DEEPHAVEN CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL COUNCIL WORK SESSION

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2006

MINUTES

 

 

1.                  Call to Order

Mayor Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

 

Present:                        Mayor Tom Anderson, Councilmembers Paul Skrede, Keith Kask, Kim Crockett and John Wheaton

 

Staff:                            City Administrator Dana Young

 

Boat Committee:           David Paulson, Oliver Arrett, Marc Anderson, Steve Pavek, Pete Onstad, Larry Parkhurst and Darel Gustafson

 

2.                  Review Storm Water Feasibility Report

Scott Harri and Zac Essig, representing Schoell & Madson, were present to present the Storm Water Feasibility Report for Council review.  The report provides construction options and related costs on improving the storm water drainage in five separate areas of the City – Hamilton/Montgomerie Avenue, Rutledge Road/Park Avenue, Main Beach, Monaltrie Avenue and Amesbury Pond.

 

Hamilton/Montgomerie Avenue Project – Five alternatives were reviewed that included:

a)      Constructing a pond for $113,470

b)      Piping to Northome Blvd for $475,110

c)      Piping through a proposed easement for $317,730

d)      Piping through a proposed driveway easement for $148,216

e)      Directional drilling through a proposed easement for $220,951

 

Rutledge / Park Avenue Project – Correcting the storm sewer drainage on Rutledge Avenue was discussed at an estimated cost of $684,377.  Mayor Anderson suggested analyzing the feasibility of running the storm water along Rutledge rather than piping the storm water underneath the street.  Scott Harri further noted that the costs of pipe and bituminous have increased dramatically this year.

 

Main Beach Project – Correcting the erosion of the beach area was discussed at an estimated cost of $42,659.  Discussion was held regarding on daylighting the pipes away from the swimming area of the beach.

 

Monaltrie Road Pond Area Project – Three options on improving the drainage from Monaltrie Road Pond were discussed.  The cost alternatives ranged from $172,362 to $247,805.  Scott Harri stated that they would evaluate the feasibility of running the storm water along Virginia Avenue instead of piping it under the street.

 

Amesbury Pond Project – Three alternatives were reviewed for correcting the overflow of the pond in Amesbury.  Cost estimates were not provided.

 

            The Council thanked Scott Harri and Zac Essig for their preliminary report.

 

3.                  Review Proposed Dock Plans for St. Louis Bay & Carson’s Bay

David Paulson, Chairman of the Deephaven Boat Committee, was present to present the proposed dock reconfiguration plans for St. Louis Bay & Carson’s Bay.  David Paulson presented a PowerPoint presentation which gave a brief overview of the history of the docks, the need to upgrade the docks, current wait time statistics, and the ever-increasing demand for larger boats and for dock slips.  He stated that the plan substantially improves the current infrastructure of docks and slides; enables a transition on the slides to meet the current demand for larger boats; eliminates the unsightly shore space; and potentially expands the Deephaven Beach.  The dock plans were reviewed which proposed the following change in boat storage units:

 

 

Carson’s Bay

St. Louis Bay

 

Existing

Proposed

Existing

Proposed

Docks

38

48

40

50

Buoys

25

25

28

28

Slides

39

39

78

63

Shorespace

--

--

13

0

Total

102

112

159

141

 

Discussion was held on the accurate number of total boat storage units and whether the plan proposed a total increase or reduction in the number of boat storage units.

 

Mayor Anderson stated that the proposed plan seems to address many of the concerns that were raised when the St. Louis Bay Dock Plan was presented several years ago.  He stated that the proposed plan appears to address the earlier concern about too much congestion around the beach, too many boats in both Bays, and the proposed plan successfully shifts the mix from one recourse (slides) to another (docks).  He stated that he would not support a total overall increase in the number of boat storage units.

 

Darel Gustafson, stated that the Committee is presenting the proposal this evening with the intention of obtaining permission to proceed with the plan.  He stated that some of the important points of the plan are that there would be 18 fewer boat storage units in St. Louis Bay and the plan addresses the fact that slides don’t offer people the larger size boats that they want.

 

Lois Boisclair, 19400 Azure Road, stated that she is concerned with the proposed location of the northernmost finger of the dock in St. Louis Bay next to her property.  She stated that continuing the request for a 22’ variance would prevent her from accessing a planned extension to her dock.

 

Discussion was held on the expansion of the Main Beach.  Mayor Anderson stated that the beach itself couldn’t be expanded because the drop off south of the beach is too severe and couldn’t hold the sand.

 

Randy Boyd, 19960 Minnetonka Blvd,  stated that he is not opposed to the proposed reconfigurations but wants to protect his dock area immediately west of the Carson’s Bay docks.  He commented that he would favor raising marina rates to be used to help offset property taxes and that he would also support a lottery system in order to provide more movement on the waiting list.  He stated that the current docks aren’t in as bad a conditions as has been stated this evening, the new docks wouldn’t necessarily be safer because they are  narrower than the current docks, and that maintenance on the new docks wouldn’t necessarily be less as has been stated earlier because if ice damaged the new pilings they would have to be removed and reset.  He added that he believes the City should try to be in compliance with the LMCD setbacks and should attempt to avoid any variances and that the LMCD will not compare the replacement of slides with docks.

 

David Paulson stated that the Boat Committee has already heard or contemplated every conceivable objection to the proposed plans and that there is not one objection that undoes this plan.  He stated that the Committee would want the plan to be flexible and to listen to comments from both the public and the LMCD.  He stated that the Committee is looking for the Council to give them direction to move ahead on this proposal or to stop.

 

Councilmember Wheaton asked the Boat Committee what were their priorities with the proposed plan.  Pete Onstad stated that their two top priorities were to address the increasing demand for dock slips and to eliminate the shore spaces.

 

Councilmember Crockett asked if there were any plans to accommodate those individuals who lease shore space once these spaces were eliminated?  Pete Onstad stated that there are three larger boats currently on the shore spaces that would have to be accommodated on the new docks.  Councilmember Crockett commented that she didn’t feel that the City should feel obligated to accommodate these larger boats since they are on an annual lease agreement.

 

Lois Boisclair questioned whether the proposed plan for expanding the beach area was the best use for the shore space area.

 

Oliver Arrett stated that the proposed dock plan has to be viewed as a concept plan and that some elements of the plan are undefined.  He stated that the central question is whether the Council wants the Boat Committee to go further with the plan.

 

Mayor Anderson provided a brief summary of the proposed plan.  He stated that it eliminates the shore space, reduces the number of boat storage units in St. Louis Bay, increases the number of boat storage units in Carson’s Bay, reduces the overall number of boat storage units and adds amenities to the south side of the Main Beach area.

 

Councilmember Crockett stated that eliminating the use of slides by sailors would free up a considerable number of slides.  Steve Pavek stated that he does not particularly favor that idea due to the fact that city-owed dories would be an additional liability to the City, sailors are truly using the slides, and there would be considerable opposition from sailors to the idea.

 

Further discussion was held on replacing some of the current slides with slides with winches to accommodate larger boats.  Mayor Anderson noted that this would result in fewer but larger boats on slides.  Pete Onstad commented that allowing larger boats would take some of the pressure off the dock waiting list.  Darel Gustafson agreed that allowing 18’ boats on slides would drop a lot of people off the dock waiting list.

 

Councilmember Crockett stated that the proposed plan really just moves around the furniture and that the real key to the hundreds of people on the waiting list is to establish time limits.  She stated that term limits is unlikely to be considered by the Council until residents bring the issue forth.

 

Councilmember Wheaton stated that the Boat Committee has done a great job of dealing with a number of variables with the development of the proposed dock plan.  He stated that he believes there are two issues to consider.  The first is configuration issues and determining what looks best aesthetically in developing a plan for the docks.  The second is resolving the access issue.

 

The Council recommended that the Boat Committee meet with David Gross, Deephaven’s representative to the LMCD, to obtain his opinion on the plan and whether he felt the LMCD would consider approval of the proposed dock plan.  Councilmember Skrede noted that if the LMCD does not approve the proposed plan and the necessary variances, it doesn’t make much sense to bring the plan to a Town Hall meeting for public comment.

 

4.                  Adjournment

The Council Work Session adjourned at 9:22 p.m.

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Dana H. Young

City Administrator