Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-10-27 Evironmental Quality Commission Meeting MinutesAGENDA Edina Environmental Quality Commission Monday, October 27, 1975, at 7:30 P.M. Edina City Hall I. Roll Call. II. Approval of the September 29, 1975, EQC Minutes. III. Old Business: A. Final Plans for Minnehaha Creek Cooperative Projects. IV. New Business: A. Minnesota Environmental Quality Council Proposed Rules and Regulations. V. Reports: A. Committee Reports. B. Watershed District Proceedings. VI. Other Business: VII. Others Wishing to be Heard. VIII. Adjournment. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION HELD MONDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1975, at 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL I. Roll Call: Barbara Casselman Clifford Johnson John Telfer Donald Hays Paul Mucke Donald Johnson Virginia Scott Astrid Wang II. Approval of the September 29, 1975, EQC Minutes. Mrs. Scott moved approval of the September 29, 1975, EQC Minutes. Mr. Mucke seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. III. Old Business: A. Final Plans for Minnehaha Creek Cooperative Projects. Mr. Hughes presented final plans for the cooperative projects of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. He noted that these projects include improvements to the Meadowbrook Area, dredging in the 44th Street area, improvements to Utley Park, portage trails at 54th Street, and rock dam renovation west of France Avenue. He recalled that the environmental assessments for the projects had been reviewed at the last EQC meeting. He noted that no decision had been made by the State EQC regarding the assessments. Mr. Hughes noted that several residents of the Meadowbrook area had expressed concern over the plan for that area. He introduced Mr. Robert Hanson of 29 Circle West and asked him to explain the concerns of the neighborhood regarding the proposed nature center. Mr. Hanson introduced several of his neighbors who were in attendance: Mr. and Mrs. C. P. Stitt (28 Circle West), Mr. Sheldon Rockler (24 Circle West), and Mr. and Mrs. John Dow (26 Circle West). He noted that several other homeowners not in attendance had also expressed concern. Mr. Hanson explained that the Meadowbrook area home- owners were concerned that their properties would be threatened by the proposed trail placement. He noted that the trail bordered the property lines of several homes on Circle West which would increase the threat of vandalism and decrease home values and privacy enjoyed by the home- owners. He further noted that the proposed nature center would not be staffed and would be unsupervised. Mr. Hanson also pointed out that it would be very difficult to police the nature trails in that access would be difficult. Mrs. Scott questioned the potential of vandalism, noting the apparently adequate situation surrounding the lakes in Minneapolis. Mr. Rockler responded that he had previously resided in the Minneapolis lake area and had experienced serious vandalism and house-breaking problems. He noted the potential for similar problems in the Meadow- brook area. Mrs. Casselman inquired as to whether an alternative to the proposed trail were possible. Mr. Hughes explained that it may be possible to 10-27-75 EQC Minutes, page 2 place the trail on a floating boardwalk and thus move it further into the marsh and away from the homes on Circle West. He explained that such a change would approximately double the length of floating board- walk required. Mrs. Casselman asked for the Circle West residents' opinion of such a change. All generally agreed that the entire elimination of the trail would be most desirable but that the proposed redesign seemed to be a workable alternative. Mr. Mucke moved to accept staff's recommendation for trail placement. Following further discussion, Mr. Hays inquired as to the number of individuals projected to use the facility. Mr. Hughes responded that such projections were not available but that benefit/cost ratios had been computed as part of the preliminary study. Upon reviewing the ratios, Mr. Hays noted that more infoLmation regarding the use of the Meadowbrook area was desirable. He moved that repre- sentatives of Hickok and Associates be invited to the next EQC meeting to explain the projected use of the Meadowbrook area, provide cost estimates for trail redesign, and review the other projects proposed in the city. Mr. C. Johnson seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. IV. New Business. A. Minnesota Environmental Quality Council Proposed Rules and Regulations. Mr. Hughes presented the proposed rules and regulations of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council regarding environmental impact statements. He explained that the proposed regulations would replace regulations currently in effect. Mr. Hughes noted that the proposed regulations differ from the existing regulations as follows: First, environmental documents (i.e. assessments and EIS's) need not be pre- pared if the proposer of the action has obtained all necessary govern- mental peLmits; second, the agency responsible for the action decides on the necessity of an EIS. Only when its decision is contested by another agency or by at least 500 citizens does the EQC review and decide on the matter. Formerly, all such decisions regarding EIS preparation were made by the EQC. Third, an "EQC Monitor" will be published periodically listing all pertinent notices regarding the EIS process. Mr. Hughes noted that the proposed regulations appeared to be an improvement in that the State EQC would not consider local issues as extensively as before. Mr. Hays questioned whether the proposed regu- lations would actually be an improvement. He noted that "local" had not been adequately defined. Mr. Hays also stated that the private developer should be respon- sible for bearing the costs of environmental documents. He noted the system in the State of California whereby private developers pay a fee based on a sliding scale for the purpose of financing EIS preparations 10-27-75 EQC Minutes, page 3 by public agencies. It was his opinion that such EIS's should not be prepared by the developer in that the document may not be objective. Mr. Hays also disagreed with the section of the regulations which allows the public agency to decide on the necessity for an EIS. He again noted the lack of objectivity concerning such a decision. Mr. Hays also explained to the EQC some of the prodedural problems associated with the EIS process. Mrs. Casselman inquired as to what action the EQC may take in this matter. The Comildssion agreed that a letter outlining the EQC's criticisms of the regulations should be forwarded to the State EQC as well as Edina's legislative representatives. Mr. Hughes was asked to draft such a letter for the next EQC meeting. V. Reports: A. Committee Reports - None. B. Watershed District Proceedings - None. VI. Other Business: A. Mrs. Casselman asked that all EQC members be reminded to contact staff at 927-8861 in the event they cannot attend an upcoming meeting. B. Mr. Telfer reported that he had received an inquiry as to the City's policy regarding replacing trees lost to Dutch Elm disease. Mr. Hughes agreed to check on the policy. VII. Others Wishing to be Heard. - None. VIII. Adjournment. Mrs. Scott moved adjournment of the October 27, 1975, EQC meeting. Mr. D. Johnson seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. GH:ln