DEEPHAVEN CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, MARCH
5, 2007
MINUTES
1.
CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Mayor Paul Skrede called the meeting to order
at 7:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Paul Skrede, Councilmembers Steve Adams, Kim Crockett, John Wheaton and Keith Kask
STAFF: Police Chief Virgil Gustafson and
City Administrator Dana Young
2.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The
Council recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
3.
APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA
Motion
by Councilmember Kask to approve the consent agenda, consisting of the
following items:
A. Minutes of February 5 &
16, 2007
B. Verifieds
C. 2007 Boat Committee Chair
& Vice-Chair
D. Reappointment of Joan Budd,
Walter Linder, Bob Werneiwski & Josh Sparber to Planning Commission
E. Reappointment of Susan
Jerutis & Pete Onstad to Boat Committee
F. Reappointment of Woody
Woodburn to Park Committee
G. Adoption of Resolution No.
09-07, Approving a Bid & Contract with Hennepin County Transportation
Department for the Repair of Bridges
H. Approve a Sanitary Sewer
Connection Agreement with the City of Minnetonka
Seconded
by Councilmember Adams. Motion carried
5-0.
4.
MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
Tracy
Gustafson, 19565 Rosedale Avenue, was present to state that she was present to
address the letter that was sent by the City informing her that her boat would
have to be in compliance with the 5’4” slide width requirement by the 2007
Boating Season. Mayor Skrede informed
Ms. Gustafson that further discussion on this issue would be held under
Unfinished Business.
5.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A.
Public Hearing to receive
public comment regarding the St. Louis Bay Dock Plan.
Mayor
Skrede stated that the Council is holding this public hearing in lieu of a Town
Hall meeting due to the fact that the St. Louis Bay Dock plan only proposes to
increase the number of dock slips by a total of ten. He added that the Boat Committee has worked
on several versions of this plan for a couple of years and the plan includes an
additional ten dock slips and wider slides.
He stated that the proposed plan would need to be approved by the Lake
Minnetonka Conservation District and the Council would like to hear any
comments from the public on this plan.
Jim
Dorf, 3675 Northome Avenue, stated that his main concern with the plan is that
the dock addition would be in the way of the ramp. He stated that this ramp is excellent for launching
sailboats because of the deep water. He
stated that the new dock addition would make it more difficult to use the ramp,
particularly in windy conditions.
Councilmember
Kask noted that the St. Louis Bay ramp is closed for the summer and that there
is another launch facility at Carson’s Bay.
Jim
Dorf stated that the depth of the water off the launch at St. Louis Bay is
unique and sailboats would have to use a crane for launching if the ramp were
not readily available.
Councilmember
Wheaton asked if the swimming buoys couldn’t be removed until the day before
the beach opens to allow boats a greater opportunity to maneuver to access the
launch.
Councilmember
Kask stated that what Mr. Dorf is stating is that it would be difficult for
boats to back in or out of the launch with the new docks.
Mayor
Skrede noted that there is a 50’ separation between the ramp and the new
docks. He asked Pete Onstad if the Boat
Committee had addressed this issue.
Pete
Onstad, Vice-Chair of the Boat Committee, stated that the Boat Committee had
recommended the navigation lane design for this very reason to address the
ramp. He added that the negative aspect
to the navigation lane is that it would be located so much closer to the
swimming beach. He also agreed that while
powerboats could be launched at Carson’s Bay, there is definitely more depth at
St. Louis Bay for sailboats.
David
Struyk, 3921 Tramore Lane, asked if Carson’s Bay launch area couldn’t be
dredged to accommodate sailboats?
Mayor
Skrede asked if there were any more comments regarding the proposed dock
plan. Hearing none, he suggested
returning the proposed plan to the Boat Committee for further review of the
ramp issue and requested that the Boat Committee report back to the City
Council with their recommendations by the March 19th Council
meeting.
B.
Public Hearing to receive
public comment regarding the City of Deephaven’s Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Program.
Administrator
Young stated that the City of Deephaven has adopted a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Program that includes a number of Best Management Practices to control and
minimize storm water runoff. He stated
that one of the major elements to the program includes public education and the
opportunity to solicit public input on the program, which is the reason for
tonight’s public hearing.
Hearing
no comments, Mayor Skrede declared the public hearing closed.
C.
Ordinance Amendment – Recommendation to the City Council on Ordinance No. 13-43, an
amendment to Section 1310.10 (1) (d) of the Zoning Code amending language
pertaining to the connection between an accessory structure and principal
structure by stating the connection must be above grade.
Motion by Councilmember Crockett to adopt Ordinance No. 13-43, an amendment to Section 1310.10 (1) (d) of the Zoning Code as presented and to waive the second reading of the ordinance. Seconded by Councilmember Wheaton. Motion carried 5-0.
Councilmember
Wheaton asked if the language within ordinance is adequate to address all
possible circumstances and wondered if the language should be further amended
to include language that would require attachments to be permanent.
Councilmember
Crockett stated that it would be helpful if staff could provide a brief summary
of what changes had been made recently to accessory structures.
6.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A.
Adopt Policy on B1 and B2
Slides
Tracy
Gustafson, 19565 Rosedale Avenue, stated that she would like to appeal to the
Council to allow her current boat to be allowed to stay on the boat slide. She stated that she didn’t realize her boat
exceeded the 5’4” width requirements and that her family had received a slide
only 1-2 months after the adoption of the 5’4” width ordinance. She stated that her circumstances are no different
from the 11 residents who are being “grandfathered” in.
David
Struyk, 3921 Tramore Lane, stated that he currently owns a Boston Whaler that
is not in compliance with the 5’4” width requirement. He stated that the Boat Committee has come to
the conclusion that these types of boats are desirable and have developed a
sensible plan that would accommodate wider boats on slides. He stated that to slap the hand of those who
are not in compliance with the width ordinance is ridiculous and that it would
force those with wider boats to sell their boats to someone else who qualified
for the wider slides. He stated that
everyone should have the opportunity for a wider slide and it should be
determined by the priority in which they first received a slide space. He added that none of those residents who are
in violation of the width ordinance did it intentionally, some even checked
with the City before purchasing their boat.
Mayor
Skrede noted that another appeal had been received by Bryan and Heidi Drumm,
who sent an email that had been included in this evening’s Council packet. He added that he also had a discussion about
this issue with Tom Brislin.
Councilmember
Crockett stated that this is a difficult issue and the Boat Committee
recommendation doesn’t distinguish between those with boats in excess of the
5’4” width requirement prior to the adoption of the ordinance in May 2004 and
those that were in violation of the ordinance after May 2004. She stated that she has a hard time holding
those people with non-compliant boats prior to May 2004 accountable since there
were no specific rules on width in place at the time. She stated that most people knew about the
width requirement following the adoption of the width requirement and she would
have a hard time rewarding those people who had ignored the rules by allowing
them to obtain a wider slide.
Councilmember
Kask stated that the Boat Committee has recommended that all 20 individuals
with wider boats should be allowed the opportunity for a wider slide. He stated that the Committee felt that by not
allowing all 20 on a wider slide, the City would be taking something away from
these individuals. He stated that the
intention of the Boat Committee is to create a resource that is used and it is
his experience that all of these wider boats are being used. He stated that there is a punitive element to
not allowing those nine individuals who acquired a boat in excess of the width
requirement after the adoption of the ordinance to not have a wider space. He stated that is the reason he supports the
recommendation of the Boat Committee.
Councilmember
Kask also stated that the Boat Committee recommended the adoption of the width
requirement due to the perception that boats were getting crowded out by larger
boats. However, he added that the
Committee doesn’t see that the boat width issue is that big a problem.
Councilmember
Crockett stated that the width issue on slides also became more of a concern
after the Council moved canoes off of slides.
She stated that one of the reasons the Council adopted the 5’4” width
requirement was to clarify the width standard.
She stated that how are we able to honor those residents that followed
the rules without following your own rules?
Councilmember
Wheaton stated that ignorance of the law is no excuse but the concept of not
allowing boats in excess of 5’4” to have a wider slide space is punitive if
they didn’t knowingly buy boats in excess of the width requirement. He stated that there have been mixed messages
sent to the residents and the City should have notified each resident if they
were in violation of width requirements immediately.
Councilmember
Adams agreed that the rules should have been enforced at the time of the
adoption of the ordinance and it seems punitive to do it at this time.
Pete
Onstad stated that the Boat Committee’s intent was to grandfather those 11
individuals that had excessively wide boats prior to the adoption of the
ordinance and to include those 9 individuals who are non-compliant because
there would be enough wide slides to fill the current demand. He stated that it is uncertain how much
demand there will be for the wider slides outside of the 20 individuals due to
the higher costs.
Mayor
Skrede stated that the Boat Committee tried to come up with as many wide slides
as possible and it happened to meet the number of outstanding wide boats. He stated that there are 20 individuals who
exceed the width requirements and each have their own story as to why they are
not in compliance. He stated that in his
mind, he also agreed with the recommendations of the Boat Committee.
Councilmember
Crockett stated that allowing all 20 individuals with excessively wide boats
access to the 20 currently available wider slides would not provide any
opportunity for those individuals whom didn’t violate the ordinance.
Councilmember
Wheaton stated that it is hard to judge intention and it would be punitive to
move those in violation of the ordinance to the bottom of the list.
Councilmember
Crockett stated that by offering a wider slide to all those individuals with
non-conforming boats would be negating the resolution of the Council and the
letter that was sent to each slide holder last year.
Councilmember
Kask stated that the larger slides would be in a visibly different area at an
appreciably higher cost than the remaining slides. He stated that he views this simply as a
housecleaning effort to clean up all the wider boats.
Mayor
Skrede asked if the Council would prefer to handle each individual appeal
separately.
Councilmember
Wheaton stated that he didn’t think it was necessary to hear individual appeals
since it would be difficult to gather any additional information than we
already have.
Administrator
Young stated that he would agree that the City has been sending out mixed
messages regarding wider boats on slides ever since the adoption of the 5’4”
width standard in May 2004. He stated
that the Boat Committee has addressed complaints regarding excessively wide
boats by recommending that staff “reshuffle the deck” to try to accommodate all
the wider boats. He stated that the Boat
Committee has been working the last several years to develop a plan for wider
slides with the intention to accommodate all the wider boats.
Councilmember
Adams recommended that those 11 individuals who had wider boats prior to the
adoption of the width requirement should have the first opportunity for the
wider slides. He stated that the
remaining 9 wide slides could be filled by asking those individuals who
obtained a slide space after May 2004 if they would like the opportunity for a
wider slide. He added that they would be
asked according to the date that they first obtained a slide space.
Mayor
Skrede stated that he has a problem with this proposal because it does not
adequately address Bryan Drumm’s circumstances. He stated that under this proposal Bryan Drumm
might not get an opportunity for a wider slide.
He stated that Mr. Drumm’s boat is only 2” over the width requirement
and Mr. Drumm obtained his slide space only one month after the adoption of the
ordinance and very likely never received a notice from the City regarding the
width requirement. He added that it
would be difficult for him to penalize those individuals who were only 2” or 3”
over the standard.
Councilmember
Kask stated that the City Council has received a recommendation from the Boat
Committee to invite all 20 non-compliant individuals to receive a wide slide
and that we should follow their recommendation.
He added that we should only have one waiting list for both the B1 and
B2 slides and that everyone at the top of the slide waiting list should have
the first opportunity.
Councilmember
Crockett stated that she likes what Councilmember Adams proposed.
Mayor
Skrede asked the Council their thoughts regarding the section of the proposed
Slide Policy that prohibited the use of B1 slides for those individuals with a
buoy permit. He stated that this section
of the proposed policy would prohibit any buoy permit holders after May 2004
from obtaining a B1 slide and he didn’t consider it a problem if someone had
both a B1 slide and a buoy permit.
Councilmember
Crockett stated that the rational for not permitting buoy permit holders to
obtain a B1 slide is that buoy holders simply need a watercraft to get out to
their sailboat. She stated that if buoy
holders were able to obtain a B1 slide it provide them with the opportunity to
get a larger boat that they could use beyond just accessing their sailboat.
Mayor
Skrede stated that he didn’t view a B1 Slide as an A resource, which buoy
holders are currently not eligible to obtain.
He stated that the B1 Slides are just a simple hybrid and did not see
the logic in shutting the door on buoy holders who want a B1 Slide.
Councilmember
Adams agreed that it doesn’t seem fair to legislate what size boat is appropriate
for buoy holders.
Councilmember
Crockett stated that the wider slides might be in greater demand than the
regular slides and buoy permit holders should only have access to boats that
provide transportation to their sailboats.
Mayor
Skrede requested that staff and Councilmember Adams work on the additional
changes to the proposed B1 and B2 Slide policy for Council review on March 19th.
7.
DEPARTMENT REPORTS
A.
Police Department
Mayor
Skrede welcomed Police Chief Vigil Gustafson back from vacation and asked if
the Chief had anything to report. Police
Chief Gustafson stated that he did not.
B.
Excelsior Fire District
Councilmember
Crockett stated that the next Fire Board meeting will be held on Wednesday,
March 21st.
C.
Public Works
Administrator
Young provided an update on recent department activities for the month of
February.
D.
Administration
Administrator
Young provided a brief update on the following items:
·
2007 Deer Management Program
·
Fiscal Agent Services to the Excelsior Fire District
·
April Newsletter
·
Senior Community Services Meeting on February 15th
·
Ice Rink closing
·
2007 Lake Minnetonka Forum on March 7th
8.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion
to adjourn by Councilmember Wheaton, seconded by Councilmember Crockett. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Respectfully
submitted,
Dana
H. Young, City Administrator