Citizen's Environmental Quality Committee

Jan. 4, 2021 Citizens Environmental Quality Committee Winona, Minnesota 55987 Dear Committee Members: The next meeting of the Citizens Environmental Quality Committee meeting will be held virtually on Thursday, January 7, 2021 at 4:30 p.m. We will be using Zoom to video conference, with a call in option as well. To access Zoom: Join Zoom Meeting: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85610993614 Passcode: 55987 Optional Call in: +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) Meeting ID (Web and call in): 856 1099 3614 1. Call to Order 2. Review of November Meeting Minutes 3. Community Garden Planning Update (15 minutes) 4. Boulevard Planting Policy Code Discussion (15 minutes) 5. Emerald Ash Borer Treatment Update (10 minutes) 6. Sustainability Planning update (5 minutes) 7. Other Business (5 minutes) 8. Adjournment Sincerely, John Howard Natural Resources Sustainability Coordinator CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES DATE: Thursday Nov. 5, 2020 TIME: Scheduled for 4:30 pm (Virtual Zoom Meeting) PRESENT: Dan Hall, Niki Ciulla, David Schmidt and Julie Fassbender GUESTS: Scott Sherman STAFF: John Howard, Katie Grannes (Community Forestry Corps) 1. Call to Order: Call to order at 4:31 PM by Dan Hall (Chair) 2. Review and Approval of Oct. 2020 Meeting Minutes: Motion by Julie, second by David, approval unanimous. 3. Community Forestry Corps Update: Katie Grannes is serving as a Community Forestry Corps member with the City. She began her term at the end of September and will serve through August 28, 2020. She provided a brief summary of the program, which is new this year. Her main focus is on updating the tree inventory of City trees. She has visited approximately 3,600 of 11,250 City owned trees. Katie is also working on invasive species removal projects. She will also look in to uses of wood from emerald ash borer killed trees, and tree planting in the spring and summer. Julie asked what threats face our existing tree canopy. Katie stated that people are likely the main threat followed by emerald ash borers and possibly Dutch elm. John added that beavers are an issue for some trees near Lake Winona. David asked if invasive species projects would focus on oriental bittersweet. Katie says that is the focus thus far, and is guided by the county. She has done some buckthorn work as well. Julie asked for Katie’s contact information, which John will include in the minutes. Katie’s email: Kgrannes@ci.winona.mn.us. Dan asked if David knew of other tree related issues/diseases. John noted tar spot disease in maples, which Katie says tend to be worse in Norway Maple. David clarified that tar spot disease can sap energy, but is not likely to be fatal. Frost damage is another threat, but emerald ash borer is the major one. David noted that urban tree protection and replacement is a multi-year effort. Dan shared an example of how Dutch elm disease destroyed his childhood neighborhood tree canopy in Chicago. 4. Prairie Restoration Grant:  John described that he is pulling together an application for prairie restoration in some bluff park areas. The grant funding would come from the Conservation Partners Legacy program. Dan asked for clarification on whether this application would work on areas identified in previous discussions with the CEQC and Planning Commission. John said this grant application would not apply to the proposed savannah restoration near Garvin heights, but is akin to the prairie restoration begun at Sugar loaf in 2018. Dan wondered what herbicide is likely to be used for the efforts? John stated garlon/triclopyr would be the most likely herbicide. It is what the City commonly uses for invasive species efforts. Julie asked for the grant monetary ask. John said the ask is around $14,000 and would include clipping and treating of invasive species, some reseeding and controlled burns. David wondered about the contractor, and if it would be Conservation Corps of Minnesota? John said they will be asked about the project, and would likely be the best cost option. Some local vendors will also be informed of the contract opportunity. David is finding that contractors bid about $1,800-2,000 for an initial round of treatment for prairie restoration. 5. Aghaming Park Plan: Julie asked for a summary from John on the park plan. John said that the plan is concise, and was largely developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The plan calls for limiting bike and vehicle use to official trails. Some habitat work is also proposed. David asked for details on which areas will be open to vehicles and bikes, and John was unable to provide specifics due to his limited knowledge of the existing trails in Aghaming. John said the plan is included in for reference, and in case the CEQC wishes to make specific comments. Individual members are also welcome to comment on the plan. Julie noted that the comments are being directed to the City. John clarified that although the plan is mainly developed by the U.S. FWS, the City is handling comments due to a more difficult process of handling comments on the federal website. Dan brought up the interesting situation where Aghaming is in Wisconsin, but owned by the City of Winona. David said this is an advantage of leasing the land to the Corps. John noted that the USFWS has issued some violations for dumping. Dan asked if the CEQC would like to comment on the plan as a group, or would be leave up to individuals to comment. Consensus is to leave commenting up to individuals. David noted that a separate commission of qualified people worked to develop the recommendations. 6. Sustainability Planning Update: John described that the sustainability planning committee met in the previous week, and reviewed a request for proposal (RFP) for technical consulting services. John said the sustainability planning committee felt the City’s asks were overly ambitious for the allotted budget, but the GreenCorps member with the City would be in a position to help fill any gaps. Dan asked if specific topic areas were already determined. John stated that the proposal lists 5-6 general topics: recycling, waste management, food production, transportation, energy use and natural lands management. Overarching above these will be the impact of climate change on the topics, and vice versa.  Julie asked about the composition of the steering committee. John said the members include Niki of the CEQC, Neal Mundahl of WSU, Nathan Engstrom (WSU sustainability coordinator), Anne Morse of the County, Allison Quam of the Winona Pollinator. Staff will also be involved including the city manager, Planning Dept. staff, Outdoor recreation coordinator, GreenCorps member Kelsie Travers, Katie of Community Forestry Corps and John. Julie wondered about the cost. John said the project is constrained by budget of about $50,000 for the technical consultant. John does not know where proposals will fall in total cost. Based on his knowledge, some other city’s plans ran about $80-100,000, although Red Wing did a smaller update for around $15,000. Julie said this is still a good amount of money, and she thinks a lot can be done within the budget. 7. Other Business: Julie discussed a proposal to have a liaison to the mayor from the CEQC. Julie wrote up a proposal, which was shared electronically (included at the conclusion of the minutes). A member of the CEQC would schedule 30 minutes with the mayor and serve a term of four months as the liaison until passing it on to another CEQC member. Scott Sherman, the mayor-elect for 2021-2024, voiced his support for Julie’s proposal. Mr. Sherman finds advisory committees to be very informative and helpful. Mr. Sherman asked about the CEQC’s views on being a subcommittee of the Planning Commission. Dan and John provided some history on the CEQC’s efforts to be a stand along commission in 2018. Mr. Sherman also wondered if the CEQC had thoughts on discontinuing the emerald ash borer treatments on ash trees. Katie voiced her thoughts that many ash trees are still in good condition, and would be nice to save if possible. Niki asked about the cost to remove a tree and cost of treatment. She understood the cost of treatment to be about $80. John said this is accurate, and he would estimate the removal cost to be around $600 for a large tree. Dan stated that he is hearing consensus to save the best ash trees rather than allow them to die. David said strategic treatment can go a long way. Dan suggested that Katie could develop a proposal and cost analysis of treatment vs. removal. 8. Adjournment: Meeting adjourned at 5:33. Motion by David, second by Julie. Approval unanimous. Notes prepared by John Howard.  CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 3. Community Garden Planning Update PREPARED BY: John Howard DATE: January 7, 2021 The City’s Park and Rec. department reviewed the list of suggested community garden sites, and reiterated that the East Lake Park site will not be available. The Tillman Park site is also unlikely to be available due to conflicting uses and future park downsizing from levee modifications. The CEQC’s recommended sites at West Lake Park and Sobieski Park are seen as potentially viable, and will be further discussed at a future meeting. Park and Recreation staff also enquired about utilizing private property for community gardens. Does the CEQC have any concerns or issues with utilizing private property vs. a park space?  PUBLIC WORKS 207 LAFAYETTE STREET PO BOX 378 WINONA, MN 55987-0378 507-457-8269 Community Garden Location Recommendations In late 2019 and early 2020, the City of Winona Citizens Environmental Quality Committee (CEQC) reviewed the suitability of potential community garden sites on City property. This initiative was in response to the likely reduction in garden space at the East Recreation Center and the high level of interest in the gardens. When reviewing the sites, the CEQC considered numerous factors including, but not limited to, the following: parking, water access, proximity to neighborhoods, likelihood of vandalism, sunlight, drainage, visibility, the potential for comingling uses, and any use conflicts. Four sites emerged as consensus favorites, and are suggested as future community garden locations. The sites are not mutually exclusive, and the CEQC recommends multiple locations be utilized for gardens. The four sites, in alphabetical order, are East Lake Park, Sobieski Park, Tillman Park and West Lake Park. The specific areas outlined at each site are included for scale and a general use area, but are not definitive location suggestions. For reference, the current East Rec. gardens occupy approximately 16,750 sq. feet. East Lake Park: Pros:  Central location with good visibility  Excludes geese from grazing  Typically drains well  Comingling of uses  Space for 50+ beds  Possible water access via field irrigation  Ample parking on street and in boat launch lot Cons:  Softballs may end up in garden Sobieski Park: Pros:  Near existing garden  Smaller yards in neighborhood, so more likely to meet need  Water and electrical access from building  Community interest and investment in area  Comingling of activities Cons:  Potentially shade from mature trees  Smaller number of possible plots Tillman Park (549 Kerry Dr.): Kerry Dr. Pros:  Sunny  Ground not saturated  Adequate parking  Water access from park building Cons:  Non-central  Low visibility West Lake Park: Pros: Cons:  Central location  Can be soggy and buggy  Comingling of park uses  Playground may be replaced, so use could  No competing uses change  Parking on street or Dacota St. entrance  Near bike path  Water access potentially from drinking fountain connection  Porta-potty within one block  CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 4. Boulevard Planting Policy Code Discussion PREPARED BY: John Howard DATE: January 7, 2021 In the fall of 2020, the CEQC re-initiated a discussion of the City’s boulevard planting policy. Based on that discussion, staff drafted edits (attached) to the applicable sections of City Code. If the CEQC approves of the draft edits, the next step would be to make a motion for the Planning Commission to review the draft code amendments. 25.25 BOULEVARD SURFACING, GRADING, AND LANDSCAPING. (e) Plantings Required. The owner or occupant of any private premises abutting on any public street, road, or alley shall plant grass or have permeable non-erosive ground cover in all earthen areas lying between the private premises and the vehicular Commented [JH1]: More explicitly makes clear people can traveled portion of such public street, road, or alley. Such vegetation or ground cover garden and do things other than grass. “Permeable ground cover” is intended to allow rock gardens and mulch. grass areas shall be maintained in accordance with Section 32.03. (f) Plantings Permitted. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section (e), a property owner in the City of Winona shall be permitted to plant, care for, and maintain gardens plantings on the boulevards and alleys adjacent to their property, subject to the restrictions set forth below. 1. Plantings, except trees, may not exceed thirty-six (36) inches in height at any point. provided that tThe maximumis height of plantings shall not exceed 24 inches within a radius of 30 feet of any intersecting street or alley and 5 feet of a neighboring driveway, as measured on the curb line. and Plantings within a 6 foot radius of any fire hydrant shall have a maximum height of 12 inches. within a radius of 6 feet from any fire hydrant. 2. Plantings must be maintained in such a way that there is no impediment to pedestriansoverhang or encroachment onto the sidewalk, curb or street area. 3. Plantings may include any annual, biennial, perennial flower, ornamental grass, and other plant which is not classified as a noxious weed or vegetable. All gardens shall be maintained in accordance with the provisions of Section 32.03. The planting of any tree or shrub shall only be permitted in accordance with the Commented [JH2]: Not allowed by tree code, so no reason to provisions of Section 25.22(c). imply it is possible. 4. No garden shall be planted on the boulevard without written documentation that the property owner has contacted “Gopher State One Call” for utility locations 48 hours before digging, and has planned plantings which will not interfere with said utilities. 5. The property owner shall take all reasonable measures to ensure that denuded boulevard areas are exposed for the shortest period of time. The intent of this provision is to minimize the potential for erosion of soil and other materials onto adjacent public sidewalks or streets. The property owner shall be responsible for the cleaning of adjacent public streets or sidewalks of any debris or material resulting from the construction and maintenance of the garden. 6. The garden shall not employ any method, such as berms or planter structures, which would serve to either increase or decrease boulevard ground elevations, from those which existed prior to garden construction unless authorized by the City of Winona Engineering Department.. 7. No fence, raised planter box, trellis, statue, bollard, irrigation or lighting system, Commented [JH3]: Fundamentally a planter or box is needed on or any other structure shall be constructed or located on a boulevard by the fully paved areas such as downtown or MU districts, and are being used without issue currently. property owner. Tree supports and protection equipment are exempt from this provision so long as they do not present a hazard to pedestrians or impede road  user sightlines. Planters or planting boxes occupying no more than 25% of the boulevard surface area adjacent to a property, are 2 or more feet from the curb, and in compliance with other boulevard rules are allowed. 8. No broad spectrum herbicides or pesticides may be used in the maintenance of gardens under this section. 32.03 WEEDS (a) "Weeds" Defined. "Weeds" shall mean and include not only such noxious weeds as defined in Minnesota Rules 1505.0751, but also such undesirable, useless, uncultivated and troublesome plants as are commonly known as weeds to the general public and or all pollen producing plants which are a hazard to hay fever sufferers. Commented [JH4]: Includes a wide range of species. Native plants purposely planted and maintained, except thistles and other injurious species, shall not be considered weeds. Commented [JH5]: Should reduce the number of enforcement Ord. No. 3450 05/01/00 Ord. No. 3900 4/16/2012 cases, allow homeowners to defend their practices.  CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 5. Emerald Ash Borer Treatment Update PREPARED BY: John Howard DATE: January 7, 2021 At the final City Council meeting in December, the City Council discussed adding $15,000 to the tax levy to fund emerald ash borer treatment of high value public ash trees. The City Council voted 4-3 against the proposal, so no City dollars were allocated for treatment in this upcoming year. The discussion begins at around the 1 hour and 30 minute mark of the recording should you wish to hear it: https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?v=2769807346608520&ref=watch_permalink The City welcomes individuals to hire an arborist to treat boulevard trees, so private funding may be the only remaining option.