Loading...
8.0. SR 03-13-2000'ity of TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Item # 8_ iver MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council Michele McPherson,~YDirector of Planning March 8, 2000 Agenda for Joint City Council/Planning Commission Meeting of March 13, 2000 The following agenda items have been assembled for discussion during the joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting of March 13, 2000: 1. Consider adoption of tree preservation standards. 2. Cluster ordinance update. 3. City Code re-codification: Zoning Code. 4. Focus area study update. 5. Comprehensive Plan implementation evaluation. 6. Transportation Plan update. 7. Discuss KinderCare at Holt and Jackson. 8. Other business. Attachments · Special meeting minutes of the City Council of Monday, October 25, 1999 · Summary provisions of other cities' tree preservation standards · St. Paul Pioneer Press Article - October 30, 1999 · KinderCare site plan Tree Preservation Staff has compiled a number of tree preservation ordinances and guidelines from various communities and publications around the country in preparation for the possible adoption of tree preservation standards. In recent months, staff has 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425 Memo to Mayor and City Council March 8, 2000 Page 2 included as a condition of plat approval specific guidelines for fencing drip lines of trees to prevent compaction and adverse impacts due to construction, grading and installation of utilities during residential plat development. A number of options are available for the City Council and Planning Commission to consider as part of the adoption of tree preservation standards. There are however, impacts to the general fund that may occur as a result of the adoption of tree preservation standards. Issues which should be discussed and decided include: Enforcement. Many cities that have adopted tree preservation standards also have on staff a certified arborist or forester. This of course, would have a general fund impact. The City could elect to contract with a company specializing in trees and require developers to pay for inspection services. Development of standards for tree preservation plans. Currently the City requires as part of plat submittals general outlines of treed areas located on properties. If the City is interested in more stringent tree preservation standards, specific details will need to be developed and required as part of protecting trees. Tree removal on private property will also need to be considered. Currently, the ordinance allows private residents to remove trees without permit or license or review by the City. Theoretically, wooded lots could be completely clear-cut by a private resident without violating any current ordinances. Tree preservation on and in City parks and City-owned land. Standards should apply to City-owned property, as well. Currently, we do not require forestry plans for tree removal in parks. Obviously, for the purpose of controlling oak wilt, trees are removed as necessary by the Public Works Department in parks and on City-owned land. The Council and Planning Commission should debate the merits of tree preservation standards and provide guidance to staff as to the desirability of such standards and the possible components of such an ordinance. Cluster Ordinance Update Staff would like to briefly update the Planning Commission and City Council regarding the newly adopted cluster ordinance. To date, we have approved the first cluster subdivision, Windsor Park, and the Planning Commission is currently reviewing two additional proposed cluster subdivisions: Whitetail Ridge, which is located near Preserve Estates, and Rolling Hills, located in the northeast corner of the City (Petersen farm). Staff has the following observations regarding the cluster subdivision ordinance: S:\PLANNING\MICHMC\3-13AGEN.DOC Memo to Mayor and City Council March 8, 2000 Page 3 a. The ordinance should be amended to allow future assessments to an entire association when dedicated open space is adjacent to roads proposed for improvements. The ordinance currently does not address assessments for public improvements. The adoption of the 10 acre minimum district was intended to be a tool to prevent leap frog development. With the proposal of Rolling Hills, the cluster ordinance may "open the door" to leap frog development, in terms of public safety and street services. The proposed Rolling Hills cluster subdivision is located as far north and east from the central core of the City as is possible. Co The ordinance may need to be amended to require developers to work with existing grades as opposed to artificially creating walk-out lots. The Planning Commission and City Council may want to express any observations they have regarding the cluster ordinance. City Code Re-Codification: Zoning Code As the Planning Commission and City Council are aware, the City is in the process of re-codifying the entire City Code. The Zoning Ordinance encompasses a large portion of the City Code and staff is proposing a major reorganization of the District Regulations in order to improve dissemination of information. Staff has also noted a number of areas in which the ordinance is deficient or open to inconsistent interpretation. The Planning Commission will be responsible for reviewing the changes and amendments as they are reviewed and presented by staff and Municipal Code Corporation. Focus Area Study Update North Star Corridor Depot With the identification of the Northstar Corridor train station site at 171st Avenue, staff is proposing to the Planning Commission and City Council that a focused land use study adjacent to the station be undertaken. Specifically, the Planning Commission and City Council would identify the desired land uses adjacent the station including consideration of increased residential densities near and around the proposed station. This is a small portion of an area that was studied in 1990. The larger area would also be reviewed at the same time. Staff proposes that this focus area study would be completed within the next six months. Update the City's Comprehensive Plan At the October 25, 1999, special meeting of the City Council, Mayor Klinzing suggested that it may be appropriate to update the City's Comprehensive Plan. S:\PLANNING\MICHMC\3-13AGEN.DOC Memo to Mayor and City Council March 8, 2000 Page 4 The bulk of the City's Comprehensive Plan was updated through the use of a steering committee and formally adopted in December of 1995. However, there have been a number of amendments since that time including an amendment to the Urban Service District in 1997, adoption of the Master Park Plan in 1997, and adoption of the Transportation Chapter in 1998. The Park and Recreation Commission is updating the Master Park Plan this year. At this time, it may be more appropriate to evaluate the status of implementation of the goals and objectives outlined in the plan to determine if the City is on track with its adopted objectives. It would serve the Planning Commission well, now that it is at its full strength, to re-acquaint themselves with the Comprehensive Plan by evaluating the status of the Comprehensive Plan implementation and reporting to the Council the success or deficiency of the implementation. Transportation Plan Update Also at the October 25, 1999, special City Council meeting, Councilmember Motin noted the lack of specifics regarding the components of the Transportation Plan and suggested that perhaps the plan needed to be updated. Specifically, Councilmember Motin spoke of under/over passes and funding of new streets that are not discussed in the plan. In addition, the impact of MN/DOT's Regional Corridor Study and access control studies are new impacts to the Transportation that was adopted in 1998. The Planning Commission and City Council have, however, worked cooperatively on transportation planning as it relates to the Northstar Corridor development. As the Transportation Plan was recently adopted 1998, it may be appropriate to again evaluate implementation of the principles adopted in the Transportation Plan in order to determine if a complete overhaul of the Transportation Plan is required. Review Site Plan for Possible KinderCare on the Holt and Jackson Site Staff met with KinderCare representatives on Thursday, March 2nd , to discuss the possibility of constructing a 10,000 square foot KinderCare facility on the Holt and Jackson property. As with previous proposals for this site, there is an issue of tree removal. The Planning Commission and City Council should discuss the proposed site plan and the impact the proposed plan has on the existing trees on the site. The representatives from KinderCare are looking for direction from the Commission and City Council as to the appropriateness of the proposal for the site. Daycares are a conditional use in the C4 (Neighborhood Commercial) district, so a public hearing before the Planning Commission and City Council will be required prior to the sale of the land and execution of a purchase agreement with KinderCare. S:\PLANNING~11CHMC\3-13AGEN.DOC SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER CITY COUNCIL HELD AT THE ELK RIVER CITY HALL MONDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1999 Members Present: Members Absent: Staff Present: Mayor Klinzing, Councilmembers Dietz, Farber, Thompson, and Motin None Pat Klaers, City Administrator; Lori Johnson, Finance Director, Sandy Peine, City Clerk; Phil Hals, Street Park Superintendent; Paul Steinman, Director of Economic Development; and Peter Beck, City Attorney Call Meetin,q To Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the special worksession of the Elk River City Council was called to order by Mayor Klinzing at 5:00 p.m. Worksession/Discussion on Council Priorities Mayor Klin7ing noted that the Council called this worksession to discuss topics of concern and priority issues of the City Council. The following issues were discussed: Comprehensive Plan: Mayor Klinzing suggested that because the existing comprehensive plan is approximately 5 years old and because of the fast growth the city is experiencing, it might be appropriate to update the comprehensive plan. It was the consensus of the city council to have the planning'commission (once it has seven members) review the comprehensive plan. It was also the consensus of the council that the city council and planning commission meet jointly, so that everyone can discuss issues regarding the comprehensive plan. Transportation Plan: Councilmember Motin noted the lack of specifics, such as under or overpasses, in the City's existing transportation plan. Additionally, such things as how to fund new streets and when new streets should be constructed are not discussed in the plan. He stated that because of this the plan would be difficult to implement. Discussion was held regarding the number of signals along Highway 169 and the impact the signals have on local drivers trying to get across Highway 169. It was noted that MnDOT's long-term plan is to make Highways 10 and 169 thoroughfares in the Elk River. Discussion was held regarding the intersection of Main Street and Highway 10. In regard to this issue, discussion was held regarding the Boelter's site, its land use at this corner, its appearance, and the need for a free right turn onto Highway 10 at this corner. Cih/Council Minutes Page 2 October 25, 1999 Discussion was held regarding the number of accidents that have taken place at Jackson Avenue and School Street. Councilmember Thompson suggested putting in a left turn arrow similar to the one at School and Freeport. Mayor Klinzing asked about the level of contact with the city of Ramsey and Anoka County, regarding Ramsey and Anoka County roads that lead into the city of Elk River such as County Road 22. School/City: Mayor Klinzing indicated her concern about the city puffing fodh cooperative ventures in regard to building space in relation to the school district, a joint community center, arts facility, and ECFE. Tree Preservation: Councilmember Motin indicated that he would be interested in seeing some sample guidelines and ordinances regarding tree preservation for new plats. It was a consensus of the council to have Michele McPherson research this issue, and to bring some sample ordinances from other cities regarding tree preservation to the council for review. Nuisances: Mayor Klinzing indicated that she would like to see the city be more proactive in its nuisance ordinance relating to the number of cars on property and recreational vehicles stored on residential property. Council Meefinqs: Councilmember Farber suggested that Mayor Klinzing run the council meetings in a more relaxed manner so as to allow the council to hold conversations amongst each other. The rest of the council supported this suggestion. It was acknowledged that the manner in which the mayor ran the meetings was beneficial to the public as it allowed the public to better follow and understand the issues. Mayor Klinzing indicated that she understood Councilmember Farber's concern. 3. Adiournment There being no further business, Mayor Klinzing adjourned this special worksession of the Elk River City Council at 5:58 p.m. City Clerk Tree Preservation Ordinances - Other Cities City Forester Ordinance Requirements Affected Land Replacement Required on Staff? Inver Grove Heights Yes Woodlands defined as 35% tree All zoning Yes, if the threshold is cover or 20 significant (8") treesdistricts, exceeded. No land alteration allowed until City Does not Based on the total number determines maximum trees are specifically of diameter inches and preserved, address publicly adjusted based on the Establishes thresholds for removalowned land. woodland type. of trees without replacement for Reforestation must occur each zoning district, within the development, on Detailed inventories required, public land, or provide Must protect trees within 30' of cash equivalent. grading limits. Special requirements for collector and arterial road construction. Plymouth Yes Defines significant trees (8"). Applies only to Reforestation is based on Establishes thresholds for removal, new development, a 1.25 to 1 diameter inch excedence of thresholds results inAll zoning of trees removed over the reforestation, districts, threshold or $100.00 per Detailed plans required. Does not address excess diameter inch or a publicly owned combination of the two. land. Blaine Yes Affects all activities. All zoning Yes. Must be replaced on Defines significant trees (8"). districts, site or pay cash Detailed plans required that have equivalent. been prepared by an expert. Must replace 1:1 up to Only two trees per year may be seven trees on residential removed on vacant lots unless a lots. forest management plan is approved. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1999 .... ~II, PAUL PIONEER PRESS SUBURBS STILLWATER Tree 'propOsal upsets owners Of large lots MARRY DIVINE STAFF WRITER 5h and Rosemary McKenzie boUght their, home overlooking Long Lake in St!l.l,water because of all the trees on and -*"mhd their lot. · J~t if a proposed tree-protection ordi- napce is passed in the city, the McKen- zles vow never to plant another tree on th~ik.proper[y. "I'm' not going to plant another tree, not if they're going to pc' naiize me," Don McKenzie says. "We'd justhave all these liabilities all over our prgperty. Once this goes through, we would be' growing hundreds and hundreds of liabilities." ?City officials say the ordinance, which will. be discussed Thursday night dUring a public meeting at City Hall, was pro- posed because of the large number of trees 'that. were cut down to make room for new housing developments. .'The goal is to protect trees on develop- m.ent sites, improve the standard of tree care, require adequate tree replacement ahti ~prevent soil erosion on bluff lines and'. slopes caused by the removal of .trees; said Steve Russell, the city's com- munity development director. .~'[We decided we needed to tighten our reg'Ulations regarding tree removal,", sell said. "The (proposed ordinance)- amits the removal of trees to a certain nuriiber Per area and. requires replace- m~t!t of removal trees. We view trees as a ..~0mmunity resource. We all share in tlie,.".responSibilitY to protect trees.'' · '-The proposed ordinance establishes siz- i e~'for significant trees -- 6 inches around ot;'gi'eater -- which are to be protected, reqiiires site review of development pro- j&/t~s: and requires a tree inventory and tree protection plan for the site. The or~linanee would apply to people who owii lots of more than one acre. · B,ut MeKenzie, who owns a 10-acre lot, says* the proposed ordinance is far too res[rietive and discriminates against peo- ple,who own large lots. He says the city's eu'rrent tree Ordinance is adequate. 'dI've got nothing against saving trees," he,?~ays.' ,'It's just that the~ current pro- po~al~ discriminates against certain prop' erty owners --and deprives those prop- ert:~ owners of their: persOnal'PropertY ri~ts~ The whole basis, of the ordinance is that the property owners don't own the tre~s,'--'~they give 'those Up to:.societYii, Affd' then th~ city tells yoU what 'you can do'with them if you have to remove a tt~e~;' yoU have to pay fees, pay fines and have the city forester come out: The city tares over your trees."" Kathy Widin; the city's forestry cOnsul[ tant, said the city's current ordinance contains "just general tree protection language." The new ordinance explains what constitutes a' significant tree and regulates the cutting of trees along bluffs and in ravines to prevent soil' erosion, she said. '~'The current draft would require more tree: replacement than is currently re- quitted,'' she said. "We're basically trying to '; ~itigate the damage that's done to pr;JPerties and the community when trees are '~emoved. The real'goal of this is to pre/,ent unnecessary tree removal, par- tidiilarly, for native woodlands." The. ordinance applies to larger lots because "most of the tree damage is goiflg to occur on lots that are more than an:'acre in size," Widin said. PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN NIG NLUA',r' NO. 16D ,.-% I~' UTILITY' L ]> 0 Z 0 ~' 15' 30' Scale: 1 "-30'-0' Dm,m: CLB ghecked:Ma$ :)a~e: 2/14,~0 I~' PS-1