Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP June 5, 1996 \ CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100 Special City Council Meeting - Wednesday, June 5, 1996 Call to Order - 7:00 pm 1. Meeting with Developers a. Transportation Fees b. Wetland Buffer c. Sequencing of Developments 2. City Hall Workshop Adjournment / .I CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE June 5, 1996 AGENDA f\O. SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT ITEM f\O. Discussion: Wetlands Discussion Planning Jeff Johnson m.~ Dave Carlberg ~ Attached, please find a copy of the Wetlands Protection Ordinance drafted by staff for your review. Staffhas researched similar ordinances from the communities of Maple Grove, Plymouth and Bumsville. The intent of the ordinance is to establish and maintain a buffer strip that abuts all wetlands that is undisturbed, or is of natural condition. \ , ) As of date, the ordinance has been brought to the Planning and Zoning Commission (minutes attached), Watershed District and to the developers for discussion. Staff would like your direction and comments on how to proceed with this proposed ordinance. ) MOTION BY: SECOND BY: APPROVED FOR AGENDA rY ,- '\ ) . ) '\ i / CITY OF ANDOVER ANOKA COUNTY. MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING BUFFER STRIPS AND STANDARDS FOR THE PROTECTION OF WETLANDS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section I. Findings and Intent. This ordinance hereby incorporates by reference the Wetlands Conservation Act of 1991 [Minn. Stat. 103G.221 et seq. (herein after referred to as the WCA)] and any future amendments adopted by the legislature. All wetlands and activities shall comply with those regulations as adopted under the WCA. The City finds it necessary to regulate the use oflands surrounding wetlands. Buffer strips, are necessary and beneficial to maintaining the health of wetlands. These strips of land surrounding wetlands protect their shorelines from erosion, while serving to filter sediment, chemicals and other nutrients before storm water discharges into the wetland. Buffer strips are also beneficial in providing habitat for wildlife. It is the intent of this ordinance to establish and maintain a buffer strip that abuts all wetlands that is undisturbed, or is of natural condition. Section 2. PUI:pose and Implementation. Through the adoption and enforcement of this ordinance, the City shall promote the general health, safety, and welfare of its residents by both conserving and protecting wetland resources of the City. The City seeks to accomplish the following purposes: (a) To satisfy all of the requirements of the Wetlands Conservation Act of 1991 as amended and, thereby, achieve no net loss of wetlands within the City; (b) To balance the needs to preserve and protect natural resources and systems with both the rights of private property owners and the need to support the efficient use of developable land within the City; \ ) (c) To promote water quality by maintaining the ability of wetlands to recharge ground water and receive the discharge of ground water, to retain sediment and toxicants and filter and strip nutrients from surface water runoff before it discharges into community lakes and streams, thus avoiding the contamination and eutrophication of these water features; and (d) To provide wildlife habitat and thereby support the maintenance of diversity of both plant and animal species within the City. Section 3. Definitions. Buffer Strip A one rod (16.5 feet or 5 meters) wide area abutting a wetland that may not be mowed, cut, or fertilized, and is left undisturbed. Wetland (s) Lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water. For the purposes of this , ) definition, wetlands must have all three of the following attributes: (1) A predominance of hydric soils; (2) Inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence ofhydrophytic vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions; (3) Under normal circumstances support a prevalence of such hydrophytic vegetation. Wetland Buffer Monument A marker which consists of a post. The post shall be 4" x 4" square and its material shall be treated non-leaching type wood or other City approved material. Post installation is as follows: - Posts shall be mounted to a height of four feet above grade, - Post shall be set at least 42 inches in the ground, - Post shall be installed at each lot line where it crosses a wetland buffer, with a maximum spacing of 150 feet, and - Post shall follow buffer contour line. '--) 2 ) Wetland Area Buffer Sign (Permanent) Sign(s) that designates the buffer strip. The sign(s) shall be mounted flush with the top of the wetland buffer monument posts and shall be fastened with non-removable screws or rivets. Signs shall be purchased from the City. The sign(s) shall replace all temporary wetland buffer sign(s) when removed. Sgin(s) are required on every wetland buffer monument. Wetland Area Buffer Sign (Temporary) Sign(s) that designates the buffer strip. The sign(s) shall be mounted flush with the top of the wetland buffer monument posts and shall be fastened with removable screws or rivets. Signs shall be purchased from the City. The sign(s) shall be installed prior to and throughout development and/or building construction and should not be removed until construction and/or development has been completed and all landscaping has been installed. Signs are required on every wetland buffer monument. Section 4. Wetland Buffer Strips and Setbacks. For lots of record created after the adoption of this ordinance, a buffer strip shall be maintained abutting all wetlands. The ) setback and buffer provisions of this ordinance shall not apply for developments that have paid the preliminary plat fee (As Established in Ordinance No. 10, Section 7.02- Procedures for Platting and Subdividing Tracts of Land) to the City within 30 days after the adoption of this ordinance. Buffer strips shall be established and maintained in accordance with the following requirements: (a) Buffer strips shall be identified within each lot by wetland buffer monumentation approved by the City. The developer shall be responsible for the placement of the monuments. A one rod (16.5 feet or 5 meters, measured linear) wide undisturbed buffer strip shall be maintained abutting all wetlands. A monument is required wherever a buffer strip intersects a lot line with a maximum spacing of 150 feet of wetland edge. (b) Wetland buffer strips shall apply to all wetlands. The minimum required setback of five (5) feet from all wetland buffer strips shall apply to all structures. This setback requirement shall take precedence over all other setbacks as required in City ordinances. \ I / 3 \ ) Recognizing that there are instances where because of the unique physical characteristics of a specific parcel of land, narrower buffer strips may be necessary to allow for the reasonable use of the land and to allow for the natural functioning of the wetland. The Andover Review Committee may approve alternative standards, based on an assessment of the following: (a) Size of the parcel, (b) Existing roads and utilities, (c) Percentage of parcel containing wetlands, and (d) Configuration of wetlands on parcel. The Andover Review Committee will evaluate the appropriateness of using the alternative standards as part of its review. An applicant must receive Andover Review Committee approval through either of these review processes prior to submitting a preliminary plan or plat application that applies the alternative buffer strip standards. Section 5. Protective Barriers. Active protective fencing shall be installed by the developerlbuilder along the most upland edge of all wetland buffer strips prior to any development and/or building ) construction. These fences will be a minimum of three (3) feet high. Geotextile fabric fencing (silt fence) is acceptable as long as it meets MNDOT 3733 Type 3. All wetland buffer strip protection zones shall be designated as such with temporary wetland area buffer signs posted visible on all sides of the fenced area. These signs are intended to inform contractors of the wetland buffer strip protection process. The developerlbuilder is responsible for the installation or placement of these signs. All fencing barriers, monuments, and signs must be installed prior to and maintained throughout development and/or building construction. All fencing barriers and temporary wetland area buffer signs shall not be removed until construction and/or development has been completed and all landscaping has been installed. Upon the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy Permit from the Building Department, it will be the responsibility of the builder to remove all temporary wetland area buffer signs and replace the temporary signs with permanent wetland area buffer signs. The permanent wetland area buffer signs are intended to inform the property owner of the wetland buffer strip protection process. , ) / 4 , , j '_ ",J Section 6. Wetland Buffer Strip Protection Plan. A Wetland Buffer Strip Protection Plan shall be submitted either as part of the Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan or as a separate drawing, to include the following: (1) Location of all wetlands. (2) Location of wetland buffer monuments. (3) Location of buffer strip(s). (4) All required setbacks from the buffer strip(s). The following notes shall be indicated on the wetland buffer strip plan in large letters: (1) Contact the City prior to any land disturbance. (2) All wetland buffer strip protection measures shall be installed prior to development and/or building construction. , " ) Section 7. Buffer Strip Vegetation re-establishment Performance Standards. Buffer strip vegetation shall be re-established and maintained in the buffer strip if the vegetation is disturbed or destroyed. The following standards apply: (a) Where acceptable native vegetation exists in buffer strip areas, the retention of such vegetation in an undisturbed state is preferred. A buffer strip has acceptable natural vegetation if it: (I) has a continuous, dense layer of perennial grasses that have been uncultivated or unbroken for at least 10 consecutive years, or (2) has an overstory of trees and/or shrubs with at least 80 percent canopy closure that have been uncultivated or unbroken for at least 10 consecutive years, or (3) contains a mixture of the plant communities as described in (1) and (2) above, that have been uncultivated or unbroken for at least 10 consecutive years. (b) Notwithstanding the above performance standards, the City may determine buffer vegetation to be unacceptable if; , ) (1) it is composed of undesirable plant species (including, but not limited to common buckthorn, purple loosestrife, leafy spurge and noxious weeds) or 5 ) . ) ) (2) it is lacking a layer of organic thatch or duff, or (3) has topography that tends to channelize the flow of surface runoff, or (4) for some other reason it is unlikely to retain nutrients and sediment. (c) Where buffer strips, or a portion thereof, have been cultivated or otherwise disturbed, such areas shall be replanted and maintained according to each of the following standards: (1) Plant species shall be selected from wetland and upland plants to provide habitat for various species of wildlife. (2) Plant species to be replanted shall need to be approved by the City. (3) No fertilizer shall be used in establishing new buffer strips, except on highly disturbed sites when deemed necessary to establish acceptable buffer vegetation and then limited to amounts indicated by an accredited soil testing laboratory. (4) Buffer strips (both natural and created), shall be protected by silt fence and the fence shall remain in place until the area crop is established. The developer/builder shall replant any buffer vegetation that does not survive or that is disturbed or destroyed during development and/or building construction. After the Certificate of Occupancy is issued, if the condition of the buffer area changes through natural processes not caused by the property O\'iner, the O\'iner shall not be required to re- establish the buffer strip to meet the standards established in this ordinance. Section 8. Encroachment in Buffer Strip Areas Buffer strip areas must be kept free of all structures, driveways, fences, play equipment and the exterior storage of all equipment and materials. Roads and trails (intended to serve an interpretive function) may be exempted from the buffer strip requirement. Section 9. Variances (a) Requests for variances shall be made in accordance with the procedures and requirements set for in Ordinance No.8, Section 5.04. 6 '\ ) (b) Variances shall only be granted when the standards and criteria set forth in Ordinance No.8, Section 5.04 have been met. Variances shall not be granted which would circumvent the intent and purposes of this ordinance. Section 10. Inspection and Investigation The City or duly authorized agents appointed by the City Administrator shall inspect all premises and places within the City of Andover as often as practicable to determine whether any condition described in this ordinance exists. The inspector shall investigate all reported wetland incidents and may enter upon private premises at any reasonable time for the purpose of carrying out any of the duties assigned to them under this ordinance. Section 11. Penalty Any developer or building contractor that fails to comply with this ordinance, the City will notify them in writing. The developer or building contractor will have a maximum of five (5) working days to comply with the request(s) as documented in written ) correspondence by the City. If the developer or contractor fails to comply with the request(s), the City may contract with a contractor to complete the request(s) and the developer or building contractor shall be responsible for all costs incurred. Rates and a fee schedule shall be adopted by City Council resolution to calculate the costs to complete the request(s). The City shall utilize erosion control escrow funds as identified in the development contract to pay for these costs. In the case where no escrow funds are available, the developer or building contractor shall be billed directly. Any person (firm, or corporation) who violates any section of this ordinance or shall obstruct staff or their representatives from carrying out their duties, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished as defined by State Law. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this day of ,1996. ATTEST: CITY OF ANDOVER ) / Vicki V olk, City Clerk J. E. McKelvey, Mayor 7 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - March 12, 1996 Page 3 ) (Discussion - Planned Unit Developments, Continued) Commissioner Putnam also felt PUDs can be used when the City wants specific buffers and certain kinds of housing in specific areas. He agreed with Mr. Carlberg that a differentiation should be made between mixed use PUDs versus clustered residential housing with increased densities. Mr. Carlberg stated Staff will try to have something back to the Commission by the next meeting. DISCUSSION - WETLAND PROTECTION ORDINANCE Mr. Johnson presented a proposed wetlands protection ordinance which was tailored from the Burnsville, Maple Grove and Plymouth ordinances. The Commission went through the ordinance section by section and made the following comments and recommendations: Page 1, Section 1, Findings and Intent: Chairperson Squires asked how poten~ial state legislation changes would affect this ordinance. Mr. Carlberg did ~ot know, but he has given a copy of the proposed ordinance to che Coo~ Creek Watershed District. They will review it a~d note any errors, conflicts, etc. He hoped that information would be available for the public hearing on this ordinance. Staff can also look into any \ proposed wet:ands legislation at the State as well. ) Page 2, Wetland Buffer Monument: Commissioner Wells suggested the m~rkers be permanent corner markings like lot stakes so they would not be removed or lost. Commissioner Putnam felt the buffer strip would n~turally occ~r; and if there is none, would the City require one to be put in? That 16 1/2 feet of buffer area might have been there for a long time, and he questioned if there would be a need for permanent markers. Mr. Carlberg explained the process of delineating the wetland to protect against the lOO-year flood elevation. It is possible for the wetland boundaries to change over time. Chairperson Squires had a concern with iron monuments. They are used for lots, which always remain the same. But he didn't agree with installing iron monuments to delineate boundaries that may change. Mr. Carlberg also felt permanent iron markers may be confused with actual corner markers. The bigges~ concern is what happens over time. Wetlands will have to be monitored so pecple don't sod or mow to the edge of the water. The intent is to avoid contamination of the wetland area with additional fill, lawn fertilizer, etc. Commissioner Putnam also felt permanent iron markers may not be necessary given today's technology of being able to determine lot lines, wetland delineations, etc., with hand-held computers. No change was made. Definition of Wetlands: Mr. Johnson stated this definition is the same one taken from the Wetlands Conservation Act, but he will double check it. ) Page 3, Wetland Area Buffer Sign: Commission discussion was on the possibili ty of having a very bright, visible sign delineating the wetland area and buffer during construction, and then replace that with Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - March 12, 1996 Page 4 \) {Discussion - Wetland Protection Ordinance, Continued} a smaller, more natural permanent sign on the wetland buffer monument posts indicating the buffer area. The permanent signs should be aesthetically pleasing, possibly a metal band around the post. Mr. Carlberg stated Staff will do further research on permanent versus temporary buffer signs. Section 4, (a), Buffer strips: Commissioner Wells suggested the buffer be greater than the 16 1/2 feet proposed in the ordinance to protect the wetlands. Chairperson Squires fel t there may be areas that have a natural buffer of more than 16 1/2 feet and forcing that specific buffer zone may be unnatural. Mr. Carlberg explained this is a 16 1/2-foot buffer outside of the delineated wetland boundary. Now they sod right up to the water. This would eliminate that practice. Commissioner Luedtke didn't feel 16 1/2 feet is enough to preserve the natural look of the wetland. Commissioner Putnam stated some people will clear to that buffer; others will leave a greater buffer. If it is a naturally- occurring buffer, it would look unnatural by requiring a larger buffer. Also, in the urban areas, any more could have a severe impact on what can be done on the lots. Chairperson Squires didn't know if there was anything that could be done with uniformity. They can only deal with ~inimums. He has also been surprised when looking at wetland delineations as to what is considered wetlands. He felt thev are verv \ liberally defined, and adding another 16 1/2 feet beyond that J delineation would be a very large area, especially in the urban area where it could really encompass a lot of the back yards. He questioned whether these same rules would apply to ponds that have been deliberately created on private property. Mr. Carlberg stated he will ask the Watershed if the 16 1/2-foot minimum would also apply to privately developed ponds as well as protected wetlands. Consequences: Commissioner Wells felt there should be more teeth in the ordinance and include consequences if barriers are violated. Chairperson Squires wondered if that is covered under the Development Agreement with the developer. Mr. Carlberg did not know if there was an escrow; but if there is a problem during construction, the developer is tagged and development.is stopped until the problem is corrected. Page 4, Section 5, Protective Barriers: Mr. Carlberg stated as written, the barriers would be removed when the Certificate of Occupancy is removed. The Commission stated the discussion was to have permanent markers as discussed previously. There probably would be no problem wier: the first owner of the lot; but as the lot is sold to others, people will not know about the barriers unless they are marked. Again, any markers during construction would be bright and reflective; and permanent markers would be unobtrusive, possibly metal wrapped around the pole stating "wetland protection buffer". Mr. Carlberg suggested the last sentence in the section state, "Upon the issuance of a ." Certif icate of Occupancy Permi t from the Building Department, the J protective barriers shall be removed by the developer/builder." He will discuss the issue of escrowing for protective barriers with the Engineering Department. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - March 12, 1996 Page 5 '\ ,) {Discussion - Wetland Protection Ordinance, Continued} Page 4, Section 6, Wetland Buffer Strip Protection Plan. phone number in the second paragraph, Item 1. Remove the Page 4, Section 7, Buffer Strip Vegetation Re-Establishment Performance Standards: Commissioner Wells argued the buffer area is not to be disturbed, so there would be no need to re-establish the vegetation. If there is a problem, she'd like to see the vegetation replaced with the original vegetation. After further discussion, the general feeling was that as written, the references to natural vegetation may be sufficient; however, Mr. Carlberg stated Staff will look at the section again to see if some clarification can be made to preserving the wetland vegetation that is appropriate. He will also ask the Watershed about re- establishing the buffer area. Wetland plants would not be found outside the wetland area. Page 6, Section 8, Encroachment in Buffer Strip Areas: Discussion was on the ability to place docks, duck blinds, boats, etc., within that buffer strl.p areas. Commissioner Wells argued by placing anything within that area, the vegetation is killed and the buffer zone is being changed. Commissioner Luedtke stated he would like to build a dock to the water area to be able to go out and enjoy it. Mr. Carlberg state~ , the intent is to keep structures, fences, play equipment, etc., out of ) the buffer strip. He didn't know if they can expand it to include temporary storage of boats, docks, etc. Chairperson Squires questioned wnether a dock is a permanent structure and suggested Staff look at whether the items listed are adequate or whether it needs to be expanded. Page 6, Section 9, Variances: Chairperson Squires thought these should be use variances which would allow someone to build a structure in the wetland buffer area. Commissioner Putnam thought someone should be able to apply for a variance on the 16 1/2 feet of buffer area as well, as possibly the elevation or other topographical feature would warrant a smaller buffer zone. Staff was asked to clarify an area variance provision as opposed to a use variance. Page 7, Section 10, Inspection and Investigation: Chairperson Squires noted the last sentence is similar to one that created considerable resident concern when proposed in another ordinance, that is granting the inspector the authori ty to enter onto private property at any reasonable time to carry out the duties assigned under this ordinance. He cautioned this may be an issue. Page 7, Section 11, Penalty: Commissioner Wells questioned the five-day provision to comply, feeling a lot of damage can be created within that time frame. Five working days is a long time. Mr. Carlberg felt it is \ a reasonable time period, in that the person does have to be given time J to correct the problem. They can attempt to distinguish between the situations of a private homeowner and during the course of construction when dealing with a contractor Ibuilder. Chairperson Squires also suggested a sentence be added that the provision does not necessarily Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - March 12, 1996 Page 6 \ , ) {Discussion - Wetland Protection Ordinance, Continued} limit the remedies given to the City under other ordinances. Make it clear this isn't the only penalty that can be levied against the person who violates the ordinance. Mr. Carlberg stated changes and corrections will be made to the proposed ordinance and a public hearing scheduled as soon as possible. DISCUSSION - ANTENNA/TOWER REGULATION ORDINANCE Mr. Johnson explained two companies have approached Staff asking about the possibility of placing antennas on the City's water towers. Staff is in the process of drafting an ordinance that will address height restrictions, permits, locations and setback requirements, policies, and lease agreements. His research has found that other communities require a permit process and charge a fee when antennas are placed on the cities' water towers. The City Council has indicated they would like to see these antennas and towers located on City-owned property and that it become a financial benefit for the community. It would also be possible for more than one company to have antennas on the same water tower. One communications company is in the process of drafting a five-year plan for the installation of their antennas, and they will send that plan to \ the City for review. He asked the Commission what other issues they / would like to see addressed in the ordinance. Commissioner Wells wanted to be sure the frequencies being used by the telecommunications companies do not interfere with or cause problems with garage door openers of residents, etc. Mr. Johnson stated in most cities the telecommunications company are required to submit a copy of an interference analysis to be sure there will be no interference problems. That can be placed in the lease agreement. Commissioner Putnam felt the antennas would not be obtrusive if placed on the water towers. A concern would be how many are needed in the City to cover the area. There may not be public property available in the northern portion of the City. He would also be concerned about the density. How many will an area or a water tower support? Mr. Carlberg stated the intent is to be sure the City has control and to protect the City in these situations. There have been no problems with the towers that have already been constructed in the City. Chairperson Squires felt that many of the issues, including liability, maintenance, upkeep and subleasing, can be handled in the lease agreement, which presumably will be drafted by the City Attorney. He also advised that the terminology "city property" be used as opposed to "public property". He recalled seeing something on the federal level dealing with this issue and suggested that be researched so any federal regulations would not preempt the local regulations. Commissioner Wells \ suggested the revenues generated from the fees be specifically / earmarked, so residents can be told how those funds will be used. Mr. Carlberg stated the Council will need to address that issue.