Loading...
11/15/2004 - Advisory Parks & Recreation CommissionApproved as amended: December 20, 2004 • ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA MINUTES OF REGULAR MEEI~ING OF N©VEMBER 15, 2004 A regular meeting of the Advisory Parks Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on November 15, 2004 with the following Commission Members present: Terry Davis, N. Mark Filipi, Jce Bari, Richazd Pletcher, Margo Danner, Muhammed Lohdi and Duane Hansen. Fhil Belfiori, Elizabeth Perry, and Dorothy Peterson were not in attendance. Staff present included Paul Olson, Parks Superintendent, Gregg Hove, City Forester, Eric Macbeth, Water Resources Coordinator, and Cherryl Mesko, Administrative Coordinator/ Recording Secretary. tOVAL OF A~'(sTsl~~k Item I-1 and I-2 were taken off the agenda and was re-scheduled for review at a workshop in December. Richard Pletcher moved, N. Mark Filipi seconded, with all present members voting to approve the agenda as amended. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 18, 2004 Chair Davis moved, Margo Danner seconded, with all present members voting to approve the minutes of October 18, 2004. VIS~I'ORS ~Td;)~ ~AR`D DAKOTA CENTER FOR THE ARTS-EAGAN ART HOUSE Betty Undis and Mike Holmdahl, members of the Dakota Center of the Arts board of directors (aka Eagan Art House) presented a 2005 fundraising plan. Undis stated that the "partnership with the city has been what has made us successful". She read the mission statement and cited participation numbers from 2003, pointing out that current demands for physically and mentally challenged adults are growing. Undis stated a class was held at the Eagan Civic Arena due to the need for accessibility that the Art House cannot provide. She expressed the need for increased space at the Art House to accommodate the number of participants who are placed on waitlists due to limited class sizes. Undis told the commission that participants appreciate the house setting for their art classes. She also recognized the Art House classes are on the lower end of tuition when compared to other art centers in the Twin Cities area. Undis discussed fundraising methods. Mike Holmdahl discussed the criteria used to develop the fundraising strategies and methods. Holmdahl cited the fundable programs as 1) Core programs at the Eagan Art House such as classes for adults and children; 2) workshops staffed by well-known artists; 3) expanded art programming to meet niche markets and expanded programming in community parks and centers. Holmdahl stated the need to employ a part time coordinator and other general operating expenses, special projects such as outreach to special needs populations, increased number and use of volunteers and desire to expand the board, staff and volunteer development. Capital improvements to the facility, shared by Holmdahl, included a separate room for glazing and firing the ceramics. Currently the kiln is within a classroom, which limits class space, safe times to use the kiln and prevents use for children's' classes. Holmdahl cited the need to remodel the basement to increase classroom space, improve accessibility to the "clay room", which was formerly the garage. A small gallery space is also desired to display art productions. Holmdahl completed the presentation with a review of their funding objectives for 2005: Individual gifts, corporate or small business and foundation grants, government donations from Metropolitan Regional Arts Council and the City of Eagan and net income from special events such as the Eagan Art Festival and other special events. Holdmdahl stated $40,000 as the goal of total contributed income. Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 15, 2004 Page 2 ' Chair Davis asked how long the Eagan Art program has been in existence. Undis said the Eagan art program has been in existence for 10 years and the Dakota Center for the Arts has been in existence for 20+ years. Member Danner asked if the space at the Eagan Community Center works for classes. Undis said that costs for room rental impacts the fee, as does additional costs for instructors because the instructors have to setup and take down for the class. Member Danner asked what the timeline for the changes to the Art House. Undis noted some safety and access issues that will need to be overcome. Holmdahl replied that the cheapest improvements will provide the most benefit; these can be done very soon. Building a small "outhouse" for the kiln, widening the door and improving the access to the ceramics room will create immediate benefit. Member Pletcher, a ceramic student at the Art House, agreed that workspace and class size are both limited and more space is needed. SUPERINTENDEN'T'S UPDA~'E A~1D DLPAI~''rNT ~I~~~ Recreation Division Superintendent Olson reviewed Recreation Department Happenings. Member Danner added that December 4 Santa will be at the Community Center from 9:00-12:00 and December 5 he will be at Holz Farm from 12:00-4:00. Parks Division Superintendent Olson reminded viewers that city staff does not monitor ice on ponds. Atl ponds are part of the storm sewer system and should not be considered safe ice. It was discussed that the Trust for Public Land would expand to the Anderson parcel. C~1~1TSENT. AGiDA - AWAD ADDITION Member Filipi moved, member Danner seconded, with all members of the APrC voting in favor of recommending approval for the proposed development. WOODLAND PRESERVE Superintendent Paul Olson noted all but 2 acres of rainwater are being handled on-site. Member Danner commented she wants to ensure the water doesn't negatively impact residents. Water Resources Coordinator, Eric Macbeth, provided information regarding water drainage of the 30 acres of land. Drainage of 28 acres will be handled onsite because it drains onto the back halves of properties. The remaining two acres will be caught along the curb line and Eagan will charge for the disposal of that water. Member Filipi moved, Member Danner seconded with all members voting in favor of recommending approval for the proposed development. DEVI~3EOP1Gl~Af~P-PbRt SWEET PLACE -EPIC DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. Superintendent Olson provided background into the development, rezoning and preliminary subdivision in a cul-de-sac accessible from Highway 3. The request is to create 8 single family residential lots; 3 are within the shore land overlay district of Fitz Lake. Olson reviewed location map, preliminary plats, proposed site plans and existing conditions. City Forester, Gregg Hove, discussed the tree inventory for the site. The developer proposes removal of 54.5%, or 85 of the significant trees. City ordinance allows 40% removal of significant trees for this type of developmental proposal (single-phase, multiple-lot, single unit residential). The applicant proposes installation 46 trees. Hove referred to the Tree Preservation section printed page 8 and made two minor corrections: paragraph 3 and 4 should read Category A trees, not Category B. He further discussed information on page 8, stating that the Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 15, 2004 Page 3 removal of trees will take place primarily around the water. Hove then passed out the tree mitigation plan from Epic Development stating he had received resident calls of concern regarding removal of trees. Epic Development agreed to transplant 20 trees away from the house to the north property line as a view block and would look for every opportunity to preserve trees. This is intended to buffer residents from the North. Chair Davis asked if staff has enough time to review plans for preservation on-site. Hove said he feels the applicant has done a sufficient job. Epic Development was asked to provide a revised Tree Preservation plan to indicate correct placement of the transplanted trees. Member Lodhi asked Hove what the rate of survival will be for large trees to be moved. Hove stressed the trees will require after care and a plan needs to be in place for watering. Hove opined the applicant wouldn't want to do the work and have failure. Member Danner asked when trees would be moved. Hove said next spring. Water Quality Coordinator, Eric Macbeth, reviewed water quality based on proximity to Fitz Lake. It is State public water, according to the DNR. Sweet Place is within 1000 feet of the lakes ordinary high water level (OHWL) and is therefore shoreland and subject to the shoreland zoning. Macbeth referred to page 8 and 9, reviewing paragraphs 3, 4 and 5, suggesting the pond be lengthened to preserve trees surrounding the pond. Member Pletcher asked if all water on the cul-de-sac will enter the pond? Macbeth answered yes. Chair Davis questioned the 42% in page 9, paragraph 3. Macbeth responded that this percentage was incorrect; he believed it to be less than 30% but was unsure of the actual number. Perry Ryan of Ryan Engineering, representing Epic Development spoke of tree protection, agreeing with the idea of pond modification of McFaddens Trail. Visitor Dan Atkinson spoke of his concern regarding sound abatement of Highway 3 noise and concern of driver safety when entering or exiting the cul-de-sac from Highway 3. Atkinson also discussed water levels because rainwater from neighboring homes currently flows to his yard. Atkinson is concerned that the addition of homes will cause flooding of his property. He also stated the. trees to be removed are Colorado Spruce and some of the trees slated for removal are on his property. Chair Davis reminded the audience that elevation issues and traffic issues are subjects to be discussed at the Planning Commission meetings. Hove reviewed the tree preservation plan. Hove assured Atkinson the entrance from highway 3 is 50 feet past the tree line and will block the view of oncoming traffic. Also discussed was the type of trees that are best for sound abatement. Hove was asked if more conifers could be planted rather than a variety. Hove agreed more conifers would be a better buffer for noise but would not be best biologically. Atkinson said this is not an improvement to the area. Chair Davis said the developers are doing a good job of mitigating tree loss. Visitor Sharon Hausley, also from neighboring lot B spoke as a group representative for the neighborhood when she expressed concern for the trees being removed. Ryan reassured the viewers they usually contract with the developer to care for transplanted trees for one year. Member Pletcher asked if tree height mandates the size of spade used. Ryan said a 95" spade is appropriate. Visitor Eric Veve asked why tree removal above 40% is being allowed. He also raised concern about Project 905 downstream and it's affect on Fitz Lake. Macbeth answered by saying MN DNR hydrologist had checked the statistics and is comfortable with the numbers of impervision surface and shoreland. Macbeth was unsure if the DNR had done analysis of the two acres of runoff water since it was such a small amount that does not enter the pond or street. Macbeth said Project 905 analyses impact, noting it was minimal but no detailed analysis was done. Most run-off is directed to the pond and the balance infiltrates on-site. Ryan said lots 1, 2 and 3 would go thru end of property into the lake. Chair Davis motioned to approve G-1 Sweet Place items 1-7 with modification to item 4, asking the applicant to submit a plan to protect and conserve trees in the pond area. Macbeth asked him to modify item 6 and 7. Prior to approval, member Danner asked what the Homeowner's Association responsibility would be for this area since the wetland fringe runs into a state monitored Fitz Lake and how homeowners will be made aware of the easement. Macbeth clarified a plaque or monument saying "this is a conservation easement" will be posted in that area. Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 15, 2004 Page 4 Chair Davis motioned, Member Filipi seconded and all members voted in favor of the alternatives 1-7 for commission consideration, noting the requests for modifications to 4, 6, and 7. OLD BUSINESS SYCAMORE PLACE Note: City Council directed that the issue of wetland sequencing for the Sycamore Place development be sent back to the Advisory Parks Commission for their review and recommendation. The 6:00 pm workshop prior to this meeting provided some preliminary background on how the wetland sequencing process works to better understand the request of the developer. Eric Macbeth reviewed wetland sequencing and specific language that provides guidance. He referred to a handout and wording by WACA. After reading points that would determine whether wetland sequencing was a reasonable alternative, Macbeth told the commission that economic considerations alone do not make an alternative unfeasible. He said a plan needs to be analyzed for impact minimization. Macbeth also stated that a wetland sequencing plan cannot be implemented unless alternatives have been considered or replacement equal or better than the first alternative has been decided upon. He then asked the commission what they wanted to do. Macbeth cited a requirement that at least 2 alternatives need to be presented, one may be "no-build". The City can then judge if they are "good faith" alternatives. Macbeth said sequencing flexibility was brought forward late last week and specified. Chair Davis asked the commission members if they believed they had reviewed and looked adequately at the rules of the Act and if the plan seen by the APrC meets sequencing as understood and whether the item should be forwarded to T.E.P. Member Filipi responded by asking if there had been any thoughts of engineering reasons wetland sequencing could not be restrstricted. Macbeth answered that this could not one of the arguments because the developer had not yet proposed two alternatives as asked. Macbeth referred to a map of the area pointing out an avoidance alternative could be to develop seven lots instead of the proposed 9. Pletcher asked if the proposal is feasible. Macbeth said defming reasonable and "prudent" is up to the City. Rich Ragis of Epic Development con concurred that the decision for wetland sequencing is not the "bottom line". He asked the APrC to consider conditional approval based on T.E.P. evaluation and discussed other sites in Eagan. He said the wetland is currently degraded and the proposal will provide more wetland development. He said the proposal moves from wetland banking to on-site. Ragis said he plans to plant 50 trees at each development, describing the area as a low grade wetland, some area a mud hole. Ragis also stated he plans to do wetland banking off site to onsite so the end product looks nicer. He also plans to increase the storm water capacity above Eagan City requirements. Ron Peterson of Peterson Environmental then spoke on behalf of Epic Development. 1. Rectification doesn't apply; it is for temporary impacts only. 2. Reducing or eliminating impact over time with remnant needing to be protected. He noted these two issues do not apply to the application. He said documentation of 2 alternatives said EPIC didn't initially invoke sequencing flexibility. Peterson showed Ariel photo from 1945 of wetland area. Peterson stated this showed wetland A qualifies for incidental wetland exemption because the water backs up to the land. Basin D was much dryer and Basin C was excavated and spread on site, but not so full that it should be considered a wetland. Peterson also argued that the question of denying application for wetland sequencing doesn't go away once sequencing is invoked, the avoidance bar is lowered. Peterson requested the APrC visit the site before gong back to the technical panel. Member Pletcher asked for clarification of the proposal, referring to 9 homes, not the original 14 planned for. He asked about total avoidance. Peterson said total avoidance is not being proposed, simply what Council asked to see. He noted that if T.E.P. evaluation and flexibility are being requested, the City may not see the wetland impact on the proposal; in fact, more lots could be added. If we eliminate what used to be wetland, that is not now a wetland, then mitigation will not be needed. Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 15, 2004 Page 5 Visitor, Craig Murry of 4812 Weston Hills Drive thanked the APrC for visiting the site and presented two wetland definitions (one from Inver Grove Heights, another independent) opining this land should be considered wetland. Muny reviewed the 5`~ step of sequencing that suggests the City can deny the wetland. He disagrees the developer made it past step 1 of sequencing. He reviewed the developers initial narrative of avoidance because of financial impact. Murry opined that a 7 lot plan would be feasible and prudent because less density would avoid impact. Murry asked for a denial of the variance requested of part D (by the developer) because there are alternatives. Murry said turkey and deer live there showing it is already a wildlife area. In Murry's opinion, the developer did not follow the rules for delineation or sequencing. Visitor Todd Shelby of 4830 Sycamore Court addressed the Commission stating he believes the developer is basing his requests on economic gain and not according to the guidelines he should follow. Deanne Parks of 4816 Weston Hills Drive addressed the Commission stating this azea is lush and beautiful, not a defunct wetland as described by the developer. Eric Veve of 1496 Sherwood Way approached the Commission stating why he believed sequencing flexibility cannot be implemented, that changing wetlands to ponding needs special MPCA requirements. Member Danner asked for clarification of "what is a wetland". Eric Macbeth described the conditions needed to be considered a wetland. He clarified that there is only one wetland under discussion. Member Pletcher asked about the option of further study from the technical panel. This was answered by Peterson who said it has been invoked so it becomes part of the application; none of the traditional rules apply. Chair Davis asked the commission members to consider whether they feel this was done in a good faith process. Macbeth stated timing was a problem to engage a technical review. Member Lodhi asked if we can take this issue to the technical panel before decision, that he doesn't have enough information to feel comfortable. Member Danner reminded everyone this issue was to be viewed by Eagan City Council the next evening. Peterson interjected that once the application was evoked the commission needs to make the decision. Member Pletcher asked the Commission if they believed they know enough to make an informed decision and noted that the developer has attempted to meet requirements. He agrees that T.E.P. should be involved. Superintendent Olson clarified what information had been shazed and what the Commission knew at this point. He said if sequencing had been met, there were no other items for discussion. If not, they will invoke sequencing flexibility and send it to the T.E.P. panel. Member Lodhi opined the group did not have enough information to make a decision. Peterson reminded the group that if the developer set a higher standazd than needed then there is no need for the flexibility. Chair Davis asked if everyone felt comfortable with their previous decision and did they feel the rules were followed. Member Lodhi said a second alternative had not been provided to the APrC. Chair Davis reminded him that they had seen alternatives of a drawing with 7 homes rather than 9. Discussion continued between members, Murray, who contends that the motivating factor is economics and Veve, who contends that there should be less density on the property. Macbeth refined the facts the members had to work with. Do they believe they have complied with avoidance sequential wetland guidelines? If yes, there is no need to discuss the issue. If no, then a technical review of arguments, functions and values should be pursued. Member Pletcher opined there was not enough information. Chair Davis said he was wary about legal advice. Members discussed between themselves: Member Danner said she would vote to delay. Member Pletcher moved to recommend to the APrC that enough questions exist that they believe sequencing has not been met, and noted that sequencing was a new process to all of them. Member Filipi said he believes the developer has done what he needed to do. Chair Davis said "the developer came to us, changed and he made adjustments. I think he tried to be conscious of neighbors concerns and make the land better than it is... better in the eyes of the beholder. They feel they can improve public value and promise to do more." Member Pletcher agreed the developer made every effort but that there were still a lot of questions in the members mind about the sequencing process. Member Pletcher recommended the commission vote no. Member Lodhi stated that voting no doesn't mean blocking the developer; just getting more information. Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 15, 2004 Page 6 Chair Davis motioned, Member Danner seconded to vote the commission to vote that there are enough questions existing as to whether sequencing has been sufficiently met. Members Danner, Bari, Pletcher and Lodhi voted yes. No votes were cast by members Filipi, Hansen and Chair Davis. Member Filipi noted this development has been under review for a year, and the option to avoid is viable, but the developer as met requirements to the best of their ability. Member Pletcher asked'for further technical information to be pursued, noting the developer's efforts towazd sequencing. Member Pletcher moved, Member Bari seconded, with all present members voting to ask for a T.E.P. review in sequencing flexibility. The vote was unanimous with all members voting yes. NEW BUSIlV'ESS PARKS AND TRAILS DEDICATION FEES WATER QUALITY FEES Items under New Business for the APrC to review were postponed until November 30 workshop at 5:30 to discuss fees for 2005. W~~CE~t RES@URCES UPD"ATE There was no information to share under this agenda item. OTHER~S~T~SS AND`ROS SUBCOMMITTEE UPDATES Chair Davis said the CIP issues would be discussed with Superintendent of Recreation Jeff Asfahl. He asked members to start putting down thoughts and input on the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for 2005. PARK SYSTEMS PLAN UPDATE Chair Davis said that he, Ken Vraa, Cherryl Mesko, Dorothy Peterson and consultants had visited various sites. The consultants also spent time on their own seeing Eagan. `~N~~~s Chair Davis announced that Member Dorothy Peterson had received an award for 30 years of Advocacy for Community Education. A workshop for Dedication Fee review will beheld on November 30, 2004, 5:30 - 6:30 pm. Member Danner asked Cherryl Mesko to update the commission on any new items regazding Cascade Bay. Mesko said the hiring of a Cascade Bay manager will not occur until after Pazks and Recreation receives a final draft of the organizational study being done for the City. There was no other new activity to report at this time. Member Danner asked Mesko if there was news to report regazding volunteer recognition for Pazks and Recreation. Mesko responded that at this time volunteer recognition has not been scheduled. ADdOI1R1V]VIENT With no further business to conduct, Chair Davis moved, Member Bari seconded with all members voting in favor to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m. J f~ao~oGo Secretary Date Minutes drafted by: Lori Kimball, clerical technician.