Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/17/92 MINUTES OF THE LAKE ADVISORY COMMITTEE November 17, 1992 The Lake Advisory Committee meeting was Tuesday, November 17, 1992 at 6:37 p.m. Dave Moran, Bill Packer, Jody Stroh, Tom Wingard. City: Staff Coordinator Joel absent were: Pete Patchin and Dave Vinlove. called to order on Members present were: Watkins, and John Rutherford. Members MOTION BY WINGARD, SECONDED BY STROH TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 15, 1992 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The next order of business was an update on the 1993 Eurasian Milfoil program. The results of the Public Hearing were discussed, along with other projects the watershed will be involved with in 1993. It was suggested that alternative funding sources be looked into prior to developing a 1994 plan for treatment of Eurasian Milfoil infestation. While discussing downstream flooding caused by the outlet, Moran pointed out that the primary problems are not even in the Prior Lake - Spring Lake Watershed. The committee agreed that the situation should be handled very carefully to avoid misunderstandings between the various agencies involved. The next order of business was a discussion of goals and Objectives for 1993. Members reviewed a synopsis of the 1992 priorities of the City Council Work Program, and commented on the status of each one. It was agreed by the Members that water level issues should be left for the Watershed District. However, Members felt that the LAC should continue to keep informed of the District's activities. The Committee agreed that a development plan should be created to address water quality issues. This plan would include identifying sedimentation basins and non-point source pollution areas. Bill Packer offered to take aerial video around the lake to identify some of these areas. Members agreed that education awareness and Eurasian Milfoil signage should also be part of the action plan. Discussion continued with how the Committee should address water use issues. It was the consensus that issues relating to Scott County Ordinance #9 should not be reevaluated by the Committee at this time. Members agreed that the Noise Level Ordinance should be left for the City Council. 4629 Dakota S1. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 I Ph. (612) 447-4230 I Fax (612) 447,4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLDYER I .~ ...-- A public marina was discussed and during that discussion Dave Moran explained to the committee the process the DNR uses to determine when a public access is needed on a lake. Discussion continued with the Governance section of the Synopsis. The Members felt many of the items have been addressed in the last year, but should be updated and continued for next year. Rutherford agreed to assemble meeting, of the goals and committee's discussion. a draft outline, for the next objectives for 1993 based on the Because some Members were absent, it was agreed that the election for officers should wait until the next meeting. The next order of business was a discussion on the Committee's plans for the Council Budget Workshop. Watkins and Moran both indicated they had other plans and could not attend. Wingard and Stroh indicated they would like to attend. Rutherford said he would call them with more information when it becomes available. Watkins presented information that summarized what effects the new Shoreland Management Regulations would have on development around the lake. Rutherford presented information that described the current status of the wetland project proposed in Fish Point Park. All members asked to be contacted when the next neighborhood meeting is scheduled for the residents. The Committee agreed to reschedule the next meeting for Wednesday, December 16. The Committee also agreed to discuss, at the next meeting, changing meeting dates for next year due to conflicts with other meetings scheduled for the third Tuesday of each month. The meeting of the LAC was adjourned at 8:35 PM. Respectfully submitted, _ ;;{, -4 ~/v-'~-' ~el A. Rutherford Recording Secretary The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, December 16, 1992 at 6:30 p.m. T D"~;' ,\ .f:' '. - T I '. '. ., ~. /',..,.. ,; r L.:,it '" ,. .'0'... ,; . .. \:..;, Ji \:; ~ SYNOPSIS OF THE NOVEMBER 12, 1991 DISCUSSION ON THE COMMITTEE'S PRIORITIES In an effort to present the work program, staff has November 12, 1991 Committee of the Committee Priorities Committee priorities into a defined incorporated the discussion from the meeting into the original "Synopsis of the City Council Work Program." The Committee Priorities for presentation only have been categorized based on the alphabet. No ranking should be inferred from the Priorities A thru M. The Committee will determine a priority at a future date. PRIORITY A Establish an aggressive policy of water retention (up stream) ~onding. A study should be conducted to determine adverse 1mpacts associated with high water such as erosion, sewer line impact including inflow and infiltration and flood proofing for structures in the flood plain. Incorporated in the study should be an analysis of the importance of protecting basins that serve desiltation purposes. Committee should initiate action on this br meeting with the County and Watershed District off1cials to a~ thei.r. interest in pursuing the study and policy. ~~ PRIORITY B Committee will prepare a Comprehensive Lake Level plan. This Plan will review the outlet operation policy and study the lake elevation history. Committee should begin activities to implement this priority by review of the 1987 Outlet Management pOlicr and discuss the priority with the Watershed Distr1ct. Management management PRIORITY C Define and reduce non-point source pollution into local waterbodies. Activities to begin this would include: review of the existing laws, a discussion with City Planner, Horst Graser, and meetings with the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Waste Control Commission officials to determine their work on this priority. F""'~. l. ~ ",: c.._,..,. '.V" i:! ~ .... .... ~ -......a; PRIORITY D Watershed District should retain an independent firm to test all major lakes on a monthly basis. will include the accumulation of baseline data on such as nutrients, water clarity, chlorophyll levels. engineering The testing information and oxygen This activity will begin by staff contacting the Watershed District to discuss their interest in this priority. PRIORITY E Increase education and awareness of lake issues, develop water quality ~ublication for residents and coordinate community educat10n programs. (staff was directed to utilize the Wavelength Newsletter, if possible). Bill Packer will contact Jim Riccioli for his interest in a column in the Prior Lake American. (Packer letter to Unmacht enclosed in December 10 Agenda. ) PRIORITY F signa~e at boat accesses should be increased to warn against EuraS1an Milfoil. Dave Moran will present proposed sign language and Tom Watkins will work with the Lake Association on their interest in participating in this priority. PRIORITY G Revaluate Scott County Ordinance #9 for management. The Committee will begin this priority by meeting with Sheriff Nevin to determine his plans for the implementation of Scott County Ordinance #9 through the DNR's office. surface water PRIORITY H Adopt noise level ordinance for waterways. The Committee will b7gin implementation of this priority by review1ng existing noise level ordinances of other communities. PRIORITY I City will undertake a feasibility study for a public marina. The Committee will begin this activity by developing a specification plan for firms to use to bid on the study. ~-... PRIORITY J D. '..R1'.... ..1\ \r.='T.. !l>' r~"\." nn ^ F'T' U' ~.t"r it fr' ~.... .II"""\. ~ Public access points should be better identified. The Committee will begin this activity by reviewing the information compiled by the Lake Review Committee Water Use Subcommittee. PRIORITY K Identifr who has water management juriSdictional respons1bility. In this research, investigate funding sources for surface water management through the city, County and Metropolitan agencies. The Committee can begin implementation of this priority by discussions with Watershed District, Scott County, and DNR officials. PRIORITY L City should create a staff position to coordinate activities of the Lake Advisory Committee. This prioritr has begun and is proceeding through a discussion w1th the Watershed Board. PRIORITY M Develop a matrix of proposed projects and funding sources. This priority can be implemented after other information and research has been generated from other priorities and work activities. . -'~-- SYNOPSIS OF THE COMMITTEE PRIORITIES OF THE CITY COUNCIL WORK PROGRAM In an effort to ~rioritize the 55 recommendations contained in the City Counc11 Work Program (dated April 20, 1991), the Lake Advisory Committee members individually ranked their recommendations within each Lake Review Committee Subcommittee. These rankin~s were then compared with one another to develop a committee prlority schedule. The top priorities are as follows: WATER LEVEL 1. A. Establish an aggressive policy of water retention (up stream) ponding. The study should be conducted to determine adverse impacts associated with high water such as erosion, sewer line impact, flood proofing potential for structures in the flood plain. Prepare a Comprehensive Lake Level Management Plan. 2. A. B. Develo~ lake level plan that defines optional outlet operat10n level and lake elevation. 3. A. Review the 1987 Outlet Management Policy. WATER QUALITY Basins that serve desiltation purposes should protected. B. Define and reduce non point source pollution into waters. 1. A. be 2. Watershed District should retain an engineering firm to test all major lakes on basis. independent a monthly A. B. Increase education awareness of water quality ~ublication for community educatlon programs. Signage at boat access should be increase to warn against Eurasian Water Milfoil. lake issues/develop residents/coordinate 3. A. WATER USE Re-evaluate Scott County Ordinance number 9 for Surface Water Management. B. Adopt Noise Level Ordinance for waterways. 1. A. 2. A. 3. A. GOVERNANCE 1. A. B. 2. A. 3. A. "LACFOL" city undertake feasibility study for public marina. Public access points should be better identified city and Scott county should investigate funding sources for surface water management. citI should create a staff ~osition act vities of Lake Advisory Comm1ttee. to coordinate water management jurisdictional IdentifI who has respons bility. Develop a matrix of proposed projects and funding sources. Section E. Section A. section B. section C. section O. Voting: All .ember. of the Comaittee, have equal voting authority. In addition to a quorum being required tor each meeting ot the Committee in order to conduct business, a majority ot those members present shall be required to transact business and approve any matters before the Committee. ARTICLE 4. SCOPE OF POWERS AND DUTIES Powers and Duties: The Committee shall act in an advisory capacity to the Prior Lake City Council. The Coamittee shall advise the City Council on matters identitied in the Preamble. On an annual basis, the Committee shall outline its duties in the form of Goals and Ob~ectives and shall give an accounting of its activ1ties at a City Council meeting each year in an annual report. The Committee may perform duties as specifically directed by the City Council not identified in the Preaable. Additional, specific powers, duties and responsibilities may be assigned to the Committee upon approval of the City Council. Subcommittees: The Committee may provide subcommittees as it deems necessary to the goals and objectives of the Committee delegate such powers and duties subcommittees necessary to carry functions. for such implement and may to such out its One Year Evaluation: At the end of the first year of the committee (August, 1992), the City Council will examine the activities of the Lake Adviso~ Committee. This examination will include monitor1ng the progress of the committee, reviewing the goals, ob~ectives and results of the committee's act1vities and determine if the committee should continue on as charged in the Preamble of the Bylaws. General: These Bylaws shall govern the conduct and procedures of the Lake Advisory Committee. If an issue is raised or a point is made which is not covered in the Bylaws, the procedures to respond to the issue or point shall be governed by Roberts Rules of Order Revised. 4 C~~ ,r.FT l.,H,r.i' . SYNOPSIS or THE NOVEMBER 12, 1991 DISCUSSION ON THE COMMITTEE'S PRIORITIES In an effort to present the work program, staff has November 121 1991 Committee of the Comm ttee Priorities Committee priorities into a defined incorporated the discussion fro. the meetinq into the oriqlnal .synoesis of the City Council Work Proqraa. The Committee Priorities for presentation only categorized based on the alphabet. No rankinq should fro. the Priorities A thru M. The Committee vill priority at a future date. PRIORITY A Establish an aggressive policy of water retention (up stream) ponding. A study should be conducted to determine adverse impacts associated with high water such as erosion, sewer line impact including inflow and infiltration and flood proofing for structures in the flood plain. Incorporated in the study should be an analfsis of the importance of protecting basins that serve deslltation purposes. have been be inferred deteraine a Committee should initiate action on this br meeting with the County and Watershed District offlcials to ascertain their interest in pursuing the study and policy. PRIORITY B Committee will prepare a Comprehensive Lake Level Management plan. This Plan will review the outlet operation management policy and study the lake elevation history. Committee should begin activities to implement this priority by review of the 1987 Outlet Management POlicr and discuss the priority with the Watershed Distrlct. PRIORITY C Define and reduce non-point source pollution into local waterbodies. Activities to begin this would include: reviev of the existing laws, a discussion with City Planner, Horst Graser, and meetings with the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Waste Control Commission officials to determine their work on this priority. ~u" {. r:'- " -., I - ."- .... . PRIORITY D Watershed District should retain an independent fira to test all major lake. on a aonthly basis. will include the accumulation ot baseline data on such as nutrients, water clarity, chlorophyll levels. engineering The testin(j intormation and oxygen This activity vill be(jin by statt contacting the Watershed District to discuss their interest in this priority. PRIORITY E Increase education and awareness ot lake issues, develop water quality ~ublication for residents and coordinate community educatlon programs. (staff was directed to utilize the Wavelength Newsletter, if possible). Bill Packer will contact Jim Riccioli tor his interest in a column in the Prior Lake American. (Packer letter to Unmacht enclosed in December 10 Agenda. ) PRIORITY F Signa~e at boat accesses should be increased to varn against EuraSlan Milfoil. Dave Moran will present proposed sign language and Tom Watkins will work with the Lake Association on their interest in participating in this priority. PRIORITY G Revaluate Scott County Ordinance '9 for manageHnt. The Committee vill begin this priority by meeting vith Sheriff Nevin to determine his plans for the implementation of Scott County Ordinance '9 through the DNa's office. surface vater PRIORITY H Adopt noise level ordinance for vaterways. The Committee vill begin implementation of this priority by reviewin(j existin(j noise level ordinances of other communities. PRIORITY I City vill undertake a feasibility study for a public marina. The Committee will begin this activity by developing a specification plan for firms to use to bid on the study. .~ PRIORITY J DR AfT DR.~FT Public access points should be better identified. The Committee will begin this activity by reviewin9 the information compiled by the Lake Review Committee Water Use Subcommittee. PRIORITY J( Identify who has vater management jurisdictional responsibility. In this research, investigate tunding sources for surface vater management through the City, County and Metropolitan agencies. PRIORITY L The Committee can begin implementation priority by discussions with Watershed Scott County, and ONR officials. of this District, City should create a staff position to coordinate activities of the Lake Advisory Committee. This priorit~ has beCJUn and is proceeding through a discussion vlth the Watershed Board. PRIORITY M Oevelop a matrix of proposed projects and funding sources. This priority can be implemented after other information and research has been generated from other priorities and work activities.