Minutes From July 19, 2007 Silver Lake Commission Meeting
Members Present: Kent Korte, Keith Haberer, Randy Ammann, Bob Wittenborn, Sally Raeber, Larry Diveley. Ex-Officio, Mark Rosen. City Council Representative, Chris Bardill and City Manager Mark Latham.
Guest: Peter Berrini, HDR/Cochran & Wilken Fish Pros, Colby Schrumpf & Josh Kirchoff.
Meeting was called to order at 7:05pm. Larry D. made a motion to approve the minutes from April 19, 2007.
Chairman Korte called upon Peter Berrini to outline the information that was going to be included in the grant application for the Implementation portion of the Clean Lakes. The deadline for submittal is August 1, 2007.
Mr. Berrini began his presentation by stating that it is important to keep in mind that this grant is not specifically for sediment removal. Rather, it is a federal grant for non-point pollution control measures that will address three (3) major issues; Livestock exclusion, Sediment and Nutrient Control Basin and Shoreline Stabilization.
This federal grant money, along with the City’s portion, which would include both cash and in-kind services, could be used to match state money, thus allowing the City to get more with less. Peter also stated that this 319 grant is an ongoing grant.
The obstacle that the City is faced with in regards to the work that needs to be done is preventing sediment with high phosphorus from reaching areas further down the lake. The TMDL study has prioritized the lake and aides in elevating our status to receive funding.
In order to achieve this, an in-lake structure would need to be constructed, thus preventing access to the northern section of the lake. Such a structure could be made from soil/rock, gabions or various other materials. This decision would be contingent upon further studies and data collecting. This structure would also have a means to allow water to pass through it, thus requiring pipe or a ‘cut-out’ to be part of its’ plan.
Shoreline stabilization and an in-lake structure would prove to have immediate impacts on reducing sediment and phosphorus from reaching further down the lake. The shoreline stabilization would require a barge system to place the rip-rap in key places and would emulate the type of structure that Kincaid Lake installed where it is not directly on the shoreline, but rather, placed further out into the water to act as a break. This would allow soil and debris to fill in behind the ‘break wall’ and in essence create a new shoreline of natural vegetation.
A Watershed Implementation Plan is another by-product of what this phase of the grant would require. The WIP would require a long, tedious work that would include all stakeholders; i.e. Lake Commission, City Council, Landowners, Lake users, etc. It was mentioned that creating fish habitats and recreational opportunities is an important part of this plan.
After Peter’s presentation, question relating to the grant and general questions were asked. The main topic of discussion was the affect larger horsepower motors have on shorelines.
Peter prefaced his answer by stating that he is not in a position to say “the higher the horsepower, the more or less shoreline erosion will occur”. Rather, he stated that from data and discussion with people from the Department of Natural Resources, there is less focus on limiting the size of horsepower and more emphasis on speed limits in lakes. He continued by stating that wind is without a doubt causes the most detriment to shorelines, mostly in late winter to early spring when there is little to no vegetation on shorelines and when the soil is less stable.
Keith H. asked Peter is funding would be available however for the cleaning of sediment out from behind the in-lake sediment control basin. Peter said that funding would be more likely to clean these areas out after the structure is in place because it needs to operate the way it is suppose to operate; meaning that it is intended to hold back sediment, not to let it spill over the structure.
When asked how soon this implementation could begin, Peter said that it could start in fiscal year 2008-09, with the structure being started in fiscal year 2009-10.
Director Rosen asked if Peter would recommend that while the restoration alternatives were being implemented, should the Lake Commission look at prioritizing such things as, but not limited to relationships with landowners, education, in-lake aeration systems, additional shoreline stabilization projects, monitoring, etc. Peter said definitely.
Chairman Korte asked if there would be a need to perform maintenance on the in-lake structure. Peter said that some would be needed, i.e. clean debris from overflow, but nothing major.
Bob W. asked if an alternative dam could be placed to drain the area so that equipment could access the area to clean out behind the structure. Peter’s response was that it is not feasible as our lake is a water supply lake and that not being able to forecast droughts could affect the city’s water supply. The only exception for performing maintenance behind the structure or to ‘clean-out’ the area would be during a drought season.
Upon the completion of Peter’s presentation, discussion was held on developing subcommittees to address the development and continual monitoring of the Watershed Implementation Plan. From the discussion, four subcommittees were approved with the following commission members serving on them. In addition, should each subcommittee desire to recruit ‘outside’ input, support for this idea was agreed upon. Therefore, the following subcommittees are developed:
Ø Implementation Committee: Kent Korte & Bill Ambuehl
Ø Landowners Committee: Dan Shimer & Keith Haberer
Ø Enforcement/Recreation Committee: Sally Raeber, Fred Bircher, Keith Haberer, Larry Diveley (Gary Pugh from the water treatment plant will be asked by Bob Wittenborn.
Ø Education Committee: Randy Ammann & Bob Wittenborn
At this time, guests Josh Kirchoff and Colby Schrumpf were asked if they had any questions or comments. Josh asked if the docks were considered to be fishing docks because often time fishermen do not yield to boats loading and unloading. Director Rosen stated that there is nothing in the ordinance stating that fishing is not permitted on the docks. The only restricted areas are along Interstate 70 and Route 143. Josh also asked if anyone noticed a new species of vegetation and wondered if it was what is commonly known as milfoil. There were no answers to this question.
Keith made a motion to adjourn, Larry seconded it and the meeting was completed at 8:50pm.
| 
