Laserfiche WebLink
<br />t.. '-. <br />;r". I <br />t . .. <br />. ..,_ , 1.--- <br />: i_..;" ,. :. . ,-... .... \ : <br />~_. &.. ...~.... L.: ~t <br /> <br />Ii <br />{~ <br /> <br />limited amount of Ramsey County Sheriff's officers with boats. The boat that the lake <br />watch group will use will be marked with a Ramsey County Patrol's emblem. The lake <br />watch group will either record and/or photograph bad or unsafe perfonnance on the lake <br />and will be able to convey emergency information to the Sheriff's office. The Sheriff's <br />office currently enforces the State statutes which define careless, reckless, safety, <br />harassment, endangerment activities on the lake itself Ltd. Bergeron stated that if <br />Roseville does adopt the 150 foot setback provision, the Ramsey County Sheriff's office <br />will enforce it. <br /> <br />A general discussion ensued regarding the use of jet bikes, the interpretation of the 300 <br />foot setback validity, and the impact that not adopting a joint powers agreement has on <br />the enforcement authority. NitoBiutevis, speaking on behalf of the Lake Owasso <br />Association and the Ad Hoc Lake Users Group for Shoreview, found that with the 300 <br />foot no-wake zone, 202 acres of surface water will be available for boating, a significant <br />reduction in the overall water area of the lake. He noted that 61,000 boats currently are <br />licensed within Ramsey County, but an estimated additional 25% growth may occur <br />because of the water jet boat phenomena. He stated a concern for everybody on the lake <br />was the safety use of the lake and noted that a number of advisory board guidelines have <br />recommended a 150 foot no-wake zone. <br /> <br />Ltd. Jerry Bergeron stated the real issue is the reduction of dangerous operations on the <br />lake regardless of the setback. The lake is not big enough for consistent 50 mph use. <br />Neither the Shoreview or Roseville ordinance may be perfect as currently written. In <br />either case, it is the activity of the users who create the safety problem, not the ordinance. <br />A general discussion ensued regarding the boaters use of the lake and the knowledge of <br />the boating rules for Minnesota. A comment was made regarding the need for better <br />signage and distribution of information about the lake and the lake regulations to all users. <br /> <br />Environmental issues were a concern to many residents. They expressed concern about <br />the sedimentation occurring on the south shore and particularly the mucky bottom. The <br />turbidity at the south end of the lake increases as the amount of heavy surface water use <br />by boaters occurs. From an environmental point of view, the south end of the lake could <br />be a no-wake zone. Other uses take priority on the south end of the lake including fishing, <br />pontooning, and canoeing. Neighbors expressed concern about the swimming and sunning <br />rafts left on the lake. There appears to be no setback regulations regarding their use and <br />are unsafe, particularly for water skiers and boaters. The DNR issues the permits for such <br />rafts and the location they can be anchored at. The rafts may be a hazard to the navigation <br />on the lake. Each raft is supposed to have a permit with a name and number and reflectors <br />on all four sides. Many participants asked if the joint powers agreement could establish <br />regulations for raft setback distances. <br /> <br /> <br />Roseville residents asked for more clarification regarding the current utrification process <br />on the lake, especially as it relates to the south end of the lake. <br /> <br />A general discussion ensued regarding the slalom permits. Each request for a permanent <br />