Menlo Park City Council Email Log

[ Home ] [ City Council ] [ Search ] [ 05/06 Archive ] [ 07/08 Archive ] [ 09/10 Archive ] [ 2011 Archive ] [ Watch City Council Meetings ]

EQC Meeting Minutes re: Well in Nealon Park.

From: domainremoved <Elizabeth>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 16:00:46 -0700

For your information and consumption - of particular note Action's 1, 2 & 3.

Elizabeth Houck

B3. Discuss the Environmental Quality Commission’s Previous Recommendation
City Council Regarding the Construction of a Potential Well on City
Property that
Could Provide Irrigation to the Sharon Heights Golf Course, City Parks, and
School Attachment

Ruben Nino, Assistant Public Works Director, gave a presentation to the
and Robin Driscoll, representative from the Sharon Heights Golf Course, was
present to
answer the Commission’s questions.

Public Comment

Paul Kick stated that he does not support the proposed project and is
against the
installation of a well in Nealon Park or in any of Menlo Park’s other

Mary Kuechler stated that she does not support the proposed project and
that she finds
the City’s project review process confusing. She also noted that she
applauds the
Environmental Quality Commission for addressing the City’s water use.

Elizabeth Houck stated that she does not support the proposed project and
her concerns over the possible impacts that could occur, such as
subsidence, if the well
were to be installed.

Lynore Banchoff stated that she does not support the proposed project and
that she is
opposed to the installation of a well in any public space.

Dan Hilberman stated that he does not support the proposed project and
suggested that
all stakeholders need to be involved to talk about the best use of the

Marjorie Zimmerman stated that she does not support the proposed project
she is opposed to the use of public land for a well.

Environmental Quality Commission Minutes – Page 3
David Alfano stated that he does not support the potential project and also
noted that
his house sits right on top of the aquifer. He also expressed his concerns
over potential
issues of subsidence and the asymmetry between San Mateo County and Santa
County’s Groundwater Management Plan. Mr. Alfano also provided the
Quality Commission with a United States Geological Survey (USGS) case study
on subsidence. (Handout)

Peter Hart stated that he does not support the potential project because
there is no
discussion on how the Golf Course’s water use will be restricted.

Brielle Johnck stated that she reaffirms her previous comment on opposing
proposed project and she also expressed concerns over new housing
developments in
Menlo Park that may impact existing water resources.

Steve Schmidt stated that he reaffirms his previous comment on opposing the
project and expressed concerns over the Golf Course’s offer to pay for the
for the project.

ACTION: Motion and Second (Slomiak/Bedwell) for the EQC to reaffirm its
2012 recommendation with the refinements as stated below and to designate
Commissioner Bedwell, with Commissioners DeCardy and Scott as his
alternates, to
speak on behalf of the EQC regarding this recommendation and its context
when the
item is brought before City Council passes (6-0-1), (Absent: Smolke).

1. To date, the Potential Irrigation Well project has been heard by
the EQCa total of
three times in the last three years, with strong resident opposition voiced
time. The EQC also recognizes that a significant amount of staff time has
spent on multiple reviews of the proposed project. As a result, the EQConce
again reaffirms its recommendation as advocated in February 2012 as stated:
“The EQC recommends to City Council that any specific proposals for
groundwater use, including the cost, siting, or the like should be
considered after:

a) A city grey water plan is developed; and
b) The city engages with the San Mateo County to clarify long term water
rights for the San Francisquito Creek Aquifer.”

2. In addition, the EQC does not support pursuing a MOU for the proposed
Heights Golf & Country Club well project due to the concerns over the
impact of
the potential project (i.e. depletion of local community drinking water
ground subsidence as a result of water extraction, damage to plants, trees,
animals from reduced aquifer water supply, and saltwater intrusion from the
and other projects similar in nature, that withdraw water from the region’s
which is a limited public and environmental resource.

Environmental Quality Commission Minutes – Page 4
3. The EQC also urges the City Council to immediately establish a criteria
system to
prioritize use for all water resources available to Menlo Park residents
businesses (i.e. installing a new bathroom, drilling a private well,
increasing water
use/irrigation) under all resource supply conditions. This criteria system
should be
in place prior to considering water resource use request.

4. Lastly, the EQC would like to provide clarification for the following
terms, “Water
Resources” and “Water Resource Supply Conditions” as stated below:

• “Water Resources” is defined as water sourced from aquifers, conveyed
water, grey water, or surface impoundment.

• “Water Resource Supply Conditions” is defined as a wide range of current
and future water supply conditions including droughts, water surplus, and
changes in water supply contracts.

Received on Wed Apr 23 2014 - 15:59:06 PDT

[ Search ] [ By Date ] [ By Message ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]

Email communications sent to the City Council are public records. This site is an archive of emails received by the City Council at its city.council_at_(domainremoved)