Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 23, 1990 o o o o o (}1'<, 1'\' CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.w. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - OCTOBER 23, 1990 M mUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Becky Pease on October 23, 1990; 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Bill Coleman, Ron Ferris, Bev Jovanovich, Randal Peek, Wayne Vistad Steve Jonak City Planner, David Carlberg; City Tree Inspector, Ray Sowada; and others Commissioner absent: Also present: APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION by Coleman, Seconded by Ferris, the approval of the October 9 Minutes. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, 2-Present (Peek, Vistad) vote. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: ORDINANCE NO. 44. FENCING REQUIREMENTS FOR JUNKYARDS Mr. Carlberg recommended the item be tabled pending further information from the FHA. The FHA will be doing further inspections this week. Mr. Carlberg stated he wiil call FHA tomorrow and ask for a written position statement on financing residential housing in the areas around the junkyard businesses. He expected to have that information by the next P & Z meeting. In discussing the fencing and berming recommendations of HUD, Mr. Carlberg noted TIF funds are not available for it because all those funds are being used to pay back the bonds. Commissioner Vistad reviewed a proposed questionnaire to be given to four appraisers to find out if other methods of residential mortgage financing restrict their financing or devalue the property if corrugated metal fencing surrounds adjoining commercial property. He felt it does no good to allow metal fencing if it adversely affects neighboring residential areas, and he thought that information should be available before amending the ordinance. Commissioner Ferris was opposed to alerting conventional financing institutions of the problem at this time. He thought the original intent was to look at the problem because FHA wants to red-line that particular corridor and to determine what standards they will accept to once again issue residential mortgages in that area. He felt this questionnaire strays from that objective. \ '0 . " u \ , ) Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - October 23, 1990 Page 2 (Public Hearing: Ordinance No. 44, Continued) Commissioner Vistad said the lenders are already aware of the problem, feeling this would give additional information as to the effect of the businesses and the type of screening lending institutions might prefer. Chairperson Pease wondered if that is within their scope. The objective was to determine the FHA standards. After further discussion, the Commission agreed to table the item on the questionnaire for local appraisers until the information is received from the FHA. They also asked Mr. Carlberg to send FHA a written request regarding their fencing and bermlng standards and the reasons residents around the junkyards are not receiving FHA financing. Mr. Carlberg suggested the placement of Commercial Boulevard be also discussed with the proposed amendment to Ordinance 44, as that location will have a direct impact on the fencing of some of the junkyards. Chairperson Pease asked for a motion to table this until the information is received from the FHA. Then, if other information is desired, the Commission can proceed with the questionnaire. \ \) MOTION by Ferris, Seconded by Coleman, to so move. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: ORDINANCE NO. 29 DISEASED SHADE TREES David Stephenson, Plant Health Specialist of the Department of Agriculture, pointed out the criteria for participation in cost-share programs in the Agenda packet. In updating the City's Diseased Shade Tree Ordinance, he did so with three things in mind: 1) the biology of the tree diseases and problems; 2) how this ordinance relates to State Statute; and 3) how this ordinance relates to the cost-share program criteria. The proposed ordinance wil I meet all those criteria. Mr. Stephenson noted the State of Minnesota is actively pursuing cost-share monies from the United States Forest Service as wel I as the State of Minnesota to use for oak wilt suppression. This year they received $50,000 of the $150,000 they requested. AI I $50,000 is initially earmarked for Anoka County. The DNR has contributed another $25,000. The Anoka County Board has also agreed to add additional funds and has put together requests for proposals to purchase a vibrating plow. Hopefully the plow wIll be available by next summer to communities that meet this criteria. He said they will again be seeking additional funding this year from the US Forest Service. " ,~ Mr. Stephenson then reviewed the proposed changes made to the draft ordinance. The key to the feasibility of controlling diseased trees is to have the Council set up control areas within the City, that , \ o / "\ U Planning and Zoning Commission \ Minutes - October 23, 1990 ,~ Page 3 (Public Hearing: Ordinance No. 29 Diseased Shade Trees, Continued) would be priority areas, in which the ordinance would apply; so the entire City would not have to be done initially. The criteria specifies they would like to see the entire City covered within three years. All species of oak in Minnesota are a problem and have been included in the ordinance, though it is only the red oak that are the spore producers. A good point is the ordinance is not confined to oak wilt, pine bark beetle and dutch elm disease. The City may want to do what the State does, and that is to put together the rules and regulations separate from the ordinance that spell out in more detail the procedures that need to be followed. The new Section 6, Inspection and Investigation, has been revised to meet State Statutes. '\ o Mr. Stephenson continued that Section 6, Subsection 3, al lows the Tree Inspector to make a diagnosis based upon accepted field symptoms or to send in samples for laboratory analysis only if he deems it necessary. They teach and certify those making the inspections on how to diagnose tree diseases. In the new Section 7, the abating of the nuisance is within the control area and will be treated in accordance with current technology and plans as designated by the Commissioner of Agriculture. That treatment changes from time to time and doesn't need to be incorporated into the ordinances. To prevent root graft transmission of oak wilt, they will be requiring cities to require a barrier to be created between diseased and healthy trees. The depth of the trench has been changed to 52 inches. He also guessed the greatest cause of oak wilt spread in Andover now is not by root graft but by overland spread caused by new development. Mr. Stephenson noted under Section 8, Subsection 3, he set the administrative cost at $100, thinking it provides more of a deterrent for the resident just allowing the City to do the work and being assessed for it. This is a recommendation, but that cost can be set at any thing the City feels is appropriate. There are some costs involved on the part of the City, the greatest one beIng the tIme spent with the resident explaInIng what needs to be done and the coordinating of the control efforts. Discussion was on some of the costs involved in this program. Mr. Stephenson saId the policy has not yet been establIshed as to whether the vibrating plow will be operated by someone from the county or by CIty Staff. The indIvIdual resIdent would not be allowed to operate it. He also explained that not all trees will have to be removed immediately. The only red oaks that will need to be removed immediately are those that are in danger of producing spores. However, they are only spore-producing within the spring from when they first become infected. A tree that has been dead for two to three years would not need to be removed immediately, though at some \ point it wil I come down, either naturally or taken down. He estimated ,_) that in any given year, only about 20 to 50 percent of the trees need to be removed. , ~ ~ u Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - October 23, 1990 .J Page 4 (Public Hearing: Ordinance No. 29 Diseased Shade Trees, Continued) Mr. Sowada thought it would take about three to four people to do the whole City. Right now he is the only Staff member to do tree inspections, and that amounts to about 10 percent of his time. A lengthy discussion ensued on various aspects of the ordinance. The Commission was concerned about the funding for the enforcement of the ordinance. There is the question of costs involved for operating the vibrating plow in terms of staff time, plus the issue of total cost to the homeowner for total abatement, which can be astronomical. The sentiment of some on the Commission at this time was that the City should participate in some of those costs. One suggestion was to set a base figure up to which the homeowner would pay within a certain time period, one year or 18 months, and the City either fund the remaining costs or those remaining costs shared with the homeowner on a 50-50 basis. Other suggestions were to provide assistance by removing the brush or having a chipping program available to residents. The Tree Inspector can also coordinate logging sales. \ ~) The Commissioner also hoped that when the agreement is finalized between the county and Department of Agriculture for the communities to use the vibrating plow, the City would be able to use it as needed in any part of the City, even outside of the control area. Mr. Stephenson noted that agreement has not yet been worked out. Another criteria for cost-sharing is to have developer/builder requirements to control the amount of construction damage to trees, recommending that those be taken care of in the platting or permitting process, not in this ordinance. All developments should be within the control area, and the developer should be required to do the work for diseased tree control, oak wilt specifically. A concern was raised about a diseased tree area posing a threat to healthy trees. Mr. Stephenson suggested that can be handled by addIng a phrase to SectIon 7, second paragraph, "...oak wilt within the designated oak wIlt control area of the City of Andover, or on property where the threat of oak wilt moving into the control area is a concern,..." The Commission studied the map from the DNR done in 1988 showing the oak wilt in the CIty. Mr. Stephenson stated the map Is about 80 percent accurate. It shows 9,400 trees with oak wilt, over 460 acres of dead trees. He estimated that number has increased by 3,000 to 5,000 trees since then. He also suggested the City contract a plane to fly over the City annually for aerial photos of the problem. Another concern raised was on the effect on water sources of the \ chemicals used for diseased trees. Mr. Stephenson explained the ,~ chemicals sterilize the ground and are completely gone in 10 to 14 days, outlining the process of chemical use. He felt that process would only be used where the vibrating plow cannot go. \ ~~ , o Planning and Zoning Commission \ j Minutes - October 23, 1990 / Page 5 (Public Hearing: Ordinance No. 29 Diseased Shade Trees, Continued) One suggestion was that the ordinance reference control zones to be established annual ly by the City Council and that any administrative costs be referenced to a Resolution so it can more easily be adjusted when necessary. Discussion returned to the costs involved to both the residents and to the City in upholding the ordinance. No specific numbers were known at this time, with the Commission asking that the following be researched before any decisions are made on the proposed ordinance: the high-low cost range for trenching, tree removal and stump removal for trees both near buildings and those in open woods; the administrative costs for inspections, talking with residents, coordinating trenching, logging or tree-removal efforts, etc.; costs for providing brush removal and locations to which the brush can be hauled; and costs for providing a chipping program in the City. The Commission also felt that unit costs need to be applied to proposed control areas on the map. Alternative funding sources were discussed, with Mr. Stephenson suggesting lobbying to the US Forest Service that Minnesota receive a ,/ larger share of those forest suppression funds and lobby local representatives that the State would also allocate funds for diseased tree control. The Commission felt this points out that it is a community problem and that the City should get involved in requesting those funds and establishing programs. Joan Spence, Creative Environments, Albertville, MN, a Forester/Tree Inspector - addressed the Commission noting her letter to the City was written in December, 1989; and she reviewed her experiences in Ramsey and Eden Prairie. Control zones were set up in Eden Prairie. The homeowner was responsible for taking down the tree, but the City paid for the removal of the tree, the point being there are many alternatives that can be considered. She said cost-sharing is when the money becomes available, also stressing that cities need to encourage their legislators to work to fund this program. Commissioner Ferris asked that ratio of costs between homeowner and city in Eden Prairie. \ Ms. Spence did not know, noting it is too variable, but she did agree to get the amount of their budget for the Commission. Eden Prairie is using general fund monies for their program at this time. She commended the City for taking care of its trees. She helped Ramsey get their second-year funding for their brush chipping program, thinking possibly Andover could work a joint powers agreement with them. She felt there are many creative possibilities of solving the problem, working with other cities, establishing pilot projects, looking for grant monies, etc., hoping she might be able to provide a service to Andover when it is needed. She was also opposed to burning the diseased trees, as it is a valuable resource that should be utilized. , / :,-.J , \ '\....J Planning and Zoning Commission \ Minutes - October 23, 1990 ../ Page 6 (Public Hearing: Ordinance No. 29 Diseased Shade Trees, Continued) Discussion continued on the various funding sources, types of programs that may be set up, establishing a Community Tree Board, on educating the public of programs and abatement procedures, the number of trees that could have to be removed each year, and costs. Once some proposals and costs are determined by Staff, the Commission felt it is important to meet with the City Council jointly to discuss the different options available and their costs and to determine the level of funding the Council Is wil ling to commit for the diseased tree control program. Staff was asked to bring their recommendations to the November 13 Planning Commission meeting for further consideration. MOTION by Coleman, Seconded by Ferris, to continue the public hearing until further Information is available. Motion carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS '\ , ) Chairperson Pease reported the Council upheld the Commission's recommendations on the amendment to the Transient Ordinance and the Scardigli variance request. There being no further business, Chairperson Pease declared the meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ,\\~~.--U~~ Marcella A. Peach Recording Secretary ,-J