Laserfiche WebLink
. � , <br /> I would like to state my abjections to the proposed Draft Rule F, for the following reasons: <br /> 1) While vegetatiue plantings may work in some situations for erosion control, especiaily in <br /> smaller water bodies with less wave action, Lake Mlnnetonka is subject to use by very 4arge <br /> boats, that create very large wakes (commoniy in excess of 3 feet). Rip-rap shorelines are <br /> often the only type of effective erosion protection from these of waves. The repeated abuse <br /> from these wakes wili destroy vegetative type shorelines. As a result, the move to <br /> vegetative shorelines will Iikely have the opposfte effect of what is intended - more erosion <br /> rather than less. <br /> As a result, this rule should be more consfderate of these conditions on high traffic <br /> waterways with large boats, such as Lake Minnetonka. <br /> 2} The cost of any type of shoreline changes will be borne entirely by the shoreline <br /> property owners, while the source of t�e erosion (large boats, often not owned by those <br /> with shoreline property) are not responsible for the damage they create. <br /> As a result, rather than putting the entire burden of erosion controi on the shoreline owners, <br /> a different rule approach should be developed that limits the source of the erosion, namely <br /> large boats. This wi11 result in a more falr burden of the costs of erosion reduction. <br /> Thank you, <br /> Mike Molitor <br />