting or disturbing soil through vehicle or equipment use, 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, tlshing or other similar iow-impaet activities. b. Planting native vegetation, once the planting plan is approved by city staff c. The selective clearing, pruning, or control trees or vegetation that is dead, diseased, noxious. or hazardous, 2 2. Ddinitions (ConL) Be.\'t management practices (BMP's) mean measures taken to minimize llegativc cffccts of stormwater runotfon 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. Bog means a peatland with acidic pH as described in the Mimlesota Land Cover Classilication System. BI!lfer means tile upland areas that are immediately adjacent and contiguous to wetland and streams which contain a protective zone of vegetation. Hnhancement mcans an action that increases the functions and values of a wetland, stream, or buffer. Erosion means the movement of soil or rock fragments, or the wearing away of the land surface by water, wind, ice, and gravity. Fen means a pcatland fed by ground watcr as dcscribed in the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System. Forested seasonal wetland means a wooded wetland with hydric soils that may have standing water year round or may dry up seasonally. Infiltration basin means a pond or basin that captures stoffi1watcr and allows it to soak into the ground. An infiltration basin will typically 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 mcans trcc, shrub, grass, or othcr plant species that are 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 vegetation means tree, shrub, grass, or other plant species that exists on a site naturally without having been planted. It may be a native or non-native species. Some naturalized species are appropriate in a bufTer and some are considered weeds. Noxious weed means plants listed as prohibited noxious weeds in the Mirmesota Noxious Weed Law. (Sce also wced.) Oligotrophic acid marsh means a shallow or decp marsh with low pH, high dissolved oxygen, and low levels of nutrients. Ordinwy high wafer mark. (Ol/WM) means a rnark delineating thc highest water 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. 3 2. Detlnitiol1s (Conl.) Rain garden means an infiltration basin that is planted as a gardcn that allows water to infiltrate within 48 hours of a storm event. Restoration mcans returning a wctland, stream, or buffer to a condition that is similar to that before development of the SUlTounding area. Sedge meadow means a wetland with saturated soils or standing water that contains a signifieant number of sedge speeies (Carex spp.), as defined as wet meadow in the Minnesota Land Cover Classilication System. Semipublic means land that is maintained by a private organization for public use. S'etback means the minimum horizontal distance between a structure and the nearest edge of the buffer, wetland, or stream. Straigh/~edge setback means a measurement to detennine 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. Straight-edge setback additions arc 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 structure. [Straight Edge Diagra~s i ~~ :.:-:--'.\ .-, n-- C- ~~~i::;~~' .~~). ,,~u'''d II / (50 buff" i - ""u,," . : l >>..li~J:;'~""'.. i'" ~'.iOdd"O" Posibfehnre--\ , ! pass,ble --. (1dct;;LOrl \ ..L, ....~! _.~9c'"d '(- 50 :!uffer Exisling . : St'uctl,re _' '\ 1~~' , i L_ CLASS C WETLA~ID/' !vlIN1MUM 50' EXEMPTION f.Or~ SI~JGLE Fllf.1:LY HOf.\E EKISTfNG HOVE IS ) S' TO 25' FROtd 'tiETlfiND ADDITION CAN us:: [.XIS-fiNG 25' STR/'JGHT EDGE CLASS C WETLAND MINI~,jUM :=:0- 50' EXEMPTION FOR Stt~GLE FAMiLY HOME EXISTllG l-iOI~E-: IS 25' FRm~ WETLAf,ID !\DDITfOhl C.A,N USE EXISTiNG STRAIGHT EDGE Slream means those areas where surface waters produce a dellned channel or bed. A defined channel or bee! 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 Sfructure means anything constructed or erected that requires location on the ground or attached to something having location on the ground. Sustainable design mcans a development design which minimizes impacts on the landscape. 4 2. Definitions (Cont.) Temporal:Y erosion control means methods of keeping soil stable during construction or grading. Temporary erosion control mcasures include, but are not limitcd to, silt fencing, erosion control blankets, balc slope baniers, or other best management erosion control methods approved by the city. Variance means a dcviation from the standards of this section that is not specifically allowed. Vegetation means any plant life growing at, below, or above the soil surface. Water quality pond means a pond that has been created to eapture stormwater runoff These are not natural wetlands. Storm water is often piped into these ponds but may also enter through sheet runoff. These are also called utility ponds. Water quality pond edge means the nonnal high water level for a water quality pond. Weed means a plant which is causing damage in some way to native vegetation or ecosystems. (See also noxious weed.) Wetland classes. The city detines the wetland classcs used in this section as follows: a. Class A I means wetland types that are very rare in our community, are particularly sensitive to impacts trom development, and provide much needed habitat for wildlife. These wetlands are special wetlands and deserve additional protection to ensure that they remain in that state. Class A+ wetlands are detined as a Manage A wetland in the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District Rules delinition (which is based on the Minnesota Routine Assessment Methodology lMnRAM] classification system) and also are one of the following unique and special types ofwetlands in Maplewood: 1) oligotrophic acid marsh 2) wet prai ri e 3) sedge meadow 4) forested seasonal wetland 5) ten 6) bog b. Class A wetlands are defined as a Manage A wetland in the Ramsey-Washington ~/fetro Watershed District Rules definition and based on the Minnesota Routinc Assessment Methodology (MnRAM) classification syslern. These wetlands are exceptional and the highest~fulletioning weliands in Maplewood. All streams in the City of Maplewood are also defined as Class A. 5 2. Del1nitioJ1S (Con!.) c. Cluss B wetlands arc defined as a Manage B wetland in the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District Rules definition and based on the Minnesota Routine Assessment Methodology (MnRAM) classillcation system. These wetlands are high~quality wetlands. d. Class C wetlands are delined as a Manage C wetland in the Ramsey~ Washington Metro Watershed District Rules delinition and based on the Minnesota Routine Assessment Methodology (MnRAM) classification system. These wetlands provide moderate quality. e. Utility Class Dcfincd as water quality ponds. Wet prairie means a wetland with saturated soils containing a signiJicant 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 prohibited. Wetland or stream edge means the line delineating the outer edge of a wetland or stream. This line shall be established using the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. The applicable watershed district must verify this line. Wetland jimctions mcans the natural processes performed by wetlands, such as helping food chain production, providing wildlile habitat, maintaining the availability and quality of water such as purifying water, acting as a recharge and discharge area for groundwater aquilers, and moderating surface water and stormwatcr flows, and performing other functions, including but not limited to those set out in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulations. Wetlands means those areas 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 inelude swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas as defined in the Army Corps of Engineers regulations. Where a person has removed or mostly changed the vegetation, one shall determine a wetland by the presence or evidence of hyclric or organic soil and other documcntation of the previous existence of wetland vegetation such as aerial photographs. 3. Applicability: This section shall apply as follows: a. '1'0 any person or use that would alter a wetland, stream, or buffer after~__ (add date of adoption of new ordinance). b. When any provision of any ordimmcc conflicts with this section, the provision that provides more protection It)]" buChers, wetlands, or strcams shall apply unless specifically provided otherwise in this scction. This also applies to the applicable watcrshed district. 4. General Exemptions: This section shall not apply to the following: a. Non~chemical control and removal of noxious weeds within the buffer. Refcr to section 5.k.3.b. (Manage Weeds in Bufler) regarding the use of chemical treatment. 6 4. General Exemptions (Cont.). b. Planting native plants within thc wetland bufler after approved by city staff. c. Removal of limbs, brush, or branchcs that are dead or pose a safety hazard. d. Removal of trees that are dead, diseased, or pose safety hazards atter approval by city staff. e. Public or semipublic streets, utilities, and trails. The city may waive the requirements for construction or maintenance of public or semipublic streets, utilities, and trails where there would be a greater public need for the project than to meet the requirement of this section. In waiving these requirements the city shall follow the standards listed below: (1) The city may only allow the construction of public or semipublic utilities and streets through bufTers where there is no other practical alternative and the following requirements are met: (a) The city council must approvc the waiver to allow public or semipublic utilities or streets to be located within a 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 property owners ","lthin five hundred (500) feet of the buJTer at least ten days before the hearing. (b) Utility or street corridors shall not be allowed when endal1gered or threatened species arc 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 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 city staff. (e) The owner or cont.ractor shall replant. utility or street corridors with appropriate native vegetation, except trees, at preconstruction densities Of greater aftcr construction ends. Trees shall he rcplaced as required by city code. (f) Any additional colTidor access fe)1' maintenance shall be provided as much as possible at specific points rather t.han to road which is parallel to wetland edge" If parallel roads are neccssary they shall be no grcatcr than fifteen (15) feel wide" (g) Mitigation actions must be met as speci Iled in section 6 below (Mitigation and Restoration of BulTers). 7 4. General Exemptions (Cont.). (2) The city may allow public or semipublic trails in buffers. Trails must be approved by eity staff and are subject to the j(lllowing guidelines: (a) Trails shall not be allowed when endangered or threatened species are found to be present in the buffer. (b) Buffers shall be expanded equal to the width of the trail conidor. (c) The owner or contractor shall replant all disturbed areas next to the trail in a time frame approved by city stan: (d) All necessary erosion control measures must be in place before constructing a trail. The erosion control measures must also be maintained and inspected by the city to ensure that the wetland or stream is not compromised by trail construction activities. (e) The trail must be designed and constructed with sustainable design methods. (t) The trail may provide one access point to the wetland but such an access shall be no more than four (4) feet wide. (g) Boardwalks are allowed within the buffer and shall be a maximum of six (6) feet in width for semipublic use and twelve (12) feet in width for public use. (h) City stalTmay require additional mitigation actions as specified in section 6 below (Mitigation and Restoration of Buffers). f. Additions to a house, garage, deck, or driveway using the existing straight-edge setbacks to a wetland or stream if the following apply: (1) Property is zoned or is being used as a single family residence. (2) There is no other reasonable alternative than encroachment toward the wetland or stream with the addition. (3) The house, garage, dcek, or driveway is a minimum oftwcnty-fivc (25) feet from the wetland or stream cdgc. (4) Addition does nol cause degradation of the wetland, stream, or the existing buffer. (5) Mitigation actions must be met as specified in section 6 below (Mitigation and Rcstoration of Buffers). g. A property which is located within a wetland bufler, but is separate from. thc wetland by an existing road. 8 5. Standards: Standards f')f this section are as follows: a. Wetland Filling: The city docs not allow the tilling of wetlands. b. Minimum Buffer Widths: The minimum buffer widths shall apply to all wetlands, ineluding those created, restored, relocated, replaced, or enhanced. e. Maintenance of Buffers: BulTers shall remain in a natural state with naturalized or native vegetation. d. Restoring Buffers: Landowners interested in restoring their buffer to native plants should submit a restoration plan as specified in section 5 .k.3 .a. (Restoration of Buffer with Native Plantings) to city staff lor approval. e. Welland, Stream, or Buffer Easements: The property owner of any property affected by this section may be required to record wetland, stream, or buffer easements with the county. 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 tor an affected property. The applicant shall submit proof that the owner or developer has filed the notice. f. Stormwater: The discharging of stormwater to a wetland or stream must comply with section 44-1245 of the City of Maple wood ordinances (St0TI11 Management). g. Plantings in Buffers: Any planting in a buffer shall be done with native vegetation after the planting plan has been approved by city staff. h. Alterations in Buffers: The city prohibits the alteration of buffers except as allowed in general exemptions. 1. Minimum buffers: The following arc the minimum required buffer widths and structure setbacks: Buffer Wetland Classes Class A Class A -!- & Streams Class B Class C Utility Minimum Buffer Width 200 ft. 100ft. 75ft. Structure Setback From Outer Edge of Buffer 10 ft. 1011. 10 ft. 5011 10 ft. 1011. 10 ft. .1. Buffer Measurement- Buffers shall be measured horizontally from wetland or stream edge, not across the 1mlTer landseapc. On slopes greater than eighteen percent (18%) the buffer width shall be increased to 10 feet beyond the apex of the slope. Extension ofthc buffer for steep slopes shall apply to all wetland classes. 9 5. Standards (Cont.) 1-- Slope Setbaek Diagram --- Apex -lO'L_ Class B WcUond 1~' Suffer ~/ .~ Buffer oxtands 10' beyond "to)O~ <I All --- ~/ !- , !__w,____ 75' Buffer me<lGur.;cJ; horlzonaliy o;lope > 18% Example: 75' buffer for Mana\le B wctldnde, ::ilope \s 19% EO the. bullar mLi~t <,;,lend 10' b"yondfhetopcfthe "lope_ L k. Alternativc Minimum and Average Buffers: Recognizing that there are instances where, because ofthc unique physical characteristics of a specific parcel orland, altcrnative size butlers may be necessary to allow for the reasonable use ofthc land. In such cascs an altcrnative minimum and average buffcr width will be permitted on tcn percent (10%) of the lincar wetland buffer within the parcel, which will be compensated for by increased buffer widths elsewherc in thc same parcel to achieve thc rcquired average buller width. (1) The alternative average buffcr standards set forth below may be applied based on an assessment ofthe following: (a) Undue hardship would arise from not allowing the alternativc, or would othcrwise not be in the public interest. (b) Size of par eel. (e) Coni1guration of existing roads and utilities. (d) Percentage of parcel covered by wetland. (c) Configuration of wetlands on thc parcel. (I) Will not cause degradation oCthe wetland or stream. (g) Wili ensure the protection or enhancement of portions ofthc buffer which are limnd to bc thc most ecological1y beneficial to the wetland or stream. 10 5. Standards (Cont.) (2) The following arc the alternative averagc buffer widths and structure setbacks: Structure Setback From Outer Edge of BulTer Wetland Classes Class A & Streams Class B Class C 75ft. * 50 ft. * 50 ft. 100 ft. 75 ft. N/A 10 fl. 10 fl. 10 ft. Bnffer Minimum Buffer Width* Average ButTer Width *The minimum buner width may be used on no more than 10 percent of the linear wetland buffer area located within the parcel. Averaging Diagram ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .- ~ ~ 1!/ <1Ver!U1-e _~~~"_U . -:_ue____ ! ~.--.7='::.:u~- 0- work - ;0'1 t~;!I ~M/! it ~ illl moterloJ 5;)' min, {Q~Jr '0%) ----c;~j------"".N..-- \ ~ Commedol Swld;1'l I .~I, jj CLASS 8 'Nt. rU\ND MIN. = 50' ING. '" 75' (3) Thc appropriateness olnsing the alternative average buffers will be cvaluated as part of the rcview of the contractor's or owner's dcvclopment application. The alternative average buffcr usee! must be within the spirit and intent of this code and must meet one or morc ofthe requiremcnts set forth by the city to include, but not limited to, the following strategies: 11 5. Standards (Cont.) (a) Restoration ofbufIer with native plantings. Submittal of a buffer rcstoration plan drafted by a professional experienced in wetland or stream restoration based on the size of the restoration project as deemed necessary by ei ty staff including: 1. Existing vegetation. 2. Restoration methods. 3. Maintenance procedures proposed during first three years of establishment. 4. Erosion control measures. 5. List of plants to be planted. 6. Qualifications of contractor. Only contractors with experience and success restoring wetland or stream buffers or natural vegetation shall be approved. 7. Maintenance agreement which states that the owner will maintain the buffer to its improved state. 8. The city may require a cash escrow or letter of credit to cover 150 percent of the required work. (b) Manage weeds in buffer. All weeds listed on the Minnesota noxious weed list must be controlled by the property owner. Owners are encouraged to control other weeds that are not on the noxious weed list but can threaten the health of a wetland. Submittal of a weed management plan drafted by a professional experienced in wetland and stream restoration including: 1. Target weeds. 2. Appropriate managementtechniqucs, including the LIse of chemical treatmcnt if approved by city starT as part of the management plan. 3. Management schedule. 4. Potential erosion and rcsceding if management will create large arcas of dead vegetation Cash escroyv or letter of credit to cover 150 percenl: of the required work. 12 5. Standards (Cont.) (c) 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 are to be located outside of the wetland butler. I. Rcduce amount of pavemcnt on site (i.e. fcwer parking stalls, nalTower driveways, shared parking with other businesses). 2. Use pervious pavement such as pavers or porous asphalt. 3. Use turf pavers or modified turf areas for overtlow parking. 4. Install rain garden or infiltration basin. 5. Install rock trench or rock pit. 6. Install filter strip of grass or native vegetation. 7. Install surface sand filter or underground filter. 8. Install native plantings on site to reduce feliilizer use and improve infiltration. 9. Install a green roof on buildings. 10. Install grit chambers, sediment traps, or forebays. 1. Stormwater Drainage Facilities: The city does not allow the construction of stormwaler drainage facilities, sedimcntation ponds, infiltration basins, and rain gardens within the buffer. m. Construction Practices: Special construction practices shall be required on projects or developments next to wetlands or streams and thcir buffers. Practices to be approved by city staff before issuance of a grading or building permit includc, but are not limited to, the following: (1) Grading. (2) Sequencing. (3) Vehicle tracking platforms. (4) Additional silt fences. (5) Additional sediment control. 13 5. Standards (Cont) n. Erosion Controllnstallatioll: Bel..we grading or construction, thc 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 linished all development activities that may atTeet the buffer. o. Wetland Signs: Before grading or construction, the boundary between a butTer and adjacent land shall be identitied using permanent signs. These signs shall mark the edge of the buffer and shall state there shall be no mowing, cutting, tilling, or dumping beyond this point. These signs shall be installed at each lot line where it crosses a wetland or stream buffer, and where needed to indicate the contour of the buffer, with a maximum spacing of onc-hundred (100) feet of wetland or stream edge. p. Erosion Control Breaches: All erosion control mcasures must be maintained and inspected to ensure compliarlce arld protection of wetlands, streams, and buffers. The contractor or owncr shall be responsible for all erosion/sedimentation breaches within the butTer and shall restore impactcd arcas to conditions present prior to grading or construction activities. q. Platting: When platting or subdividing property, the plat or subdivision must show thc wetland boundarics as approved by the applicable watershed district. r. Erosion Control Removal: After completion of grading or construction, the contractor or owner may remove the erosion control measures only aftcr inspection and approval by the city and thc applicable watershed district to ensure the areas affected have been established per requirements. s. It is the responsibility of the owner to alleviate any crosion during and after completion of grading or construction. The owner or contractor must remove erosion control measures after final approved inspection by the city and the applicable watershed district. 6. Mitigation and Restoration of Buffers: The city requires mitigation when a property owner or contractor has altered or will alter a wetland, stream, or buffer. The property owner or contractor shall submit a mitigation plan to city staff for approval. In reviewing the plan, the city may require the actions below. a. Reducing or avoiding the impact by limiting the degree or amount of thc action, such as by using appropriate technology. b. Rectifying the impact by repairing, I'chabilitating, or restoring the buffer. c. Reducing or eliminating the impact over timc hy prevention and maintenance operations during thc life of thc actions. d. Compensai.ing for the impact by replacing, enhancing, cr providing substitute buff"r land at a t\Vo-to-.one ratio. c. Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective mcasurcs. 14 6. Mitigation and Restoration of Buffers (Con!.). f. Where the city requires restoration or replacement of a blltler, the owner or contractor shall replant the buffer with native vegetation. A replanting plan must be approved by the city before planting. g. Any additional conditions required by the applicable watershed district and/or the soil and water conscrvation district shall apply. h. All strategies as listcd in item 5.k.3. (Alternative Average Bntler). 7. Nonconforming Buildings, Structures, and Properties: Any existing building or structure, or any existing use of property not in conformity with the regulations prescribed in this chapter as of the date of the adoption of such regulation (insert date of new ordinance) shall be regarded as nonconforn1ing and may continue. 8. Variances: Procedures for granting variances from this section are as follows: a. The city council may approve variances to the requirements in this section. All variances must follow Minnesota state law governing variances. b. Before the city council acts on a variance the environmental and natural resources commission will make a recommendation to the plmming commission, who will in turn make a recommendation to the city COLll1cil. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing for the variance. City statT shall notify the property owners within Eve hundred (500) feet of the butTer at least ten days before the hearing. c. The city may require the applicant to mitigate any wetland, stream, or buffer impacts with the approval of a variance, including but not limited to, implementing one or more of the strategies as listed in item 5.k.3. (Alternative Average Buffer). 9. Wetland or Buffer Surety: The applicant shall post a wetland or buffer mitigation surety with the city, such as a cash deposit or letter of credit, of one hundred and tiny (150) percent of estimated cost lor mitigation. The surety will be required based on the size of the project as deemed necessary by stafe 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 suretics required pursuant to any other provision of city code or city directive. 10. b:nforocmcnt: The city reserves the right to inspect the site or property at any time for compliance with this ordinance. The city shall be responsible for the en!clrcemcnt of this ordinance. Any person who fails to comply with or violates any scction ofthis ordinance shall be dccmcd guilty of a misdcmcanor and, upon conviction, shall be slIhicct to punishment in accordance with seotion 1~15. All land use building and grading peJ1l1its shall be sllspended until the developer has corrccted the viobtion. Each day that a separate violation exists shall constitute a separate offense. 15 Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect aftcl' the city publishes it in the ollleia! ncwspapcr. The City Council held the first reading on this ordinance on March 24, 2008. The City Council approved this ordinance on Mayor Attest: City Clerk 16 Attachment 4 MAPLEWOOD WE'fLANH ORDINANCE DRAFT 4-28-08 (Changes to the city's current wetland ordinance are underlined if added and stricken if deleted. Text revised since the 3-24-08 First Reading are in Bold.) I. Findings and purposes. The findings and purposes of this section are as follows: a. Wetlands serve a variety ofbcncticial iIillctions. Wetlands maintain water quality Qy filtering pollutants and reducing flooding and erosion., They provide food and habitat for wildlife, provide open space for human interaction. and are an integral pm1 of the 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, or accelerate the aging of or eliminate wetlands. Regulating land use m'ound wetlands is therefore in the public interest. b. Streams are also significant elements of the city's hydrologic system. Streams flow into wetlmlds and lakes, provide food and habitat for wildlife, provide open space, and are an integral part of the city's environment. Like wetlands, streams arc 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. Regulating land use around streams is therefore in the public interest. Rcquir:ng bdfcrs recognizes that the surrounding uplm:ds relate to the woodland and stream qaality and functiolllffid, therefore, are in the public interest. c. Buffers are the lands that surround wetlands and streams. They m'e integral to maintaining the valuable fIllctions many wetlands and streams perform and to maintaining a wetland's or stream's health. Requiring buffers recognizes that the surrounding uplands impact relate cO the wetland's and stream's quality and function and, therefore, g; are in the public interest. Buffers have the following tlmctions: ill Rrecluce the impacts of surrounding land use on wetlands and streams by slabilizing soil to prevent erosion b:,' storm water; ill1ll filtering suspcndcd solids, nutrients, polllltants. and harmful substances. (2.1 Moderat"ffig- JL water level fluctuations during storms. Q1 HuITer;, also pjJrovide essential wildlife habitat ill aRtl Lr~lvid~~SJ.1[l,,j~Jg r(;:(llLCce~tJ:t<3 tem pcrature 0 f botb stOJ:rrL,^,iiJyrrt)11{)tI~111d tJ:tg W<3tICl.n(19rstI~[\m. Wat"r If'mperalUre is onS;~Qf!heJilc:19l'ilSQ1.l1rolling the ability ofwatcr to hold dissolved oxygen. This ability decrcascs with increasing wat"r temperatures. The~<:Iis~solvcd oxvgcnlcvel must be maintained at a minim1Jlplevcl to maintain healthy aquatic life~ (~) Finallj~, buffer:; fReduce the adverse impacts human activities on wetlands and stremns, €EliThe purposes of this section me to: a. Prcserve wetlands and streams in a natural state. ab. Preserve the bcneficial functions of wetlands and streams by regulating the surrounding land use. es:. Stabilize the soil around wetlands and streams to prevent stonnwater erosion. ego Preserve and enhance water qualitv by Hilterirrg suspended solids, nutrients, and ha11l1ful substances before thev Hom reaching wetlands, streams, and public waters. a~. Reduce human disturbances of wetlands and streams by yisaally separating wetlands frOlR yards. e[ Prevent flooding and the costs associated with~e.freclaiming water quality. g. Protect property. fu. Protect beneficial plant and wildlife habitat. gh Educatc thc public, including appraisers, owners, potential buyers, or developers,-te regarding tlle development limitations of wetlands, streams, and associated buffers. 1., Encourage properlY owners who live adiacent to and/or nem wetlands and streams to be responsible stewards including managing and enhancing the qualitv 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 tlllS section shall have the meanings ascribed to them :1, thi,; subsection, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning. Alteration means any human action that adversely affects a butTer. Alterations include, but are not limited to, the following: grading, filling, dumping, drcdging, draining, cutting, pruning, topping, clearing, relocating or removing vegetation, applying herbicidcs or pcsticidcs or any hazardous or toxic substance, discharging polHffimls eKccpt sloITnwa:er, paving, construction, application of gravel. discharging pollutants, COlllQiLc;TIllg_Ql' disturbing soil through vehicle 01' equipment use, or any other human activity that adverscly affects the vegetation, hydrology, wildlife or wildlife habitat. Alteration does not include the f()llowing: a. Walking, passiyc recreation, fishing 01' other similar lQwcimpjlcJ activities. b. Planting tl:1at-e-HhaneE's native c. The sdcctivc clearing, pruning, QLc;9Jl1r<2! of trees or vegetation that are dead, diseased, noxious, weeffi; or hazardous. 2 Av{*tIge~bu{{erwidthlHeaH{3-thc llveruge width (,I' " 8ttffef'-\Ni+hin'{H'fingl&Elovdepr1H;pA:;-1et-er ~ Best mana!?ement oractices (BjYfP's) mean measures taken to minimize negative cffects Qf stormwater mnofl on the environment including, but not limited to. installation of rain gardens. infiltration basins, infiltration trenches, retention basins, filters, scdimenttraps, swales, reduction of impervious surfaces, planting of dec;Q:roQted native plants. landscape and pavement maintenance. Eo!? means a peatland with acidic DH as described in thc Millllesota Land Cover Classilication Svstem. Buffer means a stream or wetland !nffcr or the upland areas that are immediately adiacent and contiguous to wetlands and streams which contain a protective zone of vegetation-almlg a stream or around a wetland. Clearing means the eutting 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 roek fi'agments, or the wearing away of the land surface by water, wind. ice, and gravity. Fen means a peatland fed by ground water as described in the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System. Forested seasonal wetland means a wooded wetland with hydric soils that may have standing water year round or may dry UP seasonally. Infiltration basin means a Dond or basin that captures storm water and allows it to soak into the ground. An infiltration basin will typically drain within 48 hours of a storm event. ;\fitigtItion means an action that reduces, rectifies, eliminates, or compensates for the alteration of a bufler, wetland, or stream. NtItive vegettItion means tree, Sllfllb, grass, or other plant species that are 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 ve!?etatlon means tree. shrub, grass, or gther plant s~eie,,-Jhat exists on a site naturilIly,vith9"Lh'l,inzbeen planted. ft may pc a natiY9.Ql'JJ9D:Il!ltbJesjJecie,s,~S9me naturalized species are approm}:!1eln ClQuJTer,m<;i some are considcrcd weeds. N (iJ~ilJUS wc:?,UYlc,allspl'lnt?,HsJ,,9'i5,p1'Qhibjte,1 no xi 0 us weeds inJhcJ21innfs~Qta I\jQ>::lQ\ls\",le.;;i! L,o,WL(S",e alsluveed.) Oli!?otrouhic acid marsh means a shallow or decp marsh with low pH. high dissolved oxygen, and low IcvQls of nutrients. 3 Ordinary high water mark (OHWM) means 11 mark delineating the highest water level maintained lor enough lime to leave evidence upon the hmdscape. The ordinary high water mark is commonly that point where the natural vegetation changes from predominantly aquatic to predominantly terrcstrial. Rain "arden mcans an infiltration basin that is plantcd as a gardcn that allows watcr to infiltratc within 48 hours of a storm event. Restoration means retuming a wetland, stream, or butTer to a condition that is similar to that beforc dcvclopmcnt of the surrounding area. Sed"e meadow means a wetland with saturated soils or standing water that contains a significant number of sedge species (Carex sPP.), as dellned as wet meadow in the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System. Semiouhllc means iand that is maintained by a private organization for public use. Setback means the minimum horizontal distance between a structure and the nearest edge of the buffer, wetland, or stream. Straizht-edze setback is measurement to determine 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. Straight-edge setback additions are measured by using the existing edge ofthe 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 j)ortion of the addition can encroach closer to the edge of a bulTer. wetland, or stream than the existing structure. Stream means those areas where surface waters produce a defined chmmel or bed. A defined channel or bed is land that clearly contains the constant passage of water under normal summer conditions. Thi:;dclinition does Hot include dr~~inage swaler: or ditches that channel intermittent stormwater IlmofI Stream buffer means land that is in direct drainage to a stream and within the boundary described by this article. i\ person shall meaS~lrc all buffers from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) as identiticd in thetield. If a person emmot detem1ine the OHVlM, tl,c ~~trcam bulTer sldl bc fi-orll. the top of the Stream bailie Strld0ure means_Ell1Yiliingf.911~J\!9~Q Ol'-~I"'9ted th'ltJ~(:miJ~lLLoj;illiO!LQnlhsU,IQl!mLox_alt'l9h~Q to something having location on the ground. Sustainable desi5!.TI means a development design which minimizes inmacts on the lundscal1e. Tem/Joi"/JD'erosion control means methmls o Lk-"i;;niiJgJioi] stable dJlDnR conslructi01L<lLill!}QirlR, I9J!)12()lEllY9!:Q_~lQ]').9.QjltI())JJl()&1;;11x();;_.11l_()jl1Q(),J;mL[\ryJ1Q1Umlt9,tlQ,~ULf(';1!9jgg,_~rg.?iQIJ.CQlltmJ blan\(cts,J2'lle sl()l2<:: barriers, or oth<::Ll2<::slmullag9tllQtlLcfosi()1LCQrltI'Qilll()tl1()cls_apgroyccl.bythc city. Variance means a deviation fi'om the standaJds of this section that is not specifically allowed. Vexetation means any organic plant life growing at, below, or above the soil surfilce. 4 S'{Jl.!(~rqJ{(l/ity[!Q}1(Lmeans a pond [hal has Jiccn created to cap!ur~~~torm\'iatcrnJnofr These are not naturai wetlands. _~tormwsteIi~_Qftel1pipcd into these ponds but may also enter th!'gggh sheet runoff. These are also called utili1y ponds. Water qualitv TJ(md ed"e means the normal high water level tor a water LlLtality pond. Wetland 8b,ffcr FHeans land that is i:1 diroeHlrainago to a wetland v.ithin the bmH1dary dCGcribcd by this section. All buffers shall be mca,;ured outwarEl-from thc wetland edge. Weed means a plant which is causing damage in some way to native vegetation or ecosystems. (See also noxious weed.) Wet vrafrie means a wetland with saturated soils containing a signiJicanl numher of plant species found in wet prairie communities as defined in the Minnesota Land Cover Classitication System. Wetlands means those areas of the city inundated or saturated by groundwater or surface water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do suppOli, 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 EArmy Corps of Engineers regulations 33 crR 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 of the previous existence of wetland vegetation such as aerial photographs. Weiland classes. The city defines the wetland classes used in this section as follows: (a) Class 1 ',rcllands l'I1effiiS wetlands as"igned the uniqacleutstanding rating in the Ramsey Washingt01~ Metro Watershed District Wetlands I1F:effiory, 1995. Cb;s I wetlands mc those with eondi,ions and functions moot susceptible to human iJ'I1pacts, are mostlHl:que, have the highest community resource significance and similar charaeterist-ie& (b) Class 2 ~rctltmds mean~high value (definition based on Watershed wetlands in':enffil')' results). (c) Class 3 ~re"lal1ds meal: v. ildlife habitat valu&. E<fJ--Gkh'i5-4~wctla:1ds mean moderate \alue impacts, Eet--~Gla,\w--3'-wetlends-mealliY",,':ctlulld:J assigned the hi gb I ~'\Gte-4-h'rting~n-th,,~R(tHllieT W~t;hingtOl: 1\'letffi-WatoFShe-4-f'Jistriet Wctlm'lds Inventor), i ()95. Cbs, 5-wetlands-ar-o thoso ',',ith condi,iOI:~. aHd-funGH&f1%-mOJt ~ffeoted by h:llmm llc[ivitics, ,,,lth the lea&! di-vcrse--v-egeffiH on communi ti e", ] ea:: l comm un i l:y-rewHfce--signifleall€c-nnd--sHfri-lm' Ch~-:T;1-G-teri-s-t-ie8;: Fm--the purpo"*trf-tJ+i-s~ttioll,the-H,S,-Fi&h-m'Kl-Wildlife Se~\'i:;e',: Cia:;:,; li(:'atkmHfWet-!-ands tmctDccpwal(}F.lTabiffit{}'fJt4e--hJnW:>4-State;,,~FWSf()BS-79/:q-{CowarBin..et-ah~19 7 (Ji &&fftcillil tHg- 4",Gfipti0H'i.-anEf'.photogmphs-'€JJ~Hd--,*l&S"'MB'\fl-5tl-p,slasses, a. Class A + means wctl[!mL!yoes that aTe very rare in our communi tv, arc partieulady sensitive to impacts from development. and proviqe much needed hahitat for wildlife. These wetlands are special wetlands and deserve additional protection to ensure that they 5 !:9mrrin in that statc,__~:Jass A+ welland" are deillleq!l~Jll\1all<lg,e Gl!l~~JL~yQj:l?11dq uti-lii"in", in the Ramsey=:'vY,lshin@l'!l Metro Watershed District Rules definition (which j" based on the Mhmesota RO_lJtinc Assessment Methodology IMnRAMl classification system) and also ~,!r.e one of the following unique and s"ecial tY1JeS of wetlands in Ma"lewood: l} oligotrophic acid marsh 2) \vet txairi e 3) sedge meadow 4) forested seasonal wetland 5) fen 6) bog b. Class A wetlands are defined as a Manage A wetland in the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District Rules definition and based on the Minnesota Routine Assessment Methodology (MnRAM) classification system. These wetlands are exceptional and the highest-functioning wetlands in Maplewood. All streams in the City of Maplcwood are also defined as Class A. c. Class B wetlands are defined as a Manage B wetland in thc Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District Rules definition and based on the Minnesota Routine Assessment Mcthodology (MnRAM) classification system. These wetlands are high-quality wetlands. d. Class C wctlands are defined as a Manage C wetland in the Ramsey-Washington Mctro Watcrshed District Rules definition and based on the Minnesota Routine Assessment Methodology (MnRAM) classification system. These wetlands provide moderate quality, e. Utilitv Class - Defined as water quality ponds. Wetland easement means a designated area that includes the wetland or buffer where disturbance from mowing, cutting, or similar activities is prohibited. WetlandfunClions means the natural processes perfOlmecl by wetlands, such as hclping food chain production, providing wildlife habitat, maintaining the availability and quality of water such as purifying water, acting as a recharge and discharge area Jin groundwater aquifers, and moderating surface water and stormwater flows. and performing other functions, including bllt not limited to those set out in D.S, Army Corps of Enginccrs regulations "Pel C-f:R 3l+l-.4(b)~)(l9.gS) . Wetland or stream edge means the line delineating the outer edge of a wetland or stream. I'his One ,;nall e:;tabli:;n thi,; line By shall be established using the Federal Manual for Idenlifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands dated January UJ,1')gS" adjointI)' publd:ed ~lY ,he D_S. E . I J) . ^ 11 U:;; 12'h e nl"lE1L!i:;; . h Y:;; ^ (,' f' . nVlI"omnenta -r~fOte-&Hen , ,gene)', t c .. . 1:; ae " 1 1 C orVIOO, t e '. ., ,rm:hc.erps-B' 6 ~inc8r,; and-th0-U~,-S0i1C:Of\Bel"}atiOl: Se;'vice. The appliGable watershed district must verify this line. 3. Applicability: This section shall apply as follows: a. This sectiOl~ :;hall apply tIo any pcrson or use that would alter a wetland, stream, or buffcr after ,^cpriI2'1, 1995 add date of adoption of new ordinancy. b. When any provision of any ordinance con11iets 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 applicable watershed district. c. Public and semipublic street:;, utilities, or trails, whether built b)' a public agency or privatc developer, shall be subject to this sectioH. 4. General Exemptions: This section shall not apply to the following: a. Non~ehemical control and rcmoval of noxious weeds within the buffcr. Refer to scction 5.k.3.b. (Manage Weeds in Buffer) regarding the use of chemical treatment. b. Planting native plants within the wetland buffer after approved by city staiT. c. Removal of limbs, brush, or branches that are dead or pose a safety hazard. d. Removal of trees that are dead, diseased, or pose a safety hazard after approval bv city staff. a. The construction or maintenaHce of public or semipublic drainage facililies, sedimentation ponds, or erosioH eontrol facilities. b. The maintenance of public or semipublic facilities ineluding :;treets, utilities and trails. e. Where the city council wai','es these requirements for the constmction ofpJ.lblie ami semi public utilities or trail~;, whether built by a public agcncy or private de';eloper. e. Public or semipublic streets. utilities, and trails. The city councilmay waive tile requirements for construction or maintenance of public or semipublic streets, utilities. ~'ld trqils where there would be a greater public need for tile project than to meet the requirement ofthis section. The city coUfl€-i1-sh~tffil3lic hearing bclc)fe deolaring such a \',aivef~:rhcT0ity-sflalf~ROtify the property oymer:; \Vithil~ ",M)~fe()t4the-buffef-at lcu:;lten day:; hol(1[e thB-h&"1ftngo.-lll waiving these requirements the city smme-il-shall follow the standards listed below~ in :;ubseotion (c}ef-this scction. (I) Thc city may only allow the construction of pubi ie or semipublic: utilities illE! through butlers where there is no other practical alternative ancl thc follov'I'ing requirclneTlts arc met: (a) The city council must approvc the waiyer to allow public or semipuhlic utilities 91' streets to be located within a buffer. Bcfore the city_ council acts on the waiver the planning commission and the environmcntal and natural resources commission shall make a recommendation to the eitv 7 war,,,er. The city staff shall notifyJ!!Q.J2!'oP,,1t;crl.Yyners within five hundrccl (500) feet 9fthyJ1ui1~ ,,1 least ten days before the hearing. (b) Utility or street conidors shall not bc allowed when endangered or threatened species arc found in the bufTer. (c) Utility or street eonidors, including any allowed maintenance roads, shall be as far fi-om 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 herbicide~; 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 fi'om city stafI. (e) The owner or contractor shall replant utility or street corridors with appropriate native vegetation, except trees, at preconstruction densities or greater after construction ends. Trees shall be replaced as required by city code. (f) Any additional conidor access for maintenance shall be provided as much as possible at specilic points rather than to road which is parallel to wetland edge, by po.rallel roads. If parallel roads arc necessary they shall be no greater than fifteen (15) feet wide. (g.l. Mitigation actions must be met as specified in section 6 below (Mitigation and Restoration of ButIers). (2) The city may allow public or semipublic pri'iate trails in buffers. Trails must be approved by citv staff and are subject to the following guidelines: llil Trails shall not be allowed when endangered or threatened soecies are found to be present in the blllIer. flit The trail shall Bot be-of have a impervious surfaee materials. "A.B elevated Bourdwalk shall-not be eOBsidered liB impervillus SUflll1!e. (b) Buffers shall be expandcd,wkere-jJoGsible, equal 10 the width ofthe trail corridor. (c) The owner or contractor shall replant all disturbed areas nexlto the trail ill a timeli'ame approvcdJ2y'cltv_s1aJJ: after completffig!hB~tFatl~ (d) 8.1LllY5'~Ssary erosion cQIltro!Jn,"[l!,\I[,,~ mustJ2e in place beforc ~Qn~lr1!cting_0- trait. ThC:i::rosiQ~L~QJ:l.t-rQ.lJI1~~1..?ln'_~~.Dlust also hE; rnaintainG.q and jl1~pectedJ)y_tb\:giIYJ'H~nc~m:.Q that the wetlandQrstX1c.i;\l,l11s11ot fompromised by trail\:Q!1.~1tJJ<:;.tiol1afliyj~jes. (~ The trail must be designed and cQllstru<;ted with sustainahle design methods. 8 CD ]1l<;;~Jmil may nrovide one access point to the vietl;Jn(Lbllt.:JllellJ'ln.;J~<&Yss shall bc no ITloreJlllin1'.)liL0HJi:-".t"vide, (g} Boardwalks are allowed within the buffer and ~hall be a maximum of six (6) feet in width for semipublic use and twelve (12) leet in width for public use. tB Trails or boardwalks shall Rot be eOHStmered~elffirely aroRRd the wetlaRd. ilil City stalTmay require additional mitigation actions as specified in section 6 below (Mitigation and Restoration ofButJers). lr. Stractmes-,---vegeffitffin and maintcnaHoe activities and practices in existence ofl-.the effective date oftl~e ordinarwe fi'OIll wllich this section derives. MeBtractor or owner may remodel, reconstruct or replace affected straetures if---thc no',',' construction does not take up more buffef-land than the struetare used before the remodeling, reconstructi_ roplaeement-, (7. Whero this soetion 'A'ollld deBY all reasonable use of a lot of roeord. [n saeh case, the owner or contractor shall eE>nstraet any building to ma:limi;:e the sethack fi'om a buffer. Federal, state or watershed district rules aHd regulatioHs shall apply. ,A.lterations-t~ buffer shall he the minin1U111 necessary to allow fer the reasonable use of the property. Wflew feasible, the city may rcquire4flc-mitigation of any alteratien of a huffer. f Additions to a house, garage. deck. or driveway using the existing straigbt~edge setbacks to a wetland or stream if the following apply: ill ProDerty is zoned or is being used as a single family residence. ill There is no other reasonable alternative than encroachment toward the wetland or strean} with the addition. ill The house. garage, deck. or driveway is a minimllm oftwenty~ five (25) feet from the wetland or stream edge. ill Addition does not cause d\,'gradation of the wetland. stream. or the existing butTer. W Mitigilll.Ql} acti(lll~.must be met as}pecified in section 6 below1.MiJigilJj91Lilllc! R<;;stomtio_n~Q[J3 Ut}fI,'it g. ^-llropcrly which is iocated wiLhin a wetland b}1t1el:",Jll1.ti"2.<'Op_a.l1l1<;;JrQllLtll"-\yctl,,nd by 9.11 existing road, 5 ffi~ ;lstandmds: Standards for 111i~s<'OS;lLQll arc a~, follo\vs: a. W<oll<lJ:J-JLf<ilIil1g:~.~Ihe ~ity_gQ<?s_not-,-'lllow tl1.ejlJlmg 01 wellands..Where the---wrrteFShe-d djstricthllB'llppFOVcd'fl.".vetlmlEl~mllilg-.pel'ffi~-+l-l e c i ly shull--req-llire -wri{igfltioHfor~any di,;turbed bulTer land. 9 h. ,,,-1inimmDJl1J.tI~LY;;iclth~:~The minimum huffer widths shall apply to an wetlands, including those created, restored, relocated, replaced, or cnhanced. c. Maintenance of Buffers:"Jillffers shall remain in a natural state with naturalized or native yegetation. d. Restoring ButTers: Landowners interested in restoring their buHer to native plants should submit a restoration plan as specified in section 5.k.3.a. (Re,storation of Buf1er with Nati ve Plantings) to eitv statT for approyal. e. Wetland, Stream, or ButTer Easements: The property owner of any property affected by this section mav be required to sRal-l-record wetland, stream, or buffer easements with the county. These easements shall describe the boundaries of the buffer and prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling, or dumping within the butTer, stream, or wetland. The owner or developer shall record such easements with a final plat, with deeds from a lot division or before the eity issues a building permit for an affected property. The applicant sball submit proof that tbe owner or developer has Iiled the notice. f. Stormwater: The discharging of stormwater to a wetland or stream must comply with section 44-1245 of the City oCMaplewood ordinances (Storm Management). g. Plantings in Buffers: .^.n affceted property owner ~hall ll1flintain a buffer. Any planting in a buffer shall be done with native vegetation after the planting plan has been approved by eity staff. h. Alterations in Buffers: The city prohibits the alteration of buffers exeept as allowed in general exemptions. The eity may waive this requirement where the watershed distriet has approved a permit for Ii\ling all or pmi of a v.etland. 1. Minimum buffers: The following are the minimum required butler widths and structure building fBHndatioo-setbaeks: Buffer Wetland Classes Class 4.;) Class A+-l- & Streams Class IN Class C-4-- Utili tv GlasB AVBr-age-BufcTer width' .J-{)(.l--f"t. 10\J ft. 5-tHl ;s+t. 9-ft., Minimum Buffer Width 200-l-Q{} it. I O():5{} ft. 7522t ft. 5- O;:w.. tt. JJ){.) n. Ruilcling-FBcmdatten Structure Setback from Edge of Buffer 10ft. 101'1. 10 It. 10ft. 10 ft. j. JJllfferM",Clsurernenl: Buffers sllaILll"-1Jl"j'l:';\JJ'"clJlQri0!!11ally Irom wetkmdQf slr",l'm CdgC,)lot ncrossth<oIJlll1i=XJ;Jl],JJ'[capc. On slopes Qreatertha]l"lghl~<oIIR.erC,-,.D1..f 18%,) the 1,uVfe)' widthshalll2f; in<:J:,,!l~,"dJ() 10 feet beyond the apex o1'theslope",I="t"nSlQlH>Hhe butler tQr sleej2 slopes shall apply to all wetland.<J.<l.,;;~.es. The eitY-Hh'tY.feqBiff~a-YariQble ffilffef-widtft-w protect acljaeent habitat that the eiJydBtermHles is yallHlble to the v:etlan4, stream, \-vikUifc-ef-vegetation. 10 K, ,^,Jt9In.mivsJ\1inlmnHL'l!LCLA v~ra 2,~ J3 uffcj"~~_R~~Qlwj,?ingJ1illl (he1'",<\re jn~tan.:;",~\Vh9r9, because of the uniquc phvsieal characteristics of a spccific parcel of land. alternative size buffers may be necessary to allow for the reasonable LIse 01' the land. Tn such cases an alternative minimum and average buffer width will be pemlitted on ten percent (l0%) of the linear wetland buffer within the parcel. which will be compensated for by increased buffer widths elsewhere in the same parcel to achieve the required avcrage buffer width. ill The alternative average butTer standards set Ilwth below may be aPDlied 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. (!:U Size of Darcel. (li} Configuration of existing roads and utilities. (ill Percentage of Darcel covered by wetland. (5l} Configuration of wetlands on the Darcel. (f) Will not cause degradation of the wetland or stream. {g} Will ensure the Droteetion or enhancement of D01iions of the buffer which are found to be the most ecologically benel1eial to the wetland or stream. ill The following are the alternative average butler widths and structure setbacks: Buffer Wetland Classes Class A & Streams Class B Class C Minimum ButTer Width* 75 Ct. . 50 I't*. 50 ft. Average Buffer Width 100 ft. 75 ft. N/A Str1J91lI1~t; SetIJ1l9kFrom Outer Edge of Buffer 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 'The minimum buffer width may be used on no morc than 10 perecnt ofth9JllJ"-ill: wetland bulTer-'ltea lQ",'lted within lh_~DarcfC1 '1' L.'J Il:t"'_Cllli2I.QJ;lljaleness c~f using the alternative average bulTers will be evaluated as Dl!ILof thc rcvi C\'LO f the c(L!1traetoLLoLQ.WnCLSc!.QycjQ!lllJQI1LapgU.:;gHQllcJ:ht; altemalive aVera&9J2t,n"'_U10ed nl1.1st Q.e~ witllirllhf~:>l)jrit and intcnt onhis cQ,Ic: !1l}il. nlill?l.!Il.Qet .QllS;-21lJl1.n:e,9fJhe~ITCl1.lir.Qm<ol1tsst;LfQrth bJftl1s;.:;ityJoin'Cl,Kle.. bLli not limitcd tQ,Jhe full owing ~ttateF!ie:>l ill} Restoration of buffer with native Dlantings. Submittal of a buner restoration plan. The plan may need to be drafted by a professional 11 experienced in wetland or stream r9~J-"mlLQl1 !;lased on the size of tl:H~ restorlltioIl-ItfOiect !!~ deemed necessary by city staff includill~ 1. Existing Vcgctation, 2. Restoration methods. ;L Maintenance procedures proposed during first three years of establishment. 4. Erosion control measures. ~ List of plants to be planted. 2... Oualiflcations of contractor. Only contractors with eX12erience and success restoring wetland or stream bufTers or natural vegetation shall be approved. L Maintenance agreement which states that the owner will maintain the butTer to its improved state. 8. The eitv mav require a cash escrow or letter of credit to cover 150 percent of the required work. .ilil Manage weeds in buffer. All weeds listed on the Minnesota noxious weed list must be controlled bv the propertv owner. Owners are encouraged to control other weeds that are not on the noxious weed list but can threaten the health of a wetland. Submittal of a weed management plan drafted bv a professional experienced in wetland and stream restoration including: 1. Target weeds. 2. Appropriate management techniques, including the use of chemical treatment if approved by citv staff as pmi of the management plan. 3. Man[lK9m9!lucheduk. :J:.f'91e!ltial erosion and reseeding if man[lg9mel.TL~yill_cr"'lI"Jill:g9 areas of deacLY9getation. rash escrow or letter of crcdi:ttQQQ~Ll~_O_percellL'LU.he required work. (c) lS,>"luction in slo1'mwater_rurlQtI~Ild!9JimJl1'QY"me[1tQLQ.u~alilv 01" stormwa~t rU!loff entering Y-L<;:tland or streanl. This may bc achicveg through the following stm~ies or other staff approved best managemcnt practices for dealing with slormwater. ThesUTIleti(&~_are tQ. be !Qcated Q]Jtsij:\e of the wetland buffer. 12 Reduce amounl ofpavemenl on silefi.c. fewer parking stalls, narrower dl'iyewgvsL~btu.",.l ]2al'kin!L\yiLh other businesses ). ~ IJsejlervious pavement such as P{\Y.eJ:~-9...LQorous asphalt. 3. ]Jsel1JIfpavers or modified turf areas for overllow parking. 4. Install rain garden or infiltration basin. 2, Install rock trench or roek pit. 6. Install filter strip of grass or native vegetation. L Install surface sand !ilter or underground filter. ~ Install native plantings on site to reduce fertilizer use and improve infiltration. 9. Install a green roof on buildings, ill Install grit chambers, sediment traps. or forebays. l. Stormwater Drainage Facilities: The city does not allow the construction of stormwater drainage facilities, sedimentation ponds, infiltration basins. and rain gardens within the buffer. m. Construction Practices: Special construction practices shall bc rcquircd on proiects or developments next to wetlands or streams and their buffers. Practices to be approved by city staIr before issuance of a grading or building pcrmit include, but are not limited to, the following: ill Grading. ill Scquencing. ()J Vehicle tracking platforms. UU Additional silt tgL~(;S. ill Additional segjmenLCOnlr,)1 (i,--.-Fooefug-Bfld :jgn :;tantlaffi~ TI.& Eros)olLC;P!JIT.QJJn.sJiJUntlQn; Before grading or construction) the crwner or contractor shall put into place erosion control measures around the borders bLdETS. Such erosiQlJ <:;QIllroLll1yaSllIeS must remain in place until the owner and contractors have finished all dcvclcpmcnt activities that may affect the buTler. 0.&0 Wetland Signs: Before grading or stffiiing construction, the boundary between a buffcr and adjacent land shall be identified using permanent signs. These signs shaUmark the 13 edge of the buffer and shall state there shall be no mowing, cutting, tiIling, or dumping beyond this point. These signs shall be installed at each lot line where it crQ~ses 1\ wetland or stream buffer, and where needed to indicate the contour of the buffer, with a maximum spacing of one~hundred (1 00) feet of wetland or stream edge. 12-'" Erosion Control Breaches: All erosion control measures must he maintained and inspected to ensure compliance and protection of wetlands, streams, and butlers. The contractor or owner shall be resl10nsible for all erosion/sedimentation breaches within the butler and shall restore iml1acted areas to conditions present prior to grading or construction activities. 'ld. Platting: When platting or subdividing property, the plat or subdivision must show the wetland boundaries as approved by the applicable watershed district. r.eo Erosion Control Removal: After coml1letion of grading or construction, the contractor or owner may remove thc erosion control measures only after ins12ection and apDl'oval bv the city and the al)!)licable watershed district to ensure the areas affected have been 52stablished l1er requirements. s,f It is the responsibility of the owner to alleviate any erosion during and allet' eoml1letion of grading or construction. The owner or contractor must remove erosion control measures aIleI' final al1l1roved insl1ection bv the eitv and the al1111icable watershed district. 6.'1. Mitigation and Restoration of ButIers: The city requires mitigation when a property owner or contractor has altered or will alter a wetland, stream, or buffer. The property owner or contractor shall submit a mitigation plan to city staff for approval. In reviewing the plan, the city may require the follov,'iq; actions below in descending order ofprctercnec. a. Reducing or avoiding the impact by limiting the dcgree or amount of the action, such as by using appropriate teclmology. b. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the viOodlaHd buffer. e. 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 lJ-j3-te a twoene-to~one ratio. c, Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. f Where thc city rcquires restoration or replacement of a bllffer, the owner or contractor shal1 rcplant the butIcr with native vcgetation. at-asinrilar~den&i~yto.theflmetllJt-bcfure ak"C-t'fltien Aryl!l<lI\til1gJ:lltlI:UJ1~m,th",-IWl!IQy,,~Lhythe city bel()re planting. g. ;\nYi!.li<liti(j}l1\LS;g!E! iti()lls X",LlJir"cLRythe. f!PJJ licahle.\Vllt"rs1wddi,::trKtJ}!IQLQLth..e s(jil !md_\1{[ttcr eOll~QrYilli()lL9i~1dct.~!l'!!jlJPP.ty. h. Al1 strategies as listed in item S.le3. (Alternativc Average Buffert 14 7 N on.c:ol1forl11ing.I311il<;Ullg~o5JruclliIQ",Jl!LdJ'JQQQntQE.j:\llY mQKt"ltl1g Qlli!~1 i!1gJ:1LSlrl1st1lrh.9L~n y existing use of property not in conformity with the rCf'.uiations prcscrihcd in this chaPtcr as ofthc date of the adoption of SUCh regulation (insert date of new ordinance) shall be regarded as nonconl'orming and may continue. 8. Variances: Procedures for granting variances from this section me as follows: a. The city council may approvc variances to the requirements in this section. All variances must follow Minncsota statc law govcrning variances. b. Before the city council acts on a variance the environmental and natural resources cOlmnission will make a recommendation to the planning commission, who will in turn make a recommendation to the city council rimming cOlnmiSfrie&.-The planning commission city emmeil shall hold a public hearing for the variance. before Elflpro'iing a variance, The eCity staff shall notifY the property owners within five hundred (500) ~ fcct of the buffer at least ten days before the hearing. c. The city may require the applicant to mitigate any wctland, stream, or buffer altcrati_ impacts with the approval of a variance, including but not limited to, implementing one or more of the strategies as listed in item 5.k.3. (Alternative Average Buffer). &c +e-a!lJ3rove~'t~'n'tfi{lflec-,tfle-€0\lRcil-ffiust-makMhe..followffig.fmdi{}gs,. +) Strict cnforecment would cause undue hardship beeaase of circumstances uniqae :0 the property under consideration. The term "undue hardship" as used in grunting a variance means the ovmer o[the property in question cannot put it to a reasonable use if used under condftimlB-allowed b-y4he-efficial controls; the plight oftl'le landowner is due to eireuffistrXllces unique to his property, not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic consideratiOl~s alone arc l~Ot an ',mdue hardship if reasonable use for the property e:jsts under ,1,0 tenons o[this sectioIl. ~ The '<,ariam:e v,ould be in l~eering with the spirit and irrtent of tills section. 9. Wetland or Buffer Surety: The applicant shall post a wetland or buffer mitigation suretv with the city, such as a cash deposit or letter of credit, of one hundrecl and fifty (150) percent of estimated cost I;)]" mitigation. The surety will be required based on the size oftbe proiect as deemed necessary by staff. Funds will be held bv the city until successful completion of restoration as clctemlincd by tbe cilY-r:tfter!lc finaJjJJillectjQ]l. Wetland O1:.D.gfff.I.rnitiggttion suretLcloe!i.1J21 include other sureties required pursuant to anv other nrovisinn necity code or city directive. 10. Enforcement: The cityres.eryes th>::.Ligll1JQ in51'~g:Jhf.;~1~.s)rjJL()12"LtY.ilL<my~.tiJl1~ fQI (;o111jJli'!I1c:Q.V{itll.tl1i~. orclilillllC",.Th",citY~l1<1II.Q~. [f5P9D~Qle(oLth~~l1foICernmLQf this Qlclinanc",_bny r>.ers.Q.D..y{ho.rilU!i. to .con:mlv with or violates any section 01"1his ordinance shall be ueemed gl.lihv ora misdemeanor ami upon conviction. shall be subiect to punishment in ~(;.QrclJ!1l(;Qyyjlh~,,(;9JiQjLl:l:J.,~1\1!1~1l9.lL~,"J2.lljlcljngil!}cl gm(l!LlgQ.Qnni!~i>l}gtlll)c_~ul"QCJlctcd.lmtll thc dcvclopcr has correetcd the violation. Each cia" that a separate violation exists shall constitute a separate offense. 15 May 7, 2008 ,l\Uachment 5 Comments Re: Maplcwood Wetland Ordinance Draft 1-29-0l.l Bruce Olsen, 2444 East LarpentelIr Avenue (651) 770-2667 Overview - Protecting the city's wetlands from fllrthcr degradation and improving water quality and wildlife habitat in high priority and high value wetlands should be goals of all city residents. Updating the existing wetland ordinance for Maplewood is needed to reflect our increased understanding of the value that wetlands provide for I) maintaining the quality and quantity of our water resources and 2) supporting the quality of life that city residents expect. In general, I SUPPOlt the efforts by the city to update our wetland ordinance. However, I have questions and concerns about the approach that is being proposed in the draft ordinance language that was discussed at the Maplcwood city council meeting of April 28, 2008. Overarching comments - Item 1 - The city should develop a comprehensive wetlands management plan to support the development and implementation of its wetlands ordinance. Otherwise, there is not a sound technical basis for expanding the city's authority to manage wetlands beyond that which already exists through the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District ordinance. For example, the draft ordinance proposes a new A+ wetland classification but we currently do not have an inventory of such wetlands. Therefore, we do not have a clear understanding of the munber ofpropelty owners that will be impacted nor the public and private sector costs that will be associated with implementing the proposed regulatory requirements for the new wetland classification. Furthennore, we have not evaluated whether all wetlands, regardless of their type, arc being impaired or whether there is only a subset of them that actually need the expanded controls in the proposcd ordinance to improve water quality and to increase watershed protection. The remainder of our wetlands may exhibit acceptable water quality conditions and beneficial use based upon their classification and maintaining their current state can be achieved using the regulations that arc in place through the Ral11sey~Washington Metro Watershed District. Item 2 - The applicability section of the proposed city ordinance states under sub~item 3.a "When any provision of any ordinance conflicts with this section, the provision that provides more protection for bl,ffers, wetlands, or streams shall apply unless speciflcally provided otherwise in this scction. This also applies to the applicable watershed district." The Ramsey~Washington Metro Watershed District Rule E for wetlands states in Sub~ item 2. 11 ~ "A1JTIIORITY UNDER WATERSHED LAVv. The criterion below relates to wetland buffers and water quality and Is adopted under the District's watershed authority and applies whether or not the D1Slrict is the Wetland Conservation Act local government unit in the municipality where the wetland is located.11 May 7, 2008 Thcrc appears to be a conniet bctwcen the authority to regulatc wctland buffers and water quality that is being proposed in the draft city ordinance and the existing authority that is vested with the Ramsey- Washington Metro Watershed District. This needs to be clarified. Specific Comments - The following comments pertain to the Findings section" Item 3 - Under item l.a, the third sentence states "Wetlands are an important physical, educational, ecological, aesthetic, recreational, and economic assets to the city." However, does this statement apply UnifOffilly to all wetlands within the city? For example, are Class C wetlands that are seasonal in nature really important physical, recreational, and economic assets to the city? I suggest that this statement be modified to read "Wetlands, depending upon their type, size, and location within a watershed, mav represent important physical. educational, ecological. aesthetic, recreational, and economic assets to the city, However, the ability of a wetland to provide anv of these benefits must be evaluated on case~bv-case basis because of the uniqueness oflocal physiographic, biological. cultural. and land use characteristics." The fourth sentence in item] .a states "They are Clitical to the city's health, safety, and general welfare." This is a very broad statement and needs to be clarified. One can argue that mosquito control to reduce thc spread of West Nile virus is largely focused on wetlands; so they may, under certain circumstances, present a risk to public health, safety, and general wel fare. In fact, the early drainage laws in Mirmesota were based, in part, on the risk that wetlands presented to public health. I suggest that you change this sentence to read "Properly managed wetlands arc needed to supporllhe city's efforts to reduce flooding and to protect public health, safety, and the general welfare." Item 4 - Under item l.c, T suggest that the first sentence that defines a buffer be expanded to read "Buffers are the lands that surround wetlands and streams within a speci lied distance." As clIn-ently written, this sentence and the definition of a buffer in Section 2 do include any mention ofthe geographic limits of a buffer. Under sub~item l.c. 4 - The tast sentcnce states "The dissolved oxygen level mllst be maintained at a minimum levcl to maintain health aqnatic life". This is a very broad statemcnt and implies that human activities are solely responsible for depletion of dissolved oxygen. Howcver, even in an unaltered wetland, water depth and the thickness of organic sediments may result in the depletion of dissolved oxygen and this likely varies among and between wetland classifications. Furthermore, drought or seasonal dry conditions may cause diminished dissolved oxygcn levels even without human intervention. I suggest that this sentence be moditled to read, "Whenev-'.'f-llragll9.:J.lJle,Jhe dissolved oxygen kvel!fl\t&\ be maintained at a minimul levcl nccded to supporlHea4hy aquatic life." 2 May 7,2008 The following comments pertain to the Purposes section. Item 5 - The purposes of the ordinance should be designated as item "d". Cun-ently, this is stricken and the purposes are included under item "c" which relates to buffers. Item 6 - Sub-item 3.d.a This sentence refers to preserving wetlands and streams in a "natural" state. Howcver, there is no definition of the term "natural" in the ordinance. As a result, anyone can apply their own version of what natural means depending upon tlleir views of wetland or stream protection. Does "natural" refer to pre~settlement conditions of a wetland or stream, cun-ent conditions, a target condition that is based upon improving the existing physical state, or something else? 1 suggest that the city clearly define the term "natural" as it applies to wetlands or streams. Item 7 - Sub-item 3.d.b - This sentence refers to regulating surrounding land uses but does not specify what the term "surrounding" means. Does this imply that the wetlands ordinance will become a land use control ordinance throughout the city or does it apply only to buffered areas adjacent to a wetland or stream? I suggcst that this sub~item be modified to read "Preserve the beneficial functions of wetlands and streams by regulating land uses within the buffered areas that are defined under this section." Item 8 - Sub-item 3.d.c ~ This sentence refers to stabilizing the soil "around" wetlands and streams to prevent erosion. There is no definition of the tenn "arowld" and stabilizing soils may not completely prevent erosion because of slope, soil texture, and precipitation amounts. I suggest that this sub-item be modified to read "Reduce erosion and the resulting sediment loading to wetlands or streams by stabilizing the landscape within the buffered areas that are defined under this section." Item 9 - Sub~item 3.d.d- This sentencc refers to preserving and cnhaneing water quality by filtering suspended solids, nutrients, and "hamlful substances" before they reach wetlands, streams, and "public waters". The benefits stated in this sentence arc confusing, very broad, and not realistic. First, there is no definition of the tenns "hmmful substmlces" and "public waters" in the ordinmlce. Who or what will be harmed by the substances in surface water or runoff that will he filtered out by the controls contained in the ordinance? Wi II implementing the ordinance remove all hmmful suhstances including those that arc dissolvcd in surface water such as pharmaceuticals or endocrine disrupting chemicals? Also, do buffers eliminate all of the nitrate nitrogen or ammonia that may be dissolved in runoff from the watershed that drains into a stream or wetiand? As written, this sentence promises more treatment than can he achieved through vegetated hulTers and should be modified. 1 suggest that this sentence be re~worded to state "~LLlrJlorting thQ.p tQ~Ql:Y;11i 0 tL;1mL"tm.mWQ!!Jyllt.9Li.1u:fl1Q(?}Y<1!9LQ!lilIj!yJ)Y_l"i)!11lQing.!h9 jnP-llJ~oJ sJ!'iP.Qllil.Q':L~Q!icl~dml[i.9.rlJ~,_,mgthtmk[lI~11J:t:3.t;1.!J9Q~J!Eltln[lY a_gY9r~9JY\mpm;.t_pllllJic: heahh or aqual1c habital." Why is the term "public waters" inc1udcd in this statemcnt of PUll10SC when it is not used elsewhere in the ordinance? Does the term "public waters' refer to other surface water 3 May 7, 2()()8 features that are I) dcfincd under Minnesota Statutes section to3G.22I to 103G.2773 ami 2) regulated by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources? If so, then how does proposed wetland ordinance rct1cct the shoreIand zoning ordinance reqllirements that are specified for public waters of the state? Item 10 - Sub~item 3.d.f ~ I suggest that this purpose be reworded to state "Reduce or prevent the t100ding of public and private property and to reduce or eliminate the.gg.?ts that are associated with achieving the water quality improvements necessary to support the bencficial uses of impaired wetlands or streams." As currently written, this pmvose implies that implementing the ordinance will always prcvent flooding and always eliminate the costs ofimproving water quality, even where it is not needed. Item 11 - Sub-item 3.d.g - This purpose is worded too generally because it docs not explain how implcmcnting the draft wetland ordinancc will protect property. What will it protect property from and what capabilitics docs it have to achieve this protection? Item 12 - Sub-itcm 3.d.i ~ I suggest this statement of purpose be reworded to "Educate the public, including appraisers, owners, potential buycrs, or developers regarding the development limitations of wetlands, streams, or associated buffers that are defined under this section. As written, this purpose does not clearly communicate that the buffers referred to are those that are defined by the draft ordinance. The following comments pertain to the Definitions section Item 13 - The definition of alteration does not address wctland enhancement measures that would be approved by the city or other authorities such as the Ramsey-Washington Mctro Watershed District or the Ramsey Conservation District. As written, it implies that no changes to a buffer can be made at all. I suggest that a section be added to this definition that would identify the general categories of enhancement measures that arc acceptable. I suggest that the following items be added to exemptions that would enhance a property owners' capabilities to utilize a wetlalld- 1. The placement of up to thrcc benches by a property owner for the purposcs of observing wildlife or enjoyment oflhe outdoors. Benches are not to be longer than six feet or wider tban two feet and cannot be observed above the height of the vegetation that immediately surrounds it. Only the vegetated area immediately beneath the bench or used for the placement of a pcrson' s feet can he impacted; 2. Footpaths through vegetation that pcrmit property owners to observe wiidiifc and to Cl~jOY the outdoors providing that footpaths arc produced onlY by vv'alking and arc not mainta11led by mowing, placing muloh cr other materials used to kill vegetation, removing ofvege1atlon that is approved undcr this section, or the application of herb icicles or other substances that wiI! adversely affect the wetland vegetation or wildlife. 4 May 7, l008 3. The harvesting of vegetation by a property owncr for craft, food, or medicinal purposes provided that this does not impact the capability ofthc buffer to perform its functions to protect the wetland. Item 14 - As mentioned under Item 4, the definition of a buffer should be reworded to state "Buffers are the lands that surround wetlands and streams within a sneeified distance." Item 15 - Is there rea11y a need to create a separate Class A C designation and imposc addition land-use controls over them? Can't these high value wetlands be designated as such using a comprehensive wetlands management plan and be protected by focusing our efforts on landowners and the public using existing regulatory controls and pLlblic education, outreach, and grmlt programs? The definition describing a Class A' wetland includes the statement, "These wetlands are special and deserve additional protection to ensure that they remain in that state." The question is, if existing land use has not adversely impactcd them and they are still of high value, then why arc additional controls even necessary? The following comments pertaIn to the Standards section. Item 16 - I am very concemed that the proposed buffer classes are not based on sound technical infollnation and arc capricious. The city has not provided the public with information stating why the buffer distances that are currently used by the Ramsey- Washington Metro Watershed District are not adequate to meet the wetland protection purposes ofthe city's dmft wetlands ordinance. Instead, the draft ordinance increases a11 the minimum buffer widths by two to three times that alrcady required by the Ramsey~ Washington Metro Watershcd District. Unless these increases can be technically justified, property owners will view the additional controls as infringing on their right for beneficial use of their private property and constitute an unjnstified taking of this right. In particular, r question whether the decision to increase the buffer widths was based on including an evaluation of the following factors - . The adequacy of the buffers specified by the Ramsey~Washington Metro Watershcd District to mcet the purposes of the dralt ordinancc; . Thc capabilities of soil conditions to infiltrate runoff from precipitation or snowmelt watcr so it does not directly enter the wetland; . The slope of the landscape surrounding the wetland, pmticularly when either the existing buffer distance or the proposed extended bulTer distancc gocs past a topographic divide and surface water drains aVJay from the wetland in question; ~ The capab;]] lies to attenuatc scdimcnt and nutrient loading of adJacent wetlands that are located up-slope and 'Nithin the existing buffer dlstance; ~ The design ofthc cxisting Maplewood stonnwater sewer system to direct precipitation or snow melt water away from the wetland; 5 May 7,2008 ~ Mitigating measures for re~directing stonnwater away from the wetland or treating sto1111water runoff prior to its entry to the wetland that would be proposed in a development plan; and $ The impacts that speci fic land uses within Maplewood currently have on water quality. Item 17 - Increasing the buffers as proposed will further reduce potential development of a propeliy ifthe city does not allow the construction of stOl1nwater drainage facilities, sedimentation ponds, infiltration basins, and rain gardens within the buffer. These engineering measures are designed to reduce the scdimentation and nutrient loading impacts on the wetland and should be considered, especially if they are beyond the topographic dividc of the wetland but still within a buffcr. The combination of an un~ justified buffer distance beyond that already required by the Ramsey~Washington Metro Watershed District and rcfusing mitigating measures beyond a topographic divide would place undo hardship on a property owner or developer. Item 18 - Sub~item 5.0. - Why does the draft ordinance specify a 100 foot maximum distance between wetland notification Si[,'11S instead of 200 feet as required by the Ramsey~Washington Mctro Watcrshed District? Furthermore, thcrc arc no specifications for the size of the sign or the sizc ofthe font that is to bc used. Is it practical to expect residential landowners to make their own signs or should the city prepare signs and instructions for their placement? This could be done as part of a public education effort for wetlands protection and encourage residential land owner participation. These comments pertaIn to Mitigation and Restoration of Buffers Item 19 - Items 5.k.3.a and section 6 specify that a property owner or contractor must suhmit a mitigation plan to the city for approval prior to mitigating or restoring a buffer. Also, section 9 requires that that applicants post a surety that is 150% of the cost with the city. These requirements would apply to all mitigation and restorative efforts, regardless of the size of the area to be improved. This will discourage homeowners from participating in wetland restoration efforts and promotc current abuses such as mowing the lawn to the waters edge. For example, if] want to budget $500 to restoring a bulTer in my backyard, 1 will have to incur the additional expenses of 1) hiring a professional to prepare the mitigation plan and a weed control plan, 2) submit the plans to the city which undoubtedly will include a processing fee, and 3) post a S750 surcty bond. Furthcl1110rC, [will have to schedule inspections with the city and T may bave to correct any dcflcicncics that the city inspector detects such as a weed control violation or lirilllre to post or maintain signs along the edge of the !wl"fer. On top of all of this, 1 will havc to prcparc and follow a maintenance agreement which states that the owner (this could be the next person who purchases my property) will maintain thc buner in its improved state. This is a very draconian apprcach to havmg home owners participate m wetlands protection. 6 May 7,2008 I recommend that the city's wetland ordinance recognize the difference between an existing residential property and the owner's interest in wetlands restoration and thc development or redevelopment of multiple lots when requiring a wetlands buffer mitigation or remediation plan. I recommend that the city's wetland ordinancc include either 1) a threshold area of restored or mitigated buffer such as one half acre or 2) a minimum distance along the cdge of the wetland such as 300 feet that will trigger the requirement to submit a mitigation plan and all that goes with it. Otherwise, 1 feel very few residential property owners will want to incur the expense and governmental scmtiny to re~establish a protective buffer. Item 20 - Enforcement - Thc draft ordinancc proposes to give the ci ty authority to inspect a site or property at any time. This should bc reworded to state "The city reserves the right to inspect the site or property during regular eity business hours or upon notice to the property owner or its designated representative one busincss day in advance if the inspcction is to occur at a different time." The city should not have unfettered acccss to personal property because a violation ofthe wetland ordinance is a misdemeanor and should not present an immanent threat to public safety. 7 <II The City of Saint Paul has within it nearly 75 miles of paved State and City trails, inc]udiuF th(~ Bruce Vento Trail ( '-' ' ---~--'---------'- hl1]2:j/ronspacc,oxg/2.QQJj~\-vedc ~l::lQltQ.Y_Y___,:\~'__ento Trail/ ) End the Gateyva.Y~TUJjJ ( http://\"1,/'jy:_yY.,,(JnI,state.mn.uS/St~.tf~_,""_LnljLiLgate\vg.yli.n",i.t:::'.<_JJ1F11 ) '\vhich arc pan of an extensive, interconnected, rneLro-\vide nehvork ofbike./pedestrian trails that provide a pollution.. free mode of transportation and recreation II The Saint Paul Division of Parks and Recreation Maintains: if' 101 miles of paved ofTslreet trails if' 30 miles of bike lanes if' 10.8 miles of bike routes if' 30.3 miles of striped shoulders if' 24 miles of dilt trails · The Division of Parks and Hecreation employees a Bicycle-Pedestrian Coordinator co The Bicycle Advisory Board if' A ppointed by the Mayor ,/ Made up of citizen voluntecrs and representatives from Parks, Planning and Economic Development, Police, and Public Works ,/ Promotes the use of bicycles and the expansion of Saint Paul's paved trail system . Saint Paul Classic Bike Tour ,/ Largest annual regional bicycle event in the northern states ,/ !Iosted by the Saint Paul Neighborhood Energy Consortium and co- sponsored by the City of Saint Paul ,/ More than 7,000 riders of all ages enjoy 31 miles of mostly traffic~ fi'ee cycling on the City's trails and scenic boulevards ,/ Organizers focus on using locally-produced, organic food and beverages; music is amplified using a solar generator; and 97.68% of potential "waste" materials are recycled or compostcd . City V chicle Efficiency Improvements e In 2006, the City of Saint Paul began phasing high-mileage and flexible-fuel vehicles into the City's sedan and ligbt utility vehicle fleet " These vehiclcs will use environmcntally~friendly bio-fuels, such as Ethanol~ E85% and Biodiesel-B20% t City of Saint PaulIntcrnal EffOlts 'll Traltle signals in Saint Paul arc regularly rctimed by the Department of Public Works thereby minimizing delay and fuel consumption @J On rnany \veIl-travcllcd Public \Vorks installs pavement rI1ade ofreJlectlvc tape dudng street reconstruction projects or asphalt overlsysl 'Nhlch clirninate the need to apply paint markings to these road\\'ays for 5-7YC8XS CLEAN AIR @ Saint Paul bJlp;lI\.v_y{yy~~~i_.':~t12auJ omn. U s/ c1 cptS/lXn:;_(r.~.~tJj~;_qZL~dn sum)" ,htrn 1 @ Background: ~/ The Minnesota Pollution Control AK~n"QY reports that; ". C02 emissions are increasing in I\:'1inncsota by an average of two percent per year ~ Increased use ofclcctricity in homes, business, and industry is panially responsible . Increased use of electricity causes increasing greenhouse gas emissions from power plants . The five most polluting coal plants in Minnesota emit more than 33 million tons of C02 each year .. A utomobiles arc also responsible for global wam1ing by creating 20 pounds of C02 for every gallon of gasoline bumed ,/ The Environmental Protection Agencv reports that: . the average minivan produces] 6,800 pounds of C02 each year .. Average fuel economy in the 2001 t1cet (20.4 miles per gallon) was the lowest of any year since 1980 .. Iffuel economy was improvedlhree miles per gallon, consumers would save up to $25 billion a year in fuel costs, C02 emissions would be reduced by 140 million metric 10ns per year, and Amcrica's dependence on foreign oil would be reduced by as mueh as a mi lIion barrels a day . The Plan: ,/ In 1992, the Cities of Saint Paul and Minneapolis joined the International '<::52uncil for 1 ,ocal Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), an international network of 14 cities worldwide focussed on environmental/economic transition under the Urban C02 Reduction Project .. This project is the first global elIort to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases > Saint Paul and Minneapolis co-founded the ICLET Cities for Climate Protection Campaign, which enlists other cities to adopt policies and important measures 10 achieve quantifiable reductions in greenhouse gas emissions ,/ In 1993, the City Council adopted the C02 Reduction Plan, which was developed by a task force made up of individuals limn several departments ,/ The Plan's purpose is to: . Improve SL Paul's environmental and economic health . Reduce energy consumption at 200 City work sites by installing energy-ctIicient equipment purchased with interest~frcc loans issued by.' Xed Energy ;.. Encourage recycling and v/aste reduction, equipment/lighting c.on.version\;,water tre';iLmcnt efficiency, sustaiDilble storm \vater and vvcdands rnanagernenL, fonvard-Jooking l.and use planning and neighborhood development; encrg;/o.efficient heating/cooling, and environmentally-friendly transporLation options III Implementation: ,/ [n 1993 the Saint Paul Enyironmental-Economic Partnership Project {I',EPP) was initiatcd to implement the City's Urban C02 Reduction Plan, a 20-year cHolt if Implementation of the C02 RedLlction Plan has resulted in significant economic and environmental savings and ultimately will reduce greenhouse gas cmissions by 960,000 tons of per year, at a total cost savings of$59,000,000 ,/ In 2000, the ICI ,El awarded the EEPP a Local Initiatives Award for its development and implemcntation of a comprehensive, long-term plan to redLlcc greenhouse gas emissions and strengthen the local economy + Green Fleet Project . Established by Clean Air Minnesota http://www.cleanainninnesota.org/ . Will purchase and install diesel retrofit equipment on school buses in Saint Paul, Minneapolis, Rochester and Duluth that will reduce pollution inside the bus to outdoor levels, dramatically reducing children's exposure to pollutants . Eventually, the program will install pollution~control equipment on at least 500 school buses aeross the state + City of Saint Paul Internal Efforts co Public Works uses 1320 (20% biodiesel) tiJel in its diesel vehicles and equipment <l> Public Works currently owns 58 sedans that are E85 compatible and will continue to purchase only "flex-fuel" sedans ll! Vehicles are maintained and kept in good repair, which minimizes emissions and improves fuel economy <II The Public Works Department has a "No Vehicle Idling" policy, reducing tailpipe emissions and saving ilwl $ Public V<lurks uses hydraulic tools instead or gasoline-pm,vered tools \vhcncver possible DEVELOPMENT '+ The City of Saint Paul Dcpartmem: ofrlm~U1ing and 1;,coJ1QIni~J2~}'cloplYL~J::H_ (PED) and lhc Housin)?: [J11.g__I~_~~tcvc1.opnl\11L~~~lJb5!.ritf/ (HRA.) have implelTlcnrcd an ~JJ~rgy ~~\:!.!)~?~.rY_?ltion Dolic\:' that rcquire5: $ r~very developer undeJiaking a development in Saint Paul:^ in \vhich public doHat's have been hn;cstcd~ HUlst rned \viih energy design consuHrmts to discuss sCP/lccs that are available to make buildings more energy--efficient and cost-effective ,/ Consultant Sorvices include E11.~rgv Dcsilm Assist8J}S& (Xed Energy) and Peak PerfortTlanc_oJlQmes (Saint Paul Neighborhood Energy ConsOltiuJ11) .. For every development within the District Energy service area, the developer must meet with both District Energy and Xed to learn about the services that each provides in order to make an informed decision about which provider to use .. PED is working to link business oPPoltunities generated by the energy eonservationj:loliev with qualilicd minority businesses that have the capacity and willingness to bid and perform . Examples ofPED Projects with Green Components: .. The Market Lofts Condominiums and Indoor Farmers' Market inelude the following: ,/ District Heating aud Cooling in the Indoors Farmers' Market ,/ The high-eft1ciency, well insulated building envelope is designed to be resistant to heat flow ,/ Low V olalile Organic Chemical (VOC) paints and finishes throughout the condos ,/ Encr~v Star rated furnaces and appliances in tbe condos ,/ Programmable thermostats in the condos ,/ Uigh recycled content in concrete used in the development ,/ Sheetrock uscd in the development contains recycled materials ,/ Low-e energy~saving windows ,/ Recycled and sustainably~harvested products offered to buyers as finish products, including granite, stainless steel, bamboo flooring ,/ A rooftop storm-water retention system ,/ Centrally located near transit lines and a shopping 4> "I'he proposed redevelopment at Snelling A venue and 1-94 includes a Bcst Buy and Lowe's, both of which will undergo Energv Design Assistance (Xeel Energy) review and are considering solar~powcrcd lighting for the parking lots .. The Rondo Community Outreach I ,ibrary and 93 nearby housing units underwent t:l]rrgyJIrsign Assistance review (Xcel Energy) and incorporated the recommendations ~ The Dale Sneet ;T'ownhornes developed by the (ireat~r_F.mE,tQ~:"'DJ;;::ommu!li1J: the 1Ini\~}::sit\! of IvIinnci}.QJ,z(!_",--_0P.hQDI of Architecture" and the j,Vildcr Foundation, incorporated an Oriented Strand Board (OSB) pm,el system, ~vhich u:;es \vood ham Rltvidt.>range of fast-growing species, thereby causing less impact on the environment than traditional stick framing \1 Fzedeveloping existing buildings,ivhich is common in Saint Paul, as opposed to demoiishing and building new ones, reduces the environmental impact .. Transit oriented design, which is playing a larger role in planning and development efforts in Saint Paul, is key to making development sustainable + The Saint Paul Port Authoritv, the lead agency in industrial development in Saint Paul, has a sustainable development policv thal: co Requires evcry new building to undergo Xeel Energy's Energv Desil?n Assistance program · Offers services to businesses, through LHB Architects, that include an cvaluation of material usage for increased durability, resource efficiency and cost effectiveness · Offers services through Great River Greening's Hil?h Performance Site Design, which promotes native planting and enhanced storm water management + Examples of Port Authoritv Projects with Green Components .. Phatcn Corridor: ,f 2.5 mi Ie corridor ,f over a hundrcd acres 0 r polluted land and blight cleaned up ,/ $600 million public/private invcstment ,/ A public/private partnership with multiple City Departmcnts (Public Worl.So';, Planning and Economic Development, Parks and Recreation) ,f hundreds of new quality housing units tor people at various income levcls ,f 2,1 00 new jobs ,/ New Transit and Transportation Improvements including Phalen Boulevard ,f New and improved parks and trails ,f Ames Lake, a reclaimed wetland and neighborhood amenity that replaced a dilapidated and blighted shopping center DRINKING WATER AND WASrEW A TER TREATMENT .. Saint Pallll{egJonal V/alcr Services (SrRVlS) @ Established nearly 125 years 8g0 fa Produces an average of 50 million gal!on:~ of drinking "'vater every day and distributes it through a thousand miles of water main to morc than 417)000 residents in Saint Paul and 14 surrounding communities @ A conservation-based ralC structure discourages excessive water usage during SUD1mer months . Ensures that water is not being wasted by operating a leak detection unit that identifies and locates leaks that need to be llxcd .. Capped the lime lagoon in Maplewood .. Will operate a construction materials recycling site in one section of the lagoon and plant prairie grass and small trees on other areas of the 30-acre site .. Maintains extensive forested areas in local watershed systems that were planted in the early 1900's and selectively thins the forests so they will continue to protect source waters and remain healthy .. Promotes water and energy conservation at its own facilities II Works with Xcel Energy to reduce cnergy consumption because electricity and natural gas comprise nearly 30% ofSPRWS's material and supply budget .I Xcel Energy performed energy audits on SPR WS bllildings and the McCarron's Center ./ SPRWS rednces energy usage during peak periods and even generates its Dwn electricity, which allows it to continuc operating during power outages .. Worked with a local watershcd organization (VLA WMO) to restore three wetlands that were drained .I The State of Minnesota recoguizes this project as a "Marquis" project of the Governors Clean Water Initiative <I Partnercd with the City of Minlleapolis and the City of Saint Cloud to form the Lipper Mississippi Clean Water Partnership program, with the goal of communicating the relationships between the Mississippi River's health and local drinking water sources and urging local watersheds to address drinking water issues II Restored the Lambert Creek Watershed area if Selected by lhe Governor's Clean Water Inilialive as a metro area clean water project @ The Saint Paul Regional \Vatcr Scrviceos!v1GC~arron:s Carnpus Expansion if Completed in September 2004 ./ Consists of three separate buildings and rm~jor site irnproveInents that bring administrative and cn;:'h' en1ployees together at a combined campus located in the City oHvlaplewood if Underwent Xeel Energy's Energy Design Assistance program if Installed ,. highly efficient intericr lighting . natural daylighting . low-E glazing . highly efficient mechanical systems . storm water infiltration basins and native plantings to transfer storm water from the parking lot to the adjacent basin . native plantings of grasses, wildflowers, trees, and shrubs that reduce maintenance costs and improve biodiversity at the campus . a buffer of native plantings that runs along the edge ofthe campus that provides a visual screen and captures storm water before it enters the Trout Brook stream + The Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant . Located on the Mississippi River in 51. Paul · Largesl wastewater treatment facility in Minnesota and one of the largest in the nalion - averaging 215 million gallons of wastewater every day li"om 62 communities, 800 industries and over 2 million residents <<I When it opened in 1938, it was thc first plant in a metropolitan area on the Mississippi River <<I The Solids Management Building (SMB) if Planned and developed by lvlctropolitanC:Qll11cil Environmcntal Service" (MCES) if $160 million investment if Began opcrations in 2004 if Capacity to process 315 dry tons of biosolids per day ./ Three Iluid-bed incinerators replaced an outdated six multiple-hearlh incinerator system, thereby reducing pollutant emissions, cutting fuel consumption, and lowering operating costs if The new process recovers significantly more heat, which is used to producc steam for winter heating if The plant's highly-eftlcicnt turbine generation process produces more electricity than the old process. producing an average of three megawatts ofeJectrieily, cnough to meet 20 percent of the plant's power demands and power abolltl,OOO homes ,/ Enhanced air pollution control equipment rernovt'.s alInost 90%J more pollutants and parliculates from the air; including: metals, mercury, carbon rnonoxide, and sulruf oxides, as compared to pre-2004 emission levels I' The process uses about 80 percent less natural gas than the old system, \vhich ~ based on natural gas price estimates from 2005, results in a savings of $3 million a year I' Solids-dewatering equipment captures odors in centri luges and neutralizes them through chemical and biological processes RIVERS - LAKES - STREAMS AND WETLANDS ~ Ivlisslssippi River ~ GJy~~Ll~h:yJj=-8rk_JYJil~J~J..P1?Il -- 1:l.l1P_:_{L~N \\i~!,/ . ri v erfrontco rporat i on oyj2mL1592,~{l;H~ ,/ Jomt effort oflhe Saint Paul gjyyrfront Corporation (SPRC) and the City of Saint Paul (1'Iill]!lii11U!!l<1J3conomic Development and Park"~_~. Recreation) ,/ Plan to develop parks, improve public infrastmcture, and promote economic development along the Mississippi River ,/ FOllr lenets of future river corridor dcvclopmcnt: . More urban ,. More green . COlIDcclto the neighborhoods . Celebrate the River as a regional/nalional asset .. Mississippi River Critical Area Zoning Amendments ,/ In 2004, thc Saint Paul Qi1y.Qounci I created the Mississippi River Critical Area Task Force ,/ Task Force Purpose is to update the City's zoning regulations for the Mississippi River Critical Arca Corridor so they are consistent with the recommendations in the Mississippi River Corridor Plan ,/ The regulations address: . building set ~baeks from bluffs . building heights . scenic views . tree preservation . protection of steep slopes and bluffs .. The Saint Paul Division of Parks and R~ereation partners with Great River Greening, Friends of Parks and Trails, Friends ofthe Mississippi River, The Ramsey Soil and Water Conservation District aucl the West Side Citizens Organizalion to develop and implement plans to conserve the unique bluffs that tower above the Mississippi, reduce direct pollution into the river, restore degraded natural ameuities, and ensure that people enjoy the blutls responsibly + Trillium Site <il Plan calls for day-lighting a stream that is currently buried in storm water pipes " The stream will create wetlands and on-site park amenities, capturing all storm water at the end of streets and channelling it intD wetlands that will cleanse the water before it is discharged into the storm sewer . City of Saint Paul Internal Efforts " In 2004, the City Council adopted the Storm Water Managcment Ordinance, which requires sediment and erosion control during construction and permanent storm '0/ater managenwnt for projects invoh/ing rnore L1.HU1 one acre of impervious surf:::'lcc * Public \~/orks designs bridge drainage structures that direct pollutants into detention basins and prevent pollutants from entering ri'vcrs and streams @ Public. 'Norks currently o\vns t\:vo regenerative-air street s\veepers that minimize pollutanls Hushed into streams and rivers by stormwatcr .. Public Works lJSCS environmentally-friendly, recyclable spill/cleanup products * Public Works uses environmentally~friendly cleaning fluids .. Trucks with large hydraulic systems are stocked with recyclable oil spill kits that contain and clean oil spills . Public Works and the Residential Street Vitality Program is working together to construct rain gardens, two of which are already complete near the Swede Hollow Cafe and Como Lake . In the last ten years, Public Works has reduced its use of sand by over 90%, signiticantly reducing the amount of sand that flows into storm sewers, lakes, and fIvers .. Parks and Recreation uses prescribed burning instead of herbicides to maintain native plantings . Parks and Rccreation removes aquatic weeds to improve water quality and animal habitat .. Parks and Recreation implemented a goose feeding ban to improve flock health, reduce nitrogen pollution in area lakes, and promote public safety co V olunteers at Lake Phalen Boathouse installed a rain garden consisting of native plants . I)arks and Recreation reports pesticide use to Community Councils .. Parks and Recreation Well and Groundwater Management Program monitors well use history .. Mower decks on Parks' mowers are set at 3" to reduce the need lor watering and mulching blades are utilized when possible .. frequent mows climinate the need for herbicide use " Grass clippings are removed from impermeable surfaces, reducing the levels of nitrogen in area lal<es and rivers i@ Parks and Recreation implemented the Dcsnoyer Seep plan al.ong the !\1ississippi River Boulevard and initiated {he t100dplain forc-st restoration project at Crosby Farm Regional Park NATURAL RESOURCES - PARKS AND RECREATION + The ,'jalo! P::!1:!l.J)j}~Jt}j~)ll_cl Parks {!T!sl._g~(,:rt;aLion @ Operates: ./ 101 parks ./ 41 recreation centers \/ three golf courses if two city pools if Como Zoo ./ the lVlarjorie T\1cNccly Conservatory @ M.aintains if 450,000 trees if 101 miles ofpavod off~street trails if 30 miles of bike lanes if 10.8 miles of bike routes if 30.3 miles of striped shoulders if 24 miles of dirt trails if 160 unique garden sites if 150 hanging baskets " Is accredited by the Commission for Aooreditation of Park & Recreation Agencies (CAPRA) ./ One of only 59 park agencies nationwide to have received this accreditation and one of only three in Minnesota if For more information, visit WWW.nrlla.org. " Partners with Great River Greening, Friends of Parks and Trails, Friends of the Mississippi River, The Ramsey Soil and Water Conservation District and the West Side Citizens Organization to develop and implement plans to conserve the unique blulls that tower above the Mississippi, reduce direct pol iution into the river, restore degraded natural amenities, and ensure that people enjoy the bluffs responsibly " Employs two full-time Environmental Services staff members to maintain natural areas, environmental programs, environmentai volunteer base, and partnerships ,vith parlncr organizations $ Enacted tbe following environmental management strategies: if Natural Resource Management Plans if Restoration of Como Lake and Lake Phalen shorelines utilizing native plants to anchor the lakeshore, prevent erosion, and provide food and shelter for fish and wiidiife ./ Planting of native prairie shrubs at Monnds Park, HmTict Island, Lilydale Regionall~arks, and Mississippi River Boulevard .f Establishment of a bluff management plan for the Mississippi River gorge and a Preliminary Restoration Plan [or Pig's Eye Lake ./ tvlanagement of storm \vater runorron Harriet Island, including the use of bio-swales, so that it is captured and filtered through a biot1!tration befure reaching the Rive! ,/ t)se of rain in several areas o[the City to filter the SLormwater released into lakes and the Ri'vcr ./ Ivlonitoring and regulating insects and oihcr pests to rninimizc the use of pesticides if Eradication of invasive species if The $26 million G9fjlO Park VisitoLalliLt:';iucation RCS2LlJ:~,,-(~enter underwent the X,,-eJ Fneri:;)"s.Energv Design As~sistflI1C" analysis, which resulted in: . the use of photovoltaic pancls, recycled materials, and sustainably harvested interior wood finishes . the glass in Tropical Encounters is positioned to refiect the summer sun away and intensifY the winter sun . rain runoff is collected and used to water plants . waste water [rom the Tropical Encounters exhibit is treated and rcused . Operates the North Dale Recreation Center which: .-' Utilizes high-efficiency heating and cooling units, dimmable fluorescent lighting, occupancy sensors for ligbting control in restrooms, and earth sheltering for part oHhe building .-' Incorporates recycled ceramic tile in the kitchen .f Used recycled bituminous in the gravel base for the parking lot, te1Ulis courts, driveways, and walks .f Recaptured storm water horn the roof is used for infiltration in the play area sub~grade · Undeltook the addition and remodelling of the Griggs Recreation Center, which .-' has a high-efficiency nlrnaec and hot water heatcr as patt of the new mechanical system and long. lasting fluorescent lighting .-' incorporated recycled aggregate for the concrete slab base and recycled bituminous in tbe gravel basc of the tennis courts II Constructed the Highland Park toilet shelter building witb .-' translucent plastic windows that utilize natural light, thereby minimizing the amount of arlificiallight required .-' energy-cfllcient fluorescent and metal halide light fixtures with lighting controls .-' low.maintenance, hard.wired infrared controls for all plumbing fixtures .-' high-efficiency furnaces and fans .f long-lasting clay rooftile5 and a natural stone facade that will keep maintenance costs down @ Manages the Waco uta Commons Dog Walk area that featmes ./ alkaiine soil that neutralizes dog urine ,/ urine-resistant tree-s /" co.mrnerciatly harvested titnberwood and recycled tires lJsed to surface the pla:y area site I' on-site drainage that conserves \vater i.lnd lixnits rLlnoff @ ls planning permeable parking lots and patlnvays that allow \-vater to permeaLc through the pa vement and be filtered 4>> PrOlnotes '(green roofs,': which reduce heating and cooling costs and reduce storm watcr runoff .. Plans to install benches and waste receptacles in Parks and Recreation Centers made from recycled materials It Plans to use ethanol gas blends in City vchicles .. Uses large trash receptacles at parks and recreation centers, thercby reducing the frequency of emptying and the consumption of fucl .. Partners with volunteers to maintain natural areas and manage environmental projects, which include: ./ clearing, from a variety ofbluffiand habitats, invasive buckthorn and honeysuckle that inhibit the growth of native trees, shrubs, and wildflowers ,/ the annual Spring Parks Cleanup which draws approximately 6000 volunteers .. Manages four golf courses and in doing so: ,/ Introduces native plantings, reducing the use of water and chemicals ,/ Establishes 12 to 16 foot buffcr strips around ponds to reduce and filter runotI ,/ Jrrigates the Como Park Golf course using primarily reconditioned storm water runoff ,/ Composts grass clippings and weeds into the soil at the Como Park Golf course ,/ Works with the University of Minncsota to control the goose population thereby reducing nitrogen pollution in area lakes ,/ Mulches all leaves ,/ Utilizes spot spraying of herbicides when applicable and utilizes environmentally-friendly herbicides ,/ Encourages new bird populations through the use ofbirdhouses ,/ Jnstalls separate trash containers for metal, which is then recycled . Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary lID Just east of dovv'ntc)\vn t4 Afkr 8 CCnlLl(Y of industrial use, the land lay vacant and blighted unLiI a coalition ofl:,:a~;;t Side and l,Ov\/ertoVVl1 \vith l.he help of the launc.bed an effort to purchase the land andlransform it into the 27~acre Bruce Vento \Taturc Sanctuary ., Bluffrestoration work at the Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary and Indian Mounds Regional Park began in ApriL 2004 @ ToclaYl project partners are restoring the land IS ecology and working with Dakota people to intel1)J"et Carver's Cave/Wakan Tipi, a sacred area in a comer ofthe Sanchrary .. Stormwater that previously flowed into the Mississippi River via storm sewers, is now recaptured by native plants and is stored in three separate clear water ponds and adjacent wetlands .. Mulch, incorporated into existing sterile soil, promotes the growth of new plantings .. Limestone rock slabs previously used in railroad operations form a waterfall, stone bridge, stairway, and ponds .. Site remediation and stabilization work is ongoing .. Restoration priorities in 2005 focussed on combatting invasive species, slope stabilization, erosion control, and planting 7.5 acres of native trees . Comprehensive BlutTs Management Plan " The West Side Bluffs Task vorce developed a comprehensive Bluff Management Plan for the western segment of the Mississippi River bluff .. Developed by neighborhood volunteers, Great River Greening, and the Parks and Recreation Division, this landmark Plan was tinalized in 2003 .. The Plan provides a framework for blulTmaintenance and improvement based on a balance of ecological restoration, resource preservation, and recreational use .. Great River Greening's Ecological Inventory and Vegetation Management Plan is the foundation of the l31uff Management Plan ENERGY & ENERGY CONSERVATION .. Xccl EnCfl?y tI Y{indJ2nergy / One of the nation's leading suppliers ofv'i/illd energy ,,/ Generates about 1 100 megav/alts of wind energy capacit)' in service ,,;" Anticipates increasing output to more than 2\300 megmvaHs by 2007, including more than j ,000 megawatts each in Colorado and Minnesota ,( The additional capacity would make Xcd Energy the nation's largest utility user ofyvind power ,( Xed's goal is add another 1,700 megawatts of wind capacity by 2012 ,( This additional wind energy and its voluntary emissions reduction program will result in a net reduction of 12 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions between 2003 and 2009 ,( Xcd is a leader in offering customers a choice in buying renewahle energy . Through the Windsourcc@ program, cllstomers in Minnesota, Colorado and New Mexico can spccify that part or all of their electricity be generated by the wind . Customers choose the number of 100 kWh blocks they want to buy . Because wind energy costs more to produec than electricity from conventional sources such as coal or gas, customers pay a slightly higher price for it . The Windsource@ program is one of the largest voluntary wind power programs in the country . Conservation ,( Conservation lmDrovement Programs (ClP) . The City of Saint Paul and Xcel Energy have been working together for IS years to introduce ClPs to city, school district, county, state governmcnt, and private sector buildings . Saint Paul CIPs include facilities energy conservation, retrofits, ENERGY STAR purchasing, street lighting, signal lamp conversion, pumping peak demand pricing, lime sludge dewatering, treatmcnt chemical redudion, and private sector energy conservation . Estimated Annual Savings: 81,497 tons of CO2 gasses and $7,934,000 annually ,( Citywide rdleJgV Audit of Government Buildings . The Weidt Group conductcd an energy~use study of 6,000 government buildings in Minnesota . The first phase ofthe project is to collect information about public buildings largcr than 5,000 square fect > The information will be used to improve energy efficiency in the public bui Idings . The second phasc ofthc project involves analyzing the information and identifYing buildings that are performing poorly Departments v\,'ith poorly performing buildings '\iv-ill budget for building improvements ,"vith assistance from Xcel -Energy .I Corp/ersion to Natural Gas The IUgh Bridge Minnesota Metro Emissions Reduction Project (MERP) invotvcs replacing the existing coal-pO'vvcrcd fad] itl' \vith a natural gas- tlred combincckycle unit - a $1 Biltionllndertaking A natural gas-fired, combined-cycle plant produces electricity from two sources of energy instead of one making it about 30 percent rnore efficient than a traditional stcam planl The new unit will reduce sullllr dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate mailer by more than 90 percent, while mercury will be completcly eliminated Electricity output from the High Bridge site will be increased by 270-280 megawatts - enough electricity to supply almost 300,000 typical homes The conversion is supported by a broad coalition of environmental groups - hlto://w_ww.me3.org/news/12l803ns.html " .I ,I .r .r + District Energy Saint r'illl -- http://www.districtcnergv.QQm/ . Owns and operates the largest hot water district heating system in North America . Has produced energy from renewable sources at a low cost for commercial and residcntial customers in Saint Paul since 1983 . Serves 80% of buildings in downtown Saint Paul and adjacent areas, including the State Capitol Complex, all downtown city offices and 300 single-family homes · District Cooling began providing cooling service in 1993 and toelay serves about 60% of the buildings in downtown Saint Paul while continuing to expand its service arca . System reliability exceeds 99.99 percent CI The hot water district heating system is twicc as efficient as the previous steam heating system in downtown Saint Paul, heating twice the square footage of building space with the same amount offuel .. Using District Energy, customers saved $1,000,000 more in November 2005 alone than customers who used natural gas .. Air emissions have been significantly reduced: 150 smokestacks, 50 cooling towers, and 300 chimneys have been eliminated in St. Palll III The closed-loop distribution system eliminated the use of groundwater and ell lororlllorocarbon (CFC) refrigerants in heating and cooling.. thereby conserving an important natura! resource and reducing the use of CFCs, \vhich are destroying the E,arLh1s protecti\re 070ne. shield and are chiefly' responsible [fJf global-If/arming fib '1v-/O chilled \7>iater storage tanks store \vakr produced Ht night~ using off-peak electricity, for daytime distribution to district cooling customers. Chilled water storage increases system efficiency and reliability, improves regional air quality, and reduces regional peak electric demands II> II combined heat and power (CHP) plant located adjacent to the facility is fueled by clean wood waste a form ofbioma5s, a sustainable, renewable energy derived from plants and other organic matter. St. Paul's CHP Plant is the largest plant of its kind serving a district energy system in the U.S. . The plant simll1taneously produces heat and 25 megawatts of electricity making it more than twice as efficient as conventional electric power plants .. The plant reduces District Energy's reliance on coal 80%, reduces particulate emissions hy 50 percent, and reduces greenhouse gas cmissions by more than 280,000 tons . Under a management agreement with the City of Saint Paul, Environmental Wood SuRQly operates the City of Saint Paul's Pigs Eye Wood Recycling Center ~ each year, 300,000 tons of wood waste from the recycling center is converted into biomass fuel for the Saint Paul eo~generation facility .. MarkeLstreet Energy, in partnership with i=jlJergv Solutions, received a 2005 Environmental Initiative Award for the wood~fueled CHP plant that provides heat to District Energy Saint Paul and electricity to Xeel Energy . Energy Park District Energy System . The Saint Paul .port Authoritv owns the Energy ParkUtilitv COll1pany~, an integrated energy system utilizing innovative technologies in energy production, conservation and management .. Energy Park Utility Company applies new and emerging technologies to the provision of heating, cooling and other energy services to Energy Park, a Saint Paul complex that includes housing, industrial buildings, and retail establishments .. Since 1997, Market Street Energy has managed the central heating and cooling system for Energy Park .. The systems in Energy Park are similar to those operated by District Enelgy in downtown Saint Paul ,./ ',Vater is heated (){ cooled at a central iocation and circulated througb underground pipes to customers ,/' The v,-/tHer then reaches heat exchangers;. \vhich provide heating or coonng -for the buiJding'sintcrnai distribution system ~I 'This pro\lidcs numerous benefits to customers and the surrounding cornrnuniiy, induding energy savings, increased operating cftlcicncYl and rcduced pollution + Seier'-Q~, HQJls_eL~riment Center - hltp:/Lwww.smm.org/scicncchou,",L " Developed by The .s.cience Museum of Minnesota .. 1.2 acre Seience Park on the Mississippi Riverfront in downlown Saint Paul .. The zero-energy~consumplion Science House contains: ,( A solar-powered classroom ,( An 8.4 k W photovoltaic laminale on standing-seam steelrool; ,( Passive solar design ,( Geothcmlal heat pump ,( High~efficiency south~facing windows ,( EatthScapes and WatcrScapes, in the back yard introduces the public to landscape processcs river dynamics, ground water, biodiversity, ecosystem productivity, horticulture, renewable energy, and energy efficiency + Twin Cities Assembly Plant Hydroelectric Dam - ford Motor Company . Ford Motor Company's Twin Cities Assembly Plant is located in thc Highland Park neighborhood of Saint Paul, along the lower banks of the Mississippi River · The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers finished the dam in 1917, which was built in anticipation of hydro~power .. The promise of cheap hydro-power was the chief reason Henry Ford decided to build the plant in Saint Paul along the Mississippi .. Ford completed construction of the hydro~plant in 1 924 at a cost of about $1 million <lO The power plant currently produces a maximum of 18 kilowatts of clean cnergy, of which the asscmbly plant uses about 13 kilowatts, enough to power 10,000 homcs for a year .. The rest of the clean energy is sold back to the grid, to Xcel Energy .. The hydro plant provides $4 million of direct benefit Lo the assembly plant each year . City (il' Saint Paul Internal Energy Conservation EiTorts 1) Traffic Signals use LEDs that :-iave a substantia! amount of energy ., In 2004, Public Works replaced 30"year-old Air Conditioner units at the Traffic Operations building with new energy efficient units @ Public \\'o1'1<:s uses a computerized building management system that maintains proper heating and cooling temperatures <10 All t10rescent lighting in the Public Works shop has been replaced with new, high-efficiency units which reduce power consumption .. Division of Parks and Recreation reduces use of personal space heaters by encouraging stalfto dress appropriately on cold days .. The old four-stage chilling system at the Como Zoo "Seal Island" was replaced with a new high-efficiency variable-output chilling system WASTE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING + http'://\V\V\\', ct!rQkllrtx~)'i:H!lg:lJI.gfID.\1.~~-:~_Q_tln .. SaInt PauFs a\;vard-v,/inning non-profit re,cycling program since 199-1 " /\ mission-driven nonprofIt organization that h)()ks beyond the bottOfll line to provide the best rcc)'ding services - balancing costJ convenicnccl and environm.cntal concerns III Currently under a IJ-year contract with the City of Saint Paul, vlhich mandates recycling CI A nationalleadcr in demonstrating the best waste reduction and recycling practices . Serves all of Saint Paul's 282,000 residents . Thc curbside program serves 84,621 households .. Saint Paul is the largest U.S. city with a recycling program operated by a non- profit .. Saint Paul is the one of the largest U.S. cities that provides recycling service to all of its apartment buildings, which range in size fi'om 12 to 550 units .. The amount of material collected has increascd1 O-fold since the program went citywide in 1986 .. Participation rates have increased fi'om 15% to 62% .. Recyclable materials are collected by Eureka's biodiesel~powered vehicles, saving] 2,000 gallons of pctroleum-based thcl each year .. Recipient of the 2005 American Forest & Paper Association's National Small Business Paper Recycler of the Year Award .. Recyclable materials collected by Eureka include cardboard, newspaper, junk mail, plastics, glass, office paper, steel cans, aluminum, and textiles .. Preparing to collect organic materials like lood scraps and non~recyclable paper in 2006 '" Initiated a paper-buying cooperative that combines many small paper orders into one large order to offer quality 100% recycled office paper at a reduced cost " Initiated an internet-based exchange program that connects people who have ij-ee reusable items with people who want them, which has resulted in over 2,000 tons ofrcllsabIe goods being divened from landl111s and incinemtors ]ltjJ2~l/\'V\vv{J~yin(:.ith:s fi:ccrnarket, Off!./. + Compost / Brush Sites ~ hUp;//'^'1J:Y~-_:_Q9_.J:mIlSC\l.mn.lls/l!JJ/!I\UiGQIJ1postinQ and Yard \"/astc,htm . In an effort to keep neighborhoods clean and divert organic material from landfills, Saint Paul partners with Ramsey County to expand services at compost sites .. In 2004,146,293 cubic yards of organic waste were diverted ii'om landfills and delivered to compost sites in Saint Paul .. Brush and trees are converted into fuel used by the District Ene.rgy co-generation plant . In 2004, the first year that tree and shrub waste was accepted, 67,314 cubic yards of tree and shrub waste were collected by at the compost sites in Saint Paul ~ 1"n 2004, 78/Y19 cubic )..-ards of leaves and grass v-.rere received at the EHIT compost sites in Saint Paul ~ Ramsey County has distributed .more than 5;000 backyard compo sting units to residents of Saint Paui between 21101 and 2005. . Annual Neighborhood Cleanup '" Orchestrated by the Saint Paul's 17 District Councils 0& Residents pay a nominal fee to bring in tires, appliances, brush/tree limbs, batteries/scrap metals, asphalt, concrete, demolition/construction waste, items for reuse, electronics, and refuse · Over 12,000 tons of material have been recycled or reused over the past 15 years, which amotmts to a reduction 01'7,000 tons of C02 emissions . Cily of Saint Paul Internal Wastc Reduction EffOlts . Paper, cans, plastic bottles, glass and cardboard are recycled by in all City offices . The Finance Division of Public Works sends management reports electronically rather than using paper, thereby saving at least two reams of paper each month . Two divisions of the Public Works Department and the finance Division are using 100% post-consumer content recycled paper . The Department of Planning and Economic Development and the Office of License Inspections and Environmcntal Protection use exclusively 30% recycled paper . Public Works refurbishes and reuses light poles that have been knocked down · Public Works is replacing cardboard temporary parking signs that arc used for only one special event with reusable signs that are used for multiple special events . Sign materials and ink that Public Works uses last 15-18 years, much longer than materials used in the past eo Public Works reuses aluminum sign blanks by sanding and/or re cutting them - sign blanks that are not reusable are recyelcd .. Public Works replaces the batteries in parking meters only twice per year and is testing longer-lasting hatteries $ Public \'A/ arks uses recycled c.oncrGtc as the base lnatcrial for hridgc approach pal/crnent €il Public \Works recy'cles all steel and concreLe ll-OlH demolition projects <II Public Works recycles the waste oil, oil t1lters, air mters, scrap metal, hydraulic fluids and batteries it uses .. The Public Works repair shop uses washable rags to reduce waste . Leaves collected by Public Works during street sweeps are composted .. Public Works picks up, screens, and reuses all its seal coat rock. .. All asphalt collected as waste is recycled. .. The Division of Parks and Recreation recycles: ./ used antifi"eeze ./ motor oil ./ hydraulic oil ./ oil filters ./ sorbents ./ lead acid and dry cell batteries ./ toner cartridges ./ cell phones ./ scrap metal ./ propane cylindcrs ./ fluorescent lamp tubes and high pressure light tubes ./ paint and thinner ./ tires ./ scrap metal ./ electric ballasts that contain mcrcury ./ wastc rags ./ concrcte ./ refrigerant ./ computers, TV monitors, copiers, and appliances are recycled after hazardous materials are extracted from them e Trash collected tl'om Parks and Recreation Centers is converted into fuel for Xeel Energy power plant and does not go to landfills " Parks staff use scrap paper for messages and notes " All city tree material is composted and used to generate heat and electricity · Saint Palll Hegionai Water Services requires its janitorial service to recycle and recj"cles its spent fluorescent l1ghting fixtures -$. Saint Paul Regional \\later Services rec}'cIcs materials from construction activities @ Saint PauL Regional \Vater Services reuses asphalt and concrete as c.onstruction aggregate LJICIES ANI! PRACTICES + The City of Saini Paul Conmt~hemive Plan (the Pian) is replete concerning population density!, \valkabilitY5 transit options, brovvTifieJd reclcvclopment, environmental sk\,vardship, noise polJution, solar po\veJ', \-vater qualit):, and the City's natural beaoty. The Plan explicitly incorporates specillc environmental po hey statements among its several chapters. '" The Land tJ,e~c::hapter stresses: if Maintaining the downtown as a vital city center if Preserving neighborhoods as urban villages if Promoting growth by redeveloping the City's corridors ,/ Practicing environmental stewardship '" The TransPOltation Chapter stresses: ,/ Increasing travel modes by improving transit options, bike routes and walkways ,/ Travel demand management ,/ Traffic calming '" 'fhe Parks and Recre_ation Chaoter identifies: ,/ Policies that protect green spaces and natural areas consistent with the City Charter's "no net loss of parkland" provision ,/ Means to cxpand physical and visual access to thc Mississippi Ri ver from neighborhoods throughout the City '" Environmental policy statements are found in more than twenty chapters ofthe City Code .. Tn 2004, the City Council adopted the Stonn Water Management Ordinance, which requires sediment and erosion control during construction and permanent storm water management for projects involving more than one acre ofirnpervious surface .. No city has mores shoreline along tbe Mississippi River tban Saint Paul. 'I'he Mississippi River Corridor Plan stipulates the heightened environmental standards that the City and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources will impose on arcas along the Mississippi River .. In 1997, the City adopted the Saint Paul Sustainable Decisions Guide, which directed city departments to LtSe specific environmental guidelines in the design, construction and management of city facilities. The Minnesot',--Sustainable Desir;n Guide has since replaced the Saint Paul Guide. See: h tip :llwww.,!paul.gov/cleptslreilJeslatclsustainablel " The CQ2 Reduction Plan contains a detailed listing of City projects undertaken to reduce C02 emissions by 20%. See lltill;lL~':.w\\i, stpalll. gQ.)j~lrEt~;ln;alestate/ co2rcdnsumS_..htmJ + Urhan sprE:wl results in more highways being conslructed~ more hlel being consurned by 'vehicles dri ving on the higfnvays, more pollution caused by the vehides burning the fucl~ and more green space being paved over for parking lots for the vehicles burning the fllel. Keeping our urban cores livable is a key strategy to slowing urban sprawl and thereby protecting the environment Saint Paul has three urban redevelopment strategies intended to make the City more livable by creating quality jobs and housing. " 1\["igi}i}()Tbood redc}'Q}Qflltl",nt strategies/DolieiC_:;: Saint Paul and Minneapolis were among the first advocates for Smart Growth and affordable housing strategies in the metro region. The Saint Paul I lousing and Redevelopment Aulh(l!'ity (HRA) focuses on redeveloping blighted, contaminated, and underutilized properties in targeted neighborhoods. The BRA selectively uses its redevelopment powers to acquire, elear, remediate, and convey blighted residential and commercial properties for redevelopment by private developers and businesses. From 2002 to 2006, the Saint Paul Housing 5000 initiative invested over $1 billion of private and public funding to build over 5000 new bousing units. Twenty percent ofthese housing units are affordable to families with incomes at or below 50% oflhe area median income (AMI). At least half of that 20% is affordable to houscholds at or below 30% of Alvfl.. See hltp://www.housing5000.eom/ · Industrial redevelopment strategies/policies: The Saint Paul Port Anthority redevelops blighted, contaminated, and underutilized properties in industrial areas. Over the past 20 years the Port Authority has redeveloped hundreds of acres of blighted and contaminated land, creating 14 business centers for advanced manufacturing and service cnterprises. These busincss centers increase the tax base and provide good paying jobs to residents of Saint Paul. See hltp://slma.eom/site selection. asp · Transit oriented redevelopment strategies/policies: Tbe Saint Paul Department of Planning and Economic Develoomcnt (PED) plans 10ng-tClTIl redevelopment projects, transforming areas along transit corridors to denser, mixed-use projects. In Saint Paul, Transit-Oriented Design is a successful and sustainable approach to urban development which wil I have even a greater impact as Light Rail Transit, Bus Rapid Transit, and commuter rail are developed in the City. See htto:/ /www.stpaul.gov/depts/Dcd/uni.pdf. . City of Saint Paul Working Group on ~nvironmcntal Sustainability - Sustainable Saint Paul Initiative . Created by a resolution authored by Couneillvlember Lee Helgen and approved by the City Council and Mayor in July 2005 .. The interdepartmental group consists of Individuals from: ,/ Public Works ,f Saint Paul Regional Water Service ,,/ Division of Parks and Recreation ./ Planning and F:,Gonmnic Development. ,/ Office of l''inancial Services Contract and Analysis Services ,f Office of Technology /" License, Inspection and hnvironmcntal Protection .I Council Research " Work Group responsibililies include: if \\lebsitc development ,f Develop goals tal' the Xcd Energy hallchise negotiations ,f Evaluate characteristics of "green" cities and strive to make Saint Paul a grccn city .. The Working Group is currently conducting an internal assessment of City practices and developing a web page GET INVOLVED t Saint Palll Division of Parks aul Recreation ., Cornnlunhj:' coonlination Fann in lhe prograrn teaches residents how to gro\v their OVlTl food http;//\'>,{\V\\i,stpaul ,gov/ d epts/parks/en v i rom:nent/gardcns/jndexohtml " Volunteer f;)1" Spring Parks Cleanup http://www . stpal! I. gov / depts/parks/ en v iron ment/ parksc i ean LI p/index.html ill Environ m ental Programs httR:/ /www.stPRul.ggy/gq)l.s/parks/ cnv iromn~11t! .. Park Stewards, Eeo Stewards & Community Gardens http://www .stnau!. gov / depts/parks/ env il'OlUnent/vo I un teer / .. A Guide to Memorial, Commemorative and Gift Programs with Saint Paul Parks and Recreati on http://www .stpaul. gov / depts/parks/adll1 i n istration/ memorials. html .. Adopt an animal at Como Park Zoo http://W..vw.eomozooconservatorv.org/czcs/adoptl.htm ! . Incentives are available to individlJals and businesses in Saint Paul that generate solar or wind power, including: .. Wind and Solar-Electric fPV) Systems Exemptions excludes the value added to property by solar-electric (PV) systems trom Minnesota property tax valuation .. Solar Sales Tax Exemption exempts solar-energy systems from the state sales tax .. State of Minnesota Solar~Electric fPV) RcbateJ)rogram is a program administered by thc Minnesota Department of Commerce and funded by Xcel Energy that buys~down the up-front costs of grid-connected, solar-electric systems, with a maximum award of $20,000 per system .. Solar and Wind Easements are permitted under Minnesota law .. Cities, counties, hospitals and schools are eligible for the Energy Investment Loan ProgmlD.. which buys down the loan principal to achieve 0% interest for any specific renewable energy, energy efficicncy or energy conscrvation "capital improvement" in Minnesota with a simple payback of 10 years or less. .. The Saint Paul Neighborhood Energy Consortium (NEe) provides many energy conservation services to the public, including energy audits and ENERGY STAR home consultation and certification. NEC also links people (0 solar power resources, such as financing for solar installation and information about tax incentives [or solar power. AWARDS '" 2005 PllOcrli"t\\vaJQ Grand Prize [or"Excellence in Brownfield Redevelopment" @ A warded by' the L~.!J.it~_(:l SL4t;s EnvironlIl~n_t(lLrJ~S2tection _lusGll~.Y - the highest level of rccogn1lion by the federal gOi,'crnment, fCE' '"Excellence in Brovvnt1eld lzedevclopmenl" .. Awarded to The City of Saint Pan I, the Sain[J'mlLEort Authoritv and d(l7.ens of partners at the lllcai, state, and federal level I!> The Port Authority worked with tbe Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the EPA to obtain federal government approval to limit the legal/tinancialliability of property owners who participate in a Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup Program for polluted redevelopment sites, leading to hundreds of acres being remediated and redeveloped .. The City of Saint Paul's effOlts serve as a national model ofrccycling polluted urban land .. http://www.nvc.gov/html/hpd/html/pr2005/pr-09-0 1-05 .shtm I .. http://www.phoenixawards.org/ + 2005 Phoenix People's Choice Award .. Selected by 5,500 redevelopment professionals at the United States Environmcntal Protection Agencv Conference .. A warded to the Phalen C[)]:ridor · Description of Project: "Many developers turn wetlands into shopping centers, the Phalen Corridor partners reversed the trend. The City of Saint Paul turned a distressed shopping center on the east end of the Corridor into an exciting new development that surrounds the recaptured Ames Lake Wetland. The new development ineludes attractive housing, a seniors' residence, a state agency campus, and a Wells Fargo bank, a clinic and retail." .. See www.phalcncorridor.org. + 2005 Take Pridc in America Award http://www.doi.gov/news/05 News Relegses/0508l9 tp.htn, htlp://ww\'i,mepartnership.or~/site5/LOWERPHALEj\J~CREEK hft p ://www.americantrails.org/'lwards/tpiaawards05.., html <lI Awarded by the U.S. Department ofthe lnterior '" Recognized volnnteers who turned a former Saint Paul railroad yard and dump site into the 27-acre Bruce\l<"]lli Natur~_Sanctuary along the Mississippi River @ 'fhe Sanctuary is a national model fur illunie-ipalitics tha~ \\'i5h to transform fanner industrial land into green space .. 2005 EnvirOl)lIl_~~rltallniti~~!iy~ AsvanJ .. A warded to Market Street Energy., in pmtnership with GInerQv Solglions, for the wood~rucled Combined J feat Power (CHP) plant that provides heat to District Energy Saint Paul and electricity to Xed Energy . 2005 Nationai Gold Medal A,ward for Excellence in Park and Recreation Managemenl . Awarded by the American Academy for Park and Rccreation Administration and the National Recreation and Park Association for excellence in the field of recreation management . A warded to the Saint Paul Division of Parks and Recreation . The Gold Medal, the most prestigious award of its kind, represents and honors the nation's outstanding park and recreation agencies in communities with more than 250,000 inhabitants for excellence in the field of recreation management, including: ./ long range planning ./ tiscal resource management ./ citizen support systems ./ environmental stewardship ./ preservation ./ technological integration ./ program planning and assessment ./ professional development ./ agency recognition ./ services tor special populations . Other 2005 Class I finalists included: ./ The City of Long Beach Department of Parks, Recreation and Marine ./ The County of San Diego Department of Parks and Recreation ./ The Indianapolis Department of Parks and Recreation. + 2005 National Smalll~usiness Paper Recycler of the Year Award .. Awarded by American Forest & Paper Association .. Awarded to Eureka Recycling, which provides citywide recycling services in Saint Paul .. 2003 Accreditation of Parks $ Av,rardcd by the ComlTdssion for Accreditation of Park & Recreation Agencies (CAPPu'\) @l Ayvarded to the City of Saint Paul Divisbn of Parks and Recreation \i'J Saint Paul Parks and Hecreation Is one of only 59 park agencies to have received this accreditation nationwide and onc of only three in Minnesota i) For more inforrnation, visit + 2000 Local lnitiatives Award III Awarded by the International Council for Local Environmcntal lnitiatives (lCLEl) III Awarded to the City of Saint Paul's Environmental~Economic Partnership Proiect (EEPP) for its development and implementation of a comprehensive, long-term plan to reduce greenhouse gas (C02) emissions and strengthen the local economy PARTNERS '" The Saint Paul Ne.ighl)()j"hood EfJergy.~onsortillfQ hl1]:l://WW'0i,SpU<;c.org (NEe) @ A nonprofit organiz<JJion \v1th strong neighborhood Lic;s ~ Establisbed in 1985 ., Provides many energy conservation services to the public throughout the 'Twin Cities and the U pperMidwest Region, including energy audits and ENERG Y STAR homG consultation and certification t The Saint Paul Port Authority " Redevelops blighted, GOntaminated, and underutilizcd properties in industrial areas " Ovcr the past 20 years the Port Authority has redeveloped hundreds of acres of blighted and contaminated land, creating 14 business centers for advanced manufacturing and service enterprises " These business centers increase the tax base and provide good paying jobs to residents of Saint Paul . District Energv Saint Paul -- http://1vww.districtenergv.GOm/ .. Owns and operates the largest hot water district heating system in North America .. Has produced energy from renewable sources at a low cost for commercial and residential customers in Saint Paul since 1983 " Scrves 80% of buildings in downtown Saint Paul and adjacent areas, including the State Capitol Complex, all downtown city offices and 300 single~ family homes .. District Cooling began providing cooling service in 1993 ancl today serves about 60% oftbe buildings in downtown Saint Paul while continuing to expand its service area .. System rcliability exceeds 99.99 percent . The hot water district heating system is twice as efficient as the previous steam healing system in downtown Saint Paul, heating twice the square footage 0 [' building space with the same amount of fiJel e Using District Energy, customers saved $1,000,000 morc in November 2005 alone than customers who used natural gas .. Air emissions have been significantly reduced: 150 smokestacks, 50 cooling to\\'en-;) and :300 chimneys have been eliminated in St. Paul '" The closed-loop distribution cJirninated the use of groundvv'atcr and chlorofluorocarbon (C'FC) refrigerants in heating and coo1ing, thereby conserving an important natural resource and reducing the use orCFCs~ which are destroying the Earth's protective ozone shield and are chiefly responsible for global warming .. Two chilled water storage tanks store water produced at night, using off~peak electricity, for daytime distribution to district cooling customers. Chilled water storage increases system efficiency and reliability, improves regional air quality, and reduces regional peak clectric demands e A combined heat and power (CHP) plant located adjacent to the facility is fileled by clean wood waste a form of biomass, a sustainable, renewable energy derived fnun plants and other organic matter. St. Paul's ClIP Plant is the largcst plant of its kind serving a district cncrgy system in the U.S. .. The plant simultaneously produces heat and 25 megawatts of electricity making it more than twice as et1icient as conventional electric power plants .. The plant reduces District Energy's reliance on coal 80%, reduccs particulate emissions by 50 percent, and reduces grccnhouse gas emissions by more than 280,000 tons .. Under a managcment agreement with the City of Saint Paul, EnvironmelJtal Wood Supplv operates the City of Saint Paul's Pigs Eye Wood Recycling Center- each year, 300,000 tons of wood waste from the recycling center is convcrtcd into biomass fuel for the Saint Paul co-generation facility . Xed Encrgy + Eureka Recvcling http://www.eurekarccvcling.orgllndex.cfm 10 Saint Paul's award~winning non-profit recycling program since 1991 10 A mission~driven nonprofit organization that looks beyond the bottom line to provide the best recycling services - balancing cost, convenience, and environmental conccrns .. Currently under a 13-year contract with thc City of Saint Paul, which mandates recycling ~ A nationallcadcr in demonstrating the best waste reduction and recycling practices @ Serves all of Saint Paul's 282,000 residents @ rhe curbside program serves 84~,621 households ~ Saint Paul is the largest L "S. ell}' \virh a recycling prograrn operated by a nonM profit . Saint Paul is the one of the largest cities that pruvides recycling service to all of its apartment buiidings, which range in size ii'om 12 to 550 units ~ The amount o[Inatcrlal collected has increase-d 1 O-fold since the program \vent citywide in 1986 .. Participation rates have increased irom 15% to 62% .. Recyclable materials are collected by Eureka's biodiesel-powered vehicles, saving 12,000 gallons ofpetroleum~based fuel each year .. Recipient ofthe 2005 American Forest & Paper Association's National Small Business Paper Recycler of the Year Award .. Recyclable materials collected by Eureka include cardboard, newspaper, junk mail, plastics, glass, officc paper, steel cans, aluminum, and textiles .. Preparing to collect organic materials like food scraps and non~recyclable paper in 2006 .. Initiated a paper~buying cooperative that combines many small paper orders into one large order to offer quality 100% recycled office paper at a reduced cost .. Initiated an internet-based exchange program that connects people who have free reusable items with people who want them, whieh has resulted in over 2,000 tons of reusable goods being diverted fi'om landiills and incinerators http:! ~www.twincitiesfreemarket. org/ . The Metropolitan CQl1ncil .. Operates the region's largest bus svstem .. Collects and treats wastewater . Engages commLll1itics and the public in planning for futurc growth .. Provides forecasts of the region's population and household growth '" Provides affordable housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income individuals and families * Provides planning, acquisitions and funding for a regional system of parl::.s am.! trails w Provides a for decisions and implementation -fC}i: induding aviation, transportation, parks and open space, \valer quality a.nu vii\ler managernent . Ramsey County + gfll1l~~yS;;Ql!lJlLg~gh~LaLEllLLA"n1jllIty (RCRRA) ( http://www.co.ramsey.mluls/rail/index.htm ) Attachment 2 Sustainabiilty Iv1aplewood's quality of lifo depends on the preservation and enhancement of its environment As such, the city recognizes the sensitive interface between the natural and built environments, The sustainability chapter of the comprehensive plan will promote balanced and sustainable practices in the community in order to accommodate the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs The city promotes sustainability and environmental stewardship in a variety of ways throughout the Maplewood comprehensive plan such as promoting the efficient use of land, low impact development, storm water best management practices, and the protection of natural resources. These policies will ensure that the residents, businesses, and property owners live and function in a way that considers the livelihood of future generations and of other living beings on this planet. Beyond the sustainable policies found throughout the comprehensive plan, the sustainability chapter is an opportunity for the city to develop attitudes and ongoing actions that strengthen its natural and built environment in other ways including energy efficiency, pollution reduction, and sustainable city operations. Vision The city strives to improve upon the natural and built environment by using best practices for sustainability. The city believes that property values and the city's overall marketability will rise over time by improving upon these environments. Following its tradition as an environmental leader, the City of Maplewood holds the following vision for sustainability: The City of Maplewood, in order to ensure stewardship of its environment, will promote sustainable development and practices for the preservation, design, and maintenance of its natural and built environments, Developments and practices should maintain or enhance economic opportunity and community well-being while protecting and restoring the natural environment that people, economies, and ecological systems depend on. Goals The sustain ability chapter is a tool for action and IS intended to change long standing practices through the creation of goals and implementation strategies. To realize the sustainability vision, the city will promote these goals 1. Protect and enhance air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. SustainaOility Page 1 2. Make energy efficiency and conservation a priority through building code improvements and city operations. 3. Promote sustainable building practices such as green building standards. 4. Encourage sustaiilable and aesthetc design and maintenance practices for multi-family residential and commercial developments. 5. Adopt al1crban tree program that encourages a healthy and thriving urban tree canopy and other desirable torms of vegetation, 6. Provide transportation options for citizens without cars by GFeaffi1g promoting a transportation system that is safe, efficient, minimizes disrupticn, promotes better land development, improves the aesthetic appearance of the city, and reduces air pollution. 7. Follow low impact and environmentally sensitive city maintenance and operation practices. 8. Address noise pollution by taking measures to reduce noise pollution at point and non- point sources. 9. Focus on reducing, reusing and recycling solid waste prior to disposal. Implementation Strategies The city's present and future residents, businesses, and property owners will benefit from Maplewood's sustainable practices and guiding principles. The plan for sustain ability has the following strategies: Ed ucation/Pa rtnersh i ps . Give annual sustainability progress reports to the city council. . Prepare a sustainable newsletter and brochures for residents and businesses. . Create a sustain ability page on the city's website. . Continue and expand environmental and sustainable programs which outreach to the youth, adults, and businesses in the city. . Coordinate with Metro TranSit to faCilitate bus transportation and promote alternative mass transit options. . Supply developers and business owners with educational material on sustainable building and operational practices. . Work with other government units, owners and developers to identify and implement ways to buffer and reduce noise originating from businesses, industries, railroads, and highways. . At least one member on city staff should become certified in Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards. Sustainabiiil.y Page 2 City Policies and Ordinances Modify the city's policies and ordinances to implement feasible sustain ability strategies: " Encourage developments to utilize renewable energy sources including solar, wind, geothermal, hydro, and biomass, . Create ordinances that encourage low impact development and conservation design practices to include o Green building modeled after the United States Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmenta! Design (LEED) or Minnesota Green Star programs, o Low Impact landscaping which promotes native piantings and do Ilot require irrigatioll. o Green space requirements. . Encourage and offer incentives to developments which can obtain at least ten points toward LEED standards. . Continue to strive for and improve on building design standards and ordinances that will include provisions about building massing, architectural design, off-street parking ratios and location, access, traffic impacts, landscaping, fencing or screening, and trash handling. . Create ordinances that encourage the planting of beuJEWafE! trees and protect the city's urban tree canopy by: o Requiring a no net loss policy for the city's urban tree canopy by maintaining and preserving existing trees and planting new trees on public and private property. o Requiring new subdivisions to plant boulevard trees, . Endorse the use of alternative modes of transportation through development reviews such as public transit, bicycles, car and bike share programs, and carpools, as well as promote alternative work schedules, . Enforce and strengthen ordinances which require buffering of developments from the impacts of noise pollution, City Operations The city is in a unique position to implement and influence approaches to achieving a balance between the environment, the economy, and our community. The city can demonstrate and showcase applications of new sustainable technologies in the following ways: . Take an inventory of current city operation efforts that make progress toward sustain ability and be frank about areas that need improvement . Work to increase awareness of sustain ability among its staff and management. . Create a green team made up of city employees to make suggestions and help implement sustainable practices within all areas of city operations. Sustsinabilily Page 3 . Encourage partnerships with other organizations to make public buildings, operations, and maintenance sustainable. Establish goals for reductton of greenhouse gasses within all aspects of the city's operations including such things as a "no idle' policy increasing the fuel efficiency of city fleet vehicles, and the conversion of vehicles H1al operate by \Jk74ewi aJtematiye fuels. Require that al! new city buildings or city-funded buildings obtain at least ten points toward the LEED standards. Recycle at ail parks and government buildings. Increase recycling efforts at rnultHenant buildings and schocls. . . . . Citv Budqet Modify the city's operating procedures and annual budgets to implement feasible strategies identified above. P:\com-dev\compplan\sLlsta inaibi Ilty\su stal nabll ity chapter Sustainability Page 4