Loading...
11-26-2001 (Joint meeting with Environmental)Joint Meeting between GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION and OPEN SPACE & RECREATION COMMISSION Minutes November 26, 2001 Present: Environmental Commission — Richard Baker, Alicia Brown, David Fellman, Sue Hess, Alan Kuentz, Jessica Roe; Open Space and Recreation Commission — Liz Elder, Jim Johnson, Linda Loomis, Roger McConico, Lance Ness, Jerry Sandler, Jim Vaughan, Tom Zins City Staff: Mary Anderson, Mayor; Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works; Rick Jacobson, Director of Park & Recreation; Al Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator; Jeff Oliver, City Engineer; Tracy Pharr, Administrative Secretary Absent: Dawn Hill, Environmental Commission; Charles Cahill, Open Space and Recreation Commission I. Call to Order Meeting called to order at 7:00 p.m. II. Approval of Minutes for Environmental Commission — October 22, 2001 No changes. MOTION: Moved by Fellman, seconded by Roe, approve the minutes of the October 22, 2001 meeting as submitted. III. Approval of Minutes for Open Space & Recreation Commission — October 22, 2001 No changes. MOTION: Moved by Sandler, seconded by Elder, approve the minutes of the October 22, 2001 meeting as submitted. IV. Discussion Regarding Respective Responsibilities of the Ouen Saace & Recreation and Environmental Commissions, and Clarification of Positions on Areas of Perceived Overlap Loomis stated that this Agenda Item was part of the reason the Environmental Commission requested the Joint Meeting. Kuentz quoted Item "D from the Environmental Commission's charge, "Develop and make recommendations on management practices for the City's nature areas, public and private ponding areas, and other such city -owned properties as directed by the City Council." He commented that this seemed like and Open Space item. He wanted to know what the roles of the two commissions are. Loomis stated she had spoken with Mayor Anderson, and thought that having a joint meeting once or twice per year was a good idea, just because of the overlap. She stated that the Open Space Commission was not solely concerned with the environmental aspect of areas, but had to consider the recreational aspects as well. Roe asked if there had been any "situations" where the Environmental Commission had a concern about something the Open Space Commission was doing. Loomis stated there had not been an issue thus far. Baker recommended copying the Chair of each commission on the other's meeting minutes. He then asked if the Open Space Commission had concerns on how the City's funds are spent. Jacobson answered that the Open Space Commission works with the fees and charges for the recreation program, and the capital improvements for the park system. He stated that every year he reviews with the Commission the status of the current year's CIP, items like playground equipment, ball fields, paving of trails, etc. Then, the Commission is given an opportunity to give input for the next year's CIP. Sandler asked what happened when the Environmental Commission recommended something for funding. Oliver responded that the Commission is responsible in the same manner for the Stormwater CIP. Baker stated that he felt there was need for a process by which the Environmental Commission could make funding recommendations. Jacobson gave an example of commission input with the stormwater ponding in Hampshire Park that was part of the 1998 street reconstruction. He commented that Oliver came to the Open Space Commission with the concept of creating this pond, explained the pros and cons and sought the input of the Commission. Clancy added that had the Environmental Commission been established at that time, their input would have also been sought for that issue. Mayor Anderson asked about the Natural Resources Inventory. She asked Clancy to comment on the responsibilities at the metro level and city level. Anderson asked what the City's plan would be, and how it would relate to others. Clancy responded that the City was still doing a lot of study on what we want the inventory to be. She stated that this would be a good opportunity to evaluate how our natural resources are being managed. She commented further that this would be another area of common interest for the two commissions. Baker added that the inventory could also trigger an order of prioritization of potential open space for the City. Mayor Anderson asked for a description of the inventory. Lundstrom answered that the discussions revolved around what should be included in the inventory, what the expected output could be, developing a maintenance plan for exotic species, deciding where funding should be spent. He stated that the commissions can help prioritize and make recommendations to the Council as to what type of money should be spent on which exotic species and where. Lundstrom read (from the October meeting minutes) the items selected for the scope by the Commission. He concluded by stating that the natural resource inventory includes two components — the scope of the inventory and subsequently, the management plan for the natural resources. Jacobson commented that perhaps the Environmental Commission could participate in the parks tour taken by the Open Space & Recreation Commission each summer. MOVED by Baker, seconded by Hess, with motion to share Commission minutes, be aware of when there might be issues that the other commission would perceive as an overlap (to make sure that we consult with the other commission in those circumstances), and to hold joint meetings twice per year. Zins asked if parallel motions were required since two separate bodies were in attendance. Mayor Anderson stated that would not be necessary. Zins requested to amend motion to hold joint meeting once per year. Baker agreed to the amendment. Motion was so amended. MOVED by McConico, seconded by Zins, with motion to vote as one body. The motion carried unanimously. Original motion by Baker carried unanimously. V. Discussion Regarding the Development of Pond Buffer Zones in Parks and Open Space Areas Clancy commented that in the City's Stormwater Management Plan contains a recommendation of developing buffer zones around ponds. As staff, the City would like the support of both commissions if this procedure takes place in Golden Valley. Lundstrom added that the Stormwater CIP does identify buffer zones in Brookview Park for the Pavement Management Program in 2003-04. McConico asked for the definition and pros and cons of buffer zones. Oliver responded that a buffer zone is, typically, a non -maintained area upland of the normal water level, usually a 15 -foot border. Pros are control of geese adjacent to water bodies, filtering nutrients and sediment that cause water quality problems, i.e., phosphorus, soil stabilization and erosion control. Clancy added that buffer zones also help keep children away from the ponds in parks, helping to define the separation between passive and active playgrounds. Baker asked about the loss of useable space being a concern. Clancy answered that at Brookview Golf Course this could potentially be an issue. Jacobson added that loss of useable space would have to be taken into consideration on a case-by-case basis. Oliver pointed out Hampshire Park, a swampy area changed into a passive recreation area, as a positive example. Clancy added that buffer zones do not necessarily mean less work, just different work. Ness commented that it seemed the maintenance was more beneficial in the natural ecosystem versus typical mowing and spraying. Clancy responded yes. K] Kuentz asked for the sequence of events surrounding the buffer zones with the Pavement Management Program. Clancy responded that a consultant (with a biologist and landscape architect) would work with the City on design; feedback would be sought from both commissions; neighborhood open houses would follow. VI. Discussion Regarding Paving Trails and the CIP Baker felt that with the commissions differing viewpoints, discussion might be useful on this topic. Mayor Anderson commented that the Council had requested the Open Space Commission look into the paving of trails. Loomis added that when staff recommends paving a trail, they come to the Open Space Commission for input. She pointed out erosion concerns, recreational access for residents and maintenance issues, i.e., plowing and mowing as considerations for paving trails. Baker asked about alternates to asphalt. McConico asked Baker for an example. Baker responded recycled plastics or boards. Jacobson commented that residents consistently request year-round access to trails. He continued that some alternatives could actually be environmentally unfriendly, like gravel eroding into streams. Loomis stated there are always tradeoffs. Sandler stated that he was not aware of other acceptable alternatives. He felt that it would be a good area for the Environmental Commission to pass on this information to them. It was agreed that this information would be relayed in commission meeting minutes. VII. Discussion Regarding Water Quality of Sweeney Lake Loomis requested this agenda topic. She asked about the boom on the Schaper property in regards to the water quality of Sweeney Lake. Clancy responded that the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission did water quality studies on all water bodies within the Commission's jurisdiction. MnDOT is responsible for installing a water quality device in Schaper Park to protect the quality of Sweeney Lake. They have been having trouble getting someone to manufacture this equipment. Currently, installation is scheduled for this winter. Baker asked if this was a permanent device. Oliver responded yes. Baker asked why the responsibility fell to MnDOT. Clancy answered that it was an agreement with the Lake Association and MnDOT in response to construction of Highways 100 and 394. Clancy continued that the City is also in discussions with MnDOT about removing some deposited sediment in the Schaper ponds. McConico asked about Theodore Wirth Lake. He wondered if the City does anything with its water quality, or if this was handled strictly by the Minneapolis Park Board. Oliver answered that the City of Golden Valley is involved in a minimal way, but that the lake does fall within the jurisdiction of the Minneapolis Park Board. The City's participation is mainly through the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission. Clancy added that the Minneapolis Park Board owns this land. She continued that periodically the Park Board would ask the City to assist when issues arise. Clancy 4 � � 1 noted that the same approach, though more successful, is taken with the City of Plymouth for Medicine Lake. VIII. Natural Resources Inventory Grant Application Update ➢ Discussion Regarding Exotic Plant Eradication — Discussed as a part of other agenda items. Loomis asked if anyone had additional comments. No further discussion was requested. . IX. Other Business Items of Other Business: ➢ McConico requested the names and addresses of both Commissions' members be provided to each Commission. ➢ Jacobson noted the Meadowbrook Community Center Open House would be on Thursday, November 29, 2001 from 5:30-7:30 p.m. ➢ Ness requested a correction be made to the October 22, 2001 Open Space & Recreation Commission meeting minutes. He commented that at that meeting he had made a request to staff to look into the possibility of a recreational youth hockey program for next year. Loomis stated the minutes would thus be amended. Jacobson to pass this information on to Van Sloun. No additional business was addressed. X. Adjourn The next scheduled meeting of the Environmental Commission will be on December 17, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Pharr Administrative Secretary Department of Public Works 5