HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-08-2001 Planning Commission Meeting Packet T
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING AGENDA
Thursday, February 8, 2001 - 7:00 PM
7:00 I. Call To Order /Approval of Agenda
II. Welcome Commissioners Mike Runk and George Vogt
III. Approve Planning Commission Minutes of:
December 14, 2000 (1)
January 11, 2001 (2)
7:10 IV. Visitors/ Public Comment
This is an opportunity for the public to address the Commission with questions
or concerns not on the agenda. Please limit comments to three minutes.
v. Public Hearings
A. R -1, Single Family Residential Zoning District: To Consider
an ordinance amendment and /or adoption of a resolution
expandi ii-g- the R -1 zoning district to include Bed and
Breakfasts as a conditional use. (3)
8:15 VI. New Business
A. Presentation of Brown's Creek Watershed Plan (4)
VII. Old Business
A. Update Commission Representative Schedule (5) .
VIII. Informational
A. Pony Express Auto Wash Tabled to February 13, 2001
B. CBD Workshop Scheduled For February 5, 2001
IX. Adi ournment
Upcoming Meetings: March 8, 2001 - Regular Meeting 7:00 PM
Council Representative: February - Commissioner Hedlund
March - Commissioner Dwyer
ENCLOSURE 1
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Thursday, December 14, 2000
Call To Order: Chair Hedlund called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Present:
Commissioners Dahlquist, Dwyer and Wasescha. Staff Present: Community
Development Director Danielson and City Planner Richards.
Approval of Agenda: Commissioner Dahlquist, seconded by Commissioner Wasescha,
moved to approve the Agenda as presented. Carried 4 -0.
Approval of October 12, 2000 Minutes: Commissioner Dwyer, seconded by
Commissioner Wasescha, moved to approve the Minutes, with typographical
corrections to Public Hearing A. (1) wording to read "four (4) inches wide and to Old
Business: B. Boutwell's Landing Liahtina Plan, sixth paragraph, first line, to read
"Additional discussion was had as to the lens style of the fixtures." Carried 4 -0.
Visitors: None.
Public Hearings:
A. MnDOT TH 36- Sub -Area Study as it pertains to Hiahwav 36 interchanges within
the City of Oak Park Heights.:
Doug Fisher of Washington County Transportation and Physical Development, Otto
Schmidt of MnDOT and Brent Rusco of S.E.H. were presented and provided an
overview of the study and its analysis and addressed questions related to the same.
They distributed a packet of information and explained the reasoning for the study,
some of its history and the reason for its expansion since its beginning. They hope to
have the study completed within the next couple of months and produce a working
document of their findings.
They noted that Highway 36 is considered to be a medium priority project and
discussed such issues related to the inter - regional corridor, such as time projections
for traffic volume increase, project changes, property access along the corridor, and
long range planning designed to meet the increasing travel demands on Hwy. 36.
Chair Hedlund opened the hearing for public comment at 7:42 p.m.
Jack Doerr, 14520 Upper 56th St. N., Oak Park Heights, MN 55082, stated that he has
heard the same comments for the past eleven year regarding the roadways and that it
seems that the same studies were being repeated.
Chuck Dou2herty, 15330 58th St. N., Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 inquired as to the
interchange at Beach Rd. Mr. Fisher informed him that the overpass would remain but
the highway access would be removed. He questioned why things seem to be repeated
and nothing seems to be resolved. He stated that he would like to see something
concrete.
Planning Commission Minutes
December 14, 2000
Page 2 of 5
Tim Bochman, 14151 60th St. N., Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 inquired as to the
timing for the proposed improvements near property owned by him.
David Beaudet, 6400 Lookout Trail, N., Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 commented that
he felt the work on the bridge and the highway should occur at the same time and that
the should not be dealt with as separate issues. He also suggested that a diversion of
pass- through traffic should be looked at.
Donna Grav, 14812 58th St. N., Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 suggested lookin g at
Highway 96 to the North for diverting traffic. .
Commissioner Dahlquist noted the large acquisition of land that would be needed by
MnDOT to proceed with the changes and questioned MnDOT as to what point they
could formally begin.
Commissioner Wasescha, seconded by Commissioner Dahlquist, moved to close the
public hearing at 8:02 p.m. Carried 4 -0.
B. Jacob Holdings Subdivision Request for - pro - perty located at Neal Ave., N. and
known as Lot 2, Block 2, Jacob Addition:
City Planner Richards provided a summary of the applicant's request and reviewed his
report, noting issues as they related to the proposed project's compliance with the
City's zoning ordinance.
Chair Hedlund opened the hearing for public comment at 8:03 p.m.
There being no public comment, Commissioner Dwyer, seconded by Commissioner
Dahlquist, moved to close the public hearing at 8:03 p.m. Carried 4 -0.
Commissioner Dahlquist, seconded by Commissioner Wasescha, moved to recommend
that the City Council approve the applicant's request subject to the following
conditions:
1). The applicant shall shift the side lot line of Lot 2 to the south at the street right -
of -way to allow Lot 1 to have at least 250 feet of frontage on Neal Ave., N.
2). The applicant should plat Outlot A as part of Lot 2.
3) . The drainage and utility easement of Jacobs Addition be vacated and replaced
with the easement indicated on the preliminary plat.
4) . All access points and utilities shall be subject to the review and approval of the
City Engineer.
Carried 4 -0.
Planning Commission Minutes
December 14, 2000
Page 3 of 5
C. William A. Costa Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review Request for
property located south of 5990 Neal Ave., N.:
City Planner Richards provided a summary of the applicant's request and reviewed his
report, noting issues as they related to the proposed project's compliance with the
City's zoning ordinance.
Chair Hedlund opened the hearing for public comment at 8:20 p.m.
The applicant was present and addressed questions from the Commission as to noise
levels, ear protection for employees, anticipated number of employees and percentage
of glass to be used in building design.
David Beaudet, 6400 Lookout Trail, N., Oak Park Heights, MN 55082, inquired as to
plat requirements and issues related to parking spaces, acoustics and decibels of noise
level. The architect for the applicant addressed the question regarding acoustics.
Commissioner Dahlquist, seconded by Commissioner Wasescha, moved to close the
public hearing at 8:58 p.m. Carried 4 -0.
Commission discussion ensued as to various elements of the -proposed projects
building design, landscaping, and signage.
Commissioner Dahlquist, seconded by Commissioner Wasescha, moved to table
discussion of this matter until the regular January, 2001 Planning Commission
meeting to allow information to be gathered on issues of concern.
Carried 4 -0.
Chair Hedlund called for a five- minute break.
D. Chuck Dougherty District Zoning Amendment Request for establishment of a R-
1 / B& B, Single familv Residential,/ Bed and Breakfast District Zone located in
the area of 15330 59th St. N.:
City Planner Richards provided a summary of the applicant's request and reviewed his
report, noting issues as they related to the proposed project's compliance with the
City's zoning ordinance.
Chair Hedlund opened the hearing for public comment at 9:20 p.m.
The applicant was present and explained the reasoning for his request and made
himself available to answer questions regarding the same.
Linda Moszer, 5827 Peller Ave. N., Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 expressed that she
found Mr. Dougherty to be a good neighbor and that she didn't want to harm his
business, but she was also concerned about how a sale of the business in the future
would affect the neighborhood. She indicated that the neighborhood worked very hard
to obtain R -1 zoning in the neighborhood and would prefer to retain the composition of
the neighborhood as it presently is.
Planning Commission Minutes
December 14, 2000
Page 4 of 5
Commission discussion ensued as to potential uses of the property, future land issues
for the area as a whole, surrounding property ownership and uses and the substantial
risks involved for the neighborhood and the desire to received additional feedback from
them.
Commissioner Dwyer, seconded by Commissioner Dahlquist, moved to continue the
public hearing to January 11, 2001 at 7:00 p.m., with notices to be re- mailed so as to
allow for increased public feedback. Carried 4 -0.
E. Wal -Mart Conditional Use Permit Request for property outside storaize and
landscape alteration at 5815 Norell Ave. N.:
City Planner Richards provided a summary of the applicant's request and reviewed his
report, noting issues as they related to the proposed project's compliance with the
City's zoning ordinance.
Chair Hedlund opened the hearing for public comment at 9:47 p.m.
Greg Frank of McCombs, Frank, Roos and Associates was present on behalf of the
applicant to address questions and expressed his concern about the condition
requiring the combining of Lots 3 and 4 outlined in the City Planner's Report. He `
indicated that they would agree to the condition in order to receive CUP approval," but
may look to replat at some later date to change the lot line configuration.
Commissioner Wasescha, seconded by Commissioner Dwyer, moved to close the p ublic
hearing at 10:02 p.m. Carried 4 -0.
Commission discussion ensued as to issues such as the existing parking lots lights not
meeting the full cut off requirements as specified by the City's Zoning Ordinance.
Additional concerns were addressed regarding screening and landscaping.
Commissioner Wasescha, seconded by Commissioner Dwyer, moved to recommend
that the City Council approve the applicant's request subject to the following
conditions:
1) . The applicant shall enhance the landscape plan by planting a continuous band
of evergreen trees on top of the berm with deciduous trees planted slightly west
of the evergreen trees. The landscape plan shall be subject to review and
approval of the City Arborist.
2). The City Arborist shall review the existing landscaping on the southerly berm
and determine if adequate planting materials are present to provide screening
for the residential units in the Boutwell's Landing project. The City Arborist
shall approve any additional landscape plan required to adequately screen the
outdoor sales and storage area.
3). The plans as they relate to existing easements or utilities are subject to City
Engineer review and approval.
a
Planning Commission Minutes
December 14, 2000
Page 5 of 5
4) . The applicant shall combine Lots 3 and 4. Block 1, Wal -Mart Addition so that
the outdoor sales and screening occur on the same property.
5. All lighting within the outdoor sales and storage area shall be reconfigured to be
compliant with section 401.15.B.7 of the Zoning Ordinance as it relates to
outdoor lighting. The applicant may consider, but is not required, to configure
all lighting within the Wal -Mart site to comply with section 401.15.B.7 of the
Zoning Ordinance.
6). Material being stored must be related to the regular business of Wal -Mart.
Carried 4 -0.
New Business:
A. Commission Member Recruiting:
Community Development Director Danielson updated the Commission on current
vacancies and upcoming vacancies on the Parks and Planning Commissions. She
informed them of the steps having been taken to recruit new members to both of these
commissions and encouraged the Commissioners to mention the opportunity to
anyone they might knew who ht be interested.
g
B. Commission Representation Schedule Update:
Commission representation at the City Council Meetings was established for January,
February and March. Specifically, January 9th - Commissioner Dahlquist, January
23rd - Commissioner Wasescha, February - Commissioner Hedlund, and March -
Commissioner Dwyer.
Old Business: None.
Informational /Update: None.
Adi ournment: Commissioner Dwyer, seconded by Commissioner Wasescha, moved to
adjourn at 10:19 p.m. Carried 4 -0.
Respectfully submitted,
• t,, V
CA
a
Julie A. Hultman
Community Development Secretary
Approved by the Planning Commission:
1
ENCLOSURE j
1 3 77 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
•
Thursday, January 11, 2001
Call To Order: Chair Hedlund called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present:
Commissioners Dahlquist, Dwyer and Wasescha. Staff Present: City Planner Richards,
Community Development Secretary Hultman, and Council Liaison McComber. Absent:
Community Development Director Danielson
Approval of Agenda: Commissioner Dahlquist, seconded by Commissioner Wasescha,
moved to approve the Agenda with the addition of Cable Casting as item B. under Old
Business. Carried 4 -0.
Approval of December 14, 2000 Minutes: Commissioner Wasescha, seconded by
Commissioner Dwyer, moved to carry this item to the meeting of February 8, 2001 to
allow time for review. Carried 4 -0.
Visitors: None.
Public Hearings:
7 .
• A: � Tabled: William A. Costa Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review Request
for property located south of 5990 Neal Ave. N.:
City Planner Richards reviewed his report regarding the request, noting that the
applicant had submitted revised plans addressing a number of the concerns voiced by
the Commission at its December 14, 2000 meeting.
Chair Hedlund opened the hearing for public comment at 7:09 p.m.
William A. Costa, the applicant, introduced himself and addressed the issues contained
within the City Planner's report. He highlighted the changes made to the proposed
plans to address the concerns voiced by the Commission at their December 14, 2000
meeting. Mr. Costa also distributed sound study information requested for the
hurricane touch -free dryer he proposes to used in his business and reviewed the same
with the Commission.
Commission discussion ensued as to building design elements, the blend of the
building design elements with landscaping, noise study issues, whether or not testing
had been completed with the doors open or closed, and decibel level measurements,
with the doors open, to various locations from the proposed site.
Commissioner Wasescha, seconded by Commissioner Dahlquist, moved to close the
public hearing at 7:29 p.m. Carried 4 -0.
•
•w
p ,
Planning Commission Minutes
January 11, 2001
Page 2 of 4
Commissioner Dahlquist, seconded by Commissioner Wasescha, moved to recommend
that the City Council approve the applicant's request subject to the following
conditions:
1). The City council approves the preliminary and final plat for Lots 1 and 2, Block
1, Jacobs 2nd Addition.
2). The applicant revise the site plan to indicate sixteen (16) off - street parking
stalls.
3) . The final landscape plan is subject to review and approval by the City Arborist.
4) . All exterior lighting shall be hooded to direct light toward the ground and away
from adjacent right -of -way at not greater than a 90 degree angle.
5) . The applicant shall provide raised elevations subject to City staff approval � ty pp al that
incorporate the detailing found in building elevation Option 3, enhanced corner
detailing, and a consistent parapet height and design on all sides of the
building.
6). The applicant shall submit grading and drainage plans that incorporate all ~�
drainage systems and parking areas with curb and gutter. All grading, drainage
and utility plans are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer..
Carried 4 -0.
B. Continued: Chuck Dougherty District Zoning Amendment Request for
establishment of a R -1 / B& B, Single family Residential/ Bed and Breakfast
District Zone located in the area of 15330 59th St. N.:
City Planner Richards provided a summary of the applicant's request and reviewed his
report regarding lot area analysis of both the Village and Upper Oak Park Heights areas
as well as bed and breakfast criteria used by a neighboring community.
Richards advised the Commission that keeping in line with the 120 -day review
requirement, a recommendation must be made on the applicant's request for the
Council to act upon by the end of February.
Chair Hedlund opened the hearing for public comment at 7:45 p.m.
The applicant was present and addressed the information presented to the Commission
in the City Planner's report and made himself available for questions. In response to
Council Liaison McComber's question of design, Mr. Dougherty replied that any
addition would match that of the homes present design.
Linda Moszer, 5827 Peller Ave. N., Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 reiterated her
continued concern of maintaining the R -1 zoning of the neighborhood and the prospect
of the home /business being sold at a future date and how it would affect the
neighborhood.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 11, 2001
Page 3 of 4
Commissioner Wasescha, seconded by Commissioner Dwyer, moved to close the p ublic
hearing at 8:48 p.m. Carried 4 -0.
Commission discussion ensued as to issues such as potential transferability of a
conditional use permit for the B& B, alternatives available to meet current owners
needs and protect the neighborhood as well, zoning versus conditional use P ermit
issues and the desire for increased public input on the matter.
Commissioner Dwyer, seconded by Commissioner Wasescha, moved to recommend
that the City Council deny the request for establishment of an R -1 B&B Single Famil
Residential /Bed and Breakfast Zone as requested by the applicant. Carried 4 -0.
Commissioner Dahlquist, seconded by Commissioner Wasescha, moved to schedule a
public hearing for the purpose of public comment related to allowin g bed and
breakfasts as conditional uses in the R -1, Single Family Residential District. Carried
4 -0.
The Commission further directed staff to notify, by mail, all residents east of Osgood of
the public hearing and to draft proposed ordinance language for consideration.
New Business:
A. Commission Applicants:
Richards noted the vacancies for the Parks and Plannin g Commissions and that six
applications had been received for Commission appointment. He further informed the
Commission that the City Council had directed the Commission to interview the
applicants and make a recommendation to them for appointment. He suggested that
the Parks and Planning Commissions jointly conduct interviews to recommend
appointments to both commissions.
The date of January 17, 2001 was selected by the Commission to conduct the joint
interview session. City staff was directed to contact the Parks Commission to see if the
date was workable for a majority of them and if so, to contact the applicants and
schedule interviews.
B. 2001 Goal Setting:
Richards noted that it was that the City Council had begun establishing their g oafs for
the year and suggested that the Commission consider their goals for the year as well.
Brief discussion was had as to 2000 goals. The Commission has requested a list, if one
has been created, of the Council's 2001 goals.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 11, 2001
Page 4 of 4
Old Business:
A. Public/ Institutional Zoning District:
Richards discussed the previously proposed zoning district and summarized discussion
that had been conducted to date on the subject. He suggested that the Commission
consider moving forward with the matter of establishing such a district. It was the
consensus of the Commission that a public hearing should be held to continue
discussion of the matter in February or March to allow for preparation and public
hearing notification.
B. Cable Casting:
Commissioner Wasescha expressed that she did not feel that the cable casting of the
Commission meeting has shown any increase in public attendance or following and
moved to discontinue cable casting of the Planning Commission meeting. Motion died
for lack of a second. ,
Discussion was had as to potential cable cast audiences and benefits as well as
possible means for better communication of the cable casting and playback times.
= 4 `
Z�
Informational/ Update:
Richards introduced Council -elect Mary McComber as the appointed Council Liaison to
the Planning Commission for 2001. The Commission welcomed Mary.
Chair Hedlund expressed personal thanks to outgoing Vice Chair Dahlquist and
informed him that he will be missed and that his contributions to the Commission and
generally had been very valuable.
Adi ournment: Commissioner Wasescha, seconded b Commissioner Dwyer to
Y � er
adjourn at 8:41 p.m. Carried 4 -0.
Respectfully submitted,
Julie A. Hultman
Community Development Secretary
Approved by the Planning Commission:
Note*
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
. Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 nac@winternet.com
ENCLOSURE 3
MEMORANDUM
T0: Tom Melena
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: January 30, 2001
RE: Oak Park Heights —Bed and Breakfast Zoning
FILE NO: 798.04 — 01.01
As you are aware, the Planning Commission at their January 11, 2001 meeting
recommended .to schedule a public hearing to discuss - 'Ahe expansion of the bed and
breakfast use in the R -1, Single Family Residential District. The City Council has
denied Chuck and Judy Dougherty's request to rezone their Cover Manor property and
create an R -1 District specifically for expanded bed and breakfast uses. It was the
Planning Commission's intent to deny the specific request made by the Doughertys, but
to continue the review and consider options for bed and breakfast facilities.
The Planning Commission discussed allowing bed and breakfasts as conditional uses
in the R -1 District. With this proposed change, bed and breakfasts would be allowed in
all residential districts, but with significant conditions that would limit the use to the
Village and Upper neighborhoods of Oak Park Heights. The existing permit conditions
would be expanded to limit bed and breakfast facilities to residences of 80 years in age
or greater and to tie the number of allowable units to the lot size. The conditions would
be based upon similar limitations found in the Stillwater Zoning Ordinance.
The proposed change to the R -1 District is found as follows. Conditional uses allowed
in the R -1 District carry into the R -2, R -3 and R -B Districts. The R -2 District currently
allows bed and breakfast facilities. The current R -2 District language would be
eliminated and the proposed R -1 language would prevail. A copy of the proposed
Zoning Ordinance amendment is attached.
•
R -1, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
401.22.E Conditional Uses
E3. and breakfast facilities providing that the following criteria are met:
a) A maximum of ten (10) bed and breakfast units may be established within
a structure.
b) The facility shall have a State issued license for lodging and food service,
and comply with and maintain all health, safety, building, and fire codes .
as may be required or applicable.
c) The owner - occupant shall be in residence of the residential property
proposed for the bed and breakfast facility.
d) All bed and breakfast units shall be established within the principal
structure.
e) The principal structure shall have a minimum size of one thousand seven
hundred fifty (1,750) gross square feet.
r
fl No bed and breakfast facility shall be located closer than at -least nine
hundred (900) feet from other bed and .breakfast facilities as measured
from property lines.
g) Structures used for a bed and breakfast shall be at least eighty (80) years
old or show proof of historic significance to the City.
h) The parcel on which the bed and breakfast is located shall accommodate
at least three thousand (3,000) square feet of lot area per bed and
breakfast unit exclusive of the owner - occupants' living quarters.
i) No more than the equivalent of two (2) full time persons shall be
employed by the bed and breakfast facilities who are not residents of the
structure.
j) Dining and other facilities shall not be opened to the public but shall be
used exclusively by the residents, registered guests of the facility, or
guests of an event or meeting held at the facility.
k) The owner - occupant of the bed and breakfast shall be allowed to host
events, small groups and meetings if the facility contains at least one
thousand (1,000) square feet of area for this purpose as well as a
2
f
commercial kitchen that complies with all health, safety, and building code
standards.
I) Two (2) off - street parkin spaces shall
9 p be provided for the facility plus
one (1) for each bed and breakfast unit. Parking areas shall be screened
and landscaped and no parking space shall be located in the front yard of
the property, other than on an existing driveway. The parking areas shall
be improved with asphalt, but shall be exempt from other commercial
parking requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
m) Not more than one (1) identification sign not exceeding six (6) square feet
in area may be located on the premises. The sign shall be reflective of
the architectural features in the structure and may not be externally or
internally illuminated.
n) Adequate lighting shall be provided between the principal structure and
the parking area for the safety of guests. All external lighting shall be
regulated by conditional use permit.
d) All bed and breakfast conditional use permits shall be- reviewed annually
by the Community Development Department. If violations of City
ordinances, Building Code, or conditions of approval are found, the
C ommu?rity Development Director shall schedule a public 'of the
Planning Commission to consider the conditional use permit and
conditions. Upon a Planning Commission recommendation, the City
Council may make adjustments to or cancel the conditional use permit.
p) The provisions of Section 401.03.A.7 of this Ordinance are considered
and satisfactorily met.
The Planning Commission should review the proposed zoning -amendment and
conditions provided herein. The public hearing for the amendment has been scheduled
for the February 8, 2001 meeting. Those areas of the community east of Osgood
Avenue have been notified of the public hearing. The City newsletter is scheduled to
be delivered in early to mid - February with an article about bed and breakfast zoning.
The Planning Commission should take any comments at the February meeting, discuss
the amendment and provide direction to staff, and hold the hearing open to their March
8 2001 meeting. By that time the newsletter would have been delivered and additional
people in the community would have been made aware of the proposed zoning
amendment.
• pc: Kris Danielson
3
A a
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 2001 -
AN ORDINANCE ALLOWING BED AND BREAKFAST FACILITIES AS A
CONDITIONAL USE IN ALL R -1 DISTRICTS, THE R -2 DISTRICT, THE R -3 DISTRICT,
AND THE R -B DISTRICT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 401.22.E, Conditional Uses of the R -1, Single Family District,
is hereby amended to include the following:
3. Bed and breakfast facilities providing that the following criteria are met:
a) A maximum of ten (10) bed and breakfast units may be established within
a structure.
b) The facility shall have a StpteJssued license for lodging and food service,
and comply with and maintain all health, safety, building, and fire codes as
may be required or applicable.
c) The owner - occupant shall be in residence of the residential property
proposed for the bed and breakfast facility.
d) All bed and breakfast units shall be established within the principal
structure.
e) The principal structure shall have a minimum size of one thousand seven
hundred fifty (1,750) gross square feet.
fl No bed and breakfast facility shall be located closer than at least Wins
hundred (900) feet from other bed and breakfast facilities as measured
from property lines.
g) Structures used for a bed and breakfast shall be at least eighty (80) years
old or show proof of historic significance to the City.
h) The parcel on which the bed and breakfast is located shall accommodate
at least three thousand (3,000) square feet of lot area per bed and
breakfast unit exclusive of the owner - occupants' living quarters.
t
i) No more than the equivalent of two (2) full time persons shall be employed
by the bed and breakfast facilities who are not residents of the structure.
•
j) Dining and other facilities shall not be opened to the public but shall be
used exclusively by the residents, registered guests of the facility, or
guests of an event or meeting held at the facility.
k) The owner - occupant of the bed and breakfast shall be allowed to host
events, small groups and meetings if the facility contains at least one
thousand (1,000) square feet of area for this purpose as well as a
commercial kitchen that complies with all health, safety, and building code
standards.
I) Two (2) off - street parking spaces shall be provided for the facility plus one
(1) for each bed and breakfast unit. Parking areas shall be screened and
landscaped and no parking space shall be located in the front yard of the
property, other than on an existing driveway. The parking areas shall be
improved with asphalt, but shall be exempt from other commercial parking
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
m) Not more than one (1) identification sign not exceeding six (6) square feet
in area may be located on the premises. The sign shall be reflective of the
architectural features in the structure and may not be externally or
internally illuminated.
n) Adequate lighting shall be provided between the principal structure and
the parking area for the safety of guests. All external lighting shall be
regulated by conditional use permit.
o) All bed and breakfast conditional use permits shall be reviewed annually
by the Community Development Department. If violations of City
ordinances, Building Code, or conditions of approval are found, the
Community Development Director shall schedule a public hearing of the
Planning Commission to consider the conditional use permit and
conditions. Upon a Planning Commission recommendation, the City
Council may make adjustments to or cancel the conditional use permit.
p) The provisions of Section 401.03.A.7 of this Ordinance are considered
and satisfactorily met.
Section 2. Section 401.26.E.5, bed and breakfast facilities and the list of
conditions are hereby eliminated from the R -2, Low and Medium Density Residential
District.
w
Section 3, This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and
publication. •
PASSED this day of 2001
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
By:
David Beaudet, Mayor
Ai itST:
By:
Tom Melena, City Administrator
1
� EMMONS
FEB - 1 2001 & OLIVIER
RESOURCES
r�.� � � 1 a°�'+S e, -l-i v► c� T►1 � 1 Vl -�ro r V►�I '�s'h c� n IZ�c��i �q
J
- �G � rovJ ►1 �S Ct"ee1G �lck{ '�'�"e.� �i 5-}'r iG �s �r�°5ert +d�-`io►7
-�'� "f'ke �IA►n r► i t�q C�Wt VY� ► 55� av► O Vt 4-P.lo • S i Zoo I .
J
��,�, ivi.G�ude �"►1iS 1vt-�vrnn4malcKoN t vL -t ke
( o u id l e d• s e. s e.""i wle, - tkle 4.
�J
YY1G�e�i �.a� W1I e vt i-t i 5 �r i v�d l ►' �, � .
t V1 o All � �te. g Gl/JA W o u. li Ke Y_.e - fi n iS
�resej e C;4- Cc n c- "c1 C;�Y s +d.�f
It +�leY gAre- Avd. G '�D d�'� "�'�1c5 Wl+e�'1'1►'�'�
re v �
- }1,1,5 �JC'QS�d PV► '�"�.e ��eol� ��'ri�c�-iion �ld.v� 2
op a
Cv,
Making A Differenc Th Integrated Resource Management
EOR, INC. • 3825 Lake Elmo Avenue North •Lake Elmo, MN • 55042 •Tel: (651) 770 -8448 •Fax: (651) 770 -2552
w
w
BROWN'S CRE
WAI' 1
25 Curve Crest Boulevard, Stillwater, MN 55082 Tel: 651 - 430 -6826 Fax: 651 - 430 -6819
January 2, 2001
City of Bayport
Baytown Township
City of Grant
City of Hugo
May Township
City of Oak Park Heights
City of Stillwater
Stillwater Township
Re: Presentation on the BCWD Second Generation Plan to City Planning
Commissions
The Brown's Creek Watershed District (BCWD), in compliance with Minnesota Statutes,
has developed a Second Generation Watershed Management Plan and is in the process of
responding to comments received during the first phase of the review process. Through
an inter - agency meeting held during this .review process the District identified the need to =
better communicate key issues to the communities and to get feedback on the Plan. As a
result, the District has scheduled presentations at Planning Commission meetings for each
of the communities.
The objective of this meeting will be to identify the key issues addressed in the Plan that
affect each particular community. One of the BCWD's primary goals is to develop
cooperative relationships with the local units of government so that the management of
water resources can be accomplished in a collaborative manner. Given the allotted
amount of time for the BCWD presentation /discussion we would like to discuss each
issue and get feedback that could be incorporated in the next draft of the Plan. If there is
not enough time to reach a specific outcome at the Planning Commission meeting, a
separate meeting can be scheduled by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
(BWSR) to further discuss the issues and reach outcomes.
XA agenda for the presentation as well as a table identifying the meeting dates for each
community is provided as an attachment. We would like to recommend that any staff
members involved in land -use planning, engineering or water resources management be
invited to attend this presentation/discussion. In addition, we recommend that each
community identify those issues out of the Plan that are of particular interest to them
prior to the meeting. Three copies of the first draft of the Second Generation Plan were
mailed to each community on October 13, 2000: one to the mayor, one to the city clerk
and one to the city engineer.
Managers:
Craig Leiser, President Karen Kilberg, Vice - President Dan Potter, Secretary E. J. Gordon, Treasurer Don Peterson
If you have any questions regarding the upcoming presentation to your community or the
contents of this letter please feel free to contact Camilla Correll, District Engineer
Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. at (651) 770 -8448.
Sin erely, ,
0�
Craig Leiser, President
Brown's Creek Watershed District
� Agenda
Meeting to Present the BCWD Second Generation
Watershed Management Plan
1. Overview of the BCWD Watershed Management Plan (15 minutes)
2. Discuss Key Issues for your Community (10 minutes)
3. Identify Potential Outcomes (if there is time)
4. Discuss the Need for an Additional Meeting/Workshop (5 minutes)
Schedule for Meetings
Community Date
City of Grant January 15, 2000 7:00 p.m.
City of Hugo January 24, 2000 7:00 p.m.
May TWP January 25, 2000 7:00 p.m.
• City of Oak Park Heights February 8, 2000 7:00 p.m.
City of Stillwater February 12, 2000 7:00 p.m.
Stillwater TWP March 1, 2000 7:00 p.m.
City of Bayport March 12, 2000 7:00 p.m.
Baytown TWP No meeting scheduled.
City of Lake Elmo No meeting scheduled.
•
DRAFT 10/12100
IV. Im lementation & Ca ital Im rovement Program p p p
The Implementation Program and the Capital Improvement Program identifies high
priority improvement projects to address the issues presented in Section I, Identification
of Watershed Problems and Issues of this plan and to reach the management goals
identified in Section III, Management Goals & Strategies of this plan.
At a minimum, the Implementation Program and the Capital Improvement Program is
subject to an annual review. At that time, each proposed project will be reconsidered and
additional projects may be added by amendment according to the direction of the BCWD
Board of Managers. The Board can implement projects not included in the
Implementation Program or the Capital Improvements Program, provided the projects are
consistent with the intent of this management plan per authority granted by Minnesota
Statutes 103D.
Currently, there are no new capital improvement projects being proposed in this
Watershed Management Plan. Amendments to capital improvement projects identified in
the First Watershed Management Plan (1990) are incorporated in this Plan by reference.
These amendments are included in Appendix B. As mentioned previously, the emphasis
of this plan is to provide Technical Support of the BCWD Rules. As a result, the projects
identified in this Implementation Plan are feasibility analyses and studies. It is likely that
a number of capital improvement projects will be . in the future as these
feasibility analyses and studies are completed.
The Implementation Plan is presented in a tabular format (see Table IV -1) which is
organized by the issues identified in Section I, Identification of Watershed Problems and
Issues:
I. Technical Review of the Rules:
• Volume Control
• Buffers
• Water Quality Standards
• Wetland Bounce
• Flood Protection
2. Education, Outreach & Stewardship
3. Monitoring Plan & Data Acquisition
4. Project Monitoring and Maintenance
5. Groundwater Resources
Strategies identified in Section III of the plan were prioritized and re- evaluated in light of
the Water Governance Study. Only those strategies that the current Board of Managers
and the Citizen's Advisory Committee identified as high priority for the Brown's Creek
Watershed District over the next five years were included in this Implementation Plan.
Strategies identified in the implementation plan are intended to serve as a road map for
planning purposes. The implementation table identifies projected implementation dates,
Brown's Creek Watershed District 105
IV. Implementation do Capital Improvements Program
DRAFT 10112/00
estimated project costs and proposed collaborators. Information presented in the
implementation table does not commit the BCWD Board of Managers to completing
projects as they are laid out in the table. The Board of Managers has the flexibility to re-
evaluate priorities and strategies on an annual basis as they budget funds for the
following years.
IV -1. Implementation Program
The BCWD proposes the following program to address the watershed management issues
facing the district. In all cases, the implementation of these strategies will be coordinated
with the County, cities, townships and state agencies to the maximum extent possible.
Section IV-1a provides a general description of the program and projects the BCWD
proposes, highlighting the major components of the project. Projects identified in this
Implementation Plan have been previously identified in Section III of the plan in the bold
type. Section IV-1b contains the Table (IV -1) developed in conjunction with the
Implementation Plan. Table IV -1 identifies the associated costs for each project over a
five -year period; proposed collaborators; and the priority of the project.
IV -la. Project Description
Technical Review of the Rules: Volume Control
a. Rule Review Process
• Change and/or refine the rules based upon the results of the studies,
projects and initiatives or based upon State Statutory requirements.
• Distribute for comment
• Review by the Technical Advisory Committee
• Public hearings)
• Amend and adopt the final rule
b. Perform a Study to Determine the Need, Feasibility, Cost and Impact of Adopting
Volume Control Standards above the Current 1.5 -Year Rainfall Event
• Use the Hydrologic/Hydraulic I Model of BCWD to determine the impact
of adopting the 5 -, 10 -, and 25 -year rainfall events
• Perform a feasibility analysis and determine the impact to developers by
performing a development review applying the S -, 10 -, and 25 -year
rainfall events
• Work with the Department of Natural Resources to identify the needs of
the trout in Brown's Creek
Brown's Creek Watershed District 106,
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
DRAFT 10/12100
c. Conduct an Inventory of Local City and County Standards /Ordinances (this would
apply to all of the rules review areas but is identified under volume control)
• Distribute Rules to those communities that fall within the District
Boundaries requesting that they identify those areas in the Rules that are in
conflict with their standards /ordinances
• Work with communities to identify standards /ordinances that conflict with
the Rules
• Work with communities to develop standards /ordinances that are
compatible with the watershed rules
• Assist the LGU's in developing appropriate standards and ordinances
where they currently do not exist.
d. Imperviousness and the Benefits of Volume Control
■ Develop an education plan for Cities, Local Units of Government,
developers and residents of the Watershed to raise awareness about
imperviousness and the benefits of volume control
e. Demonstration Sites
• i
Identify suitable site for the volume control demonstration Best
Management Practice (BMP)
• Design Best Management Practice (BMP)
• Develop plans and specifications
■ Construction Observation
f. Guidance Manual
• Compile existing materials regarding the design and construction of Best
Management Practices (BMP's). This would include compiling existing
guidance manuals and collaborating with other districts and/or agencies
that have developed these types of planning tools.
• Develop useful guidance materials (i.e. guidance manual, fact sheets) that
the District can distribute to contractors, developers, Local Units of
Government to promote the design and construction of successful BMP's
Technical .Review of the Rules: Buffers
a. Rule Review Process
• Change and/or refine the rules based upon the results of the studies,
projects and initiatives or based upon State Statutory requirements.
• Distribute for comment
• Review by the Technical Advisory Committee
• Public hearing(s)
• Amend and adopt the final rule
Brown's Creek Watershed District 107
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
r
DRAFT 10112100
b. Adopt Language that Clarifies the Methodology for Determining Buffer
Requirements
• Change wording in the Rules
• Distribute for comment
• Review by the Technical Advisory
• Public hearing
• Amend and adopt the final rule
c. Identify a Percentage of the Buffer that can be allocated to Stormwater Ponding
• Develop a rationale for identifying the percentage of buffer that can be
allocated to stormwater ponding
• Modify /clarify the rules to reflect the total portion of a buffer that can be
used for the construction of stormwater ponds
d. Provide Regulatory Flexibility (identify what regulatory flexibility is going to
address i.e. buffer averaging etc.)
• Change wording in the Rules
• Distribute for comment
• Review by the Technical Advisory
• Public hearing
• Amend and adopt the final rule
e. Develop Guidelines for Increasing Buffer Quality
■ Establish vegetative specifications in the riparian corridor and set
provisions for buffer establishment and maintenance to promote desirable
plant communities. Develop a plant list for establishing buffers in the
BCWD.
f. Monumentation
• Change wording in the Rules
• Distribute for comment
• Review by the Technical Advisory
• Public hearing
• Amend and adopt the final rule
g. Evaluate Current Buffer Widths
• Monitor and inspect buffers to evaluate their effectiveness in providing
pretreatment of stormwater, desirable plant communities and diverse
wildlife habitat.
• Use the water quality data for Brown's Creek and those lakes that are
being monitored in the District to evaluate the impact that buffers have in
maintaining water quality of the system.
Brown's Creek Watershed District 108,
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
. DRAFT 10112100
h. Encourage Local Units of Government (LGU's) to Consider Using Density
Y
Compensation
• Meet with the City and Township officials in the District to discuss the
importance of buffers and to review their shoreland ordinance with respect
to the rules.
• Work with the Cities and Townships to assess the impact of adopting a
density compensation strategy.
• Work with the Cities and Townships to adopt language in their ordinances
that would allow for density compensation
i. Develop Inventory Maps Identifying Wetland Type and Classification
■ Develop a map identifying water bodies and their corresponding buffer
boundaries for distribution to the cities, Local Units of Government,
developers and residents of the watershed.
j. Buffer Education
• Develop an education plan to educate the cities, Local Units of
Government, developers and residents of the Watershed about the
importance of buffers
k. Demonstration Sites
■ Identify suitable site for the volume control demonstration Best
Management Practice (BMP)
■ Design Best Management Practice (BMP)
■ Develop plans and specifications
■ Construction Observation
Technical Review of the Rules: Water Quality Standards
a. Rule Review Process
• Change and/or refine the rules based upon the results of the studies,
projects and initiatives or based upon State Statutory requirements.
• Distribute for comment
• Review by the Technical Advisory Committee
• Public hearing(s)
• Amend and adopt the final rule
b. Demonstration Sites
■ Coordinate innovative water quality BMPs with the volume control
demonstration site identified previously.
Brown's Creek Watershed District 109
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
r
DRAFT 10112100
Technical Review of the Rules: Wetland Bounce
a. Update the Current Wetland Classification System
• Change wording in the Rules
• Distribute for comment
• Review by the Technical Advisory Committee
• Public hearings)
• Amend and adopt the final rule
b. Importance of Wetland Bounce
■ Develop an education plan to educate , the clues, Local Units of
Government, developers and residents of the Watershed about the
importance of buffers
Technical Review of the Rules: Flood Protection
a. Rule Review Process
■ Change and/or refine the rules based upon the results of the studies,
projects and initiatives or based upon State Statutory requirements.
■ Distribute for comment
■ Review by the Technical Advisory Committee
■ Public hearing(s) ..
■ Amend and adopt the final rule
b. Incorporate a Landlocked Basin Regulation
• Change wording in the Rules
• Distribute for comment
• Review by the Technical Advisory Committee
• Public hearing(s)
• Amend and adopt the final rule
c. Develop Flood Plain Map for Use by Local Communities
• Determine flood plains for water bodies in the District using existing
resources (i.e. FEMA studies) and coordinate with Washington County on
flood plain mapping efforts
• Provide each community in the District with the 1982 FEMA study
• Using the Hydrologic & Hydraulic Study I and current topographic
information for the District update the results of the 1982 FEMA study
• Determine which entity is responsible for implementing a flood plain
zoning ordinance for each structure
• Work with communities to develop solutions for flood prone structures
subject to damage
Brown's Creek Watershed District 110
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
DRAFT 10/12100
Education, Outreach & Stewardship
a. Watershed Newsletter
■ Develop 1 Issue per year to raise awareness of watershed district activities
and requirements (this newsletter will meet requirements of BWSR rule
8410.0100, subpart 4).
b. Annual Watershed Event
■ Provide the residents of the District with the opportunity to learn about
projects taking place in the watershed and updates to the rules while
providing a forum for discussion of watershed issues.
c. Technical Fact Sheets
■ One -topic fact sheets that are developed and distributed to help decision
makers and developers understand the requirements and rationale of
District Rules and monitoring program
d. Presentations at Regularly Held Township, City and County Board Meetings
■ Face -to -face meetings to provide the opportunity to maintain relationships
and up -date units of government on District activities and requirements
■ Potential for NEMO Programming (Nonpoint Education for Municipal
Officials)
e. Annual Watershed Tour
■ Annual Watershed Tour is an opportunity to learn about watershed issues
and District activities
f. School Program with 5 th and 6th Graders
■ Coordinate with the Warner Nature Center to develop an education
program that covers watershed concepts in nine classroom and field
sessions.
g. Floodplain Elevations
■ Inform Local Units of Government (LGU's) of new Foodplain elevations
and the impact these foodplain elevations have on their zoning authority
Monitoring Plan & Data Acquisition
a. Develop an Integrated Water Quality Monitoring Program
• Develop a comprehensive summary of monitoring efforts in the
Watershed District
• Use these resources to develop a monitoring plan for the Watershed
District that incorporates the volunteer monitoring program
Brown's. Creek Watershed District 111
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
r .
DRAFT 10 112 100
b. Coordinate, Collect and Compile Data
• Determine which water quality parameters the District should be
monitoring
• Data Collection (includes the current operational costs for the District plus
the operational costs associated with the three new automated monitoring
stations)
• Equipment Maintenance
• Data analysis
• Annual report
c. Acquire Automated Monitoring Equipment
■ Provide additional funding for the acquisition and installation of three new
automated monitoring stations in the District (approximately $8,000 per
monitoring station).
d. Provide Funding for Volunteer Monitoring Groups
■ Continue to work with agencies in their efforts to promote volunteer
monitoring programs within the Brown's Creek Watershed District.
e. Acquire Two- Foot.:Contour Data
■ Work with Washington County to obtain the two -foot topographic data for
the Brown's Creek Watershed District.
f. Acquire Land -Cover Mapping Data
■ Work with the Department of Natural Resources to obtain the land -cover
data for the Brown's Creek Watershed District.
g. Identify and Inventory Intercommunity Drainage Issues
• Perform a study to identify the drainage issues in the area and identify
possible solutions
• Work with the communities to solve their drainage issues
h. Data Maintenance
■ Obtain GIS updates from Washington County, aerial photography,
topographic maps and land use information as it becomes available.
Brown's Creek Watershed District 112,
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
DRAFT 10/12100
Project Monitoring & Maintenance
a. Integrate Project Monitoring with Overall District Monitoring
■ Develop a methodology for data collection and analysis that will ensure
consistency for comparison purposes.
b. Operation & Maintenance Plan
• Data Collection
• Data Analysis
• Report Generation
• Analysis of short- and long -term performance and the need for
maintenance and/or retrofitting
• Development of a maintenance plan
Groundwater Resources
a. Hydrologic & Hydraulic Study II
■ Incorporate new land use and land cover information for both existing and
future land use conditions '
■ Confirm watershed and subwatershed boundaries with two -foot contour
information
■ Incorporate final design of Trout Habitat Preservation Project (THPP)
■ Incorporate final design for Kismet Basin Project
■ Incorporate final design for Brown's Creek Channel Realignment Project
■ Incorporate final design for Long Lake Diversion
■ Incorporate new developments in the Watershed
■ Calibrate the model with new water quality and water quantity data
b. Groundwater Resource Assessment (will be performed in coordination with
Washington County, participating watershed districts and agencies)
• Determine baseflow to trout stream
• Evaluate function of landlocked basins in the groundwater system
• Quantify municipal water withdrawals
c. Link Surface Water and Groundwater Components (will be performed in
P P
conjunction with Washington County, participating watershed districts and
agencies)
■ Identify groundwater recharge and discharge areas
d. Evaluate Future Management Scenarios
■ Use model results to evaluate future hydrologic impacts to key water
resources in the Watershed
Brown's Creek Watershed District 113
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
DRAFT 10/12100
e. Address TMDL Basin Standards
• TMDL Study
• Public Review Process
f. Groundwater Monitoring Plan (will be performed in conjunction with Washington
County, participating watershed districts and agencies)
• Identification of existing monitoring stations
• Develop a network of new monitoring stations
g. Implement Groundwater Monitoring Program (will be performed in conjunction
with Washington County, participating watershed districts and agenciesl
• Collect data from a monitoring well and surface water network
• Data analysis
• Compile and present data in an annual report to discuss data, trends and
recommendations
IV -lb. Implementation Table
The strategies identified in the Implementation Table were previously identified in
Section III, Management Goals & Strategies and are those being carried forward for
implementation. The implementation table identifies projected implementation timelines,
estimated project costs and proposed collaborators. Strategies identified in the
implementation plan and tables are intended - to serve as a road map for planning purposes
and do not commit the BCWD Board of Managers to completing projects exactly as they
are laid out in the table. Estimated project costs do not include outside funding (e.g.
grants, collaboration projects, etc.). The District will however actively seek outside
funding to supplement their budget in implementing these strategies to lower their levy or
to implement additional strategies identified in Section III.
Brown's Creek Watershed District 114,
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
Table Iv -1. Capital Improvements and Implementation Plan
Technical Support of the Rules:
Projected Completion Date Estimated Project Cost Proposed Collaborators
Volume Control 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
a. Rule Review Process 5000` $20,000 -- -- $10,000 $10,000 SWCD, LGU's
b. Perform a Study to Determine the Need,
Feasibility, Cost and Impact of Adopting Volume $30,000 -- -- -- -- $30,000 SWCD, LGU's
Control Standards above the 1.5 -Year Rainfall Event
c. Conduct an Inventory of Local City and
County Standards/Ordinances $5'000 "" -- -- -- $5,000 SWCD
d. Imperviousness and the Benefits of Volume
Control See Education, Outreach &Stewardship SWCD, DNR
e. Demonstration Sites $20 $20,000 $20,000 -- -- $60,000 SWCD, LGU's
f. Guidance Manual $15,000 -- $5,000 -- $5,000 $25,000 BWSR, Met Council, MPCA
Projected Completion Date Estimated Project Cost Proposed Collaborators
Buffers 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Included in (a) Included in (a) Included in (a) Included in (a) under Volume
a. Rule Review Process under Volume under Volume -- -- under Volume SWCD, LGU's
Control Control Control Control
b. Adopt Language that Clarifies the Methodology Included in (a) Included in (a)
p gy under Volume -- -- under Volume Included in (a) under Volume SWCD, LGU's
Control Control
for Determining Buffer Requirements Control
c. Identify a Percentage of the Buffer that can be
Allocated to Stormwater Ponding $2,000 -• -- -- -- $2,000 SWCD, LGU's
Included in (a) Included in (a) Included in (a) under Volume
d. Provide Regulatory Flexibility -- under Volume -- -- under Volume Control SWCD, LGU's
Control Control
e. Develop Guidelines for Increasing Buffer Quality $5 -- -- -- -- $5,000 SWCD, LGU's
Included in (a) Included in (a) Included in (a) under Volume
f. Monumentation -- under Volume -- -- under Volume Control SWCD, LGU's
Control Control
g. Evaluate Current Buffer Widths $10,000 -- -- -- $10,000 SWCD, DNR
h. EnCv ^ i:. ab. irocal '%inI,S of GOYewne6i - to
Consider Using Density Compensation $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $000 $1,000 $5,000 SWCD, DNR
i. Develop Inventory Maps Identifying Wetland Type $5,000 $5,000
and Classification -- -- -- $10 SWCD, DNR
j. Buffer Education See Education, Outreach & Stewardship SWCD, DNR
k. Demonstration Sites $5,000 $5,000 $5 -- -- $15,000 SWCD, DNR
Projected Completion Date Estimated Project Cost Proposed Collaborators
Water Quality Standards 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Included in (a) Included in (a) Included in (a) Included in (a) under Volume
a. Rule Review Process under Volume under Volume -- -- under Volume Control SWCD, LGU's
Control Control Control
b. Demonstration Sites $5,000 $5,000 + $5,000 -- -- $15,000 SWCD, DNR
Projected Completion Date Estimated Project Cost Proposed Collaborators
Wetland Bounce 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Included in (a) Included in (a) Included in (a)
a. Update the Current Wetland Classification System under Volume under Volume -- -- under Volume Included in (a) under Volume SWCD, LGU's, BWSR, MPCA
Control Control Control Control
b. Importance of Wetland Bounce See Education, Outreach & Stewardship
Projected Completion Date Estimated Project Cost Proposed Collaborators
Flood Protection 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Included in (a) Included in (a) Included in (a) Included in (a) under Volume
a. Rule Review Process under Volume under Volume -- -- under Volume SWCD, LGU's
Control Control Control Control
Included in (a) Included in (a) Included in (a) Included in (a) u V olume
Control b. Incorporate a Landlocked Basin Regulation under Volume under Volume -- -- under Volume o SWCD, LGU's
Control Control Control l
c. Develop Flood Plain Map for Use by Local
Communities $40,000 $30,000 -- -- -- $70,000 SWCD, LGU's
Subtotal $138,000 $61,000 1 $31,000 1 $1,000 $16,000 1 $2479000
Education, Outreach & Stewardship
Projected Completion Date Estimated Project Cost Proposed Collaborators
2002 2003 2004 . 2005 2006
a. Watershed Newsletter $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $30,000 SWCD, Sub - contractor
b. Annual Watershed Event $5,200 $5 $5 $5 $5 $26,000 SWCD, Sub - contractor
c. Technical Fact Sheets $2,800 $750 $750 $750 $750 $5,800 SWCD, Sub - contractor
d. Presentations at Regularly Held Township, City $600 $600 $600 $600 $600 $3,000 SWCD, Sub - contractor
and County Board Meetings
:
e. Annual Watershed Tour $2,700 $1,600 $2,700 $1,600 $2,700 $11,300 SWCD, Sub - contractor
f. School Program with 5` and 6th Graders $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $3,750 SWCD, Sub - contractor
Included in (c) Included in (c) Included in (c) under Flood
g. Floodplain Elevations under Flood under Flood -- -- -- Protectioin SWCD, LGU's
_ Protectioin Protectioin
Subtotal $1 8,050 $14,900 $1 6,000 $14,900 $16,000 M $79,850
Monitoring Plan & Data Acquisition
Projected Completion Date Estimated Project Cost Proposed Collaborators
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
a. Develop an Integrated Water Quality Monitoring $15,000 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $25,000 SWCD, DNR, Met Council, St.
Program Croix Watershed Research Station
b. Coordinate, Collect and Compile Data $32,000 $28,000 $28,000 $28,000 $28,000 $144 SWCD
c. Acquire Automated Monitoring Equipment $24,000 -- -- -- -- $24,000 SWCD
d. Provide Funding for Volunteer Monitoring $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $7,500 DNR
Groups
e. Acquire Two -Foot Contour Data $30 -- -- -- -- $30,000 SWCD, Washington County
f. Acquire Land -Cover Mapping Data $1 -- -- -- -- $1,000 DNR
g. Identify and Inventory Intercommunity Drainage $10,000 $10,000 -- -- -- $20,000 SWCD, DNR
Issues
h. Data Maintenance $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $10,000 SWCD
Subtotal $115,500 $44,000 $34 $34 1 $34,000 M $261,500
Project Monitoring & Maintenance
Projected Completion Date Estimated Project Cost Proposed Collaborators
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
a. Integrate Project Monitoring with Overall District $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $5,000 SWCD
Monitoring
b. Operation & Maintenance Plan $10,000 .$5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $30,000 SWCD
Subtotal $11,000 $6,000 1 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 1 $35,000
Groundwater Resources
Projected Completion Date Estimated Project Cost Proposed Collaborators
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
a. Hydrologic & Hydraulic Study II $35,000 -- -• -- •- $35,000 SWCD
b. Groundwater Resource Assessment $36,000 $36,000 Washington County, BWSR, DNR,
$72,000 MPCA, LGU's
c. Link Surface Water and Groundwater Component -- -- $50,000 -- -- $50,000 Washington County, SWCD,
P P g artici atin watershed districts
d. Evaluate Future Management Scenarios -- -- -- $30,000 -- $30,000 Washington County, SWCD, DNR
County, BWSR, DNR,
e. Address TMDL Basin Standards -- -- -- $50,000 $25,000 $75,000 Washington
b. Groundwater Monitoring Plan -- -- $10,000 -- -- $10,000
Washington County, BWSR, DNR,
MPCA
c. Implement Groundwater Monitoring Program -- -- $ 25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $75,000 Washington County, BWSR, DNR,
MPCA LGU's and Developers
Subtotal $71,000 $36,000 $85,000 $105,000 $50,000 $347,000
Total $353,550 $161,900 $172,000 $160,900 $122,000 $970,350
Estimated Annual Cost Estimated Project Cost
Summary Table 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Technical Support of the Rules $121,000 $81 $31 9 000 $1 $16 $ 250,000
Education, Outreach & Stewardship $32,200 $24300 $24,400 $23,300 $21,900 $126,500
Monitoring Plan & Data Acquisition $102500 $49,000 $29,000 $29,000 $29 9 000 $ 238,500
fEoject Monitoring & Maintenance $11,000 $6 $6 $6,000 $6,000 $35,000
Groundwater Resources $36,000 i $36,000 $35,000 i $25,000 i $25,000 + $157
Total $302 $196 $125 $84,300 $97 $807
r
DRA FT 10/12100
IV -2. Funding of District Activities
The Brown's Creek Watershed District intends to fund most of its administrative and
plan activities through district -wide ad valorem levy. The levy authority for watershed
programs is under Minnesota Statutes 103B and 103D. Table IV -2 identifies the
estimated annual tax per residence in the District based upon incremental project costs.
The District reserves the right to consider other financing mechanisms such as
subwatershed taxing in special cases or circumstances. Some activities could be
coordinated and funded on a more regional scale with entities such as the Northern
Watershed Unit, Washington County or other agencies. For example groundwater
activities may be coordinated and funded to some degree through the County.
The District may also pursue additional financial resources such as grants, donations, in-
kind services and/or participation by other governmental units or agencies. The Brown's
Creek Watershed District has had success in obtaining outside grant dollars in recent
years which has greatly reduced the District's financial burden. It is important to note
that the costs tabulated in Table IV -1 do not accurately reflect or estimate the amount of
funding obtained from these sources.
Table IV -2. Approximate Annual Tax Levy Per Residence
. -"--� Project Cost
Value of Residence
C$] [$1
75,000 100 150 200 250,000
50 $4.31 $6.65 $11.39 $16.14 $20.89
100,000 $8.63 $13.30 $22.79 $32.28 $41.77
200 $17.26 $26.60 $45.58 $64.56 $83.54
500,000 $43.15 $66.50 $113.94 $161.40 $208.85
(a) Based upon the 2000 Net Tax Capacity figures provided by Washington County.
Y
IV -3. Regulatory Controls and Enforcement
The Brown's Creek Watershed District has existing Rules and Regulations in place that
were adopted on October 29, 1999 and were in effect on January 1, 2000. The District's
approach to stormwater management is clearly reflected in the Rules, a copy of which is
provided in Appendix C. The District plans on continuing its commitment to stormwater
management as reflected in the Rules. The District also understands that sections of the
Rules may be subject to change as they withstand the test of time. A rule review process
has been identified in the implementation section of this plan and is preliminarily
scheduled to occur in the years 2003 and 2006.
The goal for the implementation of the program identified in this plan is to work through
the cities' existing programs and to encourage the cities to adopt new controls as
necessary to adopt the WMP's standards. If local city controls are at least as protective
Brown's Creek Watershed District 116
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
DRAFT 10/12100
as the BCWD's Rules and the city has an approved Local Water Plan consistent with the
District's Plan, then the cities may take the lead on the review and approval of
development plans. Townships are encouraged to work through the District and
Washington County to develop a regulatory framework for enforcing the standards set
forth in the Rules and WMP.
For enforcement of the BCWD standards (until local plans and local controls are in place)
the District adopted Resolution 99 -10. This document outlines the permit review process
for the BCWD. In addition, the District will develop a guidance document to outline its
review process and enforcement procedures for the Rules for developers and the cities.
A review of the BCWD programs and implementation of standards will be carried out
annually by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAQ and presented to the Citizens
Advisory Committee (CAC). The CAC will make recommendations to the BCWD
Board of Managers on the adequacy of the present regulatory controls and
implementation thereof. If during the periodic review (at least once every two years), the
Board concurs that programmatic changes are necessary, the Board can amend the WMP
to reflect the needed changes and/or adopt new rules that require the cities to amend their
ordinances to effect the needed changes. If implementation of standards consistent with
the WMP is a problem, the BCWD will take administrative or legal action, to ensure that
the standards are being followed.
IV -4. Impacts on Local Units of Government
Minnesota Rules 8410.0110 requires that the Watershed Management Plan assess the
impact of local controls and programs required by the Plan. The assessment is to include
an analysis of the financial impact of implementation of the proposed regulatory controls
and programs identified under part 8410.0100 of the rules. At a minimum, it is to consist
of an estimate of the costs associated with the Plan's implementation and anticipated
sources of revenue.
The regulatory controls and programs proposed in this Plan will not have a financial or
other impact on local governments within the meaning of the indicated rule. The local
planning requirement of Minnesota Statutes §103B.235 will involve each local
government in creating and implementing a water resource plan. The cost of this activity
is mandated by the statute and is not a consequence of the Watershed Management Plan.
The Watershed Management Plan includes a number of strategies and programs that the
District may pursue in fulfilling its water resource mission. Many of these will involve
local government participation. Examples include:
• Inventory of local stormwater control standards
• Buffer monumentation
• Review of local land use ordinances for water resource impacts
• Development of a landlocked basin regulation and a flood contingency plan
Brown's Creek Watershed District 117
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
r
DRAFT 10/12100
• Education and outreach programs
• Monitoring and data acquisition programs
■ Identification of intercommunity drainage issues
None of the programs identified in the Plan, however, compels local government
involvement. In pursuing a specific activity under the Plan, the District will seek the
voluntary cooperation of affected local governments. If an affected local government
does not wish to participate, the District either will undertake the activity without the
involvement of that body or will forego the activity.
This Plan requires, as a criterion of local plan approval, that the official controls of the
local government, as adopted and enforced, be at least as protective of water resources as
the District's rules. Local governments will incur costs in implementing official controls
for water resource protection. However, the District permits a local government to meet
the criterion of sufficiently protective controls simply by authorizing the District's
continued application of its rules and permit requirements within the boundaries of the
local government unit. While the District will cooperate with local governments that
wish to assume sole responsibility for water resource permitting and enforcement, it also
will retain and continue to exercise permitting authority where a local government so
chooses. Accordingly, under this Plan, local governments are not compelled to expand
their regulatory programs and therefore will incur no costs related to those programs
unless they so choose. The status of local governmental official controls is as follows:
Brown's Creek Watershed District 118
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
DRA FT 10/12100
Table IV -3. Status of Local Ordinances
Erosion Stormwater
Wetland Shoretand
Community Control Management
Ordinances Ordinances
Ordinances Ordinances
Grant NA NA NA NA
Source: Source: Source: Source:
Hugo Comprehensive Comprehensive Comprehensive Comprehensive
Land -Use Land -Use Land -Use Land -Use
Regulations Regulations Regulations Regulations
4 4 4 4
Lake Elmo Source: Source: Source: Source:
Municipal Code Municipal Code Municipal Code Municipal Code
02/18/97 02/18/97 02/18/97 02/18/97
May TWP �
y ,1 �!
Source: Source: Source:
None Chapter 9 of Adopted Managed b
p Wetland g y
Subdivision Conservation Washington
Code County
Act
Oak Park
Heights Source: �. Source: Source: Source:
City Ordinances City Ordinances City Ordinances City Ordinances
Stillwater
Source: Source: Source: Source:
City Code City Code City Code City Code
Stillwater TWP NA NA NA NA
NA = Not Applicable
In developing this Plan, the District is required by Minnesota Rules 8410.0070 to solicit
and consider the water management goals and policies of local governments within the
District, the Metropolitan Council, Washington County, the Washington Soil and Water
Conservation District, the Board of Water and Soil Resources, the Pollution Control
Agency and the Departments of Natural Resources, Agriculture and Health, and to
explain and justify any inconsistencies between those goals and policies and the goals
and policies of the District as stated in the Plan. Under 8410.0110, the District also is to
solicit from Washington County and the local governments any concerns as to their
administrative and financial capabilities to adopt and enforce the controls and programs
required by the Plan.
Figure 1 in the Plan and the text accompanying it describe the process that has been used
in developing the Plan. This process has included the substantial involvement of
Washington County, the Washington Soil and Water Conservation District, the
Metropolitan Council, the Board of Water and Soil Resources and the Department of
Natural Resources. Additionally, on June 15, 2000, the issue identification and resource
inventory portions of the draft Plan were distributed to the cities and towns within the
Brown's Creek Watershed District 119
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
DRAFT 10/12100
District for review and comment. Stillwater Township provided comments to the
District.
In distributing this draft, the District specifically is asking each indicated governmental
unit to respond to the District with respect to any of its water management goals or
policies relevant to and not reflected in, or contradicted by, the Plan. Similarly, it is
asking the County and the affected cities and towns to submit comments regarding their
capabilities to implement the controls and programs required herein. As noted above, it
is the District's assessment that the Plan will not impose burdens on the administrative or
financial capabilities of local governments. If any affected governmental unit believes
otherwise, it is asked to specifically advise the District of its views. Any comments
received will be reviewed and considered in finalizing the Plan.
Brown's Creek Watershed District 120
IV. Implementation & Capital Improvements Program
c ity O
O ak el is
�0 14168 Oak Park Blvd, Box 2007 Park Heights, MN 55082 • (651) 439 -4439 • Fax 439 -0574
Memo
February 7, 2001
To: Tom Melena
Mayor and Councilmembers
From: Kris Danielson, Community Development Director
Re: Central Business District Workshop Meeting Summary
rY
The City Council held a workshop and informational meeting on Monday, 2/5 /2001, for the Central
Business District from 4:30 to 5:30 PM. The meeting was held in the large conference room and
was attended by residents, business owners, landowners, and potential developers of the site.
Representatives of the Parks and Planning Commissions were also present at the meeting. A list
of those who signed in at the meeting is enclosed for your information.
The meeting began with a short presentation of the history of the Central Business District concept
to date and was then opened for general discussion. Several issues were discussed at length:
• Residents are concerned about the heavy traffic on 4akgreen Avenue and the pressing need
for the County to undertake improvements to 4akgreen Avenue. The County has tied this
project to the River Crossing project in the past and would require 211 feet of right -of -way.
• While the overall Central Business District plan has support, many questioned whether the size
of the "downtown" area is too large. As a concept plan, the Master Plan is intended to serve as
a guide for future development and could be amended to expand housing development and
limit the size of the downtown area.
• The "market" should be the driving force of the project, determining the future development of
the property. The City's role was in planning for the development of the property. Now the
market should respond, and it is. Sigsted Carpets is expected to submit an application to
construct their new facility along 60 Street this spring. A proposed housing development is
currently being developed by Valley Senior Services Alliance, Dominion, and Rottland Homes.
The group expects to present a proposal to the City this spring.
• Tax Increment Financing or other financial assistance provided to developers will determine
whether or not the housing is "affordable" ($150,000 for - sale). Affordable housing was seen as
a desired element of the plan, but without City assistance in the form of TIF or other financing
housing would be built for sale and/or rent at market rates.
• The Design Guidelines for the Central Business District allow for higher density development
than is allowed in other areas of the City. While Design Guidelines exist throughout the City,
the CBD Design Guidelines encourage site design that is pedestrian friendly in a more urban
than suburban style.
Please contact me with any questions you may have at 439 -4439.
TREE CITY U.S.A.
t
zt4-
•
Cit Of
Oak P ts
.o
;te 14168 Oak Park Blvd, Box 2007 Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 • (651) 439 -4439 • Fax 439 -0574
Meeting Attendance
Central Business District Worksho
February 5, 2001
4:30 -5:30 PM
Large Conference Room
S :•
.. .- ... :.i.: .{!{,::: },:. :t„ � •:i /..�.. ,•r< > }y:... :.F ...'�'�: `:.:;�>:,- '•�.::�::: .• } }: C
t ? {;� {:�!f.:
::: - ...c• v .. : :. .,. M ':., } } • : . ;.: ii: v .4: .v.:. -: ..,t.i is i.... �{.. ir':J'y ... . to
• -: •... '. .,. � ...::::. - .: yi':' :' .. .'.:.. � . + :Y ; :: ,, •, .}:Y.: ... { K'C:,� -„ 4.: , S ,. F .• .'....d F' .T� :{v'<�.;t>:•:
.. .....
:r ...
.. ..,.... -. - ... -. qpp A ... , .i. n ... .. .. ..r .. .. .. ... .... ...... .... .... �:: '' +......t ..v v•. +F i�YF4'!r" � �':Rf ... .f{.`�.,,. :Jri.: v: ::i "i:.:' .. F..I..r
... t... 4..,,}. rr... r. S} Sa.,.:.... r: c•. �:.,..}T S} YdtrT Sko}:.'•> Y.i 4 >t:•T>9+r >::o£F } »S'-•£. :y}>�£,{ - ..;,,;., .. ,.. ,,. 4. �;:: ✓;: • ^r; k. ., ..:i:-r: } }2::'% ;� { :k •. ': x..._ :,.
>,. t . strr`} w;;>:t•} Yt}>:}}; :• }:,;.::.,.:...si.�+b }£:Y }t??� ,�Yfi+}.�ac£>f,!c>� , + s: »ra# '�•�` {4� � ,k �����•''��%Y}���a���� <`4r :; `�3,'asrs xt'
Tim Nolde
Wallace Johnson
Mark Moilanen
J. Michael Noonan
Dustin Kern
Sue Boardman
Barry Boardman
Linda Pilgreen
George Murray
Marcia Murray
Pat Estes
Dave Schaaf
R .. .... - : . , t2tYyyi.,,y{ • . :S;i {y ;ki,:
WN
� tKG:`• Menn:b. : '> � 'rJ`•'r.{S,r.Txt>3'„SA,a ♦!. y i•t .<,, - Y�2}act::;i2 } i::: •'.:a7':'..,. .w,. - .$trn..t i2., {:_
ai£rS;, : { #;+i s .;;;::,3t - %?; s iS ata'1ke� tu. # �"�``' s£i'z. +,�c�Y
David Beaudet
Lynae Byrne
Jack Doerr
Mary McComber
....:•:::::::•::::.::.: is }:.• •,: :: }; �: -:: %. -.:: {...; n={{: r i }.{ ' x!K•X!?4J
..�'. .,. . : : :::. .....: .. ...... ... :.: .. \<£..,.. .. ••,0.." '4t+1, .. . � ,.t.a. ., �'" "'<. . ..... K•4 } }: ,.:.::.Y,:
., .. .. ., . .. ... .. ... .. .... -.. 2�: S � •T ":hf . } a < {< �.
... .. .. .... - .t .. ,t;, lac.. »£: -aR. 2tlt.v72' r; .. ...4 +... :.:.. .. .: :.,a.,... ., FF•`c -�.. <'fi':::;;>:l :; •2i:'
. -:...: ■ °:, t^ .: ° ..::k : • , .'•::: :.., ......w# - ,X.,ct„'..... -C aa., .<... 3Y7: �:,,: ,> ::$: >.:, :tJ • -w w•.Y: ty:.:Y $t+ {" ' 'iC,
:•: -: :,; ..- ..kn'2 .t,..,...0.., :..,. .. ...:. v2.;�:.5;.. t - }:... ✓�•:::5' , }..�t<:;t::.... ....i v %��? S?`. S a, ''tit:,- . {:.i}:; {t•:.:t�
. .. .- .. .. .. .... ... .. �....... .n... �.}. ' ;A :y , : . fi t ,a.,. -,... ,..u, tit,'•: • {.:, ^; V. .. .it.`'.f ..4R- : {.. -. :>t : •::{f. .n'S. .•.:
., �: .. ..- .. ■ .. ., ... :.. r.. Y ..., ....v .... 4 :. .. ,... } y, ...�+..,,...., -.. .5..: a •: :4.
.. .: ., .:.. ., . :,. ,... :. :. .... ,. •:::: >: �. : .ay...,.... i......t�,•, ..» :•.v: � .,2 •T.4i ?:: :};:�5:.. r. .h {: •.{vv. :; V,}. Taa p.•. ' }J::;;:ij { i:<
... .. ., .: ::::. :: ..,..:.. .. :.; ., ,.. < .,.... Cx.n»,4 1}, :. .. }: °•?`.,: ,, ' {� > }}}:;4XJ: '}ha:;:: : '!: ^T }- • : {;O.v - : ht-. .,.G, :>,} :.Yy nS..
.. .. ., ... ., .. .. .. ..:. :..,.y {rl K•: ',.{ . r4 . w s ;:x, . :; }. };
... a n n i n .... .. :. . ■■■ ■■■ ■■•. „ . - :. °:: Y., t.. r :•:: £ . a£ Z•. {: i } ?} . k. , :. i:.:W.. Z .a .. /. °. \[:: ^ v {'{; °a�y�Sv:.i•,' { :: + ^:
........ .... .. .. i..L. :. ....> ::,; ... ,r .,....... .. ...... t%• , ..t?....:.{ ; ., rGv •. -.... >T * Y. r.. Tr}r..v .::,. .:>:.:} 1 -, ,Y{ :'i,2•. > 'EL. .. ). r. }.
....... ...... .... .. ... ... .......,...,, ..... �....Mc ... .,� ..:..J3 JY. ., .. }.... .r{,.. ..}i>: -'�N yy }. •. �. , ::�• }i.a •}:: '.,.Q .::•t}
.,. ............ ... .. .. , ',yt�'pp .:� , ..... ,. ,,?a •J.!: '•.b� .4Xi•`• }e ;.:•x3a .} 3. , .F ' >n .
::., :.:.,u,A3},ln..>,,.,sY. Y,.vrd J Fyn.,. 5?. ar :Fib { :AA..:aQ)'F.M... �.,:foL`r •.: #� - � t,r... t .. ,•,... v. ra,o..t , ,j .;,>::::: : ^.: ,, . y :: } .. Y '': .'�i a ' btiik•`.$ }:::,, a. y .;cE
.,,:,r h,:r ? N. z� xutA: rr> �J � :. + },4.4. }.,fi;,,.,wb: aim` };�kFalat�c'r#2#•}� },�Lt4• � • �:a4;�; r �')' °` y c Y 't;'!;; �:`:
Chuck Hedlund �• {s..�n:s �� :f<
Mike Runk
George Vogt
, .. ... .- ...� .' .. SY}..w .� : .>M,,S',y'- cY�:;'t¢�t ,:.xK: {: {, °r3T 7rt{ ,:2l, ..k#t`t': • - 'X:' • -):: ';ty::: - =r a:;i ..J.'- :s� +':».iiiS -- -:x
, � atta „a.. !:. .}>.. ,t,a .Gr. , 45>•.... 't -,;K•: <:,: ;•:;: ., ,
�: °- .- }..»:°. , ..,.. „ }: ........:ot' { t,. $q,t�'.: Vii; !.u{: a•: ?:.. �>-,.: f g:'i:'SS >'!;
1.
,
.X. a. -i:•: •:,!:.v t' :,>: •� -i' ..n ° ter F .
, . . .. . ri. ..SY. ' . rn •F• -?,. uX `::i>! U. ;T -Y Y ,. -�: {• .: :>' £+ , t.:� {4$1+2'4
... i -. ..3 .'�'C ...... ., { ,�... , - :..: .'t({.£: '• .:I•,: ...4 • { >::� ,. :;K. }} .l.'•'
........,.:.,..t,.,,..,.Y.. ��C4Yca`6ibb.•RawS`o },. - 's .E . 'q'• ', 6 , t:; ':y:, -' <. .. �c� k. {- .;.4,'h••. y ••� + � j � �� • }s$:� t
Terry Poirier
-:x
.. .... - . .. ...,n... ... ... ... .a. ::�. , :.:nJ�, , ,; .W„ Y - ,. }:•Y ,rt. . : :., .:�• i:4Y:. ..:.}f.:
. ..... ........ .: .Yw. .....- ::.:::,. .. .... .. <3:.K$....,,.£�.: T.:,. ...'.{. .. .., :i� :'t•'•;- 'J :`tA' ,..M'
. ............ ..,.1 }..:.::.,.:.,,.,.. a,:.. : .t. ..., ...... ... .......,v., ., : 4 .., .... .;
..... .............. . . ...... .............. ... : ....,.c {..., -, ..., ..., .a.......2... ,� .4.
. .... .. ....... ...... .... ..t.... ..,... ....- ...........4 ,.. .. rtSF.... .. .t{,�:.,- ::� ^..:.. '•4,•: .. ° - ': - 3' 2 0`.2..::5•'•• F £ �.:
... - ....,.,... ...,: a 3.. ....:.. - , .. (, ...[kw < {;r,., .: {• t :.'3,,'t pity , { };,
... : ....... ...... ... ...... n...t ....,.ah � r . ... 't .£....., .. ° . >...tK,.,.,,.,.,.,- .... tit....::!:: -, •. }�,�� .. >'• � ” ..
., ta.... ..,. ,. ... ........- ' -.... }..... K , .vT::C:.2a�i:::.....,.v :" 3:=r," }: > ^�: '• -:'.- �" 4Y icy. �.
... . .. . .... ... .. .. ............... . . .... .22. ..:. ... .... .. , $ ......< N.. 4 , - -:. .. .Y. x^T^ iYti -:;:: a ._.t{ { v N. i£ ^. }
... .. ..... ..... ... r. /•�}
............ .. .. . ... ... -..,. .,......,.. ...., x,. ,...t ..,, a ... -... �..
-- .- ..,.. \,....,......A.... T.... \....:4,,,,..>.R•} .,..,..ah,t, •. v /. ,.. ... � ., .:. ..\ :.... .. .} " .: •:: �{ °': tt :!�' �, � .. .i, \. � ,,,`,,£, Yom' >.•: K 9
..... n,T.Tfd ^��>`v, ,4 . ::.; ,.... , .... •;:^ x., }.,. ` -: }:.. ,,: }w.t,'.4:4,T,.+,.'�3•,: ,- :.�.,. :,.,.,�i, ..;£ •£}t, t 't!t<tA:,
t»3„>.....,.. �. ba' �i�xd>} :
,..,.r ... . ... ..... ... ..
Tom Melena ON E..
?. Y: ..: ' � . •• i.t.{.. , ya»>F �.a'�is>is�
.•X� >S:4SR•,: �:av T7>`.• }R•»xcin fro6.�e•�`?iii.'•:oPY`Yi�tr£ };,w '� }: ^°
Lindy Swanson
Kris Danielson
Julie Johnson
Kim Kamper
TREE CITY U.S.A.