SUNFISH LAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING – JUNE 6, 2017

- DRAFT –

SUNFISH LAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING – JUNE 6, 2017

7:00 P.M. - ST. ANNE’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH

Attendants:


Mayor: Richard Williams

Councilmembers: Mike Hovey, JoAnne Wahlstrom, and Daniel O’Leary

City Attorney: Tim Kuntz

City Planner: Ryan Grittman

Engineer: Don Sterna

City Treasurer: Ann Lanoue

Building Inspector: Mike Andrejka
City Forester: Jim Nayes
Police Chief: Manila Shaver

City Clerk: Cathy Iago

and Members of the General Public.

Councilmember Steven Bulach was absent

1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Williams opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.

2. APPROVE AGENDA: Mayor Williams asked if there were any additions or corrections to the agenda. He asked that the issue of dumping items on Charlton Road and the schedule for Mn/DOT closing Highway 110 be discussed under Item 8. New/Other Business.

Councilmember Hovey asked that a general update of the Highway 110 Mn/DOT improvement project also be discussed.

The Mayor asked if there were any other amendments to the agenda and there was no response.

Councilmember Wahlstrom moved to adopt the agenda as amended, seconded by Councilmember Hovey and carried. (4-0)

3. CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Williams asked if there were any questions or comments relating to any items on the Consent Agenda.

Councilmember Hovey asked if there was an invoice for the payments to Holly Divine for the City Newsletter and why it was such a large payment.

Treasurer Lanoue explained that the invoice was included with the List of Bills and she explained that the invoice submitted was from 2016 and 2017 issues of the Sunfish Lake Newsletter. She read the costs associated with editing the newsletter that were submitted for payment and offered to send the invoice to Councilmember Hovey if he was unable to locate it in the List of Bills.

Councilmember Hovey stated he would refer his documents to see if he had the invoice and he asked that Holly be notified to submit the bills in a timelier manner in the future.

Clerk Iago stated she had discussed the submission of the bills with Holly and would remind her to send them as each edition of the newsletter is completed.

The Mayor asked if there were any further comments or questions and there was no response.

Councilmember O’Leary moved approval of the Consent Agenda as presented, seconded by Councilmember Hovey and carried. (4-0)

a. Regular Council Meeting Minutes of May 2 and Special Open House Minutes of May 24. 2017

b. List of Bills

c. Monthly Financials

4. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC: The Mayor asked if there were any comments from the public.

Kitzie Nye, 2140 Charlton Road, stated that someone dumped a couch on Charlton Road. She also explained that there was an article on diseased Raccoons on the City website and she questioned if the article was current. She suggested that it would be helpful if the articles placed on the website contained a date so that residents would know if they were current or not.

Councilmember Hovey stated he would date the website articles in the future.

Councilmember O’Leary asked if West St Paul has an Animal Control Officer and Chief Shaver responded yes.

Forester Nayes asked if Council wished to have him remove the couch from Charlton Road.

Mayor Williams advised that the Forester should be instructed to remove the couch and Council agreed. He commented that dumping occurs occasionally on Charlton Road and Salem Church Road and the City should attempt to figure out a way to prevent the dumping.

Kitzie Nye suggested placing signage on the road that states it is under surveillance.

Chief Shaver advised that in West St. Paul there are cameras placed on telephone poles that record activities on a continuous loop for a two week period. He commented that the camera may get an image of a person dumping or a vehicle and the license plate. He indicated that it would be appropriate for the City to poll the residents on the road to determine if they have any objection to the surveillance camera. He advised that the cost is approximately $10,000 to $11,000 for the camera and $40 per month to provide electricity.

There was discussion regarding the signage and camera options, however, no resolution was reached at this time.

Council concurred to have the City Forester remove the couch from Charlton Road for disposal.

The Mayor asked if there were any other comments from the public.

Ibby Hammett, 2196 Charlton Road, stated there are still a lot of cars speeding on Charlton Road near Delaware Avenue. She noted that she witnessed a truck speeding and weaving and only slowing down after it reached the corner turn. She stated it is her hope that the City gives more thought to installing speed tables as part of the improvements on Charlton Road to slow down traffic.

Mayor Williams explained that there was discussion regarding the installation of speed tables as part of the Charlton Road project at the Open House meeting on May 24. He questioned if the police could do anything if Ms. Hammett gets a license number when she witnesses a vehicle speeding.

Chief Shaver explained that the police could call the owner of the vehicles and warn them that a complaint was received. He stated that the police department has a new traffic device that resembles a trash can which could be placed on the road to determine traffic patterns and what time patrols on the road would be effective.

Mayor Williams suggested it may be more appropriate to wait until improvements are made on the road before traffic counts are taken and also, in his opinion, it would be appropriate to place signage at each end of Charlton Road relating to dumping and surveillance.

The Mayor asked if there were any further comments and there was no response.

5. PUBLIC HEARING/PRESENTATIONS: None.


6. PLANNING COMMISSION/PLANNER’S REPORT: a. Consider Major Site and Building Plan Review and Variance Application, 415 Salem Church Road, Grant & Alex Fitzer: Planner Grittman referred to his reported dated June 1, 2017 regarding the Major Site and Building Plan Review and Variance application for the property at 415 Salem Church Road. He explained that the application was for construction of a new home and the variance request was to permit a roof height of 34 feet, which would be 4 ft. above the maximum allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. He stated that staff recommended approval of the Major Site and Building Plan application and that Planning Commission reviewed the applications at their May 17, 2017 meeting and voted unanimously to approve the Major Site and Building Plan application and unanimously to deny the Variance application.

The Planner also referred to the lighting plan for the new home that was approved as part of the application.

Councilmember Wahlstrom asked if the applicant proposes “seeded” glass for the lights rather than clear glass which is not permitted.

Planner Grittman stated he would refer to the builder to respond to that question.

The Planner stated that the area of concern for discussion at the Planning Commission meeting related to the driveway location, which was determined when the property was platted, and staff found that the driveway access is consistent with the plat as it is proposed.

Planner Grittman advised that the applicants submitted an updated plan and a request to withdraw the variance application on May 30, 2017. He explained that the update site and building plan moves the home 10 feet to the west on the site and reduces the height of the roof trusses. He noted that the changes to the plan bring the home to a building height of 30 feet which is in compliance with the City Code.

Councilmember Hovey asked if the movement of the home affects the septic system location and the Planner responded no.

Mayor Williams asked if there is a secondary septic site on the property and the Planner responded yes.

Councilmember Wahlstrom asked what material would be used for the exterior of the structure.

The Planner stated that Hardie Board siding with stone accents is proposed and that these materials are in compliance with the design regulations.

Mayor Williams asked if there were any further questions or comments and there was no response.

Councilmember O’Leary moved to adopt Resolution No. 17-11 titled, RESOLUTION APPROVING MAJOR SITE AND BUILDING PLANS TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 415 SALEM CHURCH ROAD, SUNFISH LAKE, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA, subject to the conditions as listed, seconded by Councilmember Wahlstrom and carried. (4-0)

b. Consider Propose Ordinance Amendment Relating to Trash Container Storage on Property: Planner Grittman referred to his report dated May 10, 2017 regarding the request for an Ordinance Amendment regulating the storage of trash containers on property within the City. He explained that Council directed the Planning Commission to study this matter and a public hearing was held at the Commission meeting on May 17, 2017 with the Commission recommending an ordinance amendment relating to the storage of trash. He advised that staff has no recommendation on the matter as this type of ordinance is hard to enforce.

The Planner noted that the City Attorney recommended change the word “curb” in the proposed ordinance and replacing it with “property line” as most properties within the City do not have curb along their property line.

Mayor Williams asked the City Attorney if the City would have authority to enforce the ordinance once it is adopted.


Attorney Kuntz explained that the City Code provides authority to regulate such items as building locations, driveways, vehicles not properly parked on property and nuisance violations relating to storage of trash. He noted that the reference to “curb” or “curbside” should be changed in the proposed amendment as that would not be useful in Sunfish Lake since most properties do not have curbing. He stated that is why he suggested a different terminology be utilized.

The City Attorney suggested that if Council prefers further information in order to study this matter further, they could table this item for discussion at the next meeting and direct staff to conduct further research.

Mayor Williams stated his concern relates to enforcement and that the City does not have staff to enforce violations.

Councilmember O’Leary commented that he shares a driveway with neighbors and that they had agreed to place their trash containers in an area where they do not visually bother the other property owner.

Clerk Iago explained that the resident who presented this issue to Council stated he had attempted to work out the storage of the trash containers with his neighbor and was told that there are no laws prohibiting where the containers may be placed. She commented that the resident advised the Planning Commission his neighbor may be apt to move the container if there were regulations that prohibit them from being stored at the end of the shared driveway.

Councilmember O’Leary pointed out that residents could contact the Planner or City Attorney if the regulations are violated. He asked if the matter should go back to the Commission for further discussion.

Council concurred that the matter did not have to return to the Commission and should be tabled for further study.

Councilmember Wahlstrom moved to table the proposed ordinance amendment relating to storage of trash containers to the July 11, 2017 Regular Council meeting, seconded by Councilmember O’Leary and carried. (4-0)

c. Planner’s Report: Planner Grittman reviewed the following information listed in his report dated June 1, 2017 and explained that the sport court lighting at 1 Grieve Glen Lane was resolved and the light was removed. He stated this was confirmed by email with a photo showing its removal prior to the deadline of June 1, 2017. Staff considers this issue a closed matter.

Planner Grittman explained that the screening for the proposed storage shed at 55 Salem Church Road was installed and the City Forester had inspected the plantings. He advised that the Forester drafted a letter to be sent to the property owner, Mr. Escoto, who is present this evening. He noted that the Forester determined the plantings are installed and are better than what was required.

The Planner stated that staff had notified the property owner at 55 Salem Church Road of several ordinance violations relating to unlicensed vehicles that were improperly parked on the property and a violation relating to the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) that was approved for a sports court on the property. He explained that staff also advised the property owner that debris should be removed from the site as it was in violation of City Code regulations. He stated that staff would re-inspect the property to check for compliance after the property owner advises these issues have been resolved.

Councilmember O’Leary explained that he is a neighbor of Mr. Escoto and that he would prefer neighbors communicate with each other when there are concerns with the condition of property and offer to assist is resolving the matter.

Mr. Escoto explained that he has several vehicles on his property that he uses for different reasons and he pointed out that he was not aware that the license plates had expired on his truck until the City sent a letter. He commented that he had now purchased plates for the vehicle. He stated that he prefers to park the larger truck on his property since there is a lot of criminal activity in the area where the restaurant is located.

Councilmember O’Leary explained that the City’s concern relates to the fact the sport court on his property is not being used for that purpose and appears to serve as a parking lot for his vehicles.

Mr. Escoto stated that he can park the cars on the grass on his property so he assumed he could park them on the asphalt. He commented that he planned to use the sport court as a tennis court but when he found that it was $25,000 more to install the base for the tennis court he did not do so.

Councilmember Wahlstrom explained that vehicles must be parked on a driveway and cannot be parked on the grass.

Mr. Escoto explained that he thought the cars could be parked on grass, but it would be better to park them on a cement surface such as the sport court.

Councilmember Wahlstrom explained that the sport court can only be used as either a tennis court or sport court, but not as a parking area.

Mr. Escoto commented that when he constructed his home he was required to plant 50 pine trees and in his opinion this was due to complaints from his neighbors who attended the meeting. He commented that in his opinion the large number of trees to be planted was due to the fact that his neighbors did not want to see him because of his nationality.

Mayor Williams explained that the number of plantings required for installation on Mr. Escoto’s property would be based on Zoning Code landscape regulations for screening between adjacent properties and not based on his nationality. He noted that the requirements for screening are applied equally to everyone who applies to build a home in the City.

Planner Grittman advised that when he last viewed the property, a few vehicles were moved to the driveway however, the large truck was still parked on the sport court.

Councilmember O’Leary explained that the vehicles must be parked on the paved driveway, not in the grass or other areas, or else they must be in the garage.

Mr. Escoto stated he would clean up the debris on the property and asked if the City wanted him to take out the cement for the sport court.

Planner Grittman advised that the cement does not have to be removed, but the surface may only be used for the purpose that it was designated and approved for.

Mr. Escoto asked if he could use the area for grilling and family picnics.

Councilmember O’Leary suggested that the grill could be placed on the grass next to the sport court.

Mayor Williams explained to Mr. Escoto that the City approved his request to build a sport court on the property and would not have approved the request if it was going to be used for another purpose. He noted that it is not a driveway and that vehicles cannot be parked there. He stated that the City is enforcing the use since there needs to be consistency when approving such requests. He stated that permission was granted to use the area only as a sport court.

Councilmember O’Leary advised Mr. Escoto that Council had just sent a letter to another resident asking them to remove the lighting from their sport court. He noted that the regulations are the same for everyone in the City.

Mr. Escoto asked why he was required to plant so many pine trees adjacent to the sport court.

Councilmember O’Leary explained that it was most likely required to screen the sport court from the adjacent neighbors on two sides of the property.

Attorney Kuntz explained that if the property owner wishes to repurpose the sport court for a patio area, he would need to apply for a permit from the City to do so.

Planner Grittman questioned if an application to amend the CUP would be required.

Attorney Kuntz explained that since it is a concrete slab it could be repurposed for use as a patio by applying for a permit rather than amending the CUP>

Planner Grittman advised Mr. Escoto that if the area is used as a patio, it would still not qualify for use as a driveway. He commented that his family could still play basketball in that area, but it could not be used for parking.

Attorney Kuntz stated that before using the area as a patio, Mr. Escoto would have to make application to repurpose the slab and that he should contact staff if he wishes to do so.

Mr. Escoto questioned why his neighbor to the west was not required to install as much screening as he was when they applied for construction. He pointed out that only three pine trees were installed.

Mayor Williams explained that there may have been enough screening already in place and that could be why only three trees were required to be installed.

Councilmember O’Leary pointed out that notice was sent to Mr. Escoto and other neighbors and he could have attended the meeting to ask for more screening if he thought it was necessary.

Mayor Williams explained that the criteria for screening is based on limiting the view to adjacent neighbors and that’s why it may be different for each property.

Attorney Kuntz explained that the Forester had approved the screening for the storage shed Mr. Escoto would be building on his property and he advised that there was a condition that the storage shed must be finished by September 6, 2017.

Mr. Escoto explained that he requested the time extension in order to install the plants since the approval was granted close to the winter months. He pointed out that he now only had a couple months to complete the project.

Mayor Williams explained that the approval was conditioned upon the shed being completed by September 6, 2017 and that Mr. Escoto may have additional problems if the project is not completed.

Mr. Escoto commented that he works long hours and that he was unsure if he could get the shed done in that time period.

Mayor Williams advised that the CUP requires the shed be completed by September 6, 2017 and that the City does not make exceptions for having to work long hours.

There was discussion relating to the size of the storage shed and whether or not a building permit would be required prior to construction.

Building Inspector Andrejka suggested that Mr. Escoto send him the plans for the shed so that he could determine if a building permit is necessary.


Mayor Williams asked if there were any further comments or questions and there was no response.

Council thanked the Planner for his report.

7. STAFF REPORTS: a. BUILDING INSPECTOR: Inspector Andrejka stated that he issued four (4) and closed two (2) permits in May.

Council thanked the Inspector for his report.

b. CITY ENGINEER: Engineer Sterna referred to his report dated June 1, 2017 and reviewed the following:

Engineering Activities Undertaken in May: A. Charlton Road Feasibility Report: Engineer Sterna explained that the draft Feasibility Report was presented to resident at an open house meeting on May 24, 2017 and approximately 25 people attended. He noted that most residents attending the meeting lived on Charlton Road, however, about 5 residents living adjacent to Sunfish Lake were also in attendance. He explained that in general the attendees were supportive of the project, with a consensus to support Option 3, improve the entire road, if the project is undertaken. He noted that they were also in favor of flattening the 90-degree curve and shifting the outlet for the lake discharge to the north side of Charlton Road.

The Engineer stated that he talked with Dick Bancroft and was advised that it was Mr. Bancroft’s opinion some residents adjacent to the lake are not interested in the improvement to the outlet.

Mayor Williams commented that it would be less expensive for the residents if the outlet improvement is done as part of the project.

Engineer Sterna stated the next steps in the process involve authorizing a financial analysis of the project as it relates to the current bond obligations before finalizing the feasibility report. He noted it would be beneficial to complete the analysis in June so that Council would know the financial impact to the City budget for discussion at the July Council meeting. He stated the next step would be to move forward with the easement acquisition process and advised that the easement could be drafted and forwarded to residents in order to determine if they would grant the easements to the City prior to finalizing the feasibility report. He explained that there would be cost of approximately $500 to $700 for a title search for each property and that there are 16 properties where easements are necessary.

Attorney Kuntz explained that it would be appropriate to prepare the easements documentation with the dimensions of the easement and to include a diagram of the area and/or stake the land so that residents may see the exact area prior to asking them to donate the land. He indicated that Council could authorize the Engineer to draft the legal descriptions of the easements, prepare a diagram of the area to be donated and stake the area on the properties to show the residents the exact amount of area to be donated. He suggested the documents be drafted and sent to the property owners and then the property could be staked in July. He advised the cost should be approximately $700 per parcel to draft the documents and estimated the total cost for the 16 parcels to be $11,000. He noted that most of those attending the Open House meeting appeared favorable to donating the easements.

Councilmember O’Leary asked if all the parcels are needed to proceed and if there were any major parcels that could “make or break” the project.

Engineer Sterna advised that all would be needed to complete the entire road and that there were 4 or 5 major parcels that could deter the project if the easements were not granted to the City.

Councilmember O’Leary asked if it would make sense to have the Engineer and a member of the Council contact the major easement property owners to determine if they are willing to provide the easements.

Attorney Kuntz responded that could work to determine their willingness to provide the easements.

Councilmember Hovey asked if the costs to prepare the easement documents and stake the properties would be additional to the project costs.

Engineer Sterna explained that there may be some additional costs, however, most of the design work for the project was completed and preparing the diagrams and staking the properties would not be expensive.

Mayor Williams asked whether or not it would be appropriate to contact property owners who support the project and expressed willingness to provide the easement first to verify their support and then contact the other property owners. He commented that the title work appears to be the most costly part of the easement acquisition.

Attorney Kuntz suggested that Council consider preparing all the legal documentation and title searches at the same time.

Councilmember O’Leary commented that it may be wise to obtain easements from the critical property owners first.

Kitzie Nye questioned how parcels such as the Dobrantz property would be categorized and if they would have to provide easements to the City going forward in the event the parcel is subdivided.

Engineer Sterna explained that the property owner would have to provide the easements for the parcel and if subdivision occurs the City would request any additional easements as part of the plat approval. He indicated there are eight (8) parcels that could be deemed as critical, including the church property. He noted that those attending the open house meeting appeared to favor the project and the Church indicated they would prefer the road be paved.

Councilmember O’Leary asked if the parishioners would be able to park on the road.

Engineer Sterna explained that the feasibility report proposes some additional parking stalls be located adjacent to the road near the church for overflow parking. He indicated that some property owners on smaller lots may be more difficult to obtain and hopefully they won’t change their support of the project after reviewing the documentation.

Councilmember O’Leary asked if it would be wise to contact the property owners prior to drafting the documents to determine if there is enough oral commitment prior to spending $20,000.

Engineer Sterna stated that would be an option and it may be appropriate to tell them that if the project does not proceed the easements would be null and void. He suggested that a small group including himself, the City Attorney and a Councilmember approach all sixteen (16) property owners to discuss the easements. He commented that this could be done in small groups or individually beginning with the major eight (8) property owners.

Councilmember O’Leary stated that in his opinion it is preferable to meet face-to-face with the residents to judge their responses to the proposal.

Mayor Williams asked if there were any residents who wished to see the road maintained with Class 5 gravel versus bituminous.

Kitzie Nye pointed out that some residents may be reticent to speak out in public with their opinion of the road surface. She stated that she would prefer to see the easement area on paper or staked out on her property before making a decision. She noted that some residents on the south end of Charlton Road appeared surprised that they are responsible for the maintenance of their City sewer hookup.

Engineer Sterna explained that the City does not provide the service and that they are connected to the Mendota Heights system.

Councilmember Hovey asked if the lake property owners do not want the outlet improvement and damage to the road occurs after the improvements who would be responsible for the costs.

Attorney Kuntz explained that any responsibility for abuse to the Mendota Heights system due to the outlet would be the City’s responsibility.

Councilmember Hovey noted that the City would save approximately $10,000 in maintenance costs over a 10-year period if the road is improved and he asked if the savings could be passed onto property owners on the road.

Engineer Sterna responded no and explained that the cost savings would be part of the City’s General Fund and used to reduce other expenditures for the City, which could save money for all residents. He pointed out that 60 percent of the project cost would be paid by the City and the reduction of maintenance costs would allow the City to use those funds to pay its portion of the costs.

Councilmember Hovey stated that the project costs came in higher and the City preferred to keep the assessments the similar to those for the Windy Hill Road project, however, there were less properties to pay the assessments on that project. He questioned why the maintenance savings would not be used to offset the assessment or lower the project costs instead of placing them in the General Fund.

Treasurer Lanoue explained that by doing so the City could reduce the operation budget and the operating levy would be less and it could also reduce the debt levy. She stated that residents would still benefit from placing the savings in the General Fund if the debt levy is reduced.

Attorney Kuntz pointed out that if the City proceeds with the project it would have three (3) bond issues that would overlap. He noted that Ehlers and Associates should be hired to measure the financial impact on the City and make suggestions for the bond payments over the 10 year time period. He recommended that Ehlers be hired to provide an analysis of the bond issues and payments for Council review.

The Attorney explained that he would recommend Council authorize the City Engineer to prepare the legal descriptions and diagrams of the easements prior to the end of July and request Ehlers and Associates to provide a financial analysis relating to the bond issues for the July meeting.

Council concurred it would be appropriate to direct the City Engineer to prepare the legal descriptions and diagrams of the easements and to contact Ehlers and Associates to request a financial analysis for review at the July Council meeting.


Treasurer Lanoue pointed out that the Engineer should contact the appropriate people at St. Anne’s Church to discuss the easements and offered to provide that information.

Mayor Williams asked if there were any further comments or questions and there was no response.

Councilmember O’Leary moved to direct the City Engineer to prepare the legal descriptions and diagrams of the easements necessary to proceed with the Charlton Road Improvement project and volunteered to accompany the Engineer and City Attorney to meet with residents to discuss the easement acquisition, seconded by Councilmember Wahlstrom.

In discussion, Councilmember Hovey also volunteered to accompany the group. There was discussion relating to the estimated costs for the Engineer’s work and it was determined that the cost would be approximately $3,000 to $4,000.

Councilmember O’Leary amended the original motion to include “at a cost not to exceed $5,000” for the Engineer’s work and Councilmember Wahlstrom agreed to the amendment.

Motion as amended carried. (4-0)

B. 2017 Street Improvement Update: Engineer Sterna stated he had the construction contracts for signature this evening and that the contracts contain the required insurance and bonds. He stated that the contractor moved the start date for the project to June 19, 2017 and that the scheduled work should be completed shortly after July 4 depending on weather conditions. He stated the project must be completed by August, 2017 and that the assessment hearing would be held in September, with the assessment roll certified to Dakota County by October, 2017.

C. 2018-2022 CIP: The Engineer stated that at this time he would solicit Council input and questions regarding the proposed 2018-2022 CIP. He noted on the bigger topics would be the potential improvements to Charlton Road and the financial implications to the City budget. He noted that the document outlines what infrastructure and maintenance projects would be scheduled in 2018 and also plan for the next 5 to 10 years for Council consideration. He explained the goal is to approve the CiP at the August Council meeting which helps establish infrastructure priorities to manage the City’s long term investments and to assist with budgeting for the upcoming year.

D. Charlton Road Grading: Engineer Sterna stated that he requested Pine Bend Paving to regrade and repair the damage to Charlton Road due to the heavy rains in the later part of May. He advised that he would monitor the dust issue and would request Council authorization for him to contract for dust control at an estimated cost of $1,750. He noted that the dust control is usually applied in June so that residents along the road receive benefit throughout the summer months.

E. Building and Site Reviews: The Engineer stated he reviewed the Major Site and Building Plan at 415 Salem Church Road for the new home construction with the revised information that was submitted and that he recommends approval from an engineering standpoint.

Public Works Activities Undertaken in the Month of May: None.


Ibby Hammett asked what happens if the lake property owners are not in agreement to proceed with the outlet improvement.

Engineer Sterna explained that he told Mr. Bancroft the outlet improvement would only go forward if all lake property owners agree to proceed.

Councilmember Hovey asked if the City would be held responsible if outlet is not improved and damage occurs to property because of the outlet.

Engineer Sterna responded no and further advised that maintenance of the outlet is not the City’s responsibility.

Council thanked the Engineer for his report.

c. CITY FORESTER: Forester Nayes referred to his report dated June 1, 2017 and stated that five (5) burning permits were issued in May and the permits are generally available until fall.

The Forester stated that the Arbor Day Green Fair was held on May 6 and information on tree planting, recycling, and native bees was distributed, and that free recycling of old tires was available. He explained that eight (8) trees were planted by members of the Sunfish Lake Tree Board, including three (3) Japanese tree lilacs, three (3) New Horizon elms and two (2) Manchurian ash trees. He noted that Councilmember O’Leary, Mayor Williams and Ibby Hammett helped plant the trees along with others in attendance. He advised that the display set up by students with information about native bees was very well received by those attending the event. He also stated that three (3) old tires were recycled.

Forester Nayes advised that the water outlets from Sunfish and Horseshoe Lakes are checked weekly and cleared of debris as needed. He noted that no new tree issues were found this month.

Council thanked the Forester for his report.

d. PUBLIC SAFETY: Chief Shaver reviewed his report dated May 22, 2017 and reviewed the calls for service. He advised that there was only one false alarm this month and congratulated residents as that was only the third one this year versus 16 during the same time period last year. He reported a burglary on Charlton Road where the door was kicked in at the residence. He reminded those present that a permission slip is needed if anyone plans to fish on Sunfish Lake.

The Chief suggested that the City place information on the City website regarding the Highway 110 road closings that begin on June 12, 2017. He stated that he had a copy of the construction schedule if the City wished to review the dates.


Council thanked the Chief for his report.

8. NEW/OTHER BUSINESS: a. Consider Appointment of Alternate Representative to Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization (LMRWMO): Mayor Williams stated that he contacted former Mayor Molly Park to ask if she was willing to serve in this position and that she had not yet responded. He asked that this matter be tabled to the July meeting.

b. Consider Resolution Supporting Name Change to Hornbeam Lake: Councilmember O’Leary thanked the City Attorney for dating the resolution relating to the name change for Hornbeam Lake.

Attorney Kuntz referred Council to his email dated May 31, 2017 and the proposed resolution requesting the name change for the lake.

Mayor Williams asked if there were any questions or comments and there was no response.

Councilmember O’Leary moved to adopt Resolution No. 17-12 titled, RESOLUTION SUPPORTING NAME CHANGE TO HORNBEAM LAKE, seconded by Councilmember Hovey and carried. (4-0)

c. Other: Mayor Williams asked the City Engineer to provide an update on the MnDOT Highway 110 Improvement Project.

Engineer Sterna stated he had talked to Jon Solberg from MnDOT and was informed that the project schedule has changed due to the recent rain.

Councilmember Hovey pointed out that the Sunfish Lake roads were supposed to be left open to allow people to cross over into West St. Paul during construction. He noted that Sunfish Lane has no other outlet if the access to Highway 110 is closed.

Engineer Sterna stated he would ask MnDOT for a weekly update to place on the City website.

Treasurer Lanoue explained that she signed up on the MnDOT website and now receives emails on the project.

Attorney Kuntz asked if the Fire Department receives notice of the road closings for emergency response purposes and the City Engineer responded yes. He explained that the Fire Department is tied into the Emergency Dispatch Center and receives information from them.

Chief Shaver agreed and noted that a majority of the project is located in Mendota Heights so they should receive notification.

Mayor Williams asked if there was any further business and there was no response.


9. ADJOURN: Mayor Williams adjourned the meeting at 8:49 p.m.



____________________________ ________________________________

Catherine Iago, City Clerk Richard A. Williams, Jr., Mayor