Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-01-05 Evironmental Quality Commission Meeting MinutesAGENDA EDINA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MONDAY, JANUARY 5, 1976, AT 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL Roll Call. Approval of the November 24, 1975, EQC Minutes. III. Old Business: A. Minnehaha Creek Cooperative Projects. IV. New Business. A. Hennepin County Solid Waste Management Proposal. 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, JANUARY 5, 1976 EDINA CITY HALL I. Roll Call: Ronald Hays Donald Johnson James Poehler Cliff Johnson John Telfer Paul Mucke James Bentley II. Approval of the November 24, 1975, EQC Minutes. Mr. C. Johnson moved approval of the November 24, 1975, EQC Minutes. Mr, Mucke seconded the motion. All voted aye. III. Old Business: A. Minnehaha Creek Cooperative Projects. Mr. Larry Kelley, President of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Board of Managers, and Mr. John MacClennan and Mr. John Holmquist of Hickok and Associates, engineers for the District, appeared to review the cooperative projects. Also in attendance were approximately 30 residents living adjacent to the Meadowbrook Marsh area. Mr. Kelley explained to the EQC the past history of the cooperative projects noting that such resulted from petitions submitted by the effected municipalities approximately two years earlier. He explained that a preliminary feasibility report was prepared for the projects in April, 1974, a hearing was held in the fall of 1974, and final plans for the projects were completed in October, 1975. Mr. Kelley noted that the District was now prepared to move on with the work of completing DNR permits and implementing the projects. Mr. John MacClennan thereupon reviewed the cost/benefit analysis and trail place- ment for the Meadowbrook area project, as was requested at the November, 1975, EQC meeting. Mr. MacClennan distributed a copy of the cost/benefit analysis conducted by the District. He noted that based on a 20 year amortization period, the total cost of the Meadowbrook area project would be $13,393.88/year. Total benefits, based on estimated usership by canoers and hikers, was calculated to be $24,090.00. Mr. MacClennan noted that this resulted in a benefit to cost ratio of 1.8:1 for the Meadowbrook area project. A total initial cost of $60,000 was anticipated. Mr. Robert Hanson, 29 Circle West, questioned the initial cost of $60,000, noting that a cost of $120,000 had been estimated at one time. Mr. MacClennan noted that the $120,000 cost included the construction of bridges in the Meadowbrook Golf Course which were not included in the present estimate. Mr. Hanson also questioned Mr. MacClennan regarding the number of days conoeing on the creek would be possible as a result of the proposed water control structure at Lake Minnetonka. He noted that this had Obvious implications as to the feasibility of the Meadowbrook project. Representatives of the Watershed District and residents of the Meadowbrook area there- upon discussed at length the number of canoes now using the area. Mr. MacClennan noted that canoe use after improvements to the creek was difficult to estimate. He noted, however, that such canoe use would have little effect on the feasibility of the Meadow- brook project in that it was largely walker-oriented. 1-5-76 EQC Minutes, page 2 Mr. Hays questioned the method used to estimate projected usership of the proposed Meadowbrook area nature center. Mr. MacClennan responded that usership was based on comparisons with other similar facilities. Mr. Hays asked if surveys were conducted in the area to ascertain usership. Mr. MacClennan responded that no such surveys were conducted. Mr. Sheldon Rockier, 24 Circle West, asked Mr. MacClennan about the estimated cost of the proposed trails in the Meadowbrook area. Mr. MacClennan explained that the floating boardwalk is estimated to cost $25.00 per lineal foot and the cinder path less than $3.00 per lineal foot. A number of residents of the Brookside Apartments who were in attendance expressed concern about vandalism and misconduct which would occur as a result of the increased public use of the area. They also noted that the wildlife of the area would suffer as a result of the project. Mr. Kelley noted that Wood Lake in Richfield is a similar facility to that proposed for the Meadowbrook area. He noted that Wood Lake personnel report no unusual vandalism problems to surrounding properties. Mr. Hanson and other residents of the area pointed out that Wood Lake is fenced and locked at night and is staffed by full time employees. They noted that Wood Lake and the Meadowbrook area were not comparable in this regard. Mr. Kelley further noted that environmental assessments prepared for the Meadowbrook area concluded that wildlife populations would not be adversely effected. Following discussion regarding the role of the City of Edina in the decision making process for the cooperative agreements, Mr. Kelley noted that the Watershed District had been most cooperative with the City in the past. He noted that all lines of communication regarding the project had been extended and were still open. He further assured the EQC and concerned residents that the Watershed District would not undertake any project of which the City was not in full agreement. In response to a question from the audience, Mr. Kelley explained that all the cooperative projects proposed would be financed by the Watershed District's one mill levy. He noted that the costs for the projects would be assessed over the entire District and that creekside residents would not pay a higher rate. Following further discussion, Chairman Bentley asked the approximately 30 adjacent residents attending the meeting for their recommendations regarding the proposed project. It was the consensus of the residents that proposed trail and canoe facilities were totally undesirable in that their privacy would be lost, property values would decrease, and the present quality of the area would be lost. Mr. MacClennan asked permission to review the alternative trail placements in the vicinity of Circle West in that such alternatives were requested at the November EQC meeting. The EQC agreed. Mr. MacClennan thereupon explained three alternatives to trail placement in the Circle West area. He noted that the original proposal which would follow the property lines of the lots on Circle West would cost $16,750.00. A trail alternative which would cross the small bay extending toward Circle West would cost $24,750.00. A third alternative which would run across the back of the lots on Circle West would cost $16,250.00. After discussion concerning the proposed trail placement, Chairman Bentley asked if any of the residents would use the trail if constructed. It was the consensus of the residents that they would not use the trail. 1-5-76 EQC Minutes, page 3 Mr. D. Johnson moved that the EQC recommend denial of the walking trail, canoe landing facilities and,trail centers proposed for the Meadowbrook area on the basis of the relatively low benefits derived from such improvements and the fact that the City has already provided an excellent opportunity for a nature center in Bredesen Park. Mr. C. Johnson seconded the motion. Mr. Telfer noted that reference to Bredesen Park in the motion was not appropriate and asked that it be deleted from the motion. Mr. D. Johnson and Mr. C. Johnson agreed to such a deletion. Mr. Kelley reminded the EQC that the City had in fact requested improvements to the Meadowbrook area in the petition prepared two years earlier. He noted that the Watershed District was attempting to respond to that petition. He further noted that to date no objections had been raised to the proposed projects by the City of Edina or by its representative on the Minnehaha Creek Governing Committee. Mr. Kelley also urged the EQC to realize that the residents attending the meeting all had very special personal interests in the Meadowbrook project and were not necessarily representing the best interests of the general public. In response to Mr. Kelley, Mr. Hays reviewed the petition signed by Edina and noted that the City generally agreed to a nature center concept for the Meadowbrook area. He cautioned the Watershed District that the City's approval two years ago did not obligate it to approve a specific plan for the area. He also noted that the motion before the EQC does not rule out other improvements to the area such as wildlife ponds, nor does it negate the general requests of the petition signed two years earlier. Chairman Bentley recalled Mr. D. Johnson's motion to recommend denial of the proposed walking trail, canoe landing facilities, and trail centers in the Meadowbrook area on the basis of the low benefits derived from such improvements. All voted aye. IV. New Business: A. Hennepin County Solid Waste Management Proposal. Mr. Hughes presented a letter from Mr. John Derus of the Hennepin County Board regarding the County's solid waste management proposal. Mr. Hughes noted that this letter as well as a hearing held in December were designed to receive input from municipalities and others regarding the County's proposal. Mr. Hughes reviewed briefly the proposed Hennepin County facility which would use solid waste to generate steam in the central business district of Minneapolis. Such steam would be sold to a variety of businesses. He also briefly reviewed the resource recovery proposals of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and Hoerner Waldorf, as well as the Citizen's League Report on solid waste management in the metropolitan area. Mr. Hughes recommended that because of the complexity of the various resource recovery proposals, a committee comprised of members of the EQC and Recycling Commission should review the proposals in order to answer Mr. Derus' letter and to recommend an official position on the Hennepin County proposal. Mr. Hughes also presented his recommendation for the Hennepin County proposal noting that this could be used as a starting point for the committee. 1-5-76 EQC Minutes, page 4 A short discussion followed between the EQC and Mr. Robert Reid and Mrs. Nancy Grimsby of the Recycling Commission regarding the Hennepin County proposal. Mr. Hays and Mr. D. Johnson volunteered to serve on a committee to study the Hennepin County proposal. Mr. Reid and Mrs. Grimsby noted that the Recycling Commission would select two members for the committee at its next meeting. V. Reports: A. Committee Reports - None. B. Watershed District Proceedings - None. VI. Other Business: - None. VII. Others Wishing to be Heard - None. VIII. Adjournment. Mr. Telfer moved adjournment of the January 5, 1976, EQC meeting. Mr. D. Johnson seconded the motion. All voted aye. Meeting adjourned. GH:ln