Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-11-24 Evironmental Quality Commission Meeting MinutesAGENDA Edina Environmental Quality Commission Monday, November 24, 1975, at 7:30 P.M. Edina City Hall • I. Roll Call. II. Approval of the October 27, 1975, EQC Minutes. III. Old Business: A. Minnesota Environmental Quality Council Proposed Rules and Regulations. B. Final Plans for Minnehaha Creek Cooperative Projects. IV. New Business: 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, NOVEMBER 24, 1975 EDINA CITY HALL I. Roll Call: Astrid Wang Virginia Scott John Telfer Clifford Johnson Paul Mucke James Poehler Ronald Hays Barbara Casselman James Bentley II. Approval of the October 27, 1975, EQC Minutes. Mr. Hays noted that the final paragraph of page 2 contained incorrect information regarding the fee schedule established in California. He clarified that California has such a fee schedule for building permit review but does not, to his knowledge, have one for Environmental Impact Statements. Mr. C. Johnson moved approval of the October 27, 1975, EQC minutes with the correction noted by Mr. Hays. Mr. Mucke seconded the motion. All voted aye. III. Old Business: A. Minnesota Environmental Quality Council Proposed Rules and Regulations. Mr. Hughes presented a draft letter addressed to the Chairman of the Minnesota EQC regarding the proposed rules and regulations for Environmental Impact Statements. He noted that the letter contained the points discussed at the October EQC meeting. These points included definition of certain key terms, costs of EIS's, the role of public agencies, and the scope of the EIS. Mr. Hughes noted that the section of the letter regarding the California fee schedule needed correction in the same manner as the October 27, 1975, EQC minutes. Mrs. Scott moved acceptance of the draft letter with the correction noted above. Mrs. Casselman seconded the motion. All voted aye. Mr. Hughes explained that the letter could be signed by Mr. Bentley, the EQC chairman, or by the mayor. All agreed that Mr. Bentley's signature would be more appropriate. Mr. Hughes noted that the letter would be forwarded to the mayor for his approval prior to sending it to the state. Mr. Hughes questioned whether copies of the letter should be sent to the other individuals. It was agreed to send copies to Edina's legislative represen- tatives, the chairmen of the House and Senate Environmental Committees, and the governor. B. Final Plans for Minnehaha Creek Cooperative Projects. Mr. Hughes reported that he invited representatives of the watershed district to the meeting to explain the projects proposed in the city. He noted that Mr. John MacClennan of Hickok and Associates, engineers for the district, would appear to review the projects but had a prior commitment until about 9:00 p.m. Mr. Hughes noted that Mr. Hanson and Mr. and Mrs. Stitt of Circle West were in attendance and perhaps would like to discuss the proposed projects prior to Mr. MacClennan's arrival. Mr. Hanson showed the EQC several photographs of the rear yards of properties on Circle West affected by the proposed trail in the Meadowbrook area. He reiterated the concerns of the residents on Circle West regarding the threat of vandalism and loss pf privacy. Following further discussion, Mr. Bentley suggested that the EQC move on to other agenda items until Mr. MacClennan's arrival. All agreed. 11-24-75 EQC Minutes, page 2 IV. New Business: None. V. Reports: A. Committee Reports: None. B. Watershed District Proceedings: Mr. Hughes reported that the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District authorized payment of $5,000 to the City for the 1975 portion of the Lake Cornelia Trail. C. City Tree Replacement Policy. Mr. Hughes recalled that the EQC inquired about tree replacement at the October meeting. He reported that the City does not presently replace boulevard trees lost to Dutch Elm disease, Oak Wilt, or other causes. Mr. Hughes noted that Mr. Rosland, the Director of Parks and Recreation, agreed that a tree replacement policy was needed and would assist in preparing such a policy for EQC and Park Board review at a future meeting. VI. Other Business: A. Mrs. Scott recalled that the EQC had not as yet established criteria for reviewing projects brought before the commission. She noted that such criteria were still necessary and should be pursued. She questioned Mr. C. Johnson regarding the criteria used by the Planning Commission. Mr. Johnson explained the comprehensive plans used by the Planning Commission as well as density and other standards specified in the zoning and subdivision ordinances. Mrs. Scott also questioned the possible need for limiting growth in the City. She noted that many of the desirable features of the City could be lost as a result of future growth. Mr. Hays recalled that a Governmental Commission had been established some time ago to study Edina's future. He questioned whether that Commission had produced a final report and conclusions. Mr. Hughes reported that he believed a report had been submitted to the Council but he did not know its status. Mr. Bentley suggested that a committee be established to study the concerns expressed by Mrs. Scott. All generally agreed. Mr. Bentley asked for volunteers to serve on the committee. Mrs. Scott, Mrs. Casselman, Mr. Telfer, Mr. Poehler, and Mr. Bentley volunteered to serve on the committee. They agreed to meet on January 8, 1976. B. December Meeting Date. The Commission agreed to reschedule the December 29, 1975, EQC meeting to January '5, 1976, due to the holidays. VII. Others Wishing to be Heard - None. After a short discussion, the Commission agreed to recess until Mr. MacClennan from the Watershed District arrived. 11-24-75 EQC Minutes, page 3 IV. B. Final Plans for Minnehaha Creek Cooperative Projects - continued. Mr. John MacClennan of Hickok and Associates appeared at 9:00 p.m. to discuss the cooperative projects. Mr. Hughes explained to Mr. MacClennan that the Commission was particularly concerned with the location of the• proposed trail in the Meadowbrook area and the projected usership of the proposed nature center. Mr. MacClennan showed on an aerial photograph the general location of the Meadowbrook Trail in the vicinity of Circle West. He explained that he was unable to show the exact location of the trail at that time. Mr. Robert Hanson and Mr. and Mrs. C. P. Stitt, residents of Circle West, questioned Mr. MacClennan about the possibility of trespass onto their properties and vandalism. Mr. MacClennan noted that the trail would be placed on a floating boardwalk and would be separated from the properties by a strip of marsh. He felt that this would impede any attempts to leave the trail in the vicinity of Circle West. Mr. Hanson and Mr. and Mrs. Stitt stated that the trail nevertheless appeared too close to the properties. Mr. Hughes asked Mr. MacClennan as to the possibility of moving the floating boardwalk easterly such that it would cross at a narrow point of the bay extending toward Circle West. Mr. Hughes noted that this would apparently reduce the threat to the Circle West properties. Mr. MacClennan explained that the floating board- walk requires some support from marsh vegetation to prevent structural damage. He felt that the location proposed by Mr. Hughes would not adequately support the boardwalk. After further discussion, Mr. MacClennan agreed to investigate alter- natives for the trail placement such that it would be farther from the homes on Circle West. Mr. Hays asked Mr. MacClennan to explain the benefit/cost analysis for the Meadowbrook area. Mr. MacClennan explained that the Meadowbrook area was combined with improvements to Gray's Bay and Oakes Lake for analysis purposes. He also explained that the analysis was based on a formula for annual participation developed by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. A 20 year use period was assumed. Mr. MacClennan noted that the benefit/cost ratio was 1.8:1 for the three projects combined for analysis. Mr. Hays stated that more information regarding benefit/cost seemed necessary prior to EQC action. Mr. C. Johnson stressed the importance of reviewing such information before advising the Council on the Meadowbrook area. Mr. Hays and Mr. C. Johnson asked that Mr. MacClennan present the data used by the Watershed District in preparing the benefit/cost analysis. Mr. MacClennan agreed to present the data at the next meeting. Mr. MacClennan, thereupon, reviewed the remainder of the projects proposed in Edina. These included dredging in the 44th Street area, canoe landings, portages and picnic facilities at Utley Park, portage trails at 54th Street, and rock dam renovation west of France Avenue. Following a short discussion regarding the remainder of the projects, Mr. Hays moved that Hickok and Associates be asked to present alternatives for trail placement in the Meadowbrook Area and data on benefit/ cost analysis for the next EQC meeting. Mrs. Scott seconded the motion. All voted aye. VIII. Adjournment. Mr. Mucke moved adjournment of the November 24, 1975, EQC meeting. Mrs. Scott seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried.