Thirty Lakes Watershed District
Board of Managers Meeting
Monday, September 28, 2009

Board Present:  T. Ebnet, G. Hardy, K. Svee, M. Young, B. Yund.  Absent:  none.

Also present was County Commissioner Rosemary Franzen, Attorney John Kolb, Engineer Tim Ramerth, Thirty lakes Watershed Staff M. Peisch and T. Lauer, Jeff Johnson, Art and Joann Weaver, Daryl Luthens, Glen Gustafson, Jerry Schroden, Carol Roquette, Diane and Don Albrecht.

The meeting was called to order at 6:30 pm by President K. Svee in the office of the Thirty Lakes Watershed District, 17064 Commercial Park Road, Brainerd, MN.

Pelican Lake Storm Water Project:  Attorney John Kolb from the Rinke Noonan Firm explained that Thirty Lakes Watershed District has established a Project according to the law based on the identification of a problem on Pelican Lake.  That problem was a failed stormwater management system installed in 1986 but not maintained according to the original plan.  The second problem is that of documented pollution being discharged from that same area.

He went on to say that the Project was established by Resolution of the Board in 2004.  According to MN Statute 103D, once a project has been established, an Engineer is then directed to prepare plans and specifications which are then sent to the Dept. of Natural Resources and the Board of Water & Soil Resources for comment.  Once those comments have been received, a Public Hearing is held to address the cost and financial issues.

He suggested to the Board of Managers that this meeting will provide the opportunity for them to make a policy decision on one of three options:  Either they can select one of the options to be presented by the Engineer and instruct him to move forward with the development of plans and specifications, instruct the Engineer to modify his plans and move forward from there, or they can decide not to move forward and dismiss the proceedings and get the project off the table.

Tim Ramerth of Westwood Professionals stated that the first concern is the water quality of Pelican Lake.  The runoff leaving the project area and going into the lake currently receives no treatment.  He also stated that the 1986 plan is sub-standard and not relevant by today’s standards.

Plan #1:  Two bioretention areas would be installed near the Lodge Apartments with a larger infiltration area.  One portion of the infiltration area would hold one ft. of ponded water, with the other half holding only one-half foot.  One limitation is the seasonal high water table, another is that the goal would be to infiltrate the water within 48 hours.  This Plan would utilize the largest land area, and acquisition of land or easements would be required.  A two inch rainfall event would be managed with this Plan.

Plan #2:  A Retention Pond or Wet Sedimentation Basin would be constructed which would retain water year long.  The particulates would settle out of the water in the pond, allowing clean water to be
displaced by incoming stormwater.  Because of the ten foot “shelf” around the perimeter of the pond, vegetation would eventually ring the pond.  Periodic cleaning of the sediment in the pond would be required.  Fencing may or may not be required to keep visitors out of the pond.

Don Albrecht of the Lodge Apartments suggested that the Plan #2 with the wet pond would present difficulties.  He went on to say that during the heavy rain event in July the culvert along the north side of the Lodge directed the water on to the grass.  However he said that the “Three Rivers” from the parking lot left a black trail as it ran towards the lake.

Jeff Johnson of Whitebirch, Inc. asked if the Board received the letter he sent.  They confirmed that they did.  He stated that the Watershed District has already spent a lot of money on this project, with more anticipated.  He said that the Retention Pond Plan would not work because the Playground Equipment cannot be moved.  He also felt that Plan #1 was so close to the original plan that it isn’t worth going forward.  He suggested that the existing pond be built back to the original specs.

Attorney John Kolb cautioned the Board that MN Statute 103D charges them to use “sound engineering principles”, and therefore any restoration or enhancing of the original plan would require additional engineering.

Bruce Yund suggested that the original pond be cleaned up and put to use to minimize the size of the Infiltration area.  Ken Svee reminded the Board that the 1986 plan was developed by Landecker & Associates, and they were asked to update that plan, however they declined.

Jerry Schroden stated that the 1986 plan also involved overflow onto the grass.  The new plan does the same thing, without the benefit of the existing pond.   There was discussion about Fire Department access to the building as well as to the lake for water supply.

MOTION BY EBNET/YOUNG THAT THE INFILTRATION OPTION BE SELECTED AND THE ENGINEER BE DIRECTED TO INCLUDE COMMENTS RECEIVED AT THIS MEETING IN A REVISED PLAN.  ALL AYE, MOTION CARRIED.

Open Forum:  Jeff Johnson requested that the minutes be posted on the Thirty Lakes website in a timely manner.   He said that the minutes from the August 24, 2009 are not on the website.  He also suggested that the agenda be posted on the website prior to the meeting, and that letters received by the Board be mentioned in the minutes.  He then said that hiring Westwood Professionals was a poor use of Taxpayer money, and that the minutes did not reflect other engineering bids received.

Consent Agenda:  MOTION BY YOUNG/YUND THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA INCLUDING THE ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 14, 2009 MEETING BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED.  ALL AYE, MOTION CARRIED.

BWSR Academy:  T. Ebnet encouraged the Managers to attend this training session.

MOTION BY YUND/HARDY THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT 7:55 PM.  ALL AYE, MEETING ADJOURNED.