01/19/1999 - 00002304CITY OF FRIDLEY
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING
JAN UARY 19, 1999
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Sielaff called the January 19, 1999, meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Brad Sielaff, Rich Svanda, Jack Velin, Peter Panchyshyn,
Rosalie Landt
Members Absent: None
Others Present: Julie Jones, Recycling Coordinator
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 15, 1998, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY
COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Panchyshyn, seconded by Ms. Landt, to approve the December 15,
1998, Environmental Quality & Energy Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SIELAFF DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
NEW BUSINESS:
a. Consideration of Curbside Recycling Proposals
Ms. Jones explained that two proposals were received on January 15, 1999, for
curbside recycling services. A proposal from Waste Management, the current
contractor, was for $1.96/unit/month. The other proposal from BFI was for
$2.12/ unit/month for single family and $1.40/unit/month for multi-units. On an
annual cost basis, Waste Management's proposal costs about $8,000 less. She
warned, however, that because of the way the County SCORE funding policy
works, the City would also lose more SCORE funding under the Waste
Management option. She explained that staff continues to have service
problems with Waste Management and plans to recommend that the City change
contractors, providing that BFI will maintain the existing collection route system.
She also explained some additional benefits of the BFI proposal.
Mr. Sielaff stated that besides what contractor they recommend, the Commission
also needs to decide on recommending a two-year or a three-year contract.
The benefits and risks of a three-year contract were debated by the Commission.
MOTION by Mr. Velin, seconded by Mr. Svanda, to recommend that the City
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES
JANUARY 19, 1999 PAGE 2
accept the proposal from BFI for curbside recycling services for a three-year
term.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SIELAFF
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
b. Review of Lake Pointe Center Alternative Urban Areawide Review
(AUAR)
Ms. Dacy explained the history of the Medtronic development proposal for the
Lake Pointe Center. She stated that after the EQE reviews the AUAR, the
Planning Commission will review the AUAR on February 3, 1999, and public
comments are taken until February 10, 1999. She explained the reason for the
AUAR as opposed to other types of environmental review. She stated that
clearly the greatest environmental impact of the project shown in the review is
the level of traffic. Proposed rerouting of Bridgewater Drive was discussed as a
point of concern.
Mr. Svanda expressed concerns about the adequacy of proposed storm water
ponds regarding water quality and quality effects on Moore Lake.
Mr. Sielaff stated he shared the same concerns and questioned what kind of
protections the City has regarding protecting the water quality of Moore Lake.
Ms. Dacy stated that both the Six Cities and Rice Creek Watersheds share
oversight of the area being developed.
Ms. Landt noted a contradiction in number 11 on page 12, noting that there are
areas of special concern nearby.
Mr. Sielaff asked why water conservation interests were not addressed.
Ms. Dacy clarified that there is adequate water supply for the project, but agreed
that water conservation measures could be pursued.
Mr. Sielaff questioned how the City can encourage or regulate traffic levels from
the development.
Ms. Dacy explained that the parking ramps are a huge expense for the company,
encouraging them to seek mass transit, car pooling, biking options, etc.
Ms. Dacy further explained that even without the Lake Pointe development, the
Highway 65/Lake Pointe intersection would be beyond capacity by the year
2010. Due to the need to expand Highway 65, Medtronic's engineer is
investigating a plan to widen Highway 65 without filling in Moore Lake.
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES
JANUARY 19, 1999 PAGE 3
Ms. Dacy stated she would make note of all the Commission's concerns and
questions and would attempt to get answers for the Planning Commission
meeting.
c. Formulation of Comments on Anoka County Solid Waste Master Plan
Mr. Svanda summarized his view of the plan, stating that it contained few new
ideas.
Mr. Sielaff agreed that he felt the same way after reading it.
Mr. Svanda stated that the County should be encouraged to hold household
hazardous waste collections until the year-round facility is operating. He stated
he would also like to see some quantifiable goals for county government facility
recycling (see Section VII, p. 1 of 9- Regional Outcome #2).
Mr. Svanda stated that he would also like to see the County do more than
provide information annually to schools and businesses (see Section XI, p. 1 of
2 - Strategies).
Mr. Sielaff stated that he felt the County should select a priority material to focus
on and maybe develop a new method of conveying information to the public. He
suggested that the County consult the OEA to identify ongoing trends.
Ms. Jones stated that she would e-mail the Commission's comments immediately
following the meeting so that they could be reviewed at the 8:00 a.m., January
20, 1999, Anoka County Board Waste Management Committee meeting.
d. Discussion of Year 2000 Goals & Objectives
Mr. Sielaff questioned the timeline of submitting suggestions for the year 2000
goals and objectives to Council.
Ms. Jones explained that it was her understanding that staff would be submitting
its recommendation to the City Manager in February. She was unsure if the
Commission would still have an opportunity to make recommendations at the
February meeting.
Mr. Sielaff decided to attempt to brainstorm potential projects for staff to bring
forward. Potential 2000 projects that were discussed included:
• University Avenue/Central Avenue beautification
• Consideration of Phase II Clean Water Partnership investigation
• Increased involvement/attention to storm water issues.
• Continue studying waste management options for the City.
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES
JANUARY 19, 1999 PAGE 4
Try and settle on a theme (i.e. "buy recycled")
Increased public education on recycling
2.. OLD BUSINESS:
Due to the lateness of the hour, Mr. Svanda suggested postponing all other
agenda items until the February meeting.
Mr. Sielaff suggested that staff first give a brief update on the closing of the
Recycling Center.
Items postponed until the February meeting were:
Old Business
Continued Discussion of Plans to Review City's Solid Waste Management
System
Continued Discussion of 1999 Work Plan
Other Business
The Living Planet Report
Update on Springbrook CWP Project]
Update on Wellhead Protection
Update on EcoTeam Program
a. Update on Recycling Center Closing
Ms. Jones reported that the Recycling Center is closing January 30, 1999.
Plans to conduct monthly collections of various problem materials are still being
worked out. So far, the City has not been able to obtain a proposal for scrap
metal due to poor market conditions.
Mr. Sielaff asked for clarification of future plans for the site/building.
Ms. Jones stated that staff is exploring the possibility of tearing down or burning
down the recycling center building as a fire training demo.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Mr. Svanda, seconded by Ms. Landt, to adjourn the meeting.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SIELAFF DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE JANUARY 19, 1999, MEETING ADJOURNED AT
9:38 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES
JANUARY 19, 1999 PAGE 5
Julie A. Jones
Staff Liaison