02/24/2003 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Special Council Meeting 2-24-03 Page 3 -. ,. ? to worry about any kind of mitigation if we build a trail through the grounds on which we are talking about. But there is stream impact; you always have to be concerned about that. Dr. Parker said I was thinking in the future if there was some property that later on we wanted to do something with it that needs some. Mayor Rinker asked, could we create it? I think the potential is there upstream as you round that last bend that is at the northwest angle because there is already a detention basin for C.E.I. which is higher ground. When you go behind Georgian Center and you look, the creek is here and the property pitches up anywhere from 15 to 20 feet before it slopes down toward S.O.M. and it still stays higher ground at the dip because the dip comes up to meet the north side of the route when you are traveling on S.O.M. We haven't gone this far but the potential would be to carve out more detention area that might align with C.E.I. But I suspect the grave differences are pretty huge that we probably wouldn't do it. I just don't think that in that area there is any wetland. If we would want to create it, would have to carve it out. And the channel is pretty well defined in there. That is probably not the place where you would do it. You would want to do it in some other where it is less static, there is less fall, it would tend to hold. Wetland areas tend to be flatter areas---- Mr. Marquardt asked, so what if this money doesn't go through? Mayor Rinker asked, which one? i? Mr. Marquardt replied any of them. Mayor Rinker said I'd go back to, the worse case scenario, I think is that we look at this property on its own merits. What I believe is very worthwhile as we've heard people talking about green space alone, that Falkner property lends itself to have that green space in there. It's a very scenic area. To me, by breaking it up over 3 years with budgeting so that we can handle that cost straight dollar for dollar, so if you're reluctant to acquire the property, I don't have an answer for that. I think it's a good policy decision. It's good ground for us to acquire and use as a park. There is another part of me that just looks at O.D.O.T. and how these things get piecemealed that I find unfathomable, that we cannot demonstrate that that's going to be a park. Because that's exactly what we are doing. And for that reason alone, I feel confident that O.D.O.T. will ultimately see the light when dealing with people they know. If they don't, I fall back to I think it's good property to own. The other is that with Issue One, I don't think there's anything to lose and everything to gain with Issue One dollars. It's a relatively new program. This is just the second funding year. We don't know if it can even be reviewed but there have been a lot of takers out there. And, the drainages that run through. Mayfield, bear in mind the Metroparks' Executive Director sits on the local Issue One Board that hosts these dollars. So I think the more that we demonstrate we are working with Metroparks, working with Chagrin River drainage and the river valley itself; as I mentioned the other night it's a scenic river, it's one of the few in the state designated that way; it is politic for us. Ultimately, I think we get critical mass in every one of these things where we demonstrate to NOACA, O.D.O.T., to the Metroparks, to the Chagrin River Watershed, the State of Ohio, to the County that we mean what we say when we are doing these things. At some point I think we will find more dollars will be loosened up. And even if they aren't, I think that the value of the property is there.