7. Other riparian’ interests.
9. Whether slips associated with commercial marinas or other commercial structures are open to the general public.
Note: Commercial marinas are typically considered open to the general public when they offer transient or daily use slips and no fee is required for pier use (e.g., restaurants), or provide annual slip rental opportunities to the general public.
Note: “What constitutes reasonable use depends upon the circumstance of each particular case, and no positive rule of law can be laid down to define and regulate such use with entire precision.” Timm v. Bear, 29 Wis. 254, 265 (1871). Cases that provide guidance regarding the application of the reasonable use doctrine to pier projects include Sterlingworth Condominium Ass’n v. DNR, 205 Wis. 2d 710, 556 N.W. 2d 791 (1996), Sea View Estates Beach Club, Inc. v. DNR, 223 Wis. 2d 138, 588 N.W.2d 667 (1998), and Hilton ex rel. Pages Homeowners’ Ass’n v. DNR, 2006 WI 84, 293 Wis. 2d 1, 717 N.W.2d 166. (f) Permanent and seasonal boat shelters.
1. Permanent or seasonal boat shelters that do not meet the requirements for placement under an exemption under s. 30.12, Stats., or s. NR 320.04 (9), a waterway general permit issued under s. 30.206, Stats., or a previously issued department permit require authorization through an individual permit: subject to all of the following conditions: a. Permanent or seasonal boat shelters are designed to berth a single watercraft.
b. Permanent or seasonal boat shelters are on a property that does not also include a boathouse over a navigable waterway.
c. The number of boat shelters placed adjacent to a property is limited to one permanent and one seasonal shelter or 2 seasonal shelters for the first 100 feet or lesser amount of shoreline frontage. One additional seasonal shelter may be placed for each additional 50 feet of shoreline frontage in common ownership. In lieu of placing additional seasonal boat shelters beyond the initial allowance for the first 100 feet of shoreline frontage, a riparian may apply to the department for an individual permit to allow one additional permanent boat shelter for every additional 100 feet of shoreline frontage in common ownership.
(5) Individual permit evaluation. To determine whether a project meets the standards for issuance under s. 30.12 (3m) or 30.123 (8) (c), Stats., the department may evaluate any of the following information in its review of individual permit applications for structures or crossings under this chapter: (a) The project’s contribution to the cumulative and individual impacts on public rights and interests in navigable waterways, including any of the following:
1. Physical, chemical, and biological effects on the waterway.
2. Water quality.
3. Water quantity.
4. Fish and wildlife habitat, especially impacts on littoral zone and nearshore habitat.
Note: Evaluation of fish and wildlife habitat includes reduced density of woody cover in shallow water; reduced density, coverage, and diversity of nearshore vegetation, such as terrestrial, emergent, floating-leafed, and submerged zones; the presence of any waterway designations identified in ch. NR 1; spawning or nursery habitat; and change in nearshore substrate that reduces its suitability for habitat. Note: Department staff, resource professionals, or consultants conducting site investigations associated with waterway individual permit application reviews should follow Lake Shoreland & Shallows Habitat Monitoring Field Protocols. This protocol provides a standard methodology for surveying, assessing, and mapping habitat in lakeshore areas, including the Riparian Buffer, Bank, and Littoral Zones, and can aide in the department’s review of a project’s overall impact on public interest factors. See dnr.wi.gov, keyword “surface water monitoring” and Lakeshore Habitat under “Protocols”. 5. Navigation.
6. Recreational activities, including swimming, boating, snowmobiling, fishing, and hunting.
6. Natural scenic beauty.
7. Special concern, threatened, or endangered species.
Note: Survey information may be used to indicate that special concern, threatened, or endangered species or their habitats are found near the site.
(6) Individual permit review. To determine whether an application meets the public interest criteria identified under sub. (5), the department may evaluate information regarding any of the following project specific factors during an individual permit application review:
(a) The purpose of the proposed project, as limited by recognized riparian rights and permitting allowances to conduct specifically identified activities under ch. 30, Stats. (b) Whether a proposed structure or crossing has been designed in size and extent to allow for use of the structure for its intended purpose and to prevent detrimental impacts to public rights and interests.
Note: A project design should have high likelihood of success as demonstrated by its appropriateness for site specific conditions and history of performance at similar sites given the best available data.
(c) Whether project specific conditions can avoid or reduce the public interest impacts of the structure while achieving the overall project purpose.
(d) Site and water-body specific factors that inform the need for, and public interest performance of, the proposed structure.
Note: For example, for an erosion control project, the erosion exposure of the project site based on site-specific conditions, including ice and the presence of natural ice ridges.
(e) The effect of the project on adjacent properties.
(7) Standards for structures placed on great lakes and outlying waters and all solid piers. (a) To ensure that there is no detrimental impact to the public interest, the department may require site specific design engineering, modeling, or geotechnical analysis certified by a professional engineer licensed or certified to practice in the State of Wisconsin under ch. 443, Stats., for structures placed on the great lakes and outlying waters that demonstrates the structure will meet the public interest review criteria under sub. (5). (b) The circumstances where engineering, modeling, or geotechnical analysis may be required include all of the following:
1. Erosion control is proposed along a site where a principal structure is located within 75 feet of the current ordinary high water mark.
2. A site where any grading on the bank is needed to access the site to place an erosion control structure, rock crib, or solid pier.
3. A site where the lakeward encroachment from the OHWM to the toe of the erosion control structure is proposed to be greater than 10feet.
4. A site where fill material other than filter stone and armor stone is proposed to be placed against the current slope face underlying a proposed erosion control structure.
5. A site where the slope of the final erosion control structure is proposed to be steeper than 1.5 foot horizontal to 1 foot vertical (1.5’H:1’V).
6. A site where the slope of the final erosion control structure is proposed to be shallower than 2.5 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical (2.5’H:1’V).
7. A site where a shore perpendicular structure, groin, solid pier, rock-crib filled pier, or other, is proposed for purposes of shore protection or erosion control.
8. A site where a shore perpendicular structure is proposed for the purposes of navigation, including a groin, rock filled crib, or solid pier.
9. A site where an offshore structure, such as a breakwater, is proposed.
10. A site where a new or reconstruction of a seawall is proposed as an erosion control structure.
11. A site where an erosion control structure is proposed along the base of a bluff.
