03/16/2015 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,March 16,2015 6:30 o'clock p.m. canopy. Weir stated while some of the trees are dead,every healthy Big Woods has dead and diseased trees, which provide food for the native woodpeckers and insects. Weir stated while the plan does help preserve the prairie, it punches a hole in the Big Woods along the site's northern border and in the center of the woods. Weir stated the Big Woods in this area are more significant because of the contiguous canopy to the north. In addition,the neighbor to the immediate south has put his land into permanent conservation, which makes these woods even more significant. Weir stated she was hoping that they could avoid the big cul-de-sac in the woods by utilizing the old driveway and perhaps dropping the homes down somewhat. Weir stated once the woodlands have been cut,they will not be of great ecological value. Weir stated while replanting is very nice and will fill it in with lots of trees, it is likely they will plant pines and spruce,which are things that do not belong in a Big Woods. Weir stated she also looked at some of Orono's Codes, specifically Section 78-1631, Conservation Design Ordinance, Purpose and Intent. Weir noted that section describes what a significant tree stand means and that this 15-acre section exceeds this standard. In addition, Section 78-1635 covers the basic conservation design master plan requirements and evaluation criteria. Weir noted that section requires the protection of significant tree stands and woodlands that support scenic and/or ecological goals, including mitigation of any such stands to be impacted by development activities. Weir stated it is impractical to mitigate a maple/basswood Big Woods by planting hardwood tree saplings since the mitigation would have to be extensive, managed for invasives, and protected from development for a minimum of 100 years. Weir stated most people, when they build a house, like light and they cut trees to achieve that. Weir stated there needs to be justification and mitigation of any negative impact. Weir stated this development would have a significant impact to an ecological community. Section 78-1635 lists the basic conservation design master plan requirements and evaluation criteria. Among other requirements is that the development results in no negative impact of ecological communities of Ecological Management Categories 1 and 2; results in no negative modification of any ecological communities as described by the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System; and establishes, maintains and improves native ecological communities, including natural and semi-natural areas to provide wildlife habitat and support natural ecological functions such as drainage, filtering, and buffering. Weir stated she would like to point out that the Big Woods were the original land cover prior to white settlement and that the prairie lands were found in the drier lands further to the west and south. Section 78-1637, Performance Bonus Requirements, states under No. 3 that one of the requirements is to improve the ecological grade of existing communities. Weir stated the development sketch does not show an improvement in the ecological grade of existing communities since it clears the heart of the specialized ecology of a 15-acre significant stand of Big Woods. No. 5 states that major preservation or enhancement of existing landmarks should be performed. Weir stated while the landmark of the prairie is preserved, it is entirely at the expense of the more ecologically significant landmark of the 15-acre Big Woods. Weir indicated she is an interested neighbor and that it is hard to see change happen to this area. Weir asked whether the homes will be single-family walkouts. Page 25 of 30