A SUMMARY OF RELEVANT PORTIONS OF THE
PROPOSED SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PLAN DATED 10/27/06
FOR DISCUSSION AT TOWN HALL MEETINGS NOV. 8-9, 2006
CONTENTS OF THE PLAN
The October 27th Draft of the Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) for the Pensacola Project includes:
1) shoreline management goals and objectives;
2) a description of the agency and stakeholder consultation process;
3) a summary of the revised Project Recreation Plan;
4) shoreline management guidelines for Project lands;
5) adaptive management strategies for assessment of future shoreline development;
6) a process for the evaluation of new shoreline uses under the classification and permitting system;
7) a description of GRDA’s permitting standards and system;
8) a description of GRDA’s SMP enforcement strategies; and,
9) a monitoring and amendment process for the SMP.
Maps, minutes of the Stakeholders Working Group meetings, and related materials may be viewed online at http://www.grda.com. Copies of the SMP and maps may be obtained from the Legal Department at GRDA pursuant to the Oklahoma Open Records Act. Copying fees will apply.
DESCRIPTION
OF SECTIONS OF THE PLAN
Section 1.0
provides introductory materials and a brief overview of the Project and gives
links to GRDA. For more detailed
information on the Project (GRDA Headquarters, 918-256-5545, Fax: 918-256-5289; Mailing Address:
Section 2.0 provides the purpose and scope of the SMP and provides context for the remainder of the document.
Section 3.0 summarizes GRDA’s management goals and objectives.
Section 4.0 outlines participation by the public, agencies and other interested stakeholders in the development of the SMP.
Section 5.0
provides a summary of GRDA’s recreation plan for
Section 6.0 provides an assessment of existing shoreline resources and development, as well as identification of areas that may be suitable for future development served as the basis for establishing the Shoreline Management Classifications and guidelines for future shoreline management within the Project.
Section 6.1 defines the Shoreline Management Classification areas and identifies their locations.
Section 6.2 defines allowable uses and their compatibility with the SMC and identifies allowable (or prohibited) uses within each Classification area. These definitions were created with input from GRDA and the Stakeholders Working Group and purport to protect sensitive shoreline resources while permitting appropriate use and reasonable access to shoreline areas within the Project.
Section 7.0 describes GRDA’s Adaptive Management strategies to monitor ongoing shoreline development in locations identified as Areas of Special Concern (ASC).
Section 8.0 identifies the process used by GRDA and a proponent of shoreline uses, to determine if and how to permit a specific activity.
Section 9.0 discusses GRDA’s permitting standards and requirements for said activities.
Section 10.0 outlines GRDA’s shoreline enforcement policies as they relate to the overall SMP.
Section 11.0 addresses the triggers and milestones that GRDA will use to assess and, when necessary, update the SMP.
Section 12.0 is the bibliography and identifies sources for more detailed Project related information.
Appendix A of this SMP provides a copy of GRDA’s enabling legislation and promulgated rules detailing the statutory authority assigned to GRDA for management and enforcement of the Pensacola Project, and Project lands.
Appendix B of this SMP contains documentation of agency consultation and public participation in the development of the SMP as well as comments received by GRDA on the draft SMP, and responses to these comments.
Appendix C contains the Environmental Report (ER) developed in support of the SMP. The ER describes environmental and cultural resources within the Project boundary and analyzes the potential effects of the SMP on these resources.
Appendix D provides SMC mapping. These maps are part of a Project resource database (Geographic Information System or GIS) that provides a visual summary of this information and serves as a tool for analysis and management of environmental resources. The maps and cross references to other Project related studies allow users to reference more detailed Project-related information. They also help to integrate other Project related management plans and studies, and therefore help to limit the potential of conflicting management objectives for the Project’s shoreline resources.
Appendix E provides suggested best management practices (BMPs) for non-Project lands. As GRDA has no jurisdiction over private lands, these BMPs are for informational purposes only.
Appendix F
contains FERC license documents, which pertain directly to the SMP and
management of
SMP
STATED PURPOSE AND PROCESS USED TO CRAFT THE SMP
The Draft Shoreline Management Plan dated October 27, 2006, states the following purpose:
“FERC guidelines recommend that an SMP use existing resource information to designate Shoreline Management Classifications (SMC) and to develop guidelines that provide a framework for determining appropriate proposed shoreline use in relation to existing uses and environmental resources. An SMP may identify areas afforded additional protection or that may require additional scrutiny before permitting new uses. Similarly, an SMP may also identify shoreline segments that are suitable for future use and that may not require as much scrutiny before development. Most importantly, the SMP provides a management linkage between the Project’s license and FERC’s obligations under the Federal Power Act (FPA). (Emphasis added)
“GRDA designed this SMP to guide GRDA’s management actions in conformance with the Project license. The SMP includes strategies to manage and enhance the environmental and socio-economic values of the Project. These strategies include protecting environmental resources and providing access to the public while maintaining consistency with other jurisdictional policies and plans relevant to the area.
“GRDA
developed this SMP while considering all of the existing and reasonably
foreseeable future uses of the Project, resources currently protected by
regulation (e.g., threatened and
endangered species, and wetland sites), public interests, and FERC regulations
and guidelines. Interested
stakeholders including adjacent property owners, commercial representatives,
local realtors, and resource agency staff provided valued assistance in
developing the SMP through their involvement in the Stakeholder Working Groups
(SWG). The SWG provided valuable insight
to daily life on the lake, local knowledge of specific environmental resources,
adjacent property, business owner and recreational user expectations, and
individual perspectives on potential management strategies and actions.” (Emphasis added)
Stakeholder Working Group members were selected by Kleinschmidt working with GRDA staff from a pool of interested citizens. Membership was informally capped at around 30 members. Three working groups (committees) were assigned the task of developing land use classifications, allowable use determination and permitting policy. Some members serve on more than one committee. Stakeholder Working Groups members and their email addresses as of 9/06 are, as follows:
Mr. John Ballard; JandB@Brightok.net
Mr. Wayne Blair; N/A
Mr. Mike Brady;
Mr. Doss Briggs; dbriggs@muskogeeusa.com
Mrs. Lea Carson; kcc1@neok.com
Mr. Kent Carson; kcc1@neok.com
Dr. Joe Chouteau; choucj@integris-health.com
Mr. Alan Doty; alndeb@gcinet.net
Mrs. Debbie Doty; alndeb@gcinet.net
Comm. Russell Earls; cocommissioner@cableone.net
Dr. Bob Green; histd22222@charter.net
Mr. Gene Hale; sailfast@brightok.net
Mr. Terry Hallauer; Terry.Hallauer@deq.state.ok.us
Mr. Rudy Herrmann; herrmannr@aol.com
Mr. Stan Jones; grajay@brightok.net
Mr. Jerry Kropff; madaline@gcinet.net
Mr. Flint Kyler; FlintK@WasteConnections.com
Mr. Jack Lenhart; jrlenhart@cox.net
Mr. Joseph McCormick; josephmccormick@Mindspring.com
Mr. Ron Miller; Ron.Miller@Prodigy.net
Mr. Mark Osborn; Mark.Osborn@integris-health.com
Ms. Carol Owens; TXFYNANZ@yahoo.com
Mr. Cliff Sager; cs_odwc@hughes.net
Dr. Matt Starcevich; mattstar@charter.net
Ms. Virginia Starr; okie2004@netzero.net
Mrs. Sherry Whiteley; swhiteley@junct.com
Mr.
Additionally, input has been received from the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality, the Army Corps of Engineers, Oklahoma Conservation Commission, and the U. S. Fish and Game Commission.
TO: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PLAN
P. O. BOX 409
VINITA, OK 74301
FAX: 918-256-
EMAIL: http://www.grda.com
FROM:
___________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
COMMENT ON SHORELINE MANAGEMENT
PLAN PROCESS, INCLUDING COMPOSITION OF COMMITTEES:
I HEREBY
NOTIFY GRDA THAT I APPROVE/DISAPPROVE OF THE PROCESS BY WHICH THE SMP WAS
DRAFTED, INCLUDING COMPOSITION OF COMMITTEES, AND CITE THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
DEFINITION
AND IDENTIFICATION OF SMP CLASSIFICATIONS AND ALLOWABLE USES
The proposed
Shoreline Management Plan assigns distinct Shoreline Management Classifications
within the Project: Multi Purpose;
Limited Development; Sensitive Resource; Public/Municipal Use; and Project
Operations. Please see maps at http://www.grda.com. These Classifications essentially constitute
zoning and GRDA will consider these classification designations when reviewing
any future permit applications on
Additionally, the Stakeholders Working Group advocated a sixth classification, “Fully Developed,” that would preclude any future development within an area so designated within the Project. Five areas within the project were reviewed: Duck Creek, Drowning Creek, Grays Hollow, Woodward Hollow, and Party Cove. GRDA does not consider at this time that any area within the Project is “Fully Developed” but will monitor these areas and conduct a six-year review for further consideration. Please see attached “Future Shoreline Management Classification – Draft” dated October 4, 2006, relating to “Fully Developed” classification.
GRDA arrived
at these classifications utilizing: input
from the Stakeholders Working Group; maps produced using existing GIS
databases that included steep slopes, palustrine wetlands, contour and
bathymetric data, aquatic and terrestrial habitats considered significant by
state and federal wildlife agencies; existing shoreline development data
obtained by GRDA staff through a lake-wide GPS effort, review of aerial
photography and the personal and corporate knowledge of GRDA and
stakeholders.
The classifications and a summary of
allowable uses are identified as follows:
Multi Purpose areas currently support both residential and/or commercial uses, but without a clearly definable use pattern. These areas remain available for all uses, including, but not limited to: existing or potential future private residential waterfront development; commercial recreation facilities such as marinas; industrial facilities, business parks and industrial water access (intakes, discharges, etc.) and commercial agriculture. Subject to meeting site-specific criteria, GRDA will manage these lands to accommodate reasonable demands for public and private uses within the guidelines of GRDA’s Permitting Program. GRDA encourages certain types of development, which minimize effects to the overall area, such as community rather than individual docks. Proponents of new commercial developments are required to provide justification for new uses.
Existing and potential Residential/Multifamily uses with a Multi Purpose Classification area include:
· Docks
· Decks/Patios
· Fishing Docks
· Breakwaters
· Retaining Walls
· Vegetation Management
· Dredging/Channeling
· Water Withdrawal/Discharge
· Floating Habitable Structures
· House Boats
· Farming Activities
· Moorings
· Multi-boat slips (<10)
· Multi-boat slips (>10)
· Beaches/Common use areas
· Picnic/Event Facilities
· Boat ramps
· Marine railway, trams, & lifts
· Fences
Existing and potential commercial uses within the Multi Purpose Classification area includes:
· New Commercial Docks construction
· Multi boat slips >10 slips
· Existing Docks Repair and replacement
·
Full Service
· Restaurants/Hotels/Casinos
· Recreational Water Parks with shoreline development
· Commercial withdrawal (e.g. golf courses)
· Habitable Structures
· Floating Breakwaters
· Navigational access dredging
· Retaining walls
· Boat ramps
· Marine railway, trams, & lifts
· Fences
· Dredging
All marinas must be l/2 mile (radius) from other existing marinas. Additionally, commercial docks, piers, and boathouses shall not contain living space or sleeping areas. Except for existing habitable structures addressed in Section 9.5.1 of the Plan, and marina facilities providing approved comfort stations and/or food service facilities, GRDA does not permit toilets and sinks.
Existing structures may be grandfathered in if they do not produce gray water or violate other environmental safety standards. Contact GRDA for information on grandfathering existing structures.
Limited Residential Development areas currently consist of primarily residential development and/or open land. Typically, residential or public uses dominate these areas. There are few or widely separated commercial facilities. While there may be undeveloped lots within Limited Residential Development areas, unless a proponent of a commercial enterprise demonstrates a particular public interest, GRDA considers any future commercial/industrial development in these areas incompatible with the primarily residential and open space uses. As such, commercial development in a Development area receives a higher level of scrutiny in GRDA’s permitting process and, in the event GRDA approves these uses, they may be subject to requirements beyond those required for commercial development in a Multi Purpose area. Multi-family residential developments such as condominiums or apartment complexes are included in the overall Development classification. As with Multi Purpose areas, GRDA encourages the development of multi-family or community, rather than individual, docks to minimize overall effects to the shoreline within these areas.
Existing and potential Residential/Multifamily uses with a Limited Residential Development Classification area include:
· Docks
· Decks/Patios
· Fishing Docks
· Breakwaters
· Retaining Walls
· Vegetation Management
· Dredging/Channeling
· Water Withdrawal/Discharge
· Floating Habitable Structures
· House Boats
· Farming Activities
· Moorings
· Multi-boat slips (<10)
· Multi-boat slips (>10)
· Beaches/Common use areas
· Picnic/Event Facilities
· Boat ramps
· Marine railway, trams, & lifts
· Fences
Regardless of a use’s status as residential or commercial, GRDA’s Board of Directors and FERC must review and approve all applications for facilities with 10 or more slips. New residential docks, piers, and boathouses shall not contain living space or sleeping areas. Existing structure may be grandfathered if they do not produce gray water or violate other environmental safety standards. Contact GRDA for information on “grandfathering” existing structures.
Existing and Potential Municipal/Public Uses within a Limited Residential Development Classification area include:
· Public/municipal water withdrawal/discharge
· Water treatment systems
· Parks
· Boat Ramps
· Docks
· Wildlife Management areas
Sensitive Resource areas are
undeveloped or have extremely limited development and/or that encompass an area
of significant environmental value. It is highly
unlikely that GRDA will permit new uses in these areas. Sensitive Resource areas include resources
protected by state and/or federal law, executive order; natural or cultural
features considered important to the area or natural environment and areas
maintained for habitat, water quality protection and general aesthetics. These areas may include palustrine wetlands[1], steep
slopes[2],
sensitive aquatic or terrestrial habitat, and islands. Wildlife Management Areas (WMA) identified in
the Project’s FERC license are included in the Sensitive Resource
classification. All currently
undeveloped islands owned by GRDA fall under the Sensitive Resource
classification. GRDA intends to manage these areas to protect
their environmental and/or aesthetic values. The
SMP ‘grandfathers’ existing uses, if those uses are properly maintained and if
they were properly permitted at the time of enactment of this SMP. GRDA may permit temporary activities that do
not require any form of construction, long-term use, or that may result in any
adverse effect on the protected resource.
Examples of temporary activities include bird-dog trials, one-time
outdoor athletic events, educational projects or programs that might be
associated with schools, universities, service clubs or youth
organizations. These temporary permits
will be highly restrictive to avoid negative effects to sensitive resources.
The Shoreline Management Plan specifically states that any
new “permanent” uses proposed for a designated Sensitive Resource area will be
considered only if the proponent of this activity can:
1) provide
compelling evidence of hardship,
2) justify
the project location as the only feasible alternative, and
3)
be willing to provide specific protection,
mitigation and/or environmental enhancements (PM&E measures) as may be
prescribed by GRDA or through any consultation with jurisdictional
agencies.
All
proposed uses in Sensitive Resource areas are subject to a consultation process
consultation process involving local, state and federal resource agencies that
may include, but are not restricted to, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Tulsa District), U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Oklahoma Department of
Wildlife Conservation, Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality, Oklahoma
Water Resource Board, Oklahoma Historical Society, Oklahoma Archaeological
Survey, County Bureau of Environmental Quality, Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Oklahoma Native American Tribes, County Floodplain Administrators, Oklahoma
Corporation Commission, Oklahoma State Fire Marshall, and the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission and may require an Environmental Assessment or
Environmental Impact Statement by project proponents.
NOTE:
While not specifically identified within the Sensitive Resource
classification, GRDA provides protection to historic and culturally sensitive
areas within the Project (Section 9.10).
Because of the sensitive nature of cultural or historic
resources, their locations are not public information. GRDA maintains data supplied by the State
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and the Oklahoma Archeological Survey
(OKAS) that identifies potential and significant cultural resource sites. GRDA will review all ground-disturbing
activities to determine if there is a possible adverse effect on these resources. Potential effects to cultural or historic
resources may result in the denial of a permit or require compliance with
protection and mitigation measures suggested by the SHPO or the Oklahoma
Archeological Survey.
Public / Municipal Use areas are for public use such as State parks, public beaches, municipal water intake/outflow, transmission/utility line crossing, roads, bridges, and gas/oil pipelines. Typically, public agencies or governmental bodies manage the areas. GRDA will not permit new uses, outside the scope of the existing management objective of the managing entity at these locations. GRDA does not permit private residential or commercial activities at these locations unless they are consistent with the management policies of the area and the operating body requests the new use.
Municipal/Public Uses include:
· Public/municipal water withdrawal/discharge
· Water treatment systems
· Parks
· Boat Ramps
· Docks
· Wildlife Management areas
Project Operations areas are reserved
for current and potential future Project operation and related functions. This category includes all Project lands used
for hydroelectric generation, dams, spillways, switchyards, transmission
facilities, right-of-way areas, security lands, and other operational
areas. While sometimes occurring within
or adjacent to other use areas, these specific shoreline uses require a degree
of separation from other activities to ensure public safety or to assure the
security of the Project infrastructure.
Maps
detailing these classifications can be found at the GRDA website,
http://www.grda.com.
TO: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PLAN
P. O. BOX 409
VINITA, OK 74301
FAX: 918-256-
EMAIL: http://www.grda.com
FROM: ___________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
COMMENT ON MAPS:
I
HEREBY NOTIFY GRDA THAT I APPROVE/DISAPPROVE OF THE CLASSIFICATION DESIGNATION
INDICATED ON THE PROPOSED SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PLAN MAPS (AS OF NOVEMBER 8,
2006), AND CITE THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
COMMENT ON CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM, IN GENERAL:
I
HEREBY NOTIFY GRDA THAT I APPROVE/DISAPPROVE OF THE PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM AS SUMMARIZED HEREIN, AND CITE THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
TO: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PLAN
P. O. BOX 409
VINITA, OK 74301
FAX: 918-256-
EMAIL: http://www.grda.com
FROM:
___________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
COMMENT ON IDENTIFIED ALLOWABLE USES WITHIN SPECIFIC CLASSIFICATIONS:
I
HEREBY NOTIFY GRDA THAT I APPROVE/DISAPPROVE OF THE IDENTIFIED ALLOWABLE USES
WITHIN THE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AS SUMMARIZED HEREIN, AND CITE THE FOLLOWING
REASONS:
The proposed Shoreline Management Plan identifies three areas along that lake as having greater development pressures and heavier use. Other areas may be added in the future. They do not identify these areas as completely “built out” (with no additional shoreline available for development but at the current/anticipated rate of growth, GRDA anticipates these areas may require specific and distinct management attention. As such, GRDA, through their adaptive management strategies, developed a system to identify Areas of Special Concern (ASC) and to monitor, analyze, and subsequently manage them in a flexible, yet locally relevant manner.
The three ASC areas identified due to intensive development include:
· Ketchum Cove
· Scotty’s Cove
· Duck Creek
GRDA selected these areas based on information from the public meetings held for the Shoreline Management Plan, professional judgment, and the social and resource conditions and physical characteristics similar to the criteria outlined in the Carrying Capacity Study (CCS). GRDA intends to include these three ASC as initial monitoring sites to assess shoreline development in relation to the social and environmental factors as discussed above.
Available data do not support the assertions that the ASC experience negative environmental and social effects due to over-development. Neither does GRDA support the assertion that any shoreline area has reached its maximum development potential; however, public comment indicates that the potential for continued growth and heavy use of these areas is a serious concern. After examining several potential strategies for managing and controlling growth on the lake, GRDA concluded that development of a lake-wide policy to contain growth or set limits on development beyond the existing SMC was not equitable to a majority of adjacent property owners or non-resident users of the lake.
The key characteristics of GRDA’s adaptive management of ASC include:
a) Acknowledgement of uncertainty about what policy/management strategy is “best”
b) Selection of appropriate policies or management practices
c) Development and implementation of a site-specific plan
d) Monitoring of the key response indicators identified in the plan
e) Analysis of the outcome in consideration of the original objectives and
f) Incorporation of the results into future decisions” [3]
Implementation of an adaptive management policy allows GRDA to continue to assess environmental and social conditions, analyze and respond directly to specific site conditions, implement additional management conditions where and when necessary; while acknowledging that these conditions may be temporary and changeable. After establishing a one-year baseline, GRDA will monitor the indicators at varying points over a three-year period.
Current conditions and preferences for targeted activities are identified in the following pages for each of the three proposed ASC areas:
Table 7.1.
Physical, Resource and Social Characteristics of
|
Areas of Special Concern |
|
|
|
Characteristics |
|
Scotty’s Cove |
Physical: Scotty’s is a relatively short and narrow cove with multiple inlets. The cove has a high level of residential and commercial development. Water depth in main channel ranges roughly from 10 to 92 ft. The shoreline is irregular in shape and well developed with residential and commercial structures. Resource: GRDA identified no sensitive resources excerpt at the back of the cove due to shallow waters and mud flats. Water quality is identified as Primary Body Contact Recreation beneficial use. Social: Scotty’s Cove is a high development area. This lake segment experiences boating use below the estimated capacity (approximately 15 percent) during normal weekends and approximately 54 percent on holiday weekends. The cove is home to relatively few (±2) marinas and commercial outfits offering support facilities for boaters and public access to the water. It is generally preferred to maintain current use mixes. |
|
Ketchum Cove |
Physical: Ketchum is a long and narrow cove with high level of residential and commercial development. Water depth ranges roughly from 2 to 62 ft. The shoreline is irregular in shape and well developed with residential and commercial structures. Resource: There are areas of wetlands present in Ketchum Cove. The shoreline at the back of the cove is a “sensitive area” in the SMP due to shallow waters and mud flats. Water quality is identified as Primary Body Contact Recreation beneficial use. Social: Ketchum Cove is a high development area. This lake segment experiences boating use below the estimated capacity (approximately 4 percent) during normal weekends and at approximately 14 percent on holiday weekends. Approximately 27 marinas and commercial outfits offer support facilities for boaters and public access to the water in the cove. It is generally preferred to maintain current use mixes. |
|
Duck Creek |
Physical: Duck Creek is a long and narrow cove with high level of residential and commercial development. Water depth in main channel ranges roughly 12 to 65 ft. The shoreline is irregular in shape and well developed with residential and commercial structures. Resource: GRDA identified no sensitive resources on except at the back of the cove due to shallow waters and mud flats. Generally, water quality is identified as Primary Body Contact Recreation beneficial use. Water quality may suffer temporarily on peak-use weekends. Social: Duck Creek is a high use area. This lake segment experiences boating use below the estimated capacity (approximately 2 percent) during normal weekends and at slightly over 10 percent on holiday weekends. Special boating regulations are in place for Duck Creek during peak-use holiday weekends as a result of heavy development and boating traffic. Approximately 5-10 marinas and commercial outfits offer support facilities for boaters and public access to the water populate the creek. It is generally preferred to maintain current use mixes. |
Table 7.2. Proposed Indicators and Standards for Scotty’s Cove
Table 7.3. Proposed Indicators and Standards for Ketchum Cove
Table 7.4. Proposed Indicators and Standards for Duck Creek
|
|
|
Standard: Current boat density and distribution is estimated to be an average of 33 boats observed at any period during normal use weekends (typically Memorial Day through Labor Day). Future monitoring efforts would examine this area individually and standards be determined upon next review. |
|
|
|
Standard: This section currently supports approximately 5 support facilities. Additional support facilities and/or expansion of existing facilities will be examined closely and approved only if they do not contribute to significant additional boater traffic or accidents, are not expected to degrade environmental resources, and are in agreement with the Carrying Capacity Study (CCS). |
|
|
|
Standard: Review boat accident data when available. Monitor data to: identify locations that may require additional management efforts (navigational markings, special travel lanes, additional enforcement of existing regulations, etc.); identify causes of accidents that may indicate a need for public education; and identify locations that may require special attention to permitted shoreline development. |
|
|
|
Indicator 5: Preferences |
|
Standard: Monitor for holiday and non-holiday weekends, but standards are set for non-holiday weekends. Target 70-90% of residents and boaters stating that weekend boating on the lake is between light to moderately heavy. Target 0-25% stating that they had a negative experience. Target 0-10% stating that additional facilities are needed. |
TO: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PLAN
P. O. BOX 409
VINITA, OK 74301
FAX: 918-256-
EMAIL: http://www.grda.com
FROM:
___________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
COMMENT ON ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT
STRAGIES/AREAS OF SPECIAL CONCERN CLASSIFICATION:
I
HEREBY NOTIFY GRDA THAT I APPROVE/DISAPPROVE OF THE PROPOSED ADAPTIVE
MANAGEMENT STRAGIES/AREAS OF SPECIAL CONCERN CLASSIFICATION AND CITE THE
FOLLOWING REASONS:
VEGETATION
MANAGEMENT
Property owners adjacent to Project lands must submit a Vegetation Management Plan and received a permit from the office of Ecosystems Management prior to conducting any vegetation management activities (including trimming trees and removing brush). VMP’s will be approved and permitted only to adjacent property owners whose existing permits, if any, with GRDA are in good standing.
Except for the
mowing and weed eating (nylon line only) of lawns established and existing before
June 1, 2005, all vegetation management activities performed by private or
commercial entities on publicly-owned (i.e.
GRDA) lands, must apply for a Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) permit and obtain written permission from the Office
of Ecosystems Management before conducting such activities. GRDA will not permit requests for VMP’s to
remove vegetation in areas identified as wetlands per the National Wetland
Inventory maps. Special circumstances
such as the presence of wetland indicators as determined by the Office of
Ecosystems Management may result in a requirement for on- or off-site
mitigation and/or an alternative vegetation management plan. Applications for submittal of Vegetation
Management Plans are available at the GRDA Office of Ecosystems Management,
located at the west end of Pensacola Dam in
Activities requiring permits include:
(a) removal of vegetation within the Project except in special circumstances (i.e., presence of wetland indicators; shoreline stabilization or other factors), for removal of vegetation less than or equal to 3 inches in diameter. GRDA may also allow removal of specified understory plants (poison ivy, salt cedar, eastern red cedar and other exotic noxious plants identified by OAC 300:35-27-4: GRDA vegetation management lake rules) identified in the VMP. Note: Use of herbicides on Project lands is expressly prohibited (OAC item c(1) in 300:35-27-4 (c) (1): GRDA vegetation management lake rules) except by a certified state licensed applicator.
(b) the removal of hazardous trees after consultation, permit application and approval, only in cases where the trees are dead and dangerous, damaged and dangerous, diseased and dangerous, or otherwise present a public safety or property hazard;
(c) pruning;
(d) any landscaping such as planting trees and shrubs, or adding or removing other features which may require removal of existing understory plants prior to landscaping
(e) adjacent property owners may clear vegetation to prevent the deterioration of retaining walls under a VMP permit that identifies approved vegetation to restore the site.
Without prior GRDA approval or receipt of a permit an adjacent landowner may remove floating debris, drift wood, litter, and trash may from GRDA lands and water provided the removal does not involve heavy machinery (i.e. bobcats, tractors, bulldozers, skidders, excavators, etc.) or other means which have the potential to disturb the shoreline through movement of soil, rocks, or existing live vegetation. Adjacent property owners may clear vegetation to create and maintain access corridors between GRDA land and adjacent property. The corridor may not exceed 20 feet in width. Corridors must consist of natural materials such as native grass, wood chips, or gravel/crushed rock. Placement of such must not involve earth moving or soil disturbance. When reviewing proposed path layouts provided in the VMP, GRDA will focus on minimizing ground disturbance and vegetation removal. The path may extend from the common boundary between GRDA and the adjacent landowner to the waters edge.
A Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) permit may require written approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), and other state and local agencies. Permittee shall perform all activities in strict accordance with the specifications approved by GRDA.
Adjacent property owners must initiate any activity allowed by the VMP permit within one year of issuance of the permit. Failure to do so will result in the expiration of the permit.
Any person that violates the provisions of the VMP may be required to pay all costs related to the repair, restoration and reclamation of GRDA lands and waters associated with the violation.
TO: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PLAN
P. O. BOX 409
VINITA, OK 74301
FAX: 918-256-
EMAIL: http://www.grda.com
FROM:
___________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
COMMENT ON VEGETATION MANAGEMENT
PLAN:
I
HEREBY NOTIFY GRDA THAT I APPROVE/DISAPPROVE OF THE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN
AND CITE THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
DREDGING
All excavation and dredging activities on GRDA-owned property require a permit from GRDA. (See http://www.grda.com for FERC approved dredging plan.) The United States Army Corps of Engineers may also require a permit for excavation and dredging activities. Additionally, FERC must approve all dredging activities on GRDA waters requiring the removal of more than 2,000 cubic yards of material. Dredging is generally not allowed in Sensitive Resource management areas.
In an effort to protect Project resources and adequately review all dredging applications, currently GRDA requires a wetland delineation study conducted by a GRDA approved wetland delineation specialist using the Army Corps of Engineers wetland delineation guidelines in any locations other than open water dredging. Excavation within vegetated wetlands is not allowed. GRDA will approve excavation of individual boat channels or embayments only when it determines there is no other practicable alternative to achieving sufficient navigable water depth, the action would not substantially influence sensitive resources, and the applicant can provide proof that they purchased their property prior to the development of these SMP policies. Applicants must be prepared to provide adequate documentation of the necessity of the project as part of any application.
No more than two thousand (2,000) cubic yards of material can be removed for any individual boat channel. Additional requirements and specifications are included in GRDA’s Permitting program documentation. Spoil material from channel excavations must be placed in accordance with any applicable local, state, and federal regulations at an upland site above the applicable flood plain and off Project lands. Dredging for new or previously authorized uses is seasonally restricted. To avoid potential impact to fish spawning areas applicants must receive approval of timing from GRDA for this activity.
Any new dredging may require sediment testing to determine if dredging may displace contaminants such as heavy metals, PCB, or other hazardous materials. Detection of hazardous materials during testing may lead to a requirement that the project either be abandoned or the project proponent provide a dredging management plan to GRDA identifying how materials will be removed in compliance with the OKDEQ Standards. Maintenance dredging of previously authorized facilities and structures under 250 cubic feet do not require soils testing.
GRDA currently requires notification of project commencement, post-dredging site review, and sign-off by GRDA enforcement staff at the completion of the action; Contractors are required to post their permit on site during activity. If other regulatory agencies (e.g. USACE) require permit application submittal and review, GRDA requires proof that the project proponent has received all other permits, prior to issuing a GRDA permit.
Within 2 years of the approval of this SMP, GRDA intends
to require all contractors wishing to undertake dredging activities at
TO: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PLAN
P. O. BOX 409
VINITA, OK 74301
FAX: 918-256-
EMAIL: http://www.grda.com
FROM:
___________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
COMMENT ON DREDGING PLAN:
I
HEREBY NOTIFY GRDA THAT I APPROVE/DISAPPROVE OF THE DREDGING PLAN AND CITE THE
FOLLOWING REASONS:
ATTACHMENT:
FUTURE SHORELINE MANAGEMENT CLASSIFICATION – DRAFT 10/04/06
Some shoreline areas along the lake have experienced greater development and use than others. No current data suggests that any shoreline areas along the lake are completely “built out” (with no additional shoreline available for development). However, given current levels of new development, GRDA anticipates that private property adjacent to the Project boundary will continue to have additional growth that may lead to areas of “built out” condition. In anticipation of this, GRDA established a “fully developed” classification which, while not currently applied to any areas, may be used in the future.
GRDA, through a recreational carrying capacity study (CCS) aimed at boating density, identified five specific locations which, while not at capacity, warrant further monitoring. These are noted as “special use areas” within the CCS and GRDA’s draft Recreation Management Plan. They include:
GRDA intends to include these areas as monitoring sites to assess shoreline development and use in conjunction with recreation capacity monitoring.
DETERMINATION OF RESOURCE INDICATORS
GRDA acknowledges that recreational capacity does not necessarily translate into shoreline development capacity, however these areas coincide with areas on the lake which are experiencing active and heavy growth. As such, GRDA developed similar monitoring parameters using resource indicators to assist them in ascertaining whether these locations (or others in the future) warrant assignment of a Fully Developed classification. Monitoring these locations will occur simultaneously with recreational use monitoring and results will be developed and published every six years in coordination with GRDA’s recreational reporting timeline.
As indicated in the CCS “resource indicators are specific measurable environmental or social variables that measure the condition in a management area. The indicators and standards represent potential trigger points that define when conditions become different from what was previously defined.” These indicators are, ideally, specific, objective, reliable and repeatable and related to residents’ expectations of use. Additionally the indicators selected must be relevant over time, easy to measure quickly without technical equipment, easy to train for monitoring; and be cost effective. By employing a system to regularly assess these indicators, GRDA can compare conditions to determine whether they remain acceptable. As needed, management actions may be taken.
As monitoring will occur in conjunction with recreational use monitoring, indicators are similar to those in the CCS. They were chosen based on information from the public meetings held for the Shoreline Management Plan, professional judgment, and the social and resource conditions and physical characteristics similar to the criteria outlined in the Carrying Capacity Study. Table X outlines the physical, resource and social characteristics of each location.
Table X Physical, Resource and Social Characteristics of
|
Special Use Areas |
|
|
|
Characteristics |
|
Duck
Creek |
Physical: Long and narrow cove with high level of
residential and commercial development. Water depth in main channel ranges
roughly 12 to 65 ft. The shoreline is
irregular in shape and well developed with residential and commercial
structures. Resource: No sensitive resources
on the water have been identified but the shoreline at the back of the cove
is identified as “sensitive” in the SMP due to shallow waters and mud
flats. Generally, water quality is
identified as Primary Body Contact Recreation beneficial use. Water quality may suffer temporarily on
peak-use weekends. Social: Duck Creek is known to be a high use
area. This lake segment experiences
boating use below the estimated capacity (approximately 2 percent) during
normal weekends and at slightly over 10 percent on holiday weekends. Special boating regulations are in place
for Duck Creek during peak-use holiday weekends as a result of heavy
development and boating traffic. The
creek is populated by approximately 5-10 marinas and commercial outfits
offering support facilities for boaters and public access to the water. It is generally preferred to maintain
current use mixes. |
|
Drowning
Creek |
Physical: This channel is long and broad channel
ranging roughly 13-95 ft in depth. The
shoreline is partially developed and partially wooded. Resource: Beaver Dam Cove is the
home of the endangered gray bats. The
cave is located at the shoreline and is occasionally inundated by flood
waters. Under normal conditions, there
is no boat access to the cave mouth.
Generally, water quality is identified as Primary Body Contact
Recreation beneficial use. Water
quality may suffer temporarily on peak-use weekends. Social: Drowning Creek is known to boaters as a
desirable location for waterskiing and tubing, particularly for
families. In recent years, pleasure
boating has reportedly increased in Drowning Creek, to a point where it is
inhibiting the family use atmosphere and its use for beginner water-skiers,
tubers, etc. This segment experiences
boating use below the estimated capacity (approximately 1 percent) during
normal weekends and is at approximately 9 percent capacity on holiday
weekends. The Creek supports 2
commercial and private support facilities, none of which are public. It is generally desirable to maintain the
low traffic character of this area. |
|
Grays
Hollow |
Physical: Narrow channel ranging roughly 30-75 ft in
depth at mouth. Shoreline is developed
and in places, steep. Resource: No sensitive resources
on the water or around the shoreline have been identified. Generally, water quality is identified as
Primary Body Contact Recreation beneficial use. Water quality may suffer temporarily on
peak-use weekends. Social: This area is considered a special use area
because of the presence of Dripping Springs, which receive very high levels
of use and significant rafting of boats, particularly during peak-use holiday
weekends. Grays Hollow experiences
boating use below the estimated capacity (approximately 17 percent) during
normal weekends. This area is
typically used at levels beyond its estimated capacity (113 percent) on
holiday weekends. One informal public
access site is available in the far reaches of the Hollow, but no other
public access from shore is available.
Special boating regulations are in place for this area to manage
crowding. It is preferred to maintain
current use patterns. |
|
Woodward
Hollow |
Physical: Woodward Hollow is a relatively long,
multi-branched channel and a moderate amount of residential development.
Water depth in main channel ranges roughly 15 to 70 ft. The shoreline is irregular in shape. Resource: No sensitive resources
on the water or around the shoreline have been identified. Water quality is identified as Primary Body
Contact Recreation beneficial use. Social: Woodward Hollow is reportedly becoming a
popular boating location, particularly for rafting. This area receives overflow rafting as
other locations on the lake fill up and reach a social capacity during the
peak use holiday periods. Woodward
Hollow experiences boating use below the estimated capacity (approximately 1
percent) during normal weekends and is at approximately 7 percent capacity on
holiday weekends. It is anticipated
this traffic will increase in the future and should be managed appropriately
in the interest of public safety and resource protection. A single public boat ramp is known to exist
at this location. It is desirable to
maintain current use mixes. |
|
Party Cove |
Physical: Party Cove is located to the northeast of
Ketchum Cove. It is a small, narrow
channel with limited residential development.
Water depth ranges roughly from 20 to 30 ft. The shoreline is irregular in shape. Resource: No sensitive resources
on the water or around the shoreline have been identified. Generally, water quality is identified as
Primary Body Contact Recreation beneficial use. Water quality may suffer temporarily on
peak-use weekends. Social: This area receives overflow rafting as
other locations on the lake fill up and reach a social capacity during peak
use holiday periods. Party Cove experiences
boating use below the estimated capacity (approximately 14 percent) during
normal weekends. This area is
typically used at levels beyond its estimated capacity (114 percent) on
holiday weekends. It is anticipated
this traffic will increase in the future and should be managed appropriately
in the interest of public safety and resource protection. Party Cove currently has no commercial,
private or public support facilities. |
INDICATORS AND STANDARDS
Indicators and standards are also provided in Table x. Each special use area is monitored with the same indicators, although the standards may vary by location. They include:
1. Water quality – State standards for Primary Body Contact Beneficial Use. Monitor results over time.
2. Boat density by activity – Replicate boat density counts. Monitor results over time to identify changing use patterns, focusing especially on non-holiday weekends.
3. Available facilities and public access – Inventory available public and commercial access sites and the boater support facilities offered by them.
4. Boating accidents – Continuously monitor the location and cause of boat accidents.
5. Resident preferences – Monitor resident opinions and preferences regarding perceptions of crowding and safety, and opinion of the adequacy of support facilities at monitoring locations.
Table x. Proposed Indicators and Standards for Duck Creek
|
Indicator 1: Water Quality |
|
Standard: Primary Contact Beneficial Use. |
|
|
|
Indicator 2: Boat Density by Activity |
|
Standard: Current boat density and distribution is estimated to be an average of 33 boats observed at any period of time during normal use weekends (typically Memorial Day through Labor Day). Future monitoring efforts would examine this area individually and standards be determined upon next review. |
|
|
|
Indicator 3: Available Support Facilities |
|
Standard: This section currently supports approximately 5 support facilities. Additional support facilities and/or expansion of existing facilities will be examined closely and approved only if they do not contribute to significant additional boater traffic or accidents, are not expected to degrade environmental resources, and are in agreement with the Carrying Capacity Study (CCS). |
|
|
|
Indicator 4: Boating Accidents |
|
Standard: Review boat accident data when available. Monitor data to: a) identify locations that may require additional management efforts (navigational markings, special travel lanes, additional enforcement of existing regulations, etc.); b) identify causes of accidents that may indicate a need for public education; and c) identify locations that may require special attention to permitted shoreline development. |
|
|
|
Indicator 5: Preferences |
|
Standard: Monitor for holiday and non-holiday weekends, but standards are set for non-holiday weekends. Target 70-90% of residents and boaters stating that weekend boating on the lake is between light to moderately heavy. Target 0-25% stating that they had a negative experience. Target 0-10% stating that additional facilities are needed. |
Table x. Proposed Indicators and Standards for Drowning
Creek
|
Indicator 1: Water Quality |
|
|
|
Standard: Current boat density and distribution by activity is estimated to be an average of 33 boats observed at any period of time during normal use weekends (typically Memorial Day through Labor Day). Future monitoring efforts will examine this area individually and standards be determined upon next review. Standards should be commensurate with the types of use preferred in this location. |
|
|
|
Standard: This section currently supports approximately 2 support facilities. Additional support facilities and/or expansion of existing facilities should be examined closely and approved only if they do not contribute to significant additional boater traffic or accidents, are not expected to degrade environmental resources, and are in agreement with the CCS. |
|
|
|
Standard: Review boat accident data when available. Monitor data to: a) identify locations that may require additional management efforts (navigational markings, special travel lanes, additional enforcement of existing regulations, etc.); b) identify causes of accidents that may indicate a need for public education; and c) identify locations that may require special attention to permitted shoreline development. |
|
|
|
Indicator 5: Preferences |
|
Standard: Monitor for holiday and non-holiday weekends, but standards are set for non-holiday weekends. Target 80-90% of residents and boaters stating that weekend boating on the lake is between light to moderately heavy. Target 0-10% stating that they had a negative experience. Target 0-10% stating that additional facilities are needed. |
Table x. Proposed Indicators and
Standards for Gray’s Hollow
|
|
|
|
|
Standard: Current boat density and distribution by activity is estimated to be an average of 33 boats observed at any period of time during normal use weekends (typically Memorial Day through Labor Day). Future monitoring efforts will examine this area individually and standards be determined upon next review. Standards should be commensurate with the types of use preferred in this location. |
|
|
|
Standard: This section currently supports approximately a single support facility. Additional support facilities and/or expansion of existing facilities should be examined closely and approved only if they do not contribute to significant additional boater traffic or accidents, are not expected to degrade environmental resources, and are in agreement with the CCS. |
|
|
|
Standard: Review boat accident data when available. Monitor data to: a) identify locations that may require additional management efforts (navigational markings, special travel lanes, additional enforcement of existing regulations, etc.); b) identify causes of accidents that may indicate a need for public education; and c) identify locations that may require special attention to permitted shoreline development. |
|
|
|
Indicator 5: Preferences |
|
Standard: Monitor for holiday and non-holiday weekends, but standards are set for non-holiday weekends. Target 80-90% of residents and boaters stating that weekend boating on the lake is between light to moderately heavy. Target 0-10% stating that they had a negative experience. Target 0-10% stating that additional facilities are needed. |
Table x. Proposed Indicators and Standards for Woodward Hollow
|
Indicator 1: Water Quality |
|
Standard: Primary Contact Beneficial Use. |
|
|
|
Indicator 2: Boat Density by Activity |
|
Standard: Current boat density and distribution by activity is estimated to be an average of 19 boats observed at any period of time during normal use weekends (typically Memorial Day through Labor Day). Future monitoring efforts will examine this area individually and standards be determined upon next review. |
|
|
|
Indicator 3: Available Support Facilities |
|
Standard: This section currently supports approximately a single support facility. Additional support facilities and/or expansion of existing facilities should be examined closely and approved only if they do not contribute to significant additional boater traffic or accidents, are not expected to degrade environmental resources, and are in agreement with the CCS. |
|
|
|
Indicator 4: Boating Accidents |
|
Standard: Review boat accident data when available. Monitor data to: a) identify locations that may require additional management efforts (navigational markings, special travel lanes, additional enforcement of existing regulations, etc.); b) identify causes of accidents that may indicate a need for public education; and c) identify locations that may require special attention to permitted shoreline development. |
|
|
|
Indicator 5: Preferences |
|
Standard: Monitor for holiday and non-holiday weekends, but standards are set for non-holiday weekends. Target 80-90% of residents and boaters stating that weekend boating on the lake is between light to moderately heavy. Target 0-10% stating that they had a negative experience. Target 0-10% stating that additional facilities are needed. |
Table x. Proposed Indicators and
Standards for Party Cove
|
Indicator 1: Water Quality |
|
Standard: Primary Contact Beneficial Use. |
|
|
|
Indicator 2: Boat Density by Activity |
|
Standard: Current boat density and distribution by activity is estimated to be an average of 30 boats observed at any period of time during normal use weekends (typically Memorial Day through Labor Day). Future monitoring efforts will examine this area individually and standards be determined upon next review. |
|
|
|
Indicator 3: Available Support Facilities |
|
Standard: There are no support facilities located in Party Cove. This lack of development is likely one of the attractions to boaters who raft up here over holiday weekends. New support facilities should be examined closely and approved only if they do not contribute to significant additional boater traffic or accidents, are not expected to degrade environmental resources, and are in agreement with the CCS. |
|
|
|
Indicator 4: Boating Accidents |
|
Standard: Review boat accident data when available. Monitor data to: a) identify locations that may require additional management efforts (navigational markings, special travel lanes, additional enforcement of existing regulations, etc.); b) identify causes of accidents that may indicate a need for public education; and c) identify locations that may require special attention to permitted shoreline development. |
|
|
|
Indicator 5: Preferences |
|
Standard: Monitor for holiday and non-holiday weekends, but standards are set for non-holiday weekends. Target 80-90% of residents and boaters stating that weekend boating on the lake is between light to moderately heavy. Target 0-10% stating that they had a negative experience. Target 0-10% stating that additional facilities are needed. |
FULLY DEVELOPED CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM & STANDARDS
The Fully Developed classification will be broken out into Multipurpose Fully Developed and Limited Residential Fully Developed. It is anticipated that, once assigned as such, these areas will be unlikely to experience any major new facilities or uses because of the lack of open space and extensive existing shoreline development. If applied, these sub classification will remain available for all allowable uses for their respective designation, however will not be available for new non-designated activities. For example, an area designated as Limited Residential-Fully Developed, will continue to be available for modification or replacement of existing residential activities with new similar activities, however it will not be appropriate for new commercial activities.
The key requirement for new development in any Fully Developed Classification area will be that an adjacent property owner proposing to modify or replace existing shoreline structures with new structures must support any proposal with documentation that the modification or replacement activities will not result in a net increase in boat slips, that changes in existing uses do not adversely affect existing adjacent uses, and that there will be no net increase in overall shoreline development.
AMENDMENTS AND ADDITIONS TO MONITORING PROGRAM
GRDA will focus its efforts on the above described locations, however, should other communities believe their particular cove or shoreline warrants similar monitoring, GRDA will entertain proposals for addition of new locations to the monitoring program. The onus to petition GRDA is on local citizenry. Prior to any addition of monitoring locations, GRDA will hold a public hearing, at which a majority of local residents must support the inclusion of that particular location. GRDA stresses that inclusion in the monitoring program will not result in immediate modification of SMCs, nor does it guarantee that a classification will be amended at the conclusion of the monitoring period.
GRDA will track the results of each monitoring effort and will evaluate this data against the established standards within the same six year time frame as their recreational monitoring schedule. From this evaluation, GRDA will determine whether the SMC within any of these areas should be amended to identify them as Fully Developed locations.
TO: SHORELINE
MANAGEMENT PLAN
P. O. BOX 409
VINITA, OK 74301
FAX: 918-256-
EMAIL: http://www.grda.com
FROM:
___________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
COMMENT ON PROPOSED FULLY
DEVELOPED CLASSIFICATION PLAN:
I
HEREBY NOTIFY GRDA THAT I APPROVE/DISAPPROVE OF THE FULLY DEVELOPED
CLASSIFICATION PLAN AND CITE THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
DISCLAIMER
THIS SUMMARY
WAS PREPARED BY CARI WILLIAMS TO FACILITATE DISCUSSION AT TOWN HALL MEETINGS
HELD NOV. 8-9, 2006 AND INCLUDES THOSE PORTIONS OF THE PROPOSED SHORELINE
MANAGEMENT PLAN MOST LIKELY TO PROMPT COMMENTS. TO SATISFY YOURSELF OF THE
CONTENTS OF THE PROPOSED SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PLAN, YOU SHOULD OBTAIN A COPY OF
THE PLAN AND REVIEW IT IN ITS ENTIRETY.
[1] For the purpose of the SMP, GRDA uses UFSWS National Wetland Inventory data to identify wetland areas. This identification does not preclude the right or responsibility of adjacent property owners to further delineate wetlands in support of permit applications for facilities or uses within the Project boundary.
[2] Steep slopes are defined as slopes of greater than 100% which are at least 20 feet in height.
[3]
Modified from Nyberg, J.B. and B. Taylor. 1995.
Applying adaptive management in