HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.A. Natural Resources Corridor Design Criteria Update
L.A,
CITY OF SHAKO PEE
MEMORANDUM
From:
Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator J!j/
.
Ryan Hughes, Natural Resources Coordinator
On Behalf of the Environmental Advisory Comm ttee
To:
Subject:
Natural Resources Corridor Design Criteria Update
City Council Work Session
Date:
January 22, 2008
INTRODUCTION:
The Environmental Advisory Committee will provide an update on the work completed
for the Natural Resources Corridor Design Criteria and requesting direction from the
Council.
BACKGROUND:
The following provides a timeline of City Council action on the development of the
Natural Resources Corridor Design Criteria:
November 14, 2005 Work Session
Council authorized work to finalize the Natural Resources Corridor Map and to begin
developing the Natural Resources Design Standards Manual.
December 15,2005 Regular Meeting
Council Adopted Natural Resources Corridor Map
February 21, 2006 Regular Meeting
Council authorized the proposal for services from CR Planning to work with the City of
Shakopee to complete the Natural Resources Design Standards Manual. The name
has since been changed to Natural Resources Corridor Design Criteria to be consistent
with its intent and terminology used in City Code.
DISCUSSION:
The City of Shakopee has a diversity of high quality natural resources, natural systems
and natural features that serve as the City's "green infrastructure." These resources
comprise Shakopee's natural heritage, provide critical functions that sustain the
developed portions of the City and shape the character of the City. While infrastructure
sustains the community, it is not inherently self-sustaining. Like the rest of Shakopee's
infrastructure (roads, water and wastewater systems, public buildings) green
infrastructure must be considered within the subdivision and development process, and
maintained via routine public investment.
Page 1 of3
The Natural Resources Corridor Design Criteria are divided into sections addressing
specific natural features that were the basis for the composite Natural Resources
Corridor map:
Section 1: Lakes and Streams
Conserve water quality, provide flood control, retain and enhance the plant and animal
communities associated with these ecosystems, and provide recreation and open space
for people.
Section 2: Wetlands
Conserve wetlands and the critical functions they provide in the ecosystem for water
quality, flood control, habitat, recreation, and open space.
Section 3: Woodlands
Conserve the various size woodland patches and reduce woodland fragmentation to
better sustain ecosystem functions.
Section 4: Upland Vegetation
Conserve the remaining native upland vegetation areas and encourage restoration
efforts to take place to connect isolated, naturally vegetated locations.
Section 5: Wildlife Habitat
Conserve existing wildlife habitat corridors and allow restoration efforts to connect these
isolated areas.
Section 6: Endangered and Threatened Species
Conserve the ecosystem upon which species classified as endangered, threatened, or
of special concern depend for survival.
Section 7: Steep Slopes and Bluffs
Conserve steep slope and bluff areas that help shape the community character for
future generations.
Section 8: Recreation
Enhance recreation to allow residents an opportunity to gain an appreciation for natural
resources.
Section 9: Accessibility/Infrastructure
Utilize existing infrastructure components of the City as part of the Natural Resources
Corridor system.
Section 10: Connectivity
Ensure recreational or natural resource connections between areas that do not have
connections with natural features.
The Design Criteria are intended to address connectivity issues. This requires
conserving or restoring natural features and the functions and connections they have to
other natural features.
Page 2 of3
A copy of the presentation is attached. A paper copy of the draft Shakopee Natural
Resource Corridor Design Criteria will be at the work session.
VISIONING RELA TIONSHIOP:
The Natural Resources Corridor Design Criteria appears to meet the following aspects
of the City's vision:
Goal:
High Quality of Life
Active and Healthy Community
Strategies:
Protect the Environment
Foster Community Connections
Enhance Physical, Mental, and Spiritual Health
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Direct the Environmental Advisory Committee to begin the process for the City to
adopt the Natural Resources Corridor Design Criteria.
2. Direct the Environmental Advisory Committee to complete revisions to the Natural
Resources Corridor Design Criteria and then begin the process for the City to adopt
the Natural Resources Corridor Design Criteria.
3. Direct the Environmental Advisory Committee to request a future work session to
discuss the progress on the Natural Resources Corridor Design Criteria.
4. Direct the Environmental Advisory Committee to discontinue work on the Natural
Resource Corridor Design Criteria.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative 1.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Direct the Environmental Advisory Committee to begin the process for the City to adopt
the Natural Resources Corridor Design Criteria.
Page 3 of3
Natural Resource Corridor Design Criteria
January 22,2008
6:30pm Council Chambers
City of Shakopee
1. Discuss Meeting Outline (2 minutes)
a. Staff Report
b. PowerPoint Presentation
c. Implementation
d. Discussion
2. Staff Report (5 minutes)
a. Questions
3. PowerPoint Presentation ( 15 minutes)
a. Natural Resources Corridor Map
b. City Vision
c. Design Criteria:
i. Lakes and Streams
ii. Wetlands
iii. Woodlands
iv. Upland Vegetation
v. Wildlife Habitat
VI. Endangered and Threatened Species
Vll. Steep Slopes and Bluffs
Vlll. Recreational Opportunities
IX. Accessibility/Infrastructure
x. Connectivity
d. Implementation
i. Text Amendment to City Code Section 12.24, Design Criteria
ii. Resolution adopting Natural Resources Corridor Design
Criteria
e. Questions
4. Discussion of Natural Resources Corridor Design Criteria (15 minutes)
a. Comments
b. Concerns
c. Questions
5. Direction from Council (2 minutes)
a. Requested Action
Design Gt'it'J~.i.~
. Lakes and Streams
. Wetlands
. Woodlands
. Upland Vegetation
. Wildlife Habitat
. Endangeredlitnd Threatened Species
. Steep SloP&$ and Bluffs
. Recreational Opportunities
. Accessibility/Infrastructure
. Connectivity
Natural Resource Corridor De
Vision ofNatlll1ll.R.esource
Corridors... .
... Product following
scientific analysis
'"..-~,
iAAl_
4~if:;i:.i:~;:;<t;-::,0.::[':':;;;;;,
. Naturala,eso
,",'~
- High QLJ~ .
- Active a
:>,,,,,,"~'''.- f"
Section 1 : tal<
~.Str~~ms
Minimum Buildable Area .
- Sewered ;lnd .~~sewered Jots
. Buffers . 'J"} ."
- Primary and'~econdary
. Create Open Space
. Vegetation Management Plans
. Low Impact Development
. Visual/mpacl Mitigation
"'.
i"I: ~..If'''"'
tV; . .~w. '~,
_'1.J:'\~'~~IJ.r
N./U'a/ ResolrCe Corridor De .
Section 2: Wetlands
. Impacts and Replacement
. Setbacks
. Buffers
. Permanent Protection
· Monuments
H.4.K<JI'EE
Naturat Resource CoiTidor De . n Criteria Presentation
~_ .2008
Section 4: UplandV!)getation
. Preservation
. Buffers
. Restoration
· Conservati~,Easement&
" ,
~ ~~ "~'.
, .... ~ __.....~~,.fi:
~ ., , "
,/. ~ "; '"
Natural R......ce Corridor O. .
Section 6: Endangered arid
Threatened Sp~.eies
Compliance with State Endangeted
Species Statute and Federal Act
H,\KOPEE
NabJfal Re$OlrCe Corridor n CrIteria Presentation
Jonll8<'(2:!.:zooa
Section 3: Woodlands
. Preservation
- Heritage Trees
- Percenta~ of Trees
-Size
. Security for Replacement
. Unauthorized Tree Removal
Penalty
N8tJ.nI Resource Corridor De CriteriaPresentaOOn
Janqary 22, 2008
nCriletla~
22l~
. Preservation Based9n Slope....
- Greater than:,lS%
- Between 1Or18%
- Less than '0%
. .. .and Erosion Potential
- Highly Erosive
- Low to Moderately Erosive
U,\KOPEE
Neuel RnoUfce Corridor Design Criteria PreHntation
J......-y2:!.:ZOOS
Section 8: Recreational
Opportunities
. Conformance with CQmprehensivePlan
- Park, Trails,~nd Open Space Plan
- Natural Resource Plan
. Ensure Publ.ic Access to Corridor
Section 1
. ProvideCo
- Trail Ea~
- Outlots
- Conserv
- ParkL8n
. Restoration.
H...."orH::
Easem~nts 11III
dication
~:..
_11""""'00 Coni"'"
Clitorta~
Jonu;uy 22. 200ll
M_-.d.. I
~h;,::.;:va~ bUlfef$l!~~.,)(tll'fl'ltmprtsolb~Me ~~"ltJto.~.... (rn""3. a\
Ih:oII.D...pCr&....
c..._,.d_
E..___
.....
I:..~
iRoq.a..~e'-
V.,.'_n"n,"~.lp'''v.od..
_----l:'~_...""ffi,
Lsu.--.l =~;:, ~"~:;,
~~.:;"'.wu K>q-.d
'lVll4fe
H."...,
yIJpl=.,
s..., 1\o<p>o"dk.
Sl.,.._d """"'0.1
~_.-
~..dl<-""" h<>t.t",~""""~"",,,,,,_Q~oi
I,.. p~",.d~,,"_~e.'
NOlh~:dOCl
Hn'"9"'.,j
F_".',,,,!,,~
~~'~:r:::~""'
: NJI..q,,,..ci,,,,1l>t
belf..
r:."'"""rJ
ll-.l......Ju..."'.J."..
~..&"'''oo,~,,_~~<><<>lIobob.:l.
En.<':..~'~l ..,.:,::..~~,;,~~~d~::",..
. ...,(c,~~., ;"_OQ;J,..":j'~i.j "'~~ " ",,:,~~,~^~,-..j
>0'. ""
Section 9:
Accessi bilityllnfrastructure
. Compliance
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Comprehensive Plan
- Engineering Design
. Utilize Easements
. Provide Access
H""l.lI'H;
--T~-
^~-
:..-=-
I~ .,,=-
~-
--
,-
_n ~~
_.~
f.......,..
6i1 11_ 11_::;'::: VI'
~,...
-
r------
~ ._~.
"--
~_,w_..~.~
. - . " l::';'~_~
. ,w ,_ ,_ '_-=- -"=._
on ,_ '_--"""- ":'_~
t . ----
f \I~';::.:~-.
L:;'..':'
,,~~ "" '-'IJ N_ N_ 11_
1__ __
_n-!"'w..ool_ ...___._....-."':""'.-..-....
-"'"~..... ...._--l'_.._~_......__~_..O
. ;..J.",,;,~:
CoII.ervftloltf:.,lIIrIeIIfl
Sever3;~' ttle O~S>9n C COlen.' '"-1'."~' .", ,~,', ,-"., ~:'. ,., "~ ~: [C, l' "Do ',.,J r1 I)/(le' [0
pcrrr.,)neot1ypro!C(tltJe 'lJtwlllr Jtur, -~I'. t~I".,,,,,. '0'''': 1,.-., "t...., 'I.. ,"('~rl! XlDllCCbU'
lU'Olll.e"'~M"e3~ell"lent'
l........
...-
?n.":Z~~~'"...t<,'
- ~ ~~~~~~'::."j .
Wildlif.
HolKt..
M'"I b. ';,;~'oJ,;,~~)~\"'" ."..
VUpI~
"-
S1_:.:.r._.
H.gl-.qu.do.'Y".gt:"""'"''
U,ff"'.ondo.F.... ,-"'.
.;. :1.'!t-.,;'"~::..i!:;-= =_A ~~.j
OJ
~"ll -:'.
)II! :
StNp SIof>>I M>d BhA'h
Many otltle n-.,raltellture' 'n(UJe steep slopes 1)/ b uits T~e 'ol._"lt..t,le """m/lI'lles
h...... ~lofIe "nd S(oIfJf1p <01lH 11I1~ "'~,~ ....11...,.,-11,,"'...'
l'Jodo,...lo:p"'....e.c-.d
.-_".r... ol.b"" "...~..
b.d.uodo:d...10f'od
~So.lo
No
do:;"~or.t
~."tl.l",'i""_
P",o:.. :"i~".ci
lmp.""m~ .mU" oowI...-,~
B..........g...,,""J_...dlo
"20"1. 't.tJ.< .,,~~... S..
,--
Wo>d...tlf
E<OO1I.So;I,
h,.II.~ '-"~ b. .",.".,od
."~,,-">l,,,,',,,.a'_
"~-':~~
~..i:'.~~~
No
cl.:t.::....t
~...tJo.. >nd.o<l>,,1. .",.B<!.d
..2Yloo..lq-.,tl,...~..
to ..,d ~1C'1.,J .
B,......... ",'-"I blond ,",0
.lop"_'aCof'-.c'n'QP
d.JOr..~~B"""
""3"""-;.~~,:::-:';""'~.oil
tJo...t-1*""d.'_
"'~.....d.. ....."""'""gh
qo,.",,"'........_=
__.~"lo;~~:? ~
Viouol
rl.Of<_of
r.:~
~.. 0:........ 7
u~ ~~:'
;,.... ~
'"
A<:;knowledgements
Thank you for your time and opportunity to
presentthe work completed by the
Environmental Advisory Committee on the
Natural Resource Corridor Design Criteria
l!,\~OPI!
Nattxa! Resource Corridor De . n Criteria Presentation-
January 22, 2008
.....-""'*-~
"ltd__,,_'~,,_~~t!.lill;jJ:__~ ,,,, .:~.d,j
.._.J~',,~'~ JIi! ill o. " . ~.
;......:~
s....-y. and ......._/1'1' Pun.
T'lelol~c'>art:>arm~":e-;.......,,,rcrt,y.:;,:a1-,'-T"'.;'
[I.."iI" C'~""3
T.,.al.J'Ln
l:=-': V.gttal>""'_.o.>l..F......,b"~" .1.11"'....,~~~....g<<d"'t I
VU,I-=..,
}P! 5J."Q. '.:;,=:,.~':"'~~''''' ~,otl....d I I
I
D2:~~~:~::~:~~"':~~~.: \
. 't-;~..::.~'~::~:~~:~~: u. ~"l'~ldOl' n.,,,,, .,,,.'rt I
~:;~T:;;;:;~::f:';,:;::;;i::;;L"~,,,. ;"=-1,
...........
..4l1oo_-...I
Sr-i_
Implementation
.,~ . .' ,
. Subdivision Regulations..
,
. Section 1:~;24 Text Amendment
. Resolution Adopting Design Standards
. n Criteria Presentation
an,,"ry 22,200&
Discussion
and
Council Direction
IL\KorU:
Natlnl Resource Corridor De n Criteria Presentation
January 22. 2008
me a e -
Grass Lake ~ U i ~
~ - %i ~ ~ ~ ~~~~V
~
\ "1
--~1 / ~ - ' ~ ~
I ~ ~'~"'x9~ Blae Lakre
I a ~ ~~s: ~ 's ~ ~ ~ :cam. ~ ~ y?-~
0 ~ Stmnks Lake i .'_~j°°~,,/ ~ r' M`. [I_ ~ I-. 16 'I,. _l
( _ ~ ~ J y r \ ~R~. ~ Rice Lake ~ \
ax Ys
1 3 ~
~.1 y' y Vii. ? r \ ~ d z. 1 ~ •
i ......r' fit. :a
i iK r - - "s
~
'
i r''-~~~ din cr.: a' I ~!~`~`"I A- ,
I ~
/ %1 ,:.,,~~'..'y',.. t ~ ~ ~ P`?' v.. k, ..gip 'a f , ~ 'm"° ~ ~ ..a a-; e '','I
` F tt~ j w~ 9y I ~ t, 7 t y~ ~ ? . - - y 7 i .
;R' ~ ~ ~ F s I [k ~ ~ ~ a ^.r w ~ I ~ ~q 1"_ k u v Ir..~\ 6 _ - I , ,1 ~`I.f
~ I -s ~ 1S
~I R f ~w I I~ ~ ~ ~ .I ~k ~ ~ I ~ L ~ Pike~~ ~ ~ ~ R"'~ i ~I..•,
/ ~ ! Ir ..f;Iw~#~,rti~ I - L ~i \ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 9 ~ ~ ~ ; i I ~ ~ •4``~ ~ . _ R I ~
-.v~ `°i 169 5~1:- e;R~~r~4~y{ I O'Dowd~Lake `7y ~-t`~~ o
.J e'.~-; t.a i
+ Y~ a t ~ F'j7 J'S tEi I ~ 'r ~ i
0.'u. Y W. ~ + J F I
i
~ ~~r
~ ~ ~~~\I ~ ~ ~ i~ LEGEND
t ~~~`f { ~ aT~ole Lake ~ II~,.~ 41a I tm -I
~ ti• - Ir,~' ~ v~ ~~~j CORPORATE BOUNDARY
J~_~ - ~ i, ~i. ' °4'` CORRIDOR PRIORITY RANKING
s yt Schneid \r Lrake I j.- - ~ TRAILS
r I - '=r,~ ,,-V,1~,~~:;~i r I+.. II GOOD
l,% ' ~ I r 'i EXISTING
- I _
~i r~~ - ----s."~~a.a~ -1----~ C f ~I +Ifie ~ r w- dLake `s~ BETTER PROPOSED
~1 A:A~lil»~~. -_-ram- l3i :U~i
I, M.~;~.,,.~,:~..t'~,_.; _ .f BEST ~ WATERBODY
• I 1- BUFFER
N I:-t"J STREAMS
Natural Resource Corridor Map j CORRIDOR CONNECTIONS ROADWAY
December 2005 PARK AND OPEN SPACE
SHAKOPEE
coH\IL'vlrrP6mes~n~cetss~ 0 1 2 4 ~
ij, Miles - `~r, ~
i
i t , I
I
x _
Al3EJl9fi OQL ~ QRGC41`~tZ~.TI,`3I~J ~ F1EL~.iS ~ , ; ~t~ ~ ~ T I1:~ c-a
-1 ~y
l
','1
a`'~ "
S ~-r
'
r ~ 6 ~e ' - qt i.
~ IIF •.6s. i ~ y
wm w ~
You are here: Carbon Sequestration 7e,~rc~strr<~i Se:quesfration
Fossil Energy
Clean Coal & Natural Gas Terrestrial Sequestration Research
Power Systems Vegetation and soils are widely recognized as carbon storage sinks. The
Carbon Se uestration N~idS
q global biosphere absorbs roughly 2 billion tons of carbon annually, an - " •-"xN.=....~.
Hydrogen & Other Clean amount equal to roughly one third of all global carbon emissions from > Energy Department
Fuels human activity. Significant amounts of this carbon remains stored in the. Awards $66.7 Million
roots of certain lants and in the soil. In fact, the inventor of carbon for Large-Scale
Qii & Natural Gas Supply & p Y Carbon Sequestration
Delivery stored in the global ecosystem equals rougiy 1,000 years worth of annual
absorption, or 2 trillion tons of carbon. Project
Natural Gas Regulation
> More Related News
U.S. Petroleum Reserves Another important area of research in terrestrial sequestration is the
development of technologies for quantifying carbon stored in a given ~a~y~ET
IN °CO€3R STATE ecosystem. Should the United States and other nations one day adopt a
carbon emissions trading program, high precisions and reliability in these > National Energy
measuring techniques will be necessary, Technology
Select a State Laboratory Web Site
Terrestrial carbon sequestration is defined as either the net removal of > Database of Carbon
CO2 from the atmosphere or the prevention of CO2 net emissions from Sequestration R&D
the terrestrial ecos stems into the atmos here. Projects
d3FFICE FACIE.ITIES Y p
Enhancing the natural processes that remove CO2 from the atmos here pB~~AM OOtdTACTS
Select a Field Site p
- - is thought to be one of the most cost-effective means of reducing > Sean Plasynski
atmospheric levels of CO2, and forestation and deforestation abatement National Energy
efforts are already under way. R&D in this program area seeks to Technology
i EMAIL, UpTES increase this rate while properly considering all the ecological, social, and Laboratory
economic implications. There are two fundamental a roaches to P.O. Box 10940
Register to receive Fossil pP
Energy NEWSALERTS by e- sequestering carbon in terrestrial ecosystems: (i) protection of U.S. Department of
malt. ecosystems that store carbon so that carbon stares can be maintained or Energy
cea;+ increased; and (2) manipulation of ecosystems to increase carbon Pittsburgh, PA 15236
sequestration beyond current conditions. 412-386-4867
C~E3IOIL REFEREN'`E > Jeffrey Summers
' Fossil Energy Project Data This program area is focused on integrating measures for improving the Office of Fossil Energy
International Activities full life-cycle carbon uptake of terrestrial ecosystems,including farmland {FE-24)
' R&D Commercial Successes and forests,with fossil fuel production and use. The following ecosystems U,S. Dept. of Energy
Fossil Energy Site Map offer significant opportunity for carbon sequestration: Washington, DC
20585
Forest lands. The focus includes below-ground carbon and long- 301-903-4412
term management and utilization of standing stocks,understory,
ground cover,and litter.
Agricultural Hands. The focus includes crop lands, grasslands,
and range lands with emphasis on increasing long-lived soil
carbon.
Biomass croplands. As a complement to ongoing efforts related
to biofuels,the focus is on long-term increases in sail carbon and
value-added organic products.
beserts and degraded lands. Restoration of degraded lands
offers significant-benef(ts and carbon sequestration potential in
both below-and above-ground systems.
' Boreal wetlands and peatlands, The focus includes
management of soil carbon pools and perhaps limited conversion
to forest or grassland vegetation where ecologically acceptable. c
The program area is being conducted in collaboration with DOE's Office of
Science and the U.S.Forest Service of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture.
Page owner: Fossil Energ~,~ office of Communications Page updated on: August 01, 2005
~C133: 1~,~~~itt' liut~>c ~"'~'f
~~~nms~r a~,,.sa~~,aY ,-,:as
t?.S. Geparfirnent of Energy ~ I.OOO Inde~3c:n-tence Fave., 5631 ! 4'Ir '~inz~lon, t?C~ 10585
1-8o0-dial-DOE (FJ2o2-586-~~G'.3 ~ e{GpneraE Con[:az.t
Ytteh I7oiicies ~ ~!o Fear Act ~ Sste ~#ap j Pri~ytacy ;Phone Bbok i Entpioyment