Council Discusses Options for Valley View Pond Project

During Tuesday night's meeting, the council was presented with an interesting dilemma during a workshop involving “repairs” to a pond: Should they spend more money on a temporary solution that appeases the residents affected or do they save money on a sustainable solution those affected do not want?

Such was the situation Tuesday as the council discussed what to do about the Valley View pond during the “first read” section of an otherwise light council agenda. The pond, in the Valley View Estates subdivision west of Main and north of 75th, suffers from poor water conditions, odors, algae blooms and more as a result from sediment buildup, waterfowl presence and a lack of substantial vegetation.

The village assumed it would be a dredging project, but when they tested the sediment in July of 2011 and results concluded the material didn't meet EPA standards for re-use at other sites and would have to be brought to a landfill, raising the estimated cost of dredging the pond from $450,000 to $900,000, the village staff started exploring other options. They ultimately developed the concept of naturalizing the pond instead. Naturalizing the pond would stabilize the sediment, add additional fill and native vegetation in order to make the pond aesthetically pleasing and ecologically sustainable at an estimated cost of $522,000.

The residents feel calling it naturalization is just a nice way to hide what it would really be: a swamp. Many residents cited the pond as being a selling point of their property and that they didn't want their view—and by extension, their neighborhood—altered by what they feel is an unacceptable solution. Further, the price discrepancy between the dredging option and the naturalization option wasn't much of a concern to the residents at Tuesday's meeting.

“Fact is, that pond hasn't been dredged in 40 years, so a $900,000 investment for 40 years isn't a high price to me,” one resident said. The village, though, may feel otherwise, as the cheaper naturalization option is sustainable and will cost significantly less in maintenance over the years.

No matter what option the village settles on—and it's entirely possible different options altogether may be pursued—the village is sure to do it with a slight twinge of bitterness.

The pond was man-made by the developer in the 1970s while developing the subdivision as a way to meet detention requirements and as a feature that could be marketed to potential homeowners. The story goes that if the developer installed the pond to the standards the demanded the park district would take ownership of the pond. When it was installed, there was a dispute between the park district, village and developer on whether or not those standards were met. Through litigation, the village ended up in control of the pond they had nothing to do with.

Bitter or not, the village knows something needs to be done.

“It's an intolerable situation that's gone on too long and needs to be remedied,” said Mayor Martin Tully.

Further neighborhood meetings are likely and the issue will make its way back on the council's agenda in the near future.

“There's no specific timeline to get this done, but it's a pressing issue that gets worse every year,” said Village Manager Dave Fieldman.