SUNFISH LAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING – MAY 5, 2009
7:00 P.M. - ST. ANNE’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH
Attendants:
Mayor: Molly Park
Councilmembers: Cathy DeCourcy, Judy MacManus, Richard Williams and Roger Conant.
City Attorney: Tim Kuntz
City Planner: Laurie Smith
City Engineer: Tim Hanson and Engineer Peter Willenbring
Building Official: Russ Wahl
City Forester: Mark Johnson
City Treasurer: Mike Blair
City Clerk: Cathy Iago
Police Chief Manila Shaver
and Members of the General Public.
1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Molly Park opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.
2. APPROVE AGENDA: Mayor Park requested an additional item be placed on the agenda under Old/New Business; Appointment of Representative from the City of Sunfish Lake to the Dakota County High Performance Partnership Project (HiPP). She asked if there were any further additions or corrections to the agenda and there was no response
Councilmember Conant moved approval of the Agenda as amended, seconded by Councilmember Williams and carried. (5-0)
3. CONSENT AGENDA: The Mayor asked if there were any questions or comments relating to any items on the Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Williams asked if he were correct in stating that the permit plan charges are budgeted as a pass through item and have no financial implications on the budget. Treasurer Blair responded that he is correct.
Councilmember Williams asked the City Treasurer if the amount shown in the monthly financials for the City Attorney and Engineer reflect the costs associated with the Salem Church Road Improvement Project.
Treasurer Blair responded no and explained those costs are shown under Capital Projects in the report; he explained that the costs would be reimbursed from the project fund.
Councilmember Conant referred to page 10 of the April 7 minutes and explained that he not heard but rather he had read on the Wisconsin DNR website that 26 deer per square mile is the recommended limit; he asked that the minutes be corrected.
Councilmember DeCourcy also referred to the discussion of the Aerial Deer County on page 10 of the April 7 minutes and asked Forester Mark Johnson if he agreed that the number of deer counted may actually be double.
Forester Johnson explained that he is not an expert in this area and explained that the helicopter pilot actually conducted the count. He explained that the deer were not moving and that typically the number could be doubled; he stated in his opinion the count should reflect an accurate number of deer present.
Councilmember DeCourcy requested the sentence be changed to read; “the deer count could possibly be doubled”. She also noted a minor typing error on page8 of the minutes, in paragraph 4, and stated it should read “line of credit” versus “ling of credit”.
Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments and there was no response.
Councilmember DeCourcy moved approval of the Consent Agenda with the amendments to the minutes as recommended, seconded by Councilmember Williams and carried. (5-0)
a. Regular Council Meeting Minutes of April 7, 2009.
b. List of Bills
c. Monthly Financial Statements
4. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC: None.
5. PRESENTATION: Mayor Park introduced Northern Dakota County Cable Commission (NDC4) Executive Director Jodi Miller and Government Coordinator Dennis Rafftery who were present to discuss the possibility of videotaping the Council meetings for broadcasting on the government channel on cable television. She asked staff and Council to introduce themselves and also stated that City Representative to the NDC4 Jim Sullivan and former Mayor Henry Hovey were present this evening.
Jodi Miller explained that she would provide some basic information on NDC4 and report on her meeting with Councilmember Conant regarding the possibility of videotaping the meetings. She stated that NDC4 was comprised 25 years ago when seven (7) cities in northern Dakota County pooled resources to form this regulatory group. She stated the commission staffs 15 people and the business office is housed in Inver Grove Heights; she explained that the commission oversees seven channels on the Comcast cable system and that two channels are dedicated to government programming. She also advised that customer complaints are handled through this office. She provided Council with information regarding the demographics of cable television in Sunfish Lake.
Ms. Miller stated that NDC4 currently tapes meetings for four of the seven cities and that occasionally over the years the other three small cities have requested information regarding taping their meetings. She noted that the School Board meetings are also televised, as well as special events for parks, Police and Fire departments.
Ms. Miller reported that she and Dennis Rafftery had met with Councilmember Conant two week ago to discuss the various levels of service and the cost differences. She explained that NDC4 offered to videotape the meetings for a three month trial period after which Council could review the tapes and receive feedback from residents. She stated that NDC4 is here to support the City’s efforts to provide information to the public and explained that statistics show the meetings receive very high viewership from Comcast customers. She advised that there would be no cost to the City during the three month trial period.
Councilmember Williams asked where the tapes would be kept after the meetings and for what period of time.
Ms. Miller responded that the individual City decides if they wish to archive the tapes or not; she noted that most cities use the minutes as the official public record and do not save the tape after the minutes are officially approved.
Ms. Miller explained that after the three month trial period Council could decide if they wish to continue the tapings.
Councilmember Conant commented that he had discussed reusing the tape after the minutes were approved so the tape would not be the permanent record.
Dennis Rafftery stated that during the trial period the meetings would be taped and then re-played two to four times on the government channel; he explained the meetings cannot be broadcast live due to the location and lack of technical equipment. He noted that NDC4 would provide the camera equipment, microphones, and personnel to tape the meetings during the three month period at no cost to the City.
Mr. Rafftery explained that if the City wishes to continue the tapings after the three month period, they would have to provide a lockable storage room for the camera equipment, access to the meeting room at least 2 hours prior to the meeting, and two volunteers to set up microphones prior to the meetings. He noted that during the trial period the City would have to make arrangements for someone to bring the microphones back to NDC4 by noon the following day.
Councilmember DeCourcy asked what the cost to the City would be after the trial period. Mr. Rafftery explained that NDC4 would provide the camera and tripod and that the City would have to purchase microphones and wiring; he stated the cost of the microphones would be approximately $2,000 and the wiring would be approximately $500 to $2,000. He further stated that the City would be responsible for maintenance of the microphones.
Councilmember DeCourcy commented that she was told some residents have requested the tapes from other cities to pursue civil actions. Ms. Miller pointed out that has occurred and that is the reason some cities have decided not to keep the tapes as the official record after the minutes were approved.
Councilmember MacManus asked if there were any additional costs other than purchasing the equipment.
Ms. Miller explained there may be costs associated with hiring personnel or paid volunteers.
Mayor Park asked if the City could share the costs with other cities and how the City would monitor viewership.
Ms. Miller stated that it may be possible to share costs with other cities. She explained that a message could be displayed when playing the tape on the government channel that asks the viewers for feedback; she further noted that a mailed survey or newsletter could be used to gather feedback or via request on the City website.
Councilmember Williams summarized the discussion by stating that NDC4 would donate the camera, tripod and microphone mixer equipment, the City would be responsible for purchasing the microphones and wiring and for maintenance of the microphones and also for hiring two volunteers to set-up the microphones and open the building two hours prior to the meeting. He also noted that the City would be responsible for providing a locked storage room for the camera and equipment.
City Clerk Iago explained that the City has access to a locked storage room at the church, however; she noted that their have been problems with the lock.
Mr. Rafftery added a point of clarification that NDC4 would not donate the camera or tripod and that the City would have to purchase the microphones and wiring after the trial period. He also noted that the City would be responsible for maintenance of the microphones and audio mixer after the trial period.
Ms. Miller explained that larger cities such as Mendota Heights and Inver Grove Heights have much higher costs due to multi-camera operations and graphics display abilities; she pointed out that another option would be to make arrangements to conduct the Sunfish Lake meetings at another location such as Mendota Heights City Hall.
Mayor Park asked if the City tapings would have an amateur appearance without the high tech abilities. Ms. Miller responded that Inver Grove Heights School District uses only one camera and it appears to work well. Dennis Rafftery noted that the camera operator would be trained to move to the person speaking and a special area would be set-up to receive public comments on camera.
Mayor Park asked if a motion to proceed with the trial period would be in order.
Councilmember Williams commented that he is unsure if he wishes to proceed at this time and suggested that the storage and personnel issues should be further discussed. He pointed out that if the equipment is stored at the church there may be other people who have access to the room. He indicated that it would be appropriate to further discuss the logistics and costs; Councilmember MacManus agreed.
Councilmember Conant suggested exploring the cost of hiring a person from the NDC4 staff to bring the equipment, set it up and then take it with them rather than storing it at the church.
Mayor Park asked the City Attorney if comments from the public were in order and he responded Council could receive comments if they wish.
Councilmember Williams commented that in his opinion Council is not in a position to make a decision on this matter until it is determined if there is a secure place to store the equipment during the trial period or determining the costs associated with using an NDC4 staff person.
Dan Halvorson, 37 Sunnyside Lane, commented that as government becomes more transparent it may be appropriate to move the meetings to another location to provide the television coverage.
Mayor Park requested that Ms. Miller to research the cost to pay an NDC4 employee to set-up the equipment, tape the meetings, and take the equipment to store facilities and she asked the City Clerk to check on the storage at the church and report at the next meeting.
Mr. Halverson asked if Council would pursue conducting the meetings at another location. Mayor Park responded not at this time and Councilmember Williams indicated that he does not believe it would work well to conduct the meetings outside of the City due to difficult dimensions such as posting notices.
Jodi Miller explained that the South St. Paul School District conducts their meetings at the South St. Paul City Hall and it appears to work well. Councilmember Williams pointed out that the meetings are conducted within the same city and that he prefers to receive the information for conducting the meetings here versus outside the city.
Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments and there was no response. She thanked Ms. Miller and Mr. Rafftery for their presentation.
6. PUBLIC HEARING: Review Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) and Comprehensive Storm
Water Management Plan.
Mayor Park opened the public hearing for the purpose of reviewing the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) and Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan and to receive public comments. She advised those present that parliamentary procedures would be followed and asked the City Engineer to introduce the request and provide historical background.
Engineer Hanson introduced Engineer Peter Willenbring who is the head of the Water Resources Department for WSB Engineering; Peter distributed informational packets for citizen review related to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Phase II.
Engineer Willenbring explained that his firm has developed storm water management plans for over 50 cities; he stated that cities are required by federal mandates to prepare these two documents relating to water quality and storm water management as part of the storm sewer discharge permit process. He advised that the permit must be renewed annually and a public hearing to review the plan and receive public comments is also required. He explained that the State of Minnesota requires cities to prepare a Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan and that the plan is not much different from the NPDES permit but that the preparation of the document is somewhat different. He stated that the 2008 NPDES Permit Annual Report will be submitted to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) after receiving and incorporating public comments.
Mr. Willenbring reviewed the principles behind the permit, pointing out that each municipality has the flexibility to write its own storm water management plan and uses existing programs to fulfill six minimum control measures. He stated that the City of Sunfish Lake complies with the regulations by conducting the annual street sweeping, distributing a informational packet for new home construction, conducting a public hearing and encouraging public comments, placing informational articles in the City newsletter and website, and reviewing construction site storm water runoff controls. He advised that since there is not any major storm sewer infrastructure within the City, illicit discharge is not a major concern. He also noted that the storm sewer map is updated annually to identify culverts that carry storm water runoff and that the City utilizes a recycling program and hazardous waste program in conjunction with the Arbor Day celebration. He further explained that the City has also recently formed an Environmental Commission. He advised that storm water related articles are also published in the City newsletter. He advised that the Zoning Ordinance requires storm water management by requiring applicants to obtain an NPDES permit during construction and that post construction storm water management is also regulated in the Zoning Ordinance. He further stated that the City has adopted an Ordinance prohibiting illicit discharge of pollutants into the City drainage system. He stated that the City must submit an annual report by June 30 each year and that comments received this evening would be submitted as part of the report.
Engineer Willenbring stated that the Storm Water Management Plan is similar and also federally mandated as part of the watershed district’s review of water issues on a regional basis and requires the City to draft a local plan to incorporate the watershed district requirements into the plan. He noted that this document contains information on the City’s water resource inventory and provides information on water quality. He explained that the City is required to develop goals and polices to maintain these resources. He explained that the document contains information on water quantity, water quality, protection and enhancement of recreational facilities and fish and wildlife, information and education for residents, protection of wetlands, controlling erosion and sedimentation. He noted there is a section for assessment of problems and identification of corrective actions; he explained that there is a section for implementation strategy and corrective measures to resolve problems. He pointed out that the corrective actions require funding.
Mr. Willienbring offered to respond to questions relating to these issues.
Mayor Park thanked Engineer Willenbring for his presentation and opened the public hearing for comments. She asked that speakers provide their names and addresses for the record.
Jim O’Hagan, 35 Windy Hill Road, asked what the permit is for since the City does not dump any water into a storm sewer system. Mr. Willenbring explained that the State of Minnesota requires the City to obtain a permit for storm sewer system discharge.
Mr. Hanson explained there are a few storm sewer culverts under Salem Church Road and Charlton Road, as well as some small ponds that create discharge.
John Oakman, 1055 60th Street West, questioned the requirements necessary to obtain the permit. Mr. Willenbring explained there are six (6) minimum control measures and each has activities associated with them; he referred to the handout he distributed listing those measures and activities associated with each item as listed in the handout. He noted that most of the requirements were mandated by the MPCA for inclusion in the permit.
Mr. Oakman asked what homeowners should do to comply with these requirements. Mr. Willenbring explained that in Section 3 of the Storm Water Management Plan the City is asked to support Dakota County efforts to eliminate illegal dumping into the storm water system and develop an ordinance relating to discharge. He stated that the City has adopted an ordinance relating to illegal discharge and also is responsible for educating residents on this issue. He further advised that the City conducts street sweeping on an annual basis as part of the program requirements.
Engineer Hanson also noted that illicit discharge is not a major issue for Sunfish Lake since it has no business or industrial areas.
John Rowe, 2250 Delaware, asked if the City has a storm water system. Engineer Hanson explained that with his plat a few ponds were developed which would fall under the storm water system.
Mr. Rowe commented that he is replacing a portion of his land that currently does the job of absorption with a rain garden; he questioned where the authority for these requirements comes from. Mr. Hanson explained that the authority comes from the Minnesota Clean Water Act and that the City is required to prepare the Storm Water Management Plan to fulfill the permit requirements.
Dan Halvorson, 37 Sunnyside Lane, stated he has four (4) concerns regarding water quality:
1) Use of lawn chemicals flowing into Sunfish Lake; he stated that Mr. Bancroft had compiled data on
phosphorous levels in the lake over a 3-year period and the lake has been fairly stable, but he only has data for
the 3-year period;
2) Kids sneaking onto the lakes with boats which could cause problems with Milfoil, although Sunfish Lake does
not have a Milfoil problem ; he noted there are two lots where this occurs on the lake and that one is a vacant
residence;
3) Ice fishing and use of gas powered augers; he stated that the gas powered auger could create pollution
4) Clear cutting of lots; he noted there is one individual doing this and he is also illegal dumping and has creosote
timbers which may enter the lake; he provided information which identified eleven illegal dump piles
on the old Leach property and distributed the information to Council.
There was discussion relating to the phosphorous data collected by Mr. Bancroft.
John Rowe questioned if it would be the responsibility of the City or for the Homeowners’ Association on the lake to deal with these issues and noted that the lake is privately owned.
Councilmember Williams pointed out that both the City and the homeowners would have some responsibility and noted that some of the issues are related to enforcement. He commented that in his opinion some of the issues are more complicated such as clear cutting and whether or not noxious growth such as Buckthorn should be removed from property and if it should be required to install replacement plantings to prevent erosion. He pointed out that City has taken steps relating to the lake access issue by adopting a permitting process to monitor persons accessing the lake. He reviewed some concerns relating to issues raised by the Lower Mississippi Watershed District as outlined in the newsletter he provided for placement on the City website; he noted that issues with surrounding cities may also affect Sunfish Lake. He pointed out that the issue of phosphorous use may fall to property owners on the lake since they would have to control what they are using on their property. He indicated that the City may need to be more aggressive in enforcement and education.
Dick Bancroft, 100 Windy Hill Road, agreed with all four issues raised by Mr. Halvorson and explained that the City does have regulations prohibiting use of motors on the lake which could be used to enforce the use of augers. He pointed out that the quality of the lake relating to chemicals could be dealt with by educating residents, but pointed out that the association meets only annually and attendance at the Lakeshore Owners Association has been low. He stated there may be a need to share information on problems with the City regarding these matters and for more stringent enforcement. He commented that the City used to issue a sticker for boats to show the persons had permission to be on the lake; residents would see the sticker and know that the person had permission to be on the lake.
Mayor Park questioned where these concerns would fit within the process. Mr. Willenbring explained these issues are more related to responsibility and jurisdiction; he pointed out that the clear cutting and auger use are issues of enforcement rather than a storm water issue. He further noted that the State has prohibited the use of phosphates and that an ordinance prohibiting their use could be placed in the code. He indicated that some of the issues could be incorporated into the program and other should be delegated as enforcement issues.
Jim O’Hagen commented that it would be difficult to police the use of phosphates unless the City adopted an ordinance prohibiting use of any chemicals on the lake. Councilmember DeCourcy stated she would support such an ordinance. Mayor Park suggested Council could study that issue and are not prepared to discuss it this evening.
Mr. Willenbring explained that Sunfish Lake has a fairly large surface area and the organic sediments in the bottom of the lake may be the greater issue than the small amount of phosphorous that may be entering the lake.
Councilmember Conant asked how this could be measured and whether or not in it an internal problem.
Mr. Willenbring explained how the method for calculating the sedimentation and monitoring water quality by taking samples from the lake would determine the phosphorous content.
Mayor Park asked for a show of hands for persons representing Horseshoe, Hornbeam and Sunfish Lake.
John Oakman pointed out the conversation appears to be focused on Sunfish Lake and some of these issues may not be relevant to Horseshoe Lake. He noted that when the last DNR grading on water quality for the three lakes was completed, Horseshoe Lake received a “B” grade and Hornbeam and Sunfish Lake received a “C” grade; he stated that there may be a greater need for management on Sunfish Lake than the other two lakes. He questioned what residents could do to maintain water quality and the lakes.
Mr. Willenburg suggested that residents review the information in the document which contains specific information relating to maintaining water quality.
Councilmember Williams noted that there are requirements listed in the document relating to new construction that are mandated by Federal and State laws; he asked if staff checks to insure these requirements are in place before and after the construction process. Mr. Willenbring responded yes.
Engineer Hanson responded to Mr. Oakman’s question by stating that the permitting process does not provide any hard set rules but rather identifies soft requirements that the City must follow and that can be accomplished over time.
Councilmember Williams pointed out that he serves as representative to the Watershed Organization and that the issue of nutrient loading will become more prevalent in the future; he agreed that the City does not follow any hardest of rules but must report annually on what it has done as part of the permit process.
Mr. Bancroft commented that there is a culvert in the storm water system that drains from Sunfish Lake to the Mississippi River; he noted there was a study on storm water runoff when the City started requiring storm water retention ponds. He noted there is some easterly flowage when there is a 100 year storm and that the lake is low now, but it is not at the lowest it has been and not as high as he has seen it. He explained that is the reason the culvert exists to maintain the high water mark at 937. He asked if the other property owners on the other two lakeshore owners get together to discuss these issues and noted that one of the requirements is public education and outreach. He stated his reaction to the six minimum control measures is that the City is doing all of them to some extent and we should be meeting permit requirements.
Dan Halverson asked if we could use this report process for leverage to receive some action on these items and a higher grade; he noted that he has been requesting help with these issues such as the clear cutting and illegal dumping for four years and have received no assistance.
Engineer Willenbring stated that the document will contain the notes from this meeting and the PCA has the ability to require the City to address the SWPPP and the Council may address the other issues; he stated the purpose of the document is identify the problems and attempt to resolve them.
Mr. Halverson asked if the City may use the report as an attempt to resolve them. Mr. Willenbring responded yes and stated that there is an observed problem and the City would identify corrective actions; the action may be to study the issue. He noted that if there is a specific project identified, the City would then find a way to fund it.
Deni Svendsen, 1 Sunfish Lane, stated she had reviewed the Sunfish Lake 2006 water quality document with the grading system for the three lakes. She recalled that when she served on the Water Management Board there was discussion regarding certain life cycles of the lakes and things that could be done to clean up the water quality of the lakes. She pointed out that Sunfish Lake maybe a little further down the life cycle and may not have sufficient flowage for the sediment to move; she suggested that one solution may be to dredge the lake. Mayor Park stated that may be something for the lakeshore owners to discuss.
Councilmember MacManus made an observation in response to John Oakman’s comment; she stated that item 6 of the minimum control measures refers to pollution prevention and good housekeeping practices and it appears that that there must be some method to enforce good housekeeping on the lakes. She stated that individuals would be responsible for controlling the use of fertilizers and the City would have some type of enforcement authority.
Mayor Park pointed out that Councilmember Williams indicated there may be requirements in the City Code and that the police department has been very good in assisting with enforcement.
Chief Shaver pointed out that the police can only enforce what it can view and it is difficult to view the properties along the lakeshore since it is private property.
Councilmember Williams indicated the City could require removal of Buckthorn and provide replacement materials to minimize erosion; he noted the real issue with enforcement, as the Chief pointed out, is that since the City cannot access private property, the landowners must report such issues so that the City is aware of the problem.
Councilmember DeCourcy asked if the pile of timbers displayed in the photo Mr. Halverson distributed was the same as the one Council asked the property owner to remove last year. Mr. Halverson responded yes.
Liz Lee, 315 Salem Church Road, explained she has not seen the study or the grading system and questioned if it is safe to swim in the lake or eat fish from the lake. Mayor Park explained there are three different ways to measure the water quality; she advised that the water quality is measured by residents under the Citizen Assisted Monitoring Program (CAMP).
Mr. Halvorsen pointed out that two City officials live on the lake and asked for their comments.
Councilmember Conant explained that in his perception has been that persons living around the lake have not appeared to be interested in looking after their own interests relating to the lake. He commented that he was happy for the turnout this evening of lakeshore owners who appear to be interested in protecting this precious resource.
Mayor Park stated that as a landowner, but not a lakeshore owner, she was concerned regarding the trespassing issue. She noted that persons accessing the lake from her property have not been allowed to take boats on the lake and that she and her family have been conscious when using or allowing others to use the lake.
Councilmember Conant noted that Council had passed some fairly effective rules for accessing the lake with a permitting process; he stated he was unsure if this is known by property owners around the lake.
Councilmember Williams stated he had copies of the Annual Report of the Lower Mississippi Watershed Association which lists their website and other websites for information; he would leave them for interested parties and that it would be posted on the website.
Arnie Svendsen, 1 Sunfish Lane, asked the engineers if they are aware of ratings for recreational lakes in Minneapolis near the Calhoun area. Mr. Willenbring explained that he was uncertain and noted that the Minneapolis lakes are not necessarily great lakes; he noted that they have a large nutrient load and algae growth, but he is unsure of their ratings.
Ginny Beckett, 5815 South Robert Trail, stated that the homeowners association on Horseshoe Lake is very active.
Mr. Halverson commented that the Minnesota DNR has profiles on all lakes in Minnesota on their website and each lake is rated.
Holly Divine, 2196 Charlton Road, asked if this applies to other wetlands, such as ponds. Mr. Willenbring explained that the monitoring program does not currently include ponds and would have to be extended; he noted this is costly. He explained that when monitoring a specific lake he suggests the review include looking at the wetlands that flow into the lake to determine what type of nutrient load comes from the wetlands. He noted the problem is that currently there is very minimal monitoring at this time; a more thorough study would be necessary.
Jim O’Hagan pointed out that the State Statutes prohibit the use of phosphates except on new grass and asked who enforces that requirement. Mr. Willenbring explained that he does not believe phosphates are used in lawn products any longer.
John Lamey, 55 Windy Hill Road, commented that he wished to go on record to agree with Mr. Halvorsen’s concerns regarding clear cutting near the lake. He stated that he has a good view of the Leach property and the property owner is stripping the land.
Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments and there was no response. She thanked those present for their comments.
Councilmember DeCourcy moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Councilmember Williams and carried. (5-0)
Council took a brief recess at 9:00 and reconvened at 9:10 p.m.
Mayor Park asked if Council had any further comments on the documents and if formal action was necessary.
Engineer Hanson explained that Council needs to formally adopt the documents.
Councilmember Williams moved to adopt the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) and the Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan after including public comments, seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy.
In discussion Mayor Park indicated that the Engineer requested that each item be considered under separate motion.
Councilmembers Williams and DeCourcy agreed to accept that as a friendly amendment to the motion.
Councilmember Williams moved to adopt the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) including public comments, seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy and carried. (5-0)
Councilmember Williams moved to adopt the Storm Water Management Plan including the public comments, seconded by Councilmember MacManus and carried. (5-0)
Mayor Park thanked Engineers Hanson and Willenbring for their presentation.
7. PLANNING:
a. Site and Building Plan/CUP Request for 336 Salem Church Road (Peters Residence): Planner Smith stated
that the applicant is requesting approval to allow a detached accessory building located on their property
consisting of approximately 2.5 acres. She stated the proposed accessory building will be located in the rear yard to the southwest of the existing home. She noted that the applicant has an in-ground swimming pool within the rear yard of their property, which is considered an accessory structure, and therefore, the City Zoning Ordinance requires approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of more than one accessory structure on the property.
The Planner explained that the existing home complies with setback requirements from all property lines and the existing pool is located in the rear yard south of the house and is enclosed by a fence. She stated the septic drainfield is not affected by the proposed construction and no changes to the house or existing septic area are proposed. The Planner advised that all existing and proposed lot requirements and setback are compliant with the R-1 District standards.
Planner Smith explained that private garages are permitted accessory uses in the R-1 District provided they are used for the storage of domestic supplies and equipment, located in the rear yard and do not exceed 1,000 sq. ft. in area and 16 ft. in height. She stated the applicant is proposing to construct a 988 sq. ft. detached garage in the rear yard to the southwest of the existing house. She advised the plans indicate that the proposed building meets setback requirements from all property lines. She stated the building will be 15 ft, 10-1/2 inches in height with a 12/7 roof pitch; the exterior will be constructed of primarily brick with additional accents and asphalt shingles. She noted the proposed garage’s exterior will match the exterior of the house and three (3) overhead garage doors are proposed along the front elevation. As part of the project, the applicant is proposing to extend the existing driveway to the south in order to connect the proposed garage with the existing driveway.
The Planner stated that the applicant has planted seven (7) 15-ft. high Black Hills Spruce trees to the west of the proposed garage location to provide screening of the garage from adjacent properties. She stated that originally no additional landscaping was proposed; however the Zoning Ordinance requires that accessory buildings shall be screened from neighboring properties. She advised that the applicant is proposing to add four (4) recessed lights in the soffit of the building, above the overhead garage doors; the proposed lighting is for safety and security purposes and is not expected to have any adverse impacts on adjacent properties.
Planner Smith reported that the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted unanimously to approve the Site and Building Plans and Conditional Use Permit with the five conditions listed in the Planner’s report dated March 10, 2009. She explained that an additional condition was added to increase the size of the rain garden and to plan additional screening on the west side of the structure. She noted that the location of the plantings were discussed and agreed upon by the Commission, the applicant and the adjacent property owner.
Councilmember Williams questioned if request is for the Site and Building Plans or the CUP or both. The Planner responded action is necessary for both items.
Mayor Park asked if there were any questions or comments and there was no response.
Councilmember Williams moved to approved a Conditional Use Permit based on a finding that the requests are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance and will be compatible with surrounding land uses, and to approve the Site and Building Plans for a 988 sq. ft. accessory building subject to the six (6) conditions as listed in the Planner’s report dated April 28, 2009.
In discussion Councilmember Conant asked the Planner to explain the rational for granting the CUP other than fact that the applicant wants a larger structure. The Planner explained that the request for the structure is a permitted use by a Conditional Use Permit; this process allows the City to place additional conditions as part of the approval. She noted that no variances are being requested. She also explained that the process requires a public hearing to receive input from impacted properties adjacent to the site, a review by the Planning Commission and final approval by Council. She noted that although a swimming pool is not an actual structure, it is considered an accessory use and that two accessory structures require a CUP and more thorough review of the request.
Councilmember Conant asked the difference between a CUP and a Variance request. Planner Smith explained that a variance does not meet all the standards required by the Zoning Code and the applicant must prove a hardship in conjunction with the request.
Mayor Park called for a vote on the motion.
Motion carried. (5-0)
b. Consider Resolution Adopting the City of Sunfish Lake 2008 Comprehensive Plan: Planner Smith explained
that the Preliminary draft of the Comprehensive Plan amendments were approved by Council in October, 2008
and sent to the Met Council for their review approval; the Met Council approved plan in February, 2009 and
it was adopted with no changes. She stated that the document generally contains the same policies and that
the City must formally adopt the plan by resolution.
Mayor Park asked if there were any questions or comments and there was no response.
Councilmember Conant moved to adopt Resolution No. 09-10 titled, A RESOLUTION ADOPTING
THE SUNFISH LAKE 2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, seconded by Councilmember Williams and
carried. (5-0)
Councilmember Conant stated he had read the entire document and it was clear and well written and he
commended the Planner for her work.
c. Schedule Joint Meeting with Planning Commission: Planner Smith advised that the Commission suggested
the joint meeting be held either before the Council meeting or the Commission meeting in June.
Councilmember MacManus asked the Planner hoe much time would be needed for the meeting. Planner
Smith explained that the time would depend on the Agenda topics chosen by Council; she noted that in the past
the meeting has taken 30 to 45 minutes.
Mayor Park recalled that Council normally provides feedback for the commission and reviews the roles of
Council and Commission and how they interact.
Councilmember MacManus pointed out that the Commission may have other issues to discuss. Planner Smith
explained that the Commission had identified some items and indicated that Council could establish an agenda.
Councilmember DeCourcy suggested delaying the meeting until the fall and Councilmember Williams agreed.
Councilmember MacManus suggested that Council consider items to place on the meeting agenda and that
the Planner discuss delaying the meeting until fall with the Commissioners.
Councilmember Conant suggested that the Commission may be irritated if the meeting is delayed and he
preferred the meeting be held earlier.
Planner Smith and the City Clerk both agreed that the Commission would not have a problem with delaying
the meeting.
Councilmember Conant asked if there was a Council liaison to the Commission and Mayor Park responded
there is not official liaison; however, occasionally a member of Council attends the meetings.
Council concurred that they would submit items for discussion at the meeting and directed the Planner to
contact the Commissioners for their items and regarding delaying the meeting until fall.
Council thanked the Planner for her report.
8. INSPECTOR’S REPORTS:
a. Building Inspector: Inspector Wahl stated that he conducted three (3) inspections and issued four (4)
permits in April.
Council thanked the Inspector for his report.
- City Engineer: Salem Church Road Reconstruction: The Engineer advised the contracts have been returned from ASTECH and that a preconstruction meeting was held on April 28. He advised that he work is scheduled to begin the week of May 11 or May 26 and the work should be substantially completed within three weeks. He stated that a newsletter was sent to the adjacent property owners that included a refrigerator magnet with contact phone numbers for information or complaints related to the project. He reported that on Friday he received word that the culvert at Robert Street and Salem Church Road had collapsed; he explained that the culvert is located within the right-of-way owned by MnDOT and that they were in the process of redesigning the culvert when it collapsed and they have scheduled the culvert replacement this week.
Charlton Road Feasibility Update: Engineer Hanson explained that the Charlton Road feasibility report is nearly completed and will be presented to Council at the June 2 meeting; he noted that the report was delayed one month due to the public hearing scheduled this evening. He stated that he will send the report to Council this month for their review prior to the June meeting.
Public Works Activates Undertaken in the Month of April:
Street Sweeping: The Engineer stated that the streets were swept on April 16 and that the sweeping is part of the water quality management procedures per the City’s NPDES permit (SWPPP).
Spring Load Limit Postings: Engineer Hanson advised that the spring load limits were removed on April 20 following MnDOT’s lifting of spring road restrictions
Mike Hovey asked when Charlton Road will be graded. Engineer Hanson advised he has just completed a survey of potholes on the road and that he anticipates the grading will be done in early May.
Anticipated Engineer/Public Works Activities for the Month of May:
* Complete Feasibility Study for Charlton Road.
* Street blading and spot aggregate placement on Charlton Road.
* Pothole repairs on City streets.
Council thanked the Engineer for his report. - CITY FORESTER: Forester Johnson reported that 56 people attended the Arbor Day activities and extended thanks to the following persons; Adina Overbee for her assistance with recycling activities, Jim Nayes for help with hauling recyclable materials, and Jim Sullivan for help with transporting the seedlings. He reported that the sale of seedings and also larger trees was good.
Forester Johnson responded to Mr. Halverson’s comment regarding no problem with Eurasian Milfoil in Sunfish Lake; he stated that to his knowledge there is no Eurasian Milfoil, but there is a healthy population of Northern Water Milfoil.
Forester Johnson questioned if Council wished to take any action on the creosote railroad ties on the Larson property; he explained that the homeowner has merely moved them to a different location on the property.
Councilmember MacManus asked if the homeowner was asked to remove them or just move them away from the lake. Mr. Johnson indicated they were close to the adjacent property and therefore he was asked to move them to a different location or remove them from the property.
Councilmember Conant asked if the ties are considered a pollutant. Councilmember Williams stated he was unsure if the creosote could leech out of the tie and contaminate the lake water.
Adina Overbee stated she had recently read something about creosote but she did not recall the article; she offered to research the matter. She asked what distance the ties are from the water and Forester Johnson responded that he was unsure of the distance.
Councilmember Williams pointed out that the City should have authority to ask the property owner to remove the ties if they are a pollutant. Chief Shaver explained that the City of W. St. Paul has a public nuisance ordinance and in his opinion this may fall under a public nuisance.
Mayor Park suggested that the Planner draft a letter to the property owner and questioned what the consequences would be it the owner does not comply. Planner Smith explained that she has drafted such letters in the past and that it could be a lengthy process; she advised that the first letter asks for the property owner’s cooperation to remove the items and provides a timeframe for their removal. She described possible next steps if the matter is not resolved after the initial contact.
Attorney Kuntz suggested that it may be more appropriate for Council to direct staff to gather all the facts before making contact with the property owner. The City Forester agreed and noted that there may be other properties in the City that also use creosote ties for landscaping purposes. Mr. Kuntz explained that staff should also research if the ties are considered a nuisance.
After a brief discussion, Council concurred to direct the Forester and Ms. Overbee to conduct research on other properties that contain creosote logs, and whether or not they are a pollutant and if they fall under the definition of a public nuisance and report back to Council.
Councilmember DeCourcy recalled that the railroad ties on the Larson property contained large nails and were considered dangerous and that is what prompted the request for their removal.
Council thanked the Forester for his report. - PUBLIC SAFETY: Mayor Park distributed the Public Safety monthly report for April, 2009. Chief Shaver was present and stated the false alarms were up substantially this month. He also advised that census personnel would be in the City this month gathering information.
Councilmember Conant asked for an explanation of “extra patrol” and questioned if the 8 extra patrols were for one location or eight different locations.
The Chief explained that the element of criminal activity sometimes requires extra patrols within the City. He stated that the extra patrols were in two locations; one resident requested the extra patrols due to the fact he is out-of-town frequently and the other location is a vacant home.
Council thanked Chief Shaver for his report.
9. OTHER/NEW BUSINESS:
a. Consider Bond Sale Proposals and Resolution Awarding the Sale of Bonds for City Project No. 2008-02, Salem Church Road Improvement Project. Steve Apfelbacher of Ehlers & Associates was present and reported
that Council had identified eight firms to contact regarding the bids; however none of the firms identified bid on the bond issue. He explained that this is no reflection on the City, but rather on the financial times.
Mr. Apfelbacher explained that one bid was received from United Bankers Banks with an interested rate of 4.75% which is slightly over the projected interest rate of 4.50%. He pointed out that based on all budgets for the project there was be approximately $5,800 remaining which makes up for the slightly higher interest rate. He stated he recommends keeping the assessment rate a 6 percent for the assessment hearing. He noted that he had provided a resolution with blanks for the final numbers and that he would update the final resolution by inserting the correct numbers from the bid tabulation.
Mr. Apfelbacher further explained that the call notice for the bond must be published annually and that a City representative or a hired agent would be responsible for publishing the notice; he recommended that an agent may be more suitable to handle this task rather than staff due to possible staff turnover and because the agent would have knowledge of the deadlines for publication.
Mayor Park asked if the bond issue is still within the figures projected for the project and Mr. Apfelbacher responded yes.
Councilmember Conant asked what the cost would be to hire an agent. Mr. Apfelbacher responded that it would be approximately $550 per year; $450 for the agent fees and $100 for the publication of the notice.
After a brief discussion, Council concurred that it would be appropriate to hire an agent to insure that the deadlines for publication are met.
Councilmember DeCourcy moved to adopt Resolution No. 09-11 titled, Resolution AWARDING THE SALE OF $350,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2009A FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS; DIRECTING THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY; AND PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT, for City Project No. 2008-02, Salem Church Road Reconstruction, seconded by Councilmember Williams.
In discussion, Councilmember Williams asked what numbers would be placed in the resolution and Mr. Apfelbacher responded that the numbers will come from the bid tabulation.
Attorney Kuntz pointed out that Council had discussed placing an approximate interest rate on the assessments of one (1) percent over the bond rate, but not to exceed 6.5 percent; he advised that the proposed interest rate remains in line with the discussion. Treasurer Blair commented that the proposed assessment will remain at $2,800.00 for homeowners.
Mayor Park called for a vote on the motion.
Motion carried. (5-0)
b. Consider Appointment of Sunfish Lake Representative to the Dakota County High Performance Partnership Project (HiPP). Mayor Park stated she currently has serves as the City representative with this group and that she wishes to continue in this capacity. Council concurred with her request.
Councilmember Williams moved to appoint Mayor Park to serve as the Sunfish Lake Representative to the Dakota County HiPP Group, seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy and carried. (5-0).
Mayor Park asked if there was any further business and there was no response.
10. ADJOURN: Councilmember MacManus moved for adjournment at 10:00 p.m., seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy and carried. (5-0)
______________________ ___________________________
Molly Park, Mayor Catherine Iago, City Clerk
We are a small community proud of our heritage and committed to the preservation of our pristine, rural character. We cherish our privacy, yet know we are part of a thriving Dakota County and the greater Twin Cities metropolitan area. With these partnerships in mind, we strive to preserve that unique spirit which is Sunfish Lake, Minnesota.