1997-05-01_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Lake O~L•asso Task Force 2 12 9~ minutes present: Deane Anklan, Peggy Egli, Kate Linder. Jim Stark. Jim ~-anous, Bem• `:z: olfangle. Gar~• ~: ood. Ste~•e_~orth absent: John Grainer. Sheila Prok chair: Gan• ~: ood 1. Approt•al of 1 14 and 1 29 9"' minutes. Liinutes ~•ere approi•ed unanimousl5• with no discussion. The 1 8 9- minutes describe the existing slalom as "heavily used", which it is not. since boats do not congregate around it and use is confined to specific hours and calm conditions (DA). The eleren boats that use the slalom a~•eraged 52 hr total use-boat•season, and the slalom was in use for •-8- days in 1996 (PE. from 1'8 notes). 2. Re~•iew meeting of 1 29 9-. John TorPerson (33' S Owasso) and Da~•id Rustad (329 S Owasso) have homes that are - 15-20' from shore: they are concerned about noise and erosion if a 150' ordinance is passed. LOTF has pre~•iousl~• discussed placing buoys to indicate the size of the no-~.•ake buffer: Buoys could be placed that ~rould also protect those residences: one buo}• at 300' (later mored to 1~0') u••as placed there m 1996 to address those complaints (GR"). The boat launch area and~or the point near it are other eood sites for demonstration buoys (DA). The aim is to educate and protect the most t•ulnerable sites while a~•oiding placement of an excessive number of buoys (GCZ-,Da). Sheriff's perrruts would be required. The Lake Josephine homeo~t•ner's association passed a resolution supporting a 150' no-wake buffer (Bill Costello. c•ia G~.-). LOTF's recommendation should concern Owasso (GR7. Terri Roesler (DAR Boat and ?;: ater Safety) says it is "more than likelt•" that a 130' buffer could be ~L•ritten to apply to towed skiers as well as to motoreraft (G~t7. This would promoee safety for people on shore. at docks; or being towed; and would reduce wakes. Hov..~ever, skiers using the existing slalom come to 140' feet from shore at 361 S Owasso; and relocating the concrete float anchors cL•ould be difficult. A sheriffs permit for the slalom might be a means of exempting slalom skiers from a 150' rule, similar to pre~•ious Sears' exemptions from the 300' rule (DA, G~: ). State law (L1'~86B.121) allows the sheriff to permit exemptions for special events, but this may not include season-long use (PE,JS) and it is unknown if permits supersede city ordinances (JS). Citt• appro~•al was cited as the reason exemptions from the 300' law were allowed (DA). Special e~•ent applications are similar to those for seasonal permits in that city signoffs are required b~• the sheriff (S'~). The last waterski special event on Owasso was ~12 years ago (DA). ?Members aereed that, if there is a 150' no-wake buffer, towed items and persons should also obsen•e it. The 1994 Shore~•iew• ordinance only applies the no-wake buffer to boats, so this point will need to be negotiated. ?viembers also supported Shorez•icw's 1994 ordinance 903.025 (boats don't so between dock and raft when swimmer is present). Regarding oral and written input -input vvas summarized by Peggy Egli (sec attachment). Many people felt the 300' law• should stay in place or felt there would be problems in going to 150'; LOTF should not disregard them (JS, KL). It was unclear whether people understood that there is a no buffer for non-ski power boats if no one is present on shore <G~~. There has been significant confusion about Roseville vs. Shore~•iew laws, ski vs. non-ski laws (PE). A city litter describing the current la~v could be sent prior to the public hearing (council meeting) on the ordinance (G~-). LOTF minutes 1 2 12 9~