HomeMy WebLinkAbout20210304 - No Wake Zone 1857
H:a4slin s
QTA45
Public Safety Committee of Council
Meeting Agenda
Thursday, March 4, 2021
4:00 pm
Zoom
1. Welcome & Introductions
2. Mississippi River"No Wake" Update
3. Next Steps
4. Other Business
5. Adjournment
City of Hastings • 101 Fourth Street East • Hastings, MN 55033-1944 • Phone: 651-480-2350 •www.hastingsmn.gov
ONOMM
Aince 1,857
Hastings
Memorandum
MINNESOTA
To: Public Safety Committee of Council
From: City Administrator Dan Wietecha and Police Chief Bryan Schafer
Date: March 4,2021
Item: No Wake Ordinance
Recommendation:
Based upon the information received and to fully address the concerns brought before this
committee, a fully enforceable, seasonal "no wake" designation is necessary for this segment of
the Mississippi River. In order for this to occur, an ordinance agreed upon by both Dakota and
Washington Counties,must drafted and approved by the DNR.
Background Information:
Overview
The "No wake" discussion has been on-going for the past several years. The request for"no
wake"is borne out of concern for the shoreline between the CP Railroad Bridge and Hastings
Marina. Residents and business owners along this corridor cite pleasure boats travelling at high
speeds during both high water and non-highwater events as the primarily cause of shoreline
destruction. Furthermore, "no wake" zones through most other cities on the river including
Afton, Prescott, Red Wing beg the question, "why not Hastings?"
In 2014,we addressed this issue by engaging Public Safety Advisory Commission, Public Safety
Committee of the Council, residents,business owners, and boaters. Ultimately,the discussion
died due to opposition by both the Dakota and Washington County Sheriffs as their opposition
would be key to gaining support from their respective county commissioners for enacting an
ordinance.
As a mitigation strategy, City Staff and advocates of"no wake" engaged in a messaging and
signage campaign"requesting"boaters to observe "No Wake"between CP Railroad Bridge and
Hastings Marina. In additional, extra patrols were conducted by Dakota and Washington County
Water Patrols during"high water" and public events along the levee. Outside of"General Rules
for Operation"under MN Statute,nothing prohibits wakes during high-water or normal water
levels at this time.
2020 Discussion
A renewed interest to discuss "no wake"came again in mid-2020. We were told that the key
decisionmakers, were now in favor of a"no wake"zone. After reaching out to the DNR and
Dakota and Washington Counties, the following was discovered:
• DNR—They stay out of these debates during the process since they are the deciding
regulatory authority. Once the proposal is received, the DNR has 120 days to decide. If
the DNR fails to so within the 120 days,the proposal takes effect.
• Dakota.County Sheriff—A legal"No-Wake"zone would be the correct thing to do,
however with this comes agreement with all enforcement entities, public comment, and
continued vetting. (See Attached).
• Washington County Sheriff- Remains in opposition.
Financial Impact:
Undetermined
Committee Discussion:
Not applicable
Attachments:
• "Hastings No Wake Zone Requirements, History, Recommendation"from Deputy
Leopold, Dakota County Sheriff's Office
Hastings No Wake Zone Requests, History, Recommendation
Since I have been in PLT,we have had a big push from Hubs Landing for a no-wake zone request from
the Lock and damn two, down to the railroad bridge. A second request has also emerged from the
residence along the shoreline in the City of Hastings. With the development of shoreline in downtown
Hastings, I believe they also support the request. This second request would span from the railroad
bridge to the Hastings Marina.
The first request was pushed hard by Hubs Marina. They made several requests and approached our
office and Washington County. We have always remained neutral in the request. Washington County
strongly objects to the request for several reasons. Washington County does not frequent the area and
would not be enforcing the surface use ordinance.They have been unable to develop any data
supporting any damage or calls of service in the area. No complaints were found for large or damaging
wakes, or erosion problems as sited by those requesting the surface use.
This second request has always been in the background, but nothing was ever officially done about it. I
know the Hastings City Council has discussed it several times, but it keeps getting put on the back
burner. Washington County was opposed to this surface use request as well siting the same reasons.
Extra enforcement has been conducted by both Washington County and Dakota County, enforcing state
law and educating boaters. The law that continually gets referred to falls under Minnesota
Administrative Rules 6110.1200 Navigation of Watercraft on The Waters of The State; Safety Equipment.
Subdivision 2 Mode of Operation of Watercraft part C states, "No person shall operate a watercraft in
such a manner that its wash or wake will endanger, harass, or unnecessarily interfere with any other
person or property." I look at this rule as something egregious or done intentionally. Even with those
Last updated 08/26/2020
Hastings No Wake Zone Requests, History, Recommendation
standards,this isn't easy to enforce or document. Once a wake is created, it is frequently hit with
another boat if not several boats, before it hits the shore.
The City of Hastings even installed a sign by the Mississippi River public launch which was misleading to
the public. This sign made it sound like the Mississippi River had a high-water restriction and was at a
"no-wake" status. I fielded a couple calls from boaters regarding this sign. I looked for the sign this
week, but it has been taken down.
Since my time in Parks, Lakes, and Trails, the request for a legal surface use (no wake zone)on both
sides was the only request. Approximately a month ago, I was approached by a citizen living on the
shoreline in the City of Hastings. He was familiar with Washington County's position and wanted us to
entertain doing a no-wake zone strictly on our side of the river. Just today, I have now heard
consideration on just marking the channel, which would not be enforceable at all.
I have no objection to the "no wake" zone but don't think it's the solution everybody wants. As we
consider this recent request, we need to consider the previous requests by Hubs Landing. If we approve
one, demands will be made to support the other, and we will be right back where we started.
Considering both requests would create a "no wake zone from Hastings Lock and Damn Two, all the way
to the Hastings Marina, which is approximately two miles (mile marker 815 to 813). Creating this no-
wake zone would leave just over a mile before hitting another no-wake zone in Prescott. This no-wake
zone is from mile marker 810.9 to 811.7. Dakota County was involved in creating the Prescott no-wake
zone and created Dakota County Ordinance 117. This no-wake zone has since been incorporated into
law and can be found under MN Rule 6105.0330 Subdivision 2(D).
Last updated 08/26/2020
Hastings No Wake Zone Requests, History, Recommendation
Large wakes are not only a problem on the Mississippi River but everybody of water. We received
complaints from time to time on Crystal and Marion every year. To get an idea of reoccurring issues in
this area of concern, I had the Dakota County Communications Center search every address in the area
dating back two years. I have not been able to find any complaints documented by the DCC. I do know
there have been a few coming from Hastings PD during the high-water season. If you visit the
Minnesota DNR website, you will see the problem is statewide. This topic comes up all the time, and
just recently, the DNR has started an "Own Your Wake" campaign. This material is new and will be used
by the Dakota County Sheriff's Office for educational enforcement and social media posts in the
upcoming boating season.
With the request of a "no-wake" zone, I have heard several different solutions or recommendations.
The first one is a legal, surface use regulation in the area creating a "no-wake" area slowing boaters
down. I have also heard requests for creatingjust Dakota County side a "no wake" zone and just
throwing buoys out, which would not be enforceable.
Washington County Sheriff's Office does not support the first request to create the surface use
ordinance. At the same time, Dakota County has taken the position where we have remained neutral.
This is a tricky part of the river for Washington County to get too and enforce; however, it is in our back
yard. With this option comes additional concerns about marking the channel and enforcing the surface
use ordinance. If a surface use regulation were granted by the state, requesting agencies or groups
would typically be responsible for marking the channel. Currently, Dakota County Sheriff's Office does
not have the capability of pulling or placing marker channels.
Last updated 08/26/2020
Hastings No Wake Zone Requests, History, Recommendation
Since Washington County does not support the surface use regulation,there have been discussions with
a "no-wake" zone on just our river's side. I would not support this for many reasons. The US Coast
Guard already designates this area of the river as a Narrow Channel. Any wake created is going to hit
both sides of the river. It will also create navigational problems with congestion on one side of the river,
creating a greater probability of accidents. Barges already use the entire channel to make the dogleg
turn in downtown Hastings. Anchoring in this area due to the narrow channel is a violation of Federal
Law.
One of the last solutions I heard recently is marking the channel without the surface use ordinance.
Doing this would create an unenforceable "no-wake" zone. I can't believe any law enforcement agency
would entertain this idea. Doing this would be deceiving to those that we serve and protect on a day to
day basis. I believe this would diminish trust with those we serve out on the water and set a poor
example to the public. Losing confidence and credibility will only make ourjob out on the water more
difficult and less valued. Also,traffic in the area is typically boaters coming and going to slips in the
area. This means a good percentage of those who use this area will know the signs are not enforceable.
It will not take long for this information to get around the boating community.
One option I thought of is a high-water surface use regulation. A surface use similar to this is already in
place for the St. Croix River. It is well documented and well known. Compliance is high, with minimal
enforcement and education. This would prevent a permanent "no wake" and help with erosion and
large wakes during high water on the Mississippi River. Both Crystal Lake and Lake Marian also have
similar ordinances. This ordinance would also discourage recreation boating traffic in high water
periods, limiting traffic in the area. I did run this idea by Washington County, and they were open to this
Last updated 08/26/2020
Hastings No Wake Zone Requests, History, Recommendation
idea. I don't know if this had come up with the City of Hastings or Hub's Landing at this point, but it may
be a good way to meet in the middle with Washington County.
To Accomplish this a surface use regulation starts with the local unit of government-town, city, or
County, depending upon where the lake or river is located. Since the City of Hastings does not
encompass the river, I believe it will fall under the County's jurisdiction. I will check with the state on
that next week. Any ordinance proposed must have a hearing and be approved by the DNR before they
can go into effect.The DNR does have the right to deny the request. The state will consider the
following when approving the ordinance, accommodating all compatible uses where feasible,
minimizing adverse impacts on natural resources, minimizing conflicts between users to provide
maximum usage, safety and enjoyment, and conforming to the standards set in law and rule.
Last updated 08/26/2020
Hastings N Wake Committee
March 2, 2021
Dear Members of the Hastings Public Safety Committee,
We are writing you today to express our strong support for the City of Hastings to seek the creation of a
no wake zone along its borders of the Mississippi River.The benefits to the city are significant:
Safety. The number one reason we encourage the city to pursue a no wake zone is for the safety of its
citizens and guests. People on the city dock, private docks and local marinas have all been knocked to
the ground by violent wakes. Small vessels have feared capsizing and taken on water trying to get in and
out of the landing. Kayakers fear the weekends. Injuries have been sustained and property has been
damaged—much of which could have been prevented.
Every city with a public dock on Pool 3, but Hastings, has built safeguards for their residents and limited
their insurance liability by enacting a No Wake zone.
Current law says that a boat operator is responsible for damage due to wakes caused by their
watercraft. While it is legally possible to hold someone accountable for damage caused by their wake, it
is almost impossible to prevail and collect for damages.
Washington County Sheriff's office said they supported other no wake zones if there was a clear public
safety goal.
If the city doesn't put in measures to slow boaters down near their public dock and landing, somebody
will be seriously injured or killed.
Economic Impact. All other cities on the Upper Mississippi with businesses close to the shoreline—from
Minneapolis to Wabasha—have no wake zones. These cities are recognizing financial gain as boaters
park at their dock's and marinas and spend their tourism dollars on food, drink, and novelties while also
attending concerts, church services and community events.
"A 1992 Environmental Management Program recreation study documented that approximately 12
million user days (one user day equals one person visiting the river for one day)occurred in 76 counties
along the Upper Mississippi River. Recreationists spend about$400 million annually and support 7,000
jobs regionally. Recreation managers are struggling to find solutions which will accommodate future
recreational demand while protecting the river's fish and wildlife resources."
Things have expanded significantly in the past couple of years with recreational boating exploding.
Hastings N Wake Committee
Boaters would welcome the opportunity to safely moor their boat and visit Hastings. Cities like Prescott,
Red Wing, Afton,Wabasha and Hudson garner substantial revenue from recreational boaters. Without a
no-wake zone, Hastings has been "waving" good bye to millions of tourism dollars.
Environmental Concerns.A no wake zone will:
Reduce erosion—A DNR study showed upper Mississippi riverbanks can erode 2 to 5 feet per year from
high energy wakes from motorboats.
Reduce sediment in water—Sediment in the water is the key difference between the Mississippi and
the St Croix. Reduced sediment improves habitat and creates cleaner water for fish, wildlife and
recreationalists.
Reduce sound pollution—the sounds of boats going by outdoor diners and concert goers becomes a
distant hum instead of a roar.
Reduce damage from flooding - When water levels are high,the risk of permanent damages is greatly
mitigated by a no wake zone.
Respect for Others. With the number of boaters growing, we all want to share the great resource of
America's river. However, it needs to be managed in a way that treats all with respect and dignity
without the fear of being capsized by a large speeding boat.
While some opposition may come from fishermen that don't want to slow down as they enter or exit
the Hastings area or cigar boat drivers that treat the city as a fly by town, a No Wake Zone will only add
a few minutes to a boater's journey past the state's best kept river city jewel. It will create a better
fishing habitat and safer places to fish.
Let's all show respect for one another on the river.
According to the environmental advocacy group American Rivers, the Upper Mississippi River is the
nation's "most endangered river" of 2020. In their report they state, "the Upper Mississippi River is
critical to the nation's economy and is a globally significant ecosystem... This new reality puts people,
habitat and infrastructure at risk–and communities along the upper Mississippi are dangerously
unprepared."A No Wake Zone is a good start for Hastings to start protecting this natural resource.
Thank you.
Peter Sirbu, Tom Day,John Goetz
Hubs Marina, No Wake Committee
O
0
1-2
c
vJ ZI -00 '� U
�,•• E
Y
O U
M1•
O 4! >
C
_ 0 U
— N N
f0
OA i
2 C vi O O �n
tQ
N 3 U N U! j �
O —
vii O 'a C N j Q) o x
_ 4!
~ N i C C C L
O v 3 C y S O •� t0 z o x
C `� fl- 7 W Mt' L U qA 7 bD
U C m m O a0 m p LL O v a o M on
C C a C Qu, U! C in a Zz
a o O O v a LL S w z Y
� o 3 v ° o �, v O
0
N >' U Q 3 t0 O N V' — Nu >
U U J v a 2 0 0 0 vi a cI J a LL L a a
y Y m ai x oa
m in N U 'O y > T O +m+ m m C 'O
T '� O hip bA rL � m m — t O N m
YiY Q
> ti O ` C N ,� m m Q N m C O O O Q m p m
vi N � � Q +�.+
IE3 CL
Lto p m m m E N y ,U m vii N m �O >' 'o 'O C �T > h0 U O
- V C m y E O C m m 7 m C r.+ m m +T+
0o p o E N 3 v ° �° 7 y v o v a " v s N y
o a Y w a) ,� ov y a m > 7 3 oai
a m 3 S .Y O
00 > m .� m c v Y E v m 3 o O m
00 s 7 m O m O v 3 m E O v = n
E 0 O a
Y aj
bD ai °�° z = c � r O v v ° v io v ~ s z v � v °�°
O m 46 W Y m V S 11 EN C to CQ m Y .N N m Y O S L w 0 N
O v v o s o v y s � `m p m c m 3 m m om' �
rl m C N in m ti E b0 c 0 — O m p �i m
O C 7 aJ m m E ? 4. N O. N ) �a, y i
tp N Y m Y m V O C m m m
m "� C p_ +m+ p a) m O m m C V > m V a)
L F' E in y C V c y m O m > 7 m N `.k m O m m m C N
V C m Q m m c N M - i LL m Q U 3 E > m C Q -0 m C
N s 3
p >, a) n i v
L W
a
c N 'O o .N _N T u p °
O F
ti m cu > 'N '^ N to N a7 E i a) 3 m 0 vi T � c `
= I m c v c E _ Y > > ° o m = m
cu 5n L m a) N '°_ O O O :> m0 0 '� '3 Y a
c E Q —r o rn 3 o
L C cu
-0 i3i1 E � E (0 i c to O O W N W N W
O p U a m m = `� m L N C
>' c v -0 c > � v 3 ° m m '0 '>m 3 a) 3 v m y w
CL O N a) ., fH U ° L O] L v m C > L C Y
rn Q 3 m
'u, �n � _ in E a7 C C 7 >, L N b0 ,i U N •, 'c c0
o v E p o 0 3 — > c v o v c 3 na m Z Y m
0 o E c u x N N a7 s Y $ v
rao m C N u) O C 3 r=o O Q E � c v w « •• m L
a) N Y N a) a a N -0 'Lp 0) .o '0 U a ° h0 in 3 3 m io E ro c_ o
c m •E -C c v E E U s m x v $ 'x o L `c°
U Q u 'p i0 O 7 N N0 0 O a •CO m T 7 in i .n a m > W > N c
C� v O -o a7 O N E vi c c oa m cu °% w .S m o a E v o
Y O U O E -O T N O C 5 E
i a) [C i1 -p O N L a) c Y N
_ v c Y c a o c 0 p _ = E Z� m '3 a v m u
I v o v o c a) .c o 0 0 o 0 chm m o m i ° _ v m a a
U v c H Y o '> E N N N c) !0 axi O 'c v M O p E .. 2 a 'u
O ° c a -0 h0 N O a) O N a 0) m O a) 7 Y O N = O +.
r N o N E o rn 6 o Q i o_ N v a Y m O L° $ m ° o v — _
a1 i c _6 a) N N N m O a)
U ° o Q m c D c r L 'u '� _ — L ° m a L o c 3
WI ¢ ° 3 -0 ° m w ° 0 m m w m P 3 iu oa m E 3 3 u — .E
> a) o
Y Y cu
C 'O w N -0 in '� Y 0 OL aL+
3 u co " -W. a ._ c Y 3 > v L 00 0 s Y
bD
LEm
= C -O c_ m r 7 m E Y L m ° 'Q m m -0 p -0 L 3
M N N >. -0 — m u'�i m c a1 a m m >. m N p
a) o u '� Y Y _0 0 3 ° c �, v v a m e
cu
CL o c ° c tw v m Y v o -Fu°o > u 3 m E v
p a, w v -o a ar c 7, v >. m a E 3 v �, ar
> N 9 p OQj
y . 9 w J. c a) .i c in -p E b0 a OL a) a) O c -M bD
m
m m s o = a° ° s u ° m 3 � O v > a ° v
L o p ^ o — U 3 m ._ m o m L
v -0 v u u 2 — _ o v E a v c m
oa c o > > m E `o m °i p 3 CL a u o v v
m c m o - E o a > > v m ° E m
c > c c L a 'p m U to
U a v o w `^ 'ui m v o c
u cu — m v o c v U 0 0 O y n L a =o
.� E c o o 0 o v o o v N n p y M o
.076 E v U Y io a, .� u m E m m o E
v U N N U = io N p Z N y m m
3 o m m O a o 3 > m E O o m 3 L o .1 0 E m
c w -p v o r -u .N = .� m v v CL c oo O a o E v v - o -°
M 3 o m Y Y > o ° > a c - o m m v 3 0 c v acu I c
m o u c '� L p Y ° N u v 7 t `2 S. 3 m � 9 16 -a E-a � o E E
m c o= a) _0 N a1 vi 7 L m N1 a) O +' in c W a) a) Y vmi U m in C a)
° .° -0 E — z '^ 0 = NO c w p0 m 00 m 0 m c v N m m a
> C 3 m O a _ '� -p Y I U m E V �) V V
> 3 v I m m u a o v U a) E m E v o v
a 0 o ami w u m °_° v o �° o -°0 N m v > o v v v .E v o
= 7 .� C Y N U U � 3 K 'c K -0 3 K -0 K �
h0 >11 m L a) a)
v c u o Y v E v v m 3 ° E m Y C o
Gnl H ° °o oa .m Y mo w v u �o r m 3 — a �I
pr
O =_
c m cu o o E
>i c O O m C_ L U Z m c0 O
upi -0 Q a1 -0 O O ° 0 a) a '^ 0 m `1 = +L+
O u +L+ Y c j = in N � 0 ai h OU .i - am+ V N -O
ai c L X
Y p c N V O F 0 v aL+ N O u a) N Y c N O
a >
> CUC 0 a y m > i N O b0 m L 3 y, a1
o v ° u v = � o o E E E 3 c C p 0p
`� m N 9 m C _0 _O O Y c L -OLr- 0 CL
O a >j in
t -0
u cu
a L °o :L E a° v m ° E oa ° m o °c° ° v oa
>, 3 > m a � O o c m 0 v
_ = a) E w V u o o > -0 p .2 c o m > c c
�I 7 U aL+ i0if a1 + ° N a) m a) N O L 7 m '> c = = N c
}-I v v O Y m - — Y V O O a m O ., O V Y m
> 'O -0 N `� O_ 3 a) O_ m m
cu
u m Y 7 - 7 Y O rEo >. ° v +' in 7 c �, m0 N � O O in
'u
m ° oa 3 3 ac v � -0 Y 3 m v v o m y m aui z M
x _ E E v o o > = r U o u m w 'M — ar a '— 0 m a
f6 U m -O = vi 0 N in C c m Y O L = T a)
�i .� a, -p `m o a, m m S _0 o E m 3 0 t m = m
U c O N m N •in O u a) m v i1 N -m0 3 N N N 41 7 _ .�
a) al ` Y E h E V_ i - C c O a1 — O Y Y a -0 m H
0 3 -m0 .� _ —°-' E w 'a v r Q -0 3 3 a co m E x