SUNFISH LAKE SPECIAL COUNCIL STUDY MEETING – MARCH 3, 2009

5:30 P.M. - ST. ANNE’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH

Attendants:

      Mayor:   Molly Park

      Councilmembers: Cathy DeCourcy, Judy MacManus, Richard Williams and Roger Conant.

      City Attorney: Timothy Kuntz

      City Engineer: Tim Hanson

      City Planner: Laurie Smith

      City Clerk: Cathy Iago

            and Members of the General Public.
     

1.   CALL TO ORDER:            Mayor Park opened the meeting at 5:30 p.m. and stated that Council would hold discussion relating to the two agenda items as posted; Water Quality and Vegetation Management. She explained that this is a public meeting; however, Council does not receive public comments at a study meeting and no formal action is taken on any items discussed.

2.   a) Water Quality; Sunfish Lake Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan; monitoring and controlling stormwater runoff to ponds and lakes within the City.

Engineer Hanson introduced Todd Hubmer who was present to review the plan changes and answer questions regarding the document.

Todd explained that he would review four issues this evening related to the Stormwater Management Plan; 1) What is proposed to change from the current policy document, is it different from previous years, what are the key elements that changed and why does the City have a plan; 2) Does the City have Ordinances in place to enforce the policy; 3) Responsibility for enforcement, who is responsible; and 4) Education opportunities for residents.

Engineer Hubmer stated that the Metropolitan Council adopted a Surface Water Management Plan in 1985. He stated that the Lower Mississippi Watershed Management Organization (LMWMO) also influences the plan regulations and that the City was responsible for adopting a Stormwater Management Plan incorporating the regulations mandated by the Met Council and the criteria set forth by the LMWMO in order to be in conformance with the regulations set forth by the Met Council. He advised that the plan will have to be updated again in three (3) years due to the fact that the LMWMO will be updating their plan and any changes the LMWMO adopts would have tobe incorporated into the City’s plan.

Mr. Hubmer noted the following items for Council: 

1) Staff added language describing the Citizen Assisted Monitoring Program (CAMP); previously this was done by consultants and now volunteers living near the lakes take samples of the water for testing water quality;

2)  Staff updated the criteria provided by the Lower Mississippi Watershed Management Organization (LMWMO) relating to classification of water bodies;

3) Staff did not change the general layout of the plan as it is dictated by State Statutes.

Mr. Hubmer reviewed the following issues in response to concerns expressed by Council:

Policy No. 6:  Classification System Table – Buffer Strips are required adjacent to shoreline for new development; however, this is not retro-active for properties developed prior to adoption of the plan. He noted that the plan suggests encouraging property owners to maintain a buffer strip through education and news articles.

Section 6 – Implementation Action Items – He reviewed three elements; Capital Improvement Projects, Studies and Programs. He noted that the City provides programs such as street sweeping under the plan and that the CIP lists improvement of culverts on Charlton Road in 2010 and Windy Hill Road in 2011 as high priority projects.

Councilmember McManus questioned how the City decides priority for projects. Mr. Hubmer responded that a High Priority project would be in response to an issue that could cause damage to property; Medium Priority projects are those considered to be nuisance or related to emergency access or items such as maintenance of culverts to avoid damage to property; and Low Priority projects are those considered to be a nuisance but do not cause damage to property.

Mayor Park questioned how the City would become aware of property issues until citizens provide such information. Mr. Hubmer explained that residents normally do not inform the City of problems until they become a high priority item or they attend a public meeting.

Councilmember Conant questioned if water quality is a high priority issue. Mr. Hubmer responded that it could be considered high priority and noted that the CAMP Program and Stormwater Management Plan are mandated to improve water quality.

Councilmember Conant asked if the SWPPP is updated annually and if a copy of the latest water quality report is available. He noted that he has asked for a copy on two separate occasions and has yet to receive it.

Mr. Hubmer responded that the plan must be updated every five (5) years, but there is an annual reporting mandate. He explained that the report could be placed on the City’s website and that he would provide a copy for posting and also to Council.

There was discussion relating to the title of the plan. Mr. Hubmer explained that the Met Council has suggested changing the name of the plan to Water Resource Management Plan to provide a better understanding of what the document actually encompasses.

Councilmember Conant agreed that the Water Resource Management Plan would be a better name and stated that in his opinion residents may not be interested in the programs since they do not live in an affected area. 

Councilmember Williams pointed out that the City may not have control over the name of the document since there are mandates that may limit what the City can do. He suggested it may be better to explain the contents of the document on the website or provide educational materials to residents.

Engineer Hubmer explained that the public hearing for the plan update could be held in conjunction with the Environmental Committee meeting; he noted that it is not required to be held at a Council meeting. He noted that input from the Environmental Committee as well as public comments could then be forwarded to Council.

Councilmember DeCourcy agreed that the name of the document should be changed to reflect the contents of the plan.

Councilmember McManus questioned how the cost estimates are established. Mr. Hubmer responded that they are developed with reasonable expectations for a City the size of Sunfish Lake.

Councilmember Conant asked if they are budgeted. Treasurer Blair responded that they are new to the City and not a budgeted item.  

Engineer Hanson pointed out that some items are generally included in the Engineering budget, although they are not specific line-items in the budget.

Councilmember Conant suggested that a separate budget section should be initiated for future water management issues. Council concurred.

Mayor Park pointed out that stormwater management relates to all properties since the city does not contain traditional size city lots and has no services; she noted that residents question why the city is involved in stormwater management and she explained that each property within the city has an environmental affect on the city as a whole.

Engineer Hubmer pointed out there are numerous educational documents available and offered to provide informational links to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the DNR that could be posted on the City website.

Mr. Hubmer referred to Table 63 – Storm Water Studies and noted that the City has been updating ordinances to comply with the plan. He stated that last year the City adopted the Discharge and Elimination ordinance and that staff would be suggesting further ordinance updates as required.

There was discussion regarding the 2007 Water Quality Report and the criteria for measuring water quality and methods to provide more informational materials to residents. Engineer Hubmer noted that the Dakota County website has numerous articles and educational information relating to this subject.      

Councilmember Conant pointed out that some people may not use the City website and that other methods of communication may be more beneficial.

Councilmember Williams stated he would prefer to have the Environmental Committee take charge of disseminating of education information. Mayor Park agreed the Committee could serve as a conduit of Council to distribute information.

Councilmember Conant agreed that both approaches are useful and that the City could provide funding for this purpose.

Councilmember DeCourcy commented that she was not aware of the fact that placing a fire-pit too close to the lake is harmful due to flying debris from the fire. Councilmember Williams indicated that placement of the fire-pit may be controlled by ordinance.

Mayor Park summarized by stated that the City must update this document to reflect any policy changes, a public hearing regarding the changes is held to receive public input and then the document must go through a process of review by other agencies prior to its final adoption.

Councilmember Conant explained that he provided a number of questions to the City Engineer related to the document and stated that in his opinion he did not receive an adequate response. He indicated that he believes the corrections he noted should be incorporated into the document and he hoped that the Engineer would review his comments and make the appropriate changes. He commented that he was displeased with the fact that the response to his questions were distributed to Council without a copy of the questions he provided; he noted that he believed it was a private communication and that by providing the comments he was attempting to make a contribution as a member of the Council.
Mr. Hubmer apologized for his categorical responses to the questions submitted by Councilmember Conant and pointed out that he normally provides information to the Council as whole regarding any request he receives from a member of the council to insure that the entire group has the same information. He explained that it has been his experience that elected officials must have the facts as a group to make an informed decision. He further stated that he prefers to review information with newly elected officials to insure they have a history of how and why documents and policies were initiated.

Councilmember Conant stated he wished to have the document be credible prior to its distribution and if there are mistakes, such as incorrect page numbering, they should be corrected.

Mr. Hubmer stated he would review the document and correct any obvious errors.

Councilmember Conant stated he wished to have a copy of the corrected document. Engineer Hubmer responded that he would send a PDF file to the Council when the corrections are made; he noted that he does not have the appendix portion of the document as a PDF file.

Councilmember Conant pointed out that the appendix also requires corrections. Engineer Hubmer replied that he would make the corrections.

Engineer Hanson explained that once the plan is adopted staff will review the ordinances to see if any updates are necessary. He pointed out that this is not the final document and that is why staff has not placed it on the website; once the changes are adopted a final copy will be available for posting on the website.

Mr. Hubmer commented that ordinances may change prior to the next update and suggested that only references to sections of the ordinances that apply be inserted into the document versus the ordinance in its entirety.

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

Council thanked Engineer Hubmer for his presentation.            

      b)  Vegetation Management polices, guidelines and regulations relating to vegetation removal, alteration and restoration.

Mayor Park explained that residents had expressed concern relating to the removal of vegetation near the shoreline in the Shoreland Overlay District and questioned whether or not the vegetation would be restored. She suggested that due to the lack of time remaining for the study meeting, Council should attempt to identify pertinent issues related to this item for future discussion.

Councilmember Williams commented that the more prevalent issue appears to be related to the fact that property owners are prohibited from removing trees within 200 ft. of the shoreline and most of the trees near the shoreline appear to be noxious Buckthorn. He commented that the one situation where concern was voiced by a resident regarding removal of vegetation near the shoreline related to the removal of Buckthorn. He indicated that in his opinion there is a need to address restoration of vegetation after removal of Buckthorn or other noxious growth occurs near the shoreline.

Councilmember DeCourcy questioned if there is an ordinance prohibiting the removal of trees from property or if a resident may remove any tree from their property.

Councilmember Williams stated that he recalls there are some limitations regarding tree removal.

Councilmember Conant suggested that Council discussion focus only on the Shoreland Overlay District.

Mayor Park commented that in her opinion removal of vegetation and its replacement are issues that relate to all properties within the City not only those adjacent to the lakes.

Attorney Kuntz suggested that if Council wishes to expand discussion of this item staff could conduct research on the current regulations for removal of trees and vegetation and if there are any regulations for replacement. He indicated that he does not recall if the current code contains regulations regarding these issues, with the exception of the Zoning Code regulations for new development. He noted that the removal of trees is usually governed by the three “D’s”; dead, diseased and downed or dangerous, and advised that if the trees fit any of those categories they may be removed.

Councilmember Conant reiterated that the discussed was supposed to center around shoreline issues and he does not believe there is sufficient time to expand the discussion. He noted that there is supposed to be a 100 ft. buffer zone adjacent to the shoreline and that several properties at the western end of Sunfish Lake have not maintained the buffer zone. He questioned if these properties were grand-fathered because they were constructed prior to adoption of the ordinance and if it is possible to require them to adhere to the ordinance at this time.

Councilmember MacManus recalled that the properties were grand-fathered due to their age and noted that she believes the City could encourage them to maintain the buffer but not require them to do so.

Councilmember DeCourcy asked if it is only the properties at the western end of the lake that do not maintain the buffer zone Councilmember Conant stated it is clear those properties do not maintain the buffer zone; however, he stated if there were other properties that may not be in conformance. He pointed out that this is not a matter of aesthetics, but rather an environmental issue.

Attorney Kuntz stated he was unable to respond to the issues raised this evening without researching the questions raised.

Councilmember Williams suggested delaying discussion of the matter until after the Lake Pepin study has been completed; he indicated that the outcome of the matter may establish mandates for the City to adopt ordinances relating to this issue.

Councilmember Conant advised that there are other issues such as invasive Yellow Iris that is harmful to the lake; he noted that Council may need to find a method to discourage the planting of Yellow Iris.

Mayor Park questioned if regulations relating to invasive plants would apply to all other lakes and ponds within the City.

Councilmember Williams responded that in his opinion the regulations for noxious weeds and invasive plants are general to all lakes within the City.

Councilmember Conant pointed out that Yellow Iris is an aquatic threat, not a noxious weed.

Mayor Park suggested that further study was needed on these issues.

Councilmember Williams suggested that the City Attorney review the ordinances to determine if the properties not maintaining the buffer have been grand-fathered and also what ordinances are in place or could be adopted to maintain water quality on the lakes. He also suggested that the Attorney research enforcement and costs associated with enforcement.  He pointed out that there are educational tools available relating to maintaining water quality near the lakes and also relating to removal of Buckthorn and other noxious vegetation.

Councilmember Conant suggested that Council consider regulating the use of dishwasher detergents that contain phosphorous materials or educate residents on the brands of detergents that are eco-friendly.

Mayor Park commented that behavior is a component related to use to environmentally safe products.

Councilmember Williams did not support regulating product use however, he supports adopting a vegetation management policy for shoreline properties and a proactive educational program.

Councilmember Conant noted that under Weed Control Enforcement in the City Code there is a reference to enforcement by a “department” and he pointed out that the City does not have “departments”. He suggested another meeting be held to discuss broader topics.

Planner Smith offered to research the matter and determine how other cities are handling these issues.

Mayor Park noted that time had run out for the study meeting and suggested a motion to adjourn.  She asked if
there were any further comments and there was no response.


3.   ADJOURN:   Councilmember DeCourcy moved, to adjourn the Regular Council meeting at 6:59 p.m., seconded by Councilmember MacManus and carried.

__________________________                                            ___________________________

Molly Park, Mayor                                                       Catherine Iago, City Clerk