Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-09-29 Evironmental Quality Commission Meeting MinutesAGENDA Edina Environmental Quality Commission Monday, September 29, 1975, at 7:30 P.M. Edina City Hall Roll Call. II. Approval of the August 25, 1975, EQC Minutes. Old Business: A. Environmental Assessments for Minnehaha Creek Cooperative Projects IV. New Business: A. Multiple Residential Density Reduction Plan B. Historic Preservation Ordinance V. Reports: A. Committee Reports B. Watershed District Proceedings VI. Other Business: A. EQC Representative on ECCO VII. Others Wishing to be Heard. VIII. Adjournment. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION HELD MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 1975, AT 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL I. Roll Call: Virginia Scott Cliff Johnson Paul Mucke John Telfer Donald Johnson James Bentley James Poehler Ronald Hays II. Approval of the August 25, 1975, EQC Minutes. Mr. Telfer moved approval of the August 25, 1975, EQC minutes. Mr. C. Johnson seconded the motion. All voted aye. III. Old Business: A. Environmental Assessments for Minnehaha Creek Cooperative Projects. Mr. Hughes presented environmental assessments prepared by the Water- shed District for the headwaters control structure, Oakes Lake, and the Meadowbrook area projects. He recalled that these projects were described in the plan reviewed by the EQC several months ago. He also noted that the assessments were prepared by Dr. Dwain Warner and Dr. James A. Jones. Mr. i-iughes explained that these environmental assessments would be presented to the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council for the purpose of determining the need for an Environmental Impact Statement. He noted that the EQC could if desired forward any comments regarding the adequacy of the assessments to Hickok and Associates. He also advised that comments could be forwarded to the State EOC regarding the need for an EIS. Mr. Hughes stated that the assessments appeared adequate and advised against forwarding a letter to the State in that the decision at this time is between the Watershed District and the State EQC. Mr. Telfer inquired as to the detail of information supplied in the assessments. He also asked if the detailed engineering plans being prepared for the projects would be incorporated in the assessments. Mr. Hughes clarified that the State EQC would make its decision solely on the basis of the environmental assessments as submitted by the Watershed District. He noted, however, that the State EQC could request more detailed information prior to action. Mr. Hays also clarified that the detailed engineering plans would be included in an Environmental Impact Statement if required but would not be reviewed at this time. Mr. D. Johnson and Mrs. Scott noted that any environmental effects of the projects appeared positive rather than negative. It was also noted that the City is, in effect, a proposer of the projects in that it co-signed the petitions requesting the projects. The EQC, thus, generally felt it inappropriate to forward any comments to the State EQC regarding this matter. 9-29-75 EQC Minutes, page 2 Following further discussion, Mr. Telfer moved that the EQC agrees with the facts contained in the environmental assessments and agrees that the proposed projects will have no adverse effects. Mr. D. Johnson seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. IV. New Business: A. Multiple Residential Density Reduction Plan. Mr. Hughes reported that several months ago, the City Council directed the City Planner and Planning Commission to prepare a plan for reducing multiple residential density in the Western, Southwest, and South Edina plan areas. He indicated that the planner had prepared a plan for density reduction and that it had been approved by the Planning Commission and tentatively adopted by the Council. He also reported that the Mayor had requested EQC review of the reduction plan. The EQC thereupon reviewed the plan for density reduction. It was noted that density reduction was based upon such physical features as slopes, wetlands, floodplains, and so forth. Mrs. Scott noted that density reduction especially in the southeastern part of the City could alleviate traffic related problems and also the preponderence of multiple family dwellings in this area. She also noted that control of commeLeial developmni_b could be more important in improving the southeastern area. Mr. Hughes noted that density reduction will not necessarily produce better developments from an environmental standpoint. He pointed out that in some cases it may cause more undesirable results. The EQC recalled the development problems of Krahl's Hill and the Vic- torsen property and discussed the effects of the density reduction on the proposed developments of these properties. Mr. Hays and Mr. D. Johnson agreed that density reduction was not warranted from an environmental viewpoint. Mr. C. Johnson stated that the Council had requested that densities be reduced as a result of their interpretation of the wishes of the public. He felt that the EQC should accept this premise. He moved that the density reduction plan as recommended by staff be approved. Mrs. Scott seconded the motion. Mr. Hays pointed out that higher densities in Edina may be more environmentally sound than lower densities. Following further discussion, Chairman Bentley recalled Mr. C. Johnson's motion. All voted aye except Mr. Hays and Mr. D. Johnson. Motion carried. B. Heritage Preservation Ordinances. Mr. Hughes reported that the City Attorney had prepared an ordinance establishing a Heritage Preservation Board as well as an amendment to the zoning ordinance allowing the establishment of heritage preservation districts. He further explained that the Heritage Preservation Board and naming Commission would recommend 9-29-75 EQC Minutes, page 3 to the City Council areas which should be designated for preservation. Once designated, a permit would be required prior to any alteration to the property in the heritage preservation district. Mr. Hughes explained that according to the ordinance, the EQC could participate in the process of designating areas for preservation. He recommended approval of the ordinance but recommended that the ordinance be amended to allow the EQC to be represented on the Heritage Preservation Board. Mrs. Scott noted the need for such preservation ordinances. She also noted the expertise of Mr. Mucke in the area of historic preservation and hoped that he would be included on the Board. After reviewing the past recommendations of the EQC regarding the Heritage Preservation ordinance, Mrs. Scott moved that the EQC endorse the proposed ordinances and recommend that Ordinance 802-A be amended to allow the EQC to be represented on the Heritage Preservation Board. She also noted the particular expertise of Mr. Mucke in this field. Mr. C. Johnson seconded the motion. All voted aye. V. Reports: A. Committee Reports. Mrs. Scott reported that the Beautification Committee had agreed that inasmuch as the Park Improvements referendum did not pass, it would be inappropriate to recommend beautification projects at this time. She reported that the Committee would re-convene at a future date. B. Watershed District Proceedings. Mr. Hughes reported that the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District tentatively agreed to finance one-half of the Lake Cornelia Trail Project. VI. Other Business: A. EQC Representative on ECCO. Mr. Bentley reported that ECCO had requested a replacement for Mr. Mucke as EQC representative. Mr. Mucke indicated that he did not know he was the EQC representative for ECCO. After further discussion it was apparent that the EQC and staff were unaware of any affiliation with ECCO. The EQC agreed that it would be inappropriate for a city commission to have such an affiliation with a civic group. It was further agreed that ECCO should be informed that the EQC is not currently represented on ECCO and does not wish to be formally represented in the future. VII. Others Wishing to be Heard: None. VIII. Adjournment. Mr. Telfer moved adjournment. Mrs. Scott seconded the motion. All voted aye. Meeting adjourned.