Laserfiche WebLink
r LRRWMO Meeting Minutes <br />August 17, 1988 <br />Page 2 <br />Elaine Bartolain, 3544 Rum River Dr., addressed the commission with <br />her concerns for the Rum River bank erosion. Their home is reportedly <br />located adjacent to a bluff which is progressively being eroded away. <br />Mrs. Bartolain reportd their frustration with some of the present <br />river traffic, noting that large horse powered motors use the water, at <br />times pulling skiiers. The increased river traffic includes everything <br />from canoes and inner tubes to runabouts and bass boats. She pointed <br />out that when the flash boards are off the dam the water level alters <br />somewhat which could contribute to some of the erosion. Mrs. Bartolain <br />did state, however, that they have noticed that the type of keel on the <br />boats in a large part determine the amount of wake created. Bass boats <br />traveling the river were found to create little water displacement and <br />very little wake. She was in favor of a proposed "NO WAKE" ordinance. <br />A diagram of their river area was presented, showing that they don't <br />have the larger trees on the bank to hold the soil. <br />Schrantz queried whether the boards on the dam are unnaturally caus- <br />ing a problem on the river. Weaver stated that the purpose of the <br />flash boards is to create the pool and thereby extend the navigability <br />of the river up stream. Mrs. Bartolain stated that lowering the boards <br />would be helpful to them personally. Much discussion followed. <br />Mrs. Bartolain went on to state that most of the boat traffic, <br />especialy that which is creating the excessive wakes, is local adolescent <br />neighboring boaters. Their turns reportedly come very close to the shore. <br />Mrs. Bartolain stated that they would like to see the water skiing stopped <br />as well as a no -wake limitation and a limitation on the size of boat motors. <br />She stated that they can accept the natural erosion of the river but feels <br />what is currently happening is excessive. County authorities have been <br />contacted on occasion. <br />Schrantz pointed out that a "NO WAKE" ordinance would be nearly im- <br />possible to enforce. Weaver concurred, but felt that at least through <br />the process a public awareness would be created. Raatikka reported that <br />the City of Ramsey has had erosion concerns reported to them and is in <br />favor of some river controls. <br />Weaver felt there are some real erosion concerns within the comunities <br />and felt that support could be received from member cities in the form of <br />a resolution and then take it on to the county for ordinance consideration. <br />Schrantz stated that his Andover City Council is unaware of a great deal <br />of concern and requests that further facts be presented. Mr. Bradley was <br />unable to address the issue until sometime in September. <br />Mrs. Bartolain stated that their plat map survey shows a lot more land <br />on the back of their property on the bluff's edge than there is there now. <br />A neighbor has reportedly lost 6 ft. of property through erosion of the <br />river's bank. Schrantz felt that some of that is natural erosion. <br />