Written Text of
Testimony
By Rusty Fleming,
Director
Grand Lakers United
Submitted to: GRDA
RE: Shoreline Management Plan
DATE:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input as you move toward the final development of a Shoreline Management
Plan for
Our organization actually came about because of the work to
develop a Shoreline Management Plan, and my comments today are related to the
December, 2006 draft of the SMP released by the Grand River Dam Authority for
public review. For the most part, we
have no problem with the vast majority of the draft. Our recommended changes relate to less than
20% (twenty percent) of the draft document; but we believe they are significant
to the future development of
The
federally approved Electric Consumers Protection Act requires “equal
consideration to the purposes of energy conservation, the protection,
mitigation of damage to, and enhancement of, fish and wildlife… the protection
of recreational opportunities, and the preservation of other aspects of
environmental quality.” GRDA’s actual
license from FERC to manage and operate the
Frankly, our organization does not believe all stakeholders have been treated equally in the development of the current draft.
We
have four basic areas of concern. The
first is the Land Use Classification, or the zoning of the
We
believe the current zoning proposals for Multi-Purpose, Limited Use, Sensitive,
Project Management, and Municipal are too numerous and too restrictive to
provide the opportunity for wise and expedient permitting decisions by the GRDA
Board of Directors in the future.
The
most commercial development-friendly zoning proposal currently under
consideration in the SMP provides opportunities for job-creating commercial
development on less than 17% of
While we realize the draft SMP provides some opportunity for commercial development in the Limited Use category, it requires unspecified “additional requirements” and “a particular public interest,” which is also undefined. It must be admitted, however, that such approval would be unlikely. In fact, the SMP draft even states, “GRDA considers any future commercial/industrial development in these areas incompatible with the primarily residential and open space uses.”
It is inconceivable to us, that future full-time residents would want to live in shoreline areas where necessary commercial services such as boat storage, mechanic service, lakeside restaurants and clubs, and recreational facilities could never be provided to them in the future.
Our recommendation is to eliminate the
Limited Use classification, and incorporate all commercial/industrial/and
residential shoreline designations in the Multi-Purpose classification, leaving
the final permitting decisions to the GRDA Board of Directors after providing
significant opportunity for public input.
That process has worked well in the past, and we believe it is wise to
continue for those decisions to be made in the future by Oklahomans who observe
and understand the changing dynamics of this
GRDA
has already implemented the most complex, demanding and expensive commercial
permit application process in
The SMP can be reviewed in six years. If we have the good fortune to be overrun with companies wanting to bring good-paying jobs to our area, additional restrictions could be considered at that time.
We recommend, then, only four categories of
classification: Multi-Purpose,
Sensitive, Project Management and Municipal.
Such zoning would be clear, concise, simple, direct and, most
importantly, manageable at the local level.
Our
second concern is the Vegetation Management Plan. We realize that most of the proposals in the
SMP represent the current GRDA plan that was recently adopted. However, since we are mapping the future of
Let me say to my fish and wildlife resource agency friends, we have no problem with the way the Vegetation Management Plan is written as it relates to the shoreline classified as Sensitive. We do believe, however, it is anti-productive and overly restrictive in areas where the opportunity is provided for development.
We propose two separate vegetation management plans. One, as is proposed in the current SMP draft, would be enforced in the Sensitive Areas and a second would be adopted for the Multi-Purpose (including the currently identified Limited Use) classification.
With regard to a second Vegetation
Management Plan, utilized in this category, we recommend the following
language:
“Vegetation is important to the aesthetic
qualities and environmental health of
“Although GRDA uses
“It is important
to enhance the natural beauty, water quality protection and habitats of the
shoreline. GRDA believes it is in best interest of both the long-term
health of lake’s water quality and the value of adjacent property owned
by its neighbors that an area of natural vegetation exist on its property
adjacent to the shoreline. This “shoreline buffer zone” consists of trees,
shrubs, and ground cover of native plants and understory. State and federal
resource agencies support the buffer zone concept for the purpose of protecting
the lake environment, water quality and providing wildlife habitat.
“These policies
encourage proper management of this vegetative buffer zone, which extends from
the shoreline up to GRDA’s project boundary. Most lakefront property
owners at
“GRDA will inform
property owners on the water quality benefits of the vegetative buffer zone
including maximizing the use of its existing outreach programs and
projects. The Authority will also provide guidance to
“Vegetation within the project boundary
must be preserved if present. Ground-disturbing activities in this area
must be minimal to maintain the function of the vegetative buffer.
“A property owner may, without providing a
complete Vegetation Management Plan or obtaining a permit, modify the existing
vegetative cover subject to the policies below by removing vegetation to:
1) provide for
reasonable view of the water,
2) construct access paths to the shoreline and/or dock,
3) construct erosion
control measures along the shoreline, or
4) perform general
maintenance to the vegetated area.
“The following
policies regarding vegetation modification and land disturbance apply to
shoreline property owned or controlled by GRDA adjacent to
“GRDA prohibits
removing any tree larger than 4 inches in diameter unless it is
threatening safety or property, or any dogwood or redbud tree regardless of
size, without replacing each with a suitable native tree of a minimum diameter
of 1.5 inches or larger. Replacement trees shall be planted within 25
feet of the shoreline and within the disturbed area where possible.
Location of replacement trees may be managed to provide appropriate water views.
Except for an access path and/or recreational use area, native ground cover
should be preserved or established. GRDA encourages residents to use
native grasses and perennial plants in this shoreline zone, or allow it to
develop into natural forest, for shoreline protection.
“GRDA reserves
the right to plant vegetative materials within the project boundary, and may
require, at the property owner’s expense, the removal of any unauthorized
improvements and restoration of GRDA land to a natural state.
“Any unauthorized clearing of trees or
vegetation or failure to restore trees and/or vegetation as outlined above may
result in the immediate cancellation of the individual’s permit(s), as well as,
possible legal action to require the re-vegetation of the affected area.
“Nothing contained in
this policy shall be construed to require the removal of any landscaping or
other improvements in existence when the Shoreline Management Plan is adopted.”
We firmly believe in the preservation of the shoreline, but
we think the overly restrictive and cumbersome permitting process proposed in
the current SMP draft would be cumbersome, unenforceable would be totally
unmanageable for the GRDA Ecosystems Management Team without the addition of
significant numbers of employees and a lengthy and unnecessary process for obtaining
permits. A very similar plan has been
included in the Shoreline Management Plan proposed at
Our third area of concern involves two of the criteria
utilized to designate Sensitive Areas in the Land Use Classifications: “steep slopes (twenty feet or more in
height)” and (as indicated in the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife’s proposed
Land Use Classification Map) “Shallow areas” which
they define “as being less than 10 feet in depth at a WSEL of 740' and clipped
to the El. 744' shoreline.”
In many areas of
We recommend that the “steep slope” definition be
eliminated from the definition of Sensitive Areas and that the SMP shoreline
zoning maps be adjusted accordingly.
Similarly, boaters in virtually
all coastal areas and along all intra-coastal waterways would undoubtedly find
“shallow water” and “10 feet” to be oxymoronic if included in the same sentence
– especially when measured from the rare (and never planned) 740’ lake
level. Even the largest yachts on
Utilization of the “shallow water” inclusion in the SMP
draft maps with no corresponding benefit for fish and wildlife is, once again,
an unfair and arbitrary rule which has a significant detrimental economic
impact on owners of adjacent properties.
We recommend that the SMP shoreline zoning maps be adjusted to eliminate
these “shallow water” areas from the Sensitive Area shoreline classification.
And finally, we would hope GRDA
would consider the significant economic impact adoption of this Shoreline
Management Plan may impose on unsuspecting adjacent property owners. We recognize the current draft of the SMP
contains a section providing the possibility of “waivers” under certain
circumstances; however, we believe it does not adequately encompass detrimental
economic impact on current and future property owners. In most cases, proper Land Use Classification
will likely have little impact, due to the topography of
In addition to the permitting waiver process currently being
utilized, we recommend an additional section in the SMP, providing a
user-friendly appeals process for adjacent property owners who seek a change in
Land Use Classification. This process
would provide an opportunity for an adjacent property owner whose land is
classified as “sensitive,” for example, to apply for a change in the
classification. Such a process should
include the following: Upon written
application by adjacent property owners and an opportunity to present pertinent
information to the Grand River Dam Authority Board of Directors, the GRDA Board
may grant a waiver of the Land Use Classification and associated requirements
imposed on private and/or commercial permit applications, or may choose to
change the Land Use Classification of such shoreline. Prevailing uses in the general geographic
area, shoreline topography, safety, environmental resources, economic
development, job creation and tourism benefits, economic impact on current and
future adjacent property owners and recreational value will be among
considerations utilized by the Board.
FERC and/or
We are appreciative of the hard
work that many individuals and agencies have put into the development of the
draft. We are simply concerned that some
stakeholders have been provided distinct advantages, to the detriment of other
stakeholders who have not been as involved in the development process. It is not just our opinion that all
stakeholders should be treated equally.
It is federal law. We believe
these recommended changes help provide that equality to all involved.