Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-18-80 CCMSpecial City Council Meeting, September 18, 1980 Surface Water Use Mayor Armstrong opened the meeting and gave;.the background of why the Council called this meeting to set guidelines and restrictions on recreaction on the lakes. Administrator Whittaker outlined the facts, explained potential problems, and reviewed the City's Surface Water Use Ordinance. The Council is requesting resident input and suggi�stions to guide the City in adopting policies and regulations that will make the use of then.lakes in Lake Elmo and their accesses, controllable without penalizing lakeshore & City residents. The Administrator also outlined the City's position on the Regional Park. AUDIENCE REMARKS: Otto Mayer - 9295 Lake Jane Tr. - Presented a petition with 20 to 25 signatures, of residents around Lake Jane, requesting that Lake Jane be restricted to a speed zone of 5 mph at all times. Sue Wier - 8991 Jane Rd. N. - Comment on the petition - had the petition presented to her, they did not sign,it but noted that not all the petitioners do not live on Lake Jane. OttoMayer - 9295 Lake Jane Tr. - Stated that the petitioners listed may_ n6t live on the lake, but have access to the lake. Todd Williams - 3025 Lake Elmo Avenue N. - Asked if it is State law that the C ti y cannot adopt an ordinance giving special treatment to riparian owners. Armstrong stated this is a DNR Policy not sure of the legal status. Mr. Williams referred to articles in the paper about lack of access to metropolitan lakes,e.g. White Bear Lake, which do have ordinance and policies granting special rights to lake - shore owners. Asked if the City could not pass this type of ordinance; that would restrict non-lakeshore owners boat and motor size and give special. rights to lakeshore owners. Challenge the DNR policy and stand behind it. Armstrong stated this is an economic question and you are fighting the State of Minnesota. Lake Elmo is not financially able to pursue such 'battles'. Whittaker stated there is a Public Waters law in effect that states the waters in the State belong to all, the people and you cannot discriminate among them. This is the basis of this DNR policy. Williams said this would not restrict the access to the waters but the use of the waters: Armstrong cited the regulations similar to this suggestion are in force on Square Lake, this access is run by the County and enforced by them. Lake Elmo is telling the County this is what they should do on Lake Elmo - regulate and design the access so that people who come out to the County park only use small craft or small motors. Speed regulation is difficult without a shore patrol. Iiarvey Allen 249.1 Lake Elmo Avenue - Stated DNR restricts motor size in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area, but give exemptions to businesses. Does not feel an ordinance with exceptions would be out of line. Carol Kelm_ - 10975 32nd St. N. - lives on the lake and is aware of abuses on the lake from people who live on the lake. Does not feel lakeshore owners should have any more priviledges. Horsepower reg- ulations should apply to everyone who uses the lake. 2 Jim Weyer---8991 Jane Rd. N. - Read a prepared statement that was eritnreT-Into the record.. He expressed these statements concerning Lake Jane: no water use problem on Lake Jane today, confirmed by Officer Orth and neighbors - lake residents are taxed higher rates because of their lakeshore - is legally possible, practical and workable to allow residents to launch. any size boats and motors from private property and restrict same at a public access (Square Lake example) - against any regulations that restrict existing rights of the lakeshore residents (regulations on horsepower, limitations on skiing hours, limitations on fishing hours, etc.) Recommended no additional regu- lations be passed on Lake Jane, if problems do arise then pass required regulations, regulations should differentiate between non-lakeshore and lakeshore residents based on the fact that lakeshore owners are taxed more.: ,Mr. Weyer stated that Officer Orth feels that there are enough regulations to handle any misuse of the lake by high powered boats. Officer. Orth and Paul Rice, DNR Conservation Officer, feel it is unlikely that problems with speed boats will arise as the Lake Jane access is not designed to eftcourge klrge boats, no public beach, no picnic area, and provides parking for only eight vehicles. Don Klosterboer_ - 2119 Lake Elmo Avenue - Does not see a problem with ia. skng_on_lc Lae' Elmo today. Cites problems with fishermen. .Feels fishermen and skiiers should be treated equally;, and does not feel the hours alloted to skiiers is equitable. Wait until there is a problem before imposing more regulations. Richard Connors - 9250 Lake Jane Tr. - Lives next to the public access on Lake Jane. Said the DNR has dredged a 4 ft., not 2 ft., channel out from the launch. Could launch high horsepowered boats with no problem. Feels the lake should be kept strictly for the fishermen; add a granfather clause for larger boats owned by lakeshore residents. No problem with water skiing now; but anticipates problems if 9 additional ski boats use. the lake at once. Ben Klaus - 8190 Hill Tr. - Have all. sorts of rules; but no law enforce3nefit. Must enforce the rules that now exist. Lives on the channel between Olson and DeMontr.eville. Snowmobilers also pose problems in early morning hours. He has found that the sheriff's department does not have adequate men to handle these typEs,)f complaints. Law enforcement greatest problem rather than changing rules and laws.. Armstrong stated that law enforcement costs money. Are,pesidents'willing, to have taxes increase"dsw.for additional servicee? Roy Brogren 4769 Olson Lake Tr. - question How is the City planning on informing people, other than residents, what the Water Surface Regulations are? No information is': publicized. Mr. Brog.ren suggested posting rules at accesses. John Cromll 7930 DeMontreville.:Tr. - Asked on what basis the DNR can reject City regulations? Why do they have this power. Whittaker reponded that this is public water in the State and the, State governs it, the DNR is a state agency, and the City is only a creature of the State. Mr. Crowell asked about the possible parking ar'a for Lake DeMontreville (1.5a) Will this be limited to a certainn number of parking spaces, this could hold potentially 75 to 100 cars. Whittaker stated it would be held to 1 space for 20A of lake surface. Engineering would limit the area.to 12 spaces. -3- Lois DeLon5 8274 Hidden Bay Tr. - Asked about the number of boats allowed on DeMontreville. She lives on Lake Olson - if there are three.spped boats on Olson it is crowded what happens when the allotted number of boats on DeMontreville come onto Olson? Bill Rowe - 8286 Hidden Bay Ct. - lives on the DeMontreville/Olson channel. DNR create situations then provide no enforcement. Enforcement money is available, but he cannot see where they are spending it in enforcement. DNR does not enforcement. Local enforcement expensive only way to handle problems in through access control (size). City must develop accesses that are very minimal and call local enforcement agencies violations occur. Restroom facilities should be a part of any access; fishermen's use of ;the lake for sanitary purposes highly insenses lake shore residents. Jim Delong 8274 Hidden Bay Tr. -Any recourse for,City government torask for the full package. They give us the problems with no solutions. What are other City governments doing? Not willing to pay high taxes for a lake he cannot use. If this is to be made the playground for surrounding counties someone has to pay for it besides Lake Elmo. Administrator Whittaker stated that the City has sent letters stating that if you provide access you must provide money to enforce the rules to the DNR and the legislature. He urged residents to do the same and do it in force. If enough protests are received they will listen. John Crowell - DeMontreville Tr. - Asked what control the City has for access on DeMontreville and Olson. Whittaker explained the DNR owns the access on Lake Jane, the County owns the access on Lake Elmo, and the City owns the one on DeMontreville. The DNR is proposing to buy land and create their own access on DeMontreville. Once the DNR owns the land the City loses control of the access. The DNR has the power to condemn to obtain access property. Jim Yarusso - 5620 Highland Tr. - Asked how the DNR proposes to build a safer access on DeMontreville. No plan as yet, but would fill the lake. Carol Connors - 9404 Lake Jane Tr. - Who will maintain the Lake Jane access? DNR does have funds to maintain the access in the summer or they may contract with the City to do this. No money or policy is currently available for maintenance during the winter. Don Erickson - 8224 Hidden Bay Tr. - Does not know how to respond to what the City wants since there is no well laid out proposals. Concern is with population of boats on the lake. Have to work out solution so that skiiers and fisherman can co -exist. Does not see large number of water skiiers coming out to these small lakes as a prime water ski area. Local or lakeshore owners will be the primary skiiers. His solution - Olson no problem - has only seen 3 to 4 boats skiing for a short period, max. Issue is blown out of proportion. Jim Weyer- Jane Rd. N. - asked if legal action best way to control DNR. Whittaker said the best way to control them is politically. Write your legislator and ask for additional money for policing the lakes or else change the policy for lake access; encourage a more restrictive policy on lake access in the metro area. Fran Pott - Problems do exist now, on a.'low level. Purpose of meeting is o try and steer the situat_iQn1to avoid major problems that would require shutting off everything. Mayor Armstrong - the City still has some control and imput on the Regional Park. One access has been eliminated, camping areas have been relocated, but the carry --over boat access is still in disagreement. The County is not willing to design such an access. The City is still maintaining the 'County 'engineer theaccess for carry-over use only. Pat Burns - 11140 20th St. N - Concerned with the potential danger of water --skiing use. Limiting the access by engineering. Al Noreen - 7960 DeMontreville Tr. - Can we override DNR's recommendations and accept the regulations the City proposed and adopted? He prefers the ordinance of the City. Whittaker stated he is not sure to what degree DNR controls the City. City ordinance more liberal. Janice Surface - Hidden Bay Trail - lives on Lake Olson. Front yard very close to the water. Problem is not with the water skiing or the boat size, but with the usage of the lake. Additional fishermen or skiers the water will no longer be good for any use. Thought this meeting was a chance to limit the amount of new access on the lakes; the area and how there built to control the uses of the lake. She would like to see what limitations we can set up; how we go about doing it and when we should start on it. Betty Lundholm -2737 Lake Elmo Avenue - Does not feel there should be any public access to these small lakes. The DNR should be protecting the natural resources and opening up Lake Elmo via the Regional Park will destroy them. Why can't the City and residents fight this other than just by writing letters. Make the DNR more conscious of preserving these natural resourses. Mayor Armstrong - Have to deal with existing policy. The best way to change these regulations is politically; write the County Commissioner, legislator, and DNR. Harvey Allen - Lake Elmo Avenue - How much control does the Council have in the development and regulations on Lake Elmo? The City has very little control. The City is not giving up on the access but it is an uphill battle. The City needs the residents support and incouragesthem to contact the County Commissioner and the Met Council with their concerns. Mayor Armstrong polled the audience on their recommendations for the lakes. LAKE ELMO: Prevent a large County access; limit the number of boats on the lake and parking; City limit their cooperation with DNR and the County on developing an access unless they work with the City on the carry-over access the `City >aske4..for; tell the County to limit parking and number of boats to DNR limit; verify .if the DNR is law ar advisory on lake use; Lake *Elmo is'-203'acres',-'limit number of boats to 10; limit parlcing.to one car for 20 acres of water; withhold City services to park unless access type can be negotiaited LAKE JANE: limit all boats to 5 mph; no additional regulations until a problem arises; enforce No Parking on the City street. General consensus is no additional regulations are needed now with the 8 parking spaces at the access; wait and see. DEMONTREVILLE AND OLSON: keep parking to a reasonable minimum; keep No Parking on the road and enforce; limit the number of off-street parking spaces; :enforcement of regulations on all the lakes and the parking areas; close the City access if the DNR should develp another access; -J- DEMONTREVILLE AND OLSON: Verify DNR's authority to condemn. SURFACE WATER USE: Regulation will,,.apply to all the lakes. "Wake" proposed hours - 10:00 a.m, to 8 p.m. weekdays and 10:00 a.m; to 7 p.m. on weekends; Vote on hours vs no hours - 12 for hours 21 for no hours No Wake areas in narrow and channel areas; the hours proposed met with audience agreement. OW the vote for regulation of hours it was felt that there would not be a problem or a need for regulation if the number of boats proposed by DNR for each lake is enforced.