Discuss Erosion Concerns Along Both Rivers and Consider Potential Prevention/Mitigation Resources

Ramsey is bordered to the east by the Rum River and to the south by the Mississippi River.  Along stretches of both rivers, there are significant erosion/bank stabilization concerns that exist. The purpose of this case is to discuss the general concern of erosion control along river banks, obstacles, real or perceived, preventing riparian land owners from taking steps to stabilize their river bank, and what informational resources are available. 

Erosion of river banks is a real concern for many riparian lot owners.  Causes of erosion can be natural (flowage of river, ice blocks after break-up) and/or a result of land use (removal of natural vegetation on a slope/bank, increased impervious area near river banks).  The damage can be significant and can result in sloughing off of land.  Many riparian land owners are concerned with potential loss of land due to erosion and are looking for options to prevent further bank deterioration.

Both the Rum River and the Mississippi River are considered waters of the state and thus, any work conducted below the Ordinary High Water elevation (OHW) does require a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR).  Additionally, work above the OHW typically requires a grading permit and potentially an Environmental Permit, which is processed similar to a Conditional Use Permit, through the City.

One concern that Staff has heard in the past is that the DNR will not allow the use of hard armament (riprap) and a stabilization technique.  This is not necessarily accurate.  If a demonstrated need exists, such as steep slopes, the DNR has stated that riprap, with natural vegetation interspersed between the rocks, is an acceptable or even preferred technique. 

The other major concern that is raised by property owners has to do with financial resources.  Bank stabilization can be very expensive and not surprisingly, has been a significant barrier for some to moving forward with a project.  The Anoka Conservation District does, occasionally, have funds available to assist with project design and/or project implementation.  Their funding is a cost-share reimbursement program in which a recipient must incur the expenses and provide applicable documentation to receive the funds.  We have been informed that often, the amount of funding available may not even be sufficient to fully address a project for a single parcel.

Staff has developed a Policy Statement that is attached to this case.  A brief synopsis of that document is the desire to complete a shoreline inventory of the rivers to establish a baseline data set, which can be used to identify erosion/stabilization priorities.  Having that information available would put the City in a better position if it were to pursue funding opportunities to assist with stabilization projects.  The ACD completed such an inventory along the Mississippi River; however, it stopped at Ramsey's eastern border.  If the inventory could be be extended to Ramsey's western border (and/or address the Rum River shoreline), after prioritizing sites, the City could proactively engage these property owners to further explore their interest in participating (and contributing financially) in a potential project.

Erosion concerns along these rivers is not isolated to Ramsey.  Staff believes that engaging the ACD, the DNR, and possibly even the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) to discuss opportunities and strategies to develop a comprehensive program to address these concerns.  Once again, though, having a baseline set of data regarding current conditions would be beneficial with these discussions.

Another action that the City can initiate is starting to put some information in the newsletter, website, or even on the City's Facebook page regarding erosion and resources available to property owners.  This may be a worthwhile interim step as the City explores the feasibility of completing a shoreline inventory.

Alternatives

Option 1. Recommend that Staff explore the potential of completing a shoreline inventory of the rivers to establish a baseline data set.  This will help inform Staff and policy makers of current conditions to assess how great a concern this issue truly is.  This is also a critical element should the City choose to pursue potential funding opportunities, either individually or in partnership with another agency.  Staff supports this option.

Option 2. Recommend that Staff begin with implementation of targeted education campaign and gauge the response to this effort before exploring a shoreline inventory.  It is possible to offer a workshop and/or open house for riparian land owners along both rivers to solicit their input on river bank conditions.  While this may provide some valuable information, it would not necessarily result in an enhanced application for funding should funding opportunities be identified.  Staff is not opposed to initiating some targeted educational efforts but believes that a shoreline inventory is still a critical piece if a comprehensive program were to be developed.

Option 3. Recommend that the City do nothing.  Presently, landowners can contact the ACD, or other agencies, directly to discuss options for erosion control and bank stabilization.  However, as previously noted, the cost of these projects can become a barrier to implementation.  Preventing and/or correcting erosion issues has a public benefit as it helps maintain water quality, aquatic habitat, and the viewshed for users of the river.  Staff would not support this option.

Motion to recommend that Staff explore completing a shoreline inventory to establish a baseline data set of current conditions and use that data to prioritize potential project sites, proactively contact those property owners, and engage other public agencies to discuss development of a comprehensive program to assist riparian land owners with erosion concerns.