07/07/87 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

...Continued from page 2 The Department's proposed shoreland rule revisions provide for a minor setback for accessory structures from the ordinary high water level (OHWL) primarily to prevent damage from ice and wave action. The current rules unwisely allow boathouses and tool sheds to be built right do~ to the OIBX,%. The second alternative: 'do nothing, then restore the damage', is not a joke and may be the most reasonable ap- proach along existing developed shorelines. This method basically says stay out of wrath's path and clean up after- wards. It's a form of planned, acceptable damage. It natu- rally would require that all structures, landscaping, etc. be placed beyond anticipated damage limits. The allowable damage then would be to let the ice do its 'push thing", shoving the earth upon the shore. Then when spring thaw is over, man does his ~push thing" and shoves the earth back again. This is a kind of unending game that some may en- joy, but most don't. The third way to deal with ice force is to attack its strength. This means you will acknowledge the superior strength ice has in compression and will build something strong enough to resist it. As you might expect, that tiffs would be the most costly approach. One example would be a reinforced concrete retaining wall, professionally designed to withstand the forces acting upon it. Most shoreland residents cannot afford the cost of proper design let alone the cost of construction of such a facility. The Department discourages the installation of retaining walls, but allows them when no alternatives exist and the landowner agrees to repair and maintain them. They can only be constructed after a permit is issued by the Department. The fourth approach: 'attack the wea'kness', is the most innovative method, but undoubtedly the most difficult. Knowing that ice is weak in tension, the problem becomes one of designing a project that will make the ice more or less self-destruct. One example may be to use sloped runners or ribs, perpendicular to the shoreline, that would cause the ice to deflect upward and then sag and break from its own weight (tension failure). if you have a problem along your shoreline that is caused by ice, contact your nearest Area Hydrologist of the DNR's Division of Waters. He will be able to advise you whether permits are needed and can give advice on how to solve your particular problem. If you're unfamiliar with the location of his office call the toll free number, 1-800-652- 9747, and you will be given his name, phone number and address. Editors Note: Gerald Paul is the Regional Hydrologist for DNR Region I (the northwest) stationed at Bemidji. 'Jerry" has a Bachelor's degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Detroit. Prior to his 15 years of work experience with DNR, Jerry held the title of Regional Hydrologist for V, qsconsin's Wolf River Basin Regional Planning Commission for 5 years. His Wisconsin experience was preceded by 7 years of work with the Los Angeles County Flood Control Commission in California. Platting the Destiny of Our Shoreland By Eon Morreim In these times of tmcertaln economic growth, one area of the economy that continues to flourish is the develop- ment of shoreland areas. There seems to be no end to the desire and demand for owning lakeshore property. One thing is for certain though. There is a limit ultimately to the · amount of shoreland left to develop! During a brief span of 2 years (1985-1986), over 25 miles of shoreland were parceled out into lakeshore lots in Cass and Crow Wing Counties alone. The process, called "platting", created 50 subdivisions containing about 900 lots. Upon ultimate development, the plats will collectively affect nearly 2000 acres of natural shoreline and forest. ':..One thing is for certain though. There is a limit ultimately to the amount of shoreland left to develop! ..." ,3 The impact of platting on a lake can be great or mini- real, depending upon how much thought went into the ap- proval process at the local level. Most of the prime lakeshore on the larger, more popular lakes has long since been developed. The platting pressure is now primarily on marginal shoreland, typically smaller lakes. These lakes frequently have marshy shorelines, steep bluffs and/or soils with severe development limitations. Unfortunately, the shoreland which is least desirable for development is the most valuable for the maintenance of the lake's fish, wildlife and water quality. These considerations ail point to the need for effective shoreland subdivision regulations. They also point to a need for an exhaustive plat review by local officials to help mitigate the long term environmental impacts on the lake. Careful platting also will ensure that property values will be maintained. Crow Wing County recognized this need when they recently approved a 180 acre subdivision on Ross Lake. The subject land contained a variety of wetland areas as well as topographic problems that needed special consideration. The rex4sed plat that was ultimately approved resulted in 12 riparian lots. Seven (7) of these lots had lot widths that exceeded the 150 feet minimum lot width. The lot areas ranged from one acre all the way up to 12 acres in size due to the severe site limitations. The larger lot sizes will provide suitable building sites without significant wetland filling, topographic alterations, or variances from lake setback. This type of development takes advantage of the most :.uitable areas and limits devel- opment of problem areas. 'Ihls constitutes wise shoreland management. Platting ot' shoreland historically is followed by pres- sure from the new lot owners to t-all in wetland areas to cre- ate lawns or gain access to the lake. Owners also typically desire to rid the lake of any cattails, bulrush, etc. which might restrict swimming and boating activity. They rarely realize the cumulative impact of such actions. If uncon- trolled, they can degrade water quality and reduce fish and Continued on page 4 {~ ~