Letter to FERC Regarding Crown Hydro from Sara Durhman

1
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, NE Washington, O. C. 20426 I am a resident of the RiverWest Condominium Association in Minneapolis, MN and am writing to you to express my concern about the Crown Mill Hydroelectric Project, Project No. 11175-024- Minnesota. As stated in s letter from the President of the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, "there is one central fact relevant to FERC's proceedings: despite numerous attempts over the last decade to obtain controi over public park land for its project, Crown Hydro has not secured MPRB's permission to do so. Most recently, at Crown Hydro's request, the MPRB did attempt to reach an understanding on the conditions under which the project could proceed snd could possibly be acceptable to the MPRB. When presented with the conditions under which the MPRB could consider the project, Crown Hydro would not accept the ter~s. C~ow~ Hydro apparently believes that it is entitled to controi of pu!blic park land on terms they alone propose and no others. Neithe~ the MPRB nor any other local unit of government should agree to such sn expropriation of public park lang. At the outset, it is impertant to understand the context of the new location Crown Hydro is pro posing for use as a power generating site. The site is st the tep of the Falls of St. Anthony„a place that once was the milling capitol of this country. New, nearly ail of the shore land of the Mississippi river in th'is area is owned by the MPRB. Along with adjacent land„ the MPRB hss crested a park of statewide significance in the very heart of the Gty of Minneapolis. The Mississippi Central Riverfront Perk is s statewide resource and attracts over 1, 000,000 user visits each year. it is one of the top ten perks sites by visitation in the state snd is the home to nationally designated historic districts and sites. The historic 3sme!s 1. Hill Bridge connects the east and west banks of the park and acts ss a focal point along with theSt. Anthony Fails, The park's neighbors inciude thousands of homeowners„hundreds of businesses, the nationally renewned Gut!hrie Theater snd the second largest facility owned by t' he Minnesota Historical Society. This area is truly unique because of its history and geography. " i teo sgl'ee that the area a!round the proposed Crown Hydro site has dramatically changed since FERC granted the license for another adjacent site to the current proposed Crewn Hydro iocstion. 'Thirty three million dollars of local and state investment has resulted in over one billion dollars in new development in the area. There are over 7r, 060 new residents in the surrounding ares. The St. Anthony Fa8s (adj!scen!t to the propesed Crown Hydro site) is central te that development. MPRB wishes to protect that public and private investment. We believe that had this development been in place at the time of the originai evaluation of impacts, that FERC msy not have granted the He@AM. I have supported hydroelectric power generation, but also have a responsibiiity to myseif„my community and my city 40 protect our' gf'eat parks, 20110912-0002 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 09/12/2011 Posted by http://MillCityTimes.com

description

 

Transcript of Letter to FERC Regarding Crown Hydro from Sara Durhman

Page 1: Letter to FERC Regarding Crown Hydro from Sara Durhman

Kimberly D. Bose, SecretaryFederal Energy Regulatory Commission

888 First Street, NE

Washington, O.C. 20426

I am a resident of the RiverWest Condominium Association in Minneapolis, MN and am writing to you to express myconcern about the Crown Mill Hydroelectric Project, Project No. 11175-024-Minnesota.

As stated in s letter from the President of the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, "there is one central factrelevant to FERC's proceedings: despite numerous attempts over the last decade to obtain controi over public park

land for its project, Crown Hydro has not secured MPRB's permission to do so. Most recently, at Crown Hydro's

request, the MPRB did attempt to reach an understanding on the conditions under which the project could proceed

snd could possibly be acceptable to the MPRB. When presented with the conditions under which the MPRB could

consider the project, Crown Hydro would not accept the ter~s. C~ow~ Hydro apparently believes that it is entitled tocontroi of pu!blic park land on terms they alone propose and no others. Neithe~ the MPRB nor any other local unit ofgovernment should agree to such sn expropriation of public park lang.

At the outset, it is impertant to understand the context of the new location Crown Hydro is pro posing for use as apower generating site. The site is st the tep of the Falls of St. Anthony„a place that once was the milling capitol ofthis country. New, nearly ail of the shore land of the Mississippi river in th'is area is owned by the MPRB. Along with

adjacent land„ the MPRB hss crested a park of statewide significance in the very heart of the Gty of Minneapolis. The

Mississippi Central Riverfront Perk is s statewide resource and attracts over 1,000,000 user visits each year.

it is one of the top ten perks sites by visitation in the state snd is the home to nationally designated historic districts

and sites. The historic 3sme!s 1. Hill Bridge connects the east and west banks of the park and acts ss a focal point along

with theSt. Anthony Fails, The park's neighbors inciude thousands of homeowners„hundreds of businesses, the

nationally renewned Gut!hrie Theater snd the second largest facility owned by t'he Minnesota Historical Society. This

area is truly unique because of its history and geography."

i teo sgl'ee that the area a!round the proposed Crown Hydro site has dramatically changed since FERC granted the

license for another adjacent site to the current proposed Crewn Hydro iocstion. 'Thirty three million dollars of local

and state investment has resulted in over one billion dollars in new development in the area. There are over 7r,060

new residents in the surrounding ares. The St. Anthony Fa8s (adj!scen!t to the propesed Crown Hydro site) is central

te that development. MPRB wishes to protect that public and private investment. We believe that had this

development been in place at the time of the originai evaluation of impacts, that FERC msy not have granted theHe@AM.

I have supported hydroelectric power generation, but also have a responsibiiity to myseif„my community and my city

40 protect our' gf'eat parks,

20110912-0002 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 09/12/2011 Posted by http://MillCityTimes.com