Minnesota Coastal Zone Management Program public hearing draft

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

00
N

0
MINN 0
COASTAL N
m
co
ESOTA DZi
r
AL Z8
z
MANAGEMENT
p
ROG
RAMM@HN

MINNESOTA COASTAL ZONE@@ MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

PUBLIC HEARING. DRAFT

FEBRUARY 24, 1978

The preparation of this report was financed
-in part through a Program Development Grant
under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
administered by the Office of Coastal Zone
Management of the Nationa'1 Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.

MINNESOTA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Local Members

Maureen Bye, Duluth City Council
Edwin Hansen Lake County Board of Commissioners
Melvin Koepke Mayor, City of Silver Bay
Chester Lindskog Cook County Board of Commissioners
John Moe Silver Creek Township Supervisor
Lloyd Shannon 9t. Louis,County Board of Commissioners
Ronald Sherer Arrowhead Regional Development Commission
Board of Directors

State Members

Sandra Gardebring Executive Director, Pollution Control Agency
James Harrington Director, Department of Transportation
Warren Lawson Commissioner, Department of Health
John Millhone Director, Minnesota Energy Agency
William Nye Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources
Peter Vanderpoel Director, State Planning Agency

LOCAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Cook County Members Advisory to Chester Lindskog:

Steve Benson John McClure Ray Sjoberg, Jr.
Linda Bystrom Ivan Miller Richard Swanson
Steve Carlson Alyce Monten Orton Tofte
Dick Crosby Earl Niewald John Twiest
Irving Hansen George Peet Jim Winterer
James Hull, William Peterson George Nelson
Steve Krueger Elizabeth Rosenquist
Virginia Lueth Bob Silver

Lake County Members Advisory to Edwin Hansen:

William Aho William Nosek, Jr.
Blaine Fenstad Lino Rauzi
Lester Mattson

St. Louis County Members Advisory to Lloyd Shannon:

Joan Bates John Jubala Dr*. Fred Witzig
Herbert Boe Janet Green, Dr. Thomas Wood
Bunny Jones John.Syck

TO THE READER:

This document represents the second draft of the Coastal Zone
Management Plan. It is a distillation of the various research
studies, staff papers and PAC decisions made over the last
three and one-half years, It is by no means the final plan
and it will undergo an intensive review before being finalized.

1. This draft will reach you in early March. Notices of public
hearings on the North Shore will be placed in local news-
papers at this time.

2. Informational meetings will be held on the North Shore
during March to enable citizens to familiarize themselves
with the contents of the plan and have questions and comments
clarified by staff.
3. Public hearings will be held during earlZ A"rl- 1 to allow
all interested parties an opportuni@y to formaTly comment
on the plan. Questions will not be answered at the hearing.
We intend to hold hearings in Grand Marais, Silver Bay, Two
Harbors, Duluth and St. Paul.

4. Staff will compile the public hearing comments and PAC
will meet in early May to review them. PAC will determine
what changes'"a=e0o be made and approve a final CZM plan
for submission to the Governor.

5. The Governor will review the plan and if he approves, send
it to the federal Office of Coastal Zone Management (OCZM)
in Washington around June lst.

6. Federal agencies will review and comment on the plan.
Comments will be reviewed by OCZM and PAC to determine
if changes to the plan are necessary. Once OCZM approves
a plan satisfactory to PAC, Minnesota will begin implement-
ing the Plan recommendations and become eligible for
federal implementation funds. These funds will be distributed
among cities, counties, state agencies and others who have a
role in implementing the plan.

7. If there is a need to change the plan, a procedure has
been developed for this to be done. Thus, the CZ11 plan
can remain an up-to-date guide for all to follow.

Written comments on this draft should be sent to:

Roger S. Williams
State Planning Agency
Room 100
550 Cedar Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101

-Table I

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ............

n
The Federal Coastal Z*@*e M n g men A .... .. ii
use of this Document ............................. :.. IV
The Policy Advisory Committee .......................
Plan Format ................................... 0.0 ... vi

CHAPTER 1: BOUNDARIES
Background .......................................... 1-1
A. Minnesota Shoreland Management Program and Coastal
Zone Boundaries ............... * ............... 1-1
B. Boundary in Unincorporated Areas., ............... 1-3
C. Boundary Within Municipal Areas ................. 1-4
D. An Administratively Feasible Boundary ........... 1-4
E. Relationship of Minnesota Coastal Zone Boundary
to Federal Lands ................................ 1-6
F. Minnesota Coastal Zone Boundary Maps ............ 1-6

CHAPTER 2: LAND AND WATER USES
Introduction,,-.,,,,-,-, .... 2-1
Direct and Significant .............................. 2-2
ZM Policy Development Process ...................... 2-3
I. Air Quality .............. 0 ...................... 2-7
A. Problems and Issues ......................... 2-7
B. Goals, Policies and Implementation Steps .... 2-11
C. Policies and Authorities ................. 0.. 2-11

II. Water Resources ...... o .......................... 2-14
A. Existing Conditions ......................... 2-14
B. Problems and Issues ......................... 2-15
C. Goals, Policies and Implementation Steps .... 2-21
D. Policies and Authorities .................... 2-25

III. Vegetation ...................................... 2-40
A. Problems and Issues...... ................... 2-40
B. Goals, Policies and Implementation Steps .... 2-41
C. Policies and Authorities .................... 2-43

IV. Mineral Extraction ............................... 2-47

A. Problems and Issues ......................... 2-47
B. Goals, Policies and Implementation Steps .... 2-47
C. Policies and Authorities .................... 2-48

V. Fish and Wildlife ............................... 2-51

A. Problems and Issues ......................... 2-51
B. Goals, Policies and Implementation Steps .... 2-51
C. Policies and Authorities .................... 2-53

VI. Transportation .................................. 2-56

A. Problems and Issues ......................... 2-56
B. Goals, Policies and Implementation Steps .... 2-57
C. Policies and Authorities .................... 2-61

VII. Land Use ........................................ 2-64

A. Land Use Conditions ......................... 2-64
B. Problems and Issues ......................... 2-69
C. Goals, Policies and Implementation Steps .... 2-71
D. Policies and Authorities .................... 2-77

VIII. Solid Waste ........... i......................... 2-85

A. Problems and Issues ......................... 2-85
B. Goals, Policies and Implementation Steps .... 2-85
C. Policies and Authorities .................... 2-86

IX. Economic Development ............................ 2-89

A. Problems and Issues ......................... 2-89
B. Goals, Policies and Implementation Steps .... 2-89
C. Policies and Authorities .................... 2-90

X. Outdoor Recreation .............................. 2-95

A. Policies and Issues ......................... 2-96
B. Goals, Policies and Implementation Steps .... 2-99
C. Policies and Authorities .................... 2-131

XI. Historic Preservation ........................... 2-135
A. Existing Conditions ......................... 2-135
B. Problems and Issues ......................... 2-156
C. Goals, Policies and Implementation Steps .... 2-156
D. Policies and Authorities .................... 2-157

CHAPTER 3: ORGANIZATION AND AUTHORITIES
Introduction ........................................ 3-1

section 1: Authorities for Control of Land and Water
Activities in the Coastal Zone .......... 3-2

A. Requirements of the Federal CZM Act .......... 3-2
B. Summary of Existing State Legal Authorities.. 3-4
C. Minnesota Network Approach for Organization
and Control of Land and Water Uses ......... 3-14

Section 2: Miscellaneous Organization Requirements
Including Lead Agency Selection and Plan
Amendments ................................... 3-21

A. Descriptive Requirements ............. 3-21
B. Gubernatorial Approval ............... .......... 3-21
C. Lead Agency ..................... ....... 3-21
D. Amendment Process ............... .......... 3-22
E. Land Acquisition Authorities ........................ 3-23

Section 3: Federal and State/Local Consistency Review '
Mechanisms ..... .............................. 3-27

A. Federal Consistency Review ............. ... 3-27
B. State/Local Consistency Review and Mechanisms for
Local ARDC Impact into Federal Consistency
Review .......................................... 3-33
Compendium of State and Federal Actions for
Consistency Monitoring ........................... 3-40

Section 4: Interim Controls... ............. ............. 3-61

A. Legal Requirements ............ ..... 3-61
B. Minnesota Interim Control Appro-@:*::::::::*
*ac ...... 3-62

CHAPTER 4: USES OF REGIONAL BENEFIT AND THE NATIONAL INTEREST
Introduction ......................... o .................... 4-
1. Legal Requirements ................................ oo.. 4-1
2. Minnesota Approach to Regional and National Interest
Uses ... o................... o....................... 4-1

CHAPTER 5: GAPCs -
5-1
A. Federal Requirements for the GAPC Process ....... o.... 5-1
B. Potential GAPCs in Minnesota's Coastal Zone .......... 5-2
C, GAPC Nomination and Designation Process During
Program Implementation...... ...................... 5-15
D. Effect of GAPC Designation .....o......... o ........ - 5-24
E. Funding .............................................. 5-24
F. Steps in Developing Plans for GAPCs....., ............. 5-25
6 42@
1

CHAPTER 6: ENERGY FACILITY PLANNING PROCESS
Introduction ........................................... 6-1

A. Energy Requirements of the Coastal Zone Act ........ 6-1
B. Benefits of the Process ............................ 6-1
C. Work Program for Energy Facility Planning ........... 6-2
D. Energy Chapter Format ................................. 6-3

Section 1: Power Plants - Numbers and Locations ....... 6-7

A. Statewide Supply and Demand.... 6-7
6-11
'@*;e
B. Northeastern Minnesota Supply an man
C. Policy Options .................................. 6-13
D. Locational Factors..6 ............................. 6-14

Section 2: Other Energy-Related Facilities.@- Numbers and
Locations .................................. 6-21

A. Coal Handling Facilities ...... 6-21
B. Oil Storage Facilities ......... 6-21
C. Transmission Lines ...................... ; ........ 6-21

Section 3: Existing Management Controls ............... 6-27
A. Forecasting ...................................... 6-27
B. Certificate of Need ............................. 6-32
C. Location of Power Plants and Transmission Lines. 6-33
D. Siting of other Facilities ...................... 6-37
E. Environmental Review ............................ 6-38
F. Permits ............. 4 ............................ 6-39

Section 4: Site Requirements/Impacts .................. 6-43
Section 5: Coordinational Network ...................... 6-49

Section 6: Conclusions ................................ 6-53
Section 7: Tentative Recommendations .................... 6-59

CHAPTER 7: EROSION PLANNING PROCESS ....................... 7-1

CHAPTER 8: SHOREFRONT ACCESS PLANNING PROCESS

A. A Procedure for Assessing Public Areas Requiring
Access or Protection ............................ 8-1
B. Definition of the Term Beach and an Identification
of Public Areas that Meet that Definition ....... 8-2
C. State Policies and Authorities Pertaining to Shore-
front Access and/or Protection .................. 8_9

D. Method for Designation of Shorefront Areas as Areas
of Particular Concern ............................. 8-11
E. Mechanisms for Continuing Refinement and Implementa-
tion of Management Techniques ..................... 8-12
F. Identification of Funding Programs and Other
'Techniques that can be Used to Meet Management
Needs ............................................. 8-12

CHAPTER 9: DULUTH-SUPERIOR HARBOR STUDY

A. Harbor 9 1
B. The Harbor Plan ...................................... 9-12

APPENDIX 1: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ............................ Al-l

Attachment A: Coastal Zone Meetings ..................... Al-9
Attachment B: North Shore Survey ........................ Al-21
Attachment C: Federal and Interest Group Questionnaires
and Mailing List ........................ Al-25

APPENDIX 2: COASTAL ZONE SOIL RESOURCES AND GUIDELINES FOR
DEVELOPMENT ..................................... A2-1
Summary of Coastal Zone Soil Conditions ................... A2-1 @,l
Remedial Measures and General Guidelines for Soil
Management Within the Coastal Zone .................... A2-10
General Guidelines for Local Soil Management Ordinances.. A2-19

APPENDIX 3: MAJOR IMPLEMENTATION STATUTES AND REGULATIONS.... A3-1

GLOSSARY

DRAFT

Memor to Eileen Mulaney

From Heath Coleman

Subject: Mi esota Threshold Rvview

The foll * g are my comments and suggestions based upon my review of

the Minnesota Pu ic Hearing Draft CZM Plan CFebruary 24, 1978). You asked

me to review Chapt r Three of the document concerning the proposed

authorities and org izational structure for the Minnesota program.

General Comments: I have indicatekto you before, it is my opinion

that the authorities and ganizational structure proposed by Minnesota

can meet the requirements o section 306 of the CZMA, as interpreted in

OCZMIs March 1, 1978 Program velopment and Approval Regulations.

I have no fundamental problems *th the proposed approach, kogNixb however

I - -I --- @ ther are a nunber of changes that I would

recommend in the February document we 1 as several steps which must

be completed by the state before an eceive program approval.
Recommended Changes in Chapter Three: Minnesotaf is proposing a

"networked" program which involves the state Environmental Quality Board's

adoption of the program as state environmental policy, to which state agencies

wi4l be bound to adhere in conducting their programs and activitieso and
A
local adoption and/or revision of shoreland ordinances in conformity with
would
the adopted staee program. While state agencies mAk be bound to comply
A
with the program bmediately Iupon its adoption by the Environmental Qualtiy
6%&A- VAX Otv-Wla4f would
Board,, local ordinance revision xUA stretch out two years after program
A
approval. Minnesota has proposed an interim control technique over local
actions for this period of ordinance revision, and approval of the program

Section
(qp) The procedures within this shall also pertain. to a

disagreement between a state agency aqliqd a Federal agency resulting

from a state agency-s objection -to the continued operation of a

Federally conducted qPr supported activity or_Fe.qderal. development

project which was: (i) prevqiouqsly.deterqmined to be consisten't

the management.program but which the state agency later maintains

is not being conducted in the 7,.ianner originally proposed and is no

longer consistent with the management program; or (iqi) previously
0

determined not to. bie subject t'othe, -requirements of the m.aInaqge4qmenqt

program b-cit which the state agency later, maintains is not being

.coqnducted in. thq6 r"anner originally proposed and,. a1pa.- result of this

change, is- subject to and not consistent with, the management program.

would be based initially upon this interim control scheme. Since initial
I
8qP4qV2qD8q92q*2qM approval would be based upon thi q) e, provisions for monitoring
SA0qX6q@
local actions and for requiring local compliance with the program during the

interim period should appear in the aarly part of the chapter. there-
fore recommend thefollowing reordering of the chapter:
1) Start the chapter with the discussion that now appears in Sectio0q@qi,-

part C.of qehapter Three, describing Minnesota's Networking Approach for

Organization and Control of Land and Water Uses.

2) Under "Control of Land and Water Uses and Resolutions of Conflicts

Among Competing Uses" (page 3-17), describe the process of E0qQB adoption

of the program to mandate state agency compliance, the Governor's executive

orderl and then describe.in detail the interim control approach for achieving

local consistency with the program. This is the program which is-qPro2qposed for
isqc0quqsqsqiOn ro ide a sc e e o co et on of the ordinance revisio
approval under sec on miff IM_r a interim contro
an NR view process' --
scheme, it wo piqriate to escribe the monitoring and review
of local implementation qV after the shoreqj2qAa
? _8q/d

ordinances have been approved by the Minnesota DNR. The document should

state that an amendment or refinement to the program will be sought at the

completion of the interim phase, before entering into the second phase

of the program.

3) The discussion in deta il of existing state legal authorities should
1q14q" appear at the end of Section I, as a reference and her--
qIq_q_08qr 0q&4q=qoql32q@ qI0qd
explanation for the reader of the document. 8q@ 4q&q,q, 24q& 20q"6q;64qbq'28q&A q1q@ 24qW 0q6q1q@00q@00qr
40q4qrqs44q@ql q, 64qY56qAq-qA16qt Is 84q*qiq_24q@ 92q640qe
0qlqeqk 12qZ68q&q,q.q.48qd00qA 04qt4qt8qR8q%8q@ 36qLqe24qxq_q@q,q,q@72qd q_0q504q9q-44qe24q4 q'q18q404qCq-qIiq@qf q1q9q;q14q@6q084q/q_8q1q432q46qa
4) The Consistency discussion in Section 6q:0q5 of Chapter Three should 64qPq,0q@q,q, 44q@
also describe 40q* how this process will work for local actions during both-
qc e Zan d h 6q@e2q@-
0q62q,

the interim and permanentphases of the program.

program. Accordipgly, Congress determined that for these exceptional

situations some leeway should be provided to Federal agencies, but added tqhat

At was not anticqipated.tha.t there would be many situations where Federal

agencies would be compelled to undertake activities or projects which

deviqated-from approved program requirements. Therefore, following the

spirit of Congressional intent, NOAA qhas narrowly defined tqhe term "to

the maximum extent practicable," in the form of a variance provision

-ifqied by Unforqseen
permitting deviations from state programs when just

circumstances qk%lhqiqch compel rion-adherence to aqn approved program in order to

4
.avoid a disproportionate burden on tqhqe Federal qagqenc,k when measured against
the qbenef i ts of complete 'adherence to the:, proqgqi`qam..
(qe.). Many Federal agencies expressed concern that' the preliminary draft
reqgquqlqat-qiqon-s dqid-not carefully adopt what, might be termed the "causal" language

-rely 4- 1' itqie-s "directly affecting"
with,'qn +he consistency sions, qnai tiat actqiV
proqvqi

and devqeqlopqment projeqc-ts- "in" qtqhe coastal Zone were the onl v act-ions qsu@`ect
--- --- LJIJ

to beqing consistent to the.maxiiqnum extent practicable with an approved

program. Adqditi4qgnally, the Federal agencies were generally dissatisfied

qith our initial attempt at 1--rininqg the terms "affecting" and "directly

affecting. In response to these criticisms, qNqOAA has done tqhe followinqq.

First -of all. the language of.the proposed,reqgulatiqonqs will adopt the

i1qcausqal" terms the Act. Furthermoqye,qfqiqo.qattempt qaqiqlql, be made to define tqhe

meaning of "affecting" or, "directly affecting" -- these terms will speak, qiqfq"or

themselves and 0qd6qjq-32qf32qf4CU6qlt8qjqeS
will be addressed on a case by case basis.

Some discus0qsionq, ho0qtq,,ql4qov0qerq, is required at this point to info`8qrm all
parties as to hqo0qw Nq'0qOAA in"tendsq' to q"aq-8qdqi4ql0q"inqi 4qSq-q1q1-er t0qhe 'Act qwi 0qth regard to the

7) The discussion of existing state legal authorities should explain
how soil consoervation districts will be utilized during program implementation.
Their role in the program is not clear from the present descrijption.
8) suggestO ardiditions to the chart appearing on page 3-16:

Add to EQB description the EQB's authority over subdivisions and power plants

and transmission lines. Add to DNR's authorityxftm a reference to

DNR's various permit and license authorities. Delete

_XW_WW '11. amend rules consistent with CZM plan!' from #0 state agencies

box.

5) Omit the discussion entitled "compliance with Federal requirements."

This can be judged by the reviewers and should be self-evident from the

general discussion of organization and authorities in Minnesota.

6) Omit references to the need for state agency rule changes unless

these are required before program approval (see below). The discussion of
and the Environmental Quality Board Act
the Administrative Procedures Act will be sufficient to inform the reader
A
of how a new rule can be proposed or required of a state agency in the future,

qs d such a need arise.

t s Which Must be Completed Before Program Approval: In addition

o the above recommended changes Ji0qn the program document, there are a
V% 48q@_6qP_
nqL0q*er of ite6qVqwhic the next few months.

1) Because the Subdivided Land Sales Act will be

a very important means of ensuring that development in the coastal zone
2qM4qeqdqvq-qk.qad consistency with the coastal program
is consistent with the program, Minnesota has agreed to promulgate as
an environmental standard for subdi4qvi4ql6q@qvlq; pursuant
to A0qs0qo8qf8qt EQB,,authority under the 4qA4qw2q"6qU8qrqkqs4quql Subdivided Land Sales Act,.
This will involve the promulgation of -qi4qn0qwrevised rules by the E0qQB, qa0qaqd &-o4q@'2qC4

--qsq4q=qix0q@ take place before program approval.
? q(q37
2) Because the EIS process, which covers both local and state aetions;

with potential for significant environmental effects, will be an impottant

tool in monitoring local and state actions for consistency with the manage=
_,_ 2q4qo8qv6q?q1", 1q5
ment program, Minnesota qe0q@ amend its EQB EIS regulations to require
A
an 2qEIS in any cir0qc0qL00qm0qistance where a major action is proposed that would be in

4 q+-q.
violation of the program policies. - q4 qaqr0qt hat t

d e

referable, promulgation take place prior to program approva.
qs

ep
4q@qC'

he EIS rule change is not absolutely
necessary prior to program approval because the EQ92qB posseses the authority

(h) Hearings shall be as informal as may be reasonable and

appropriatein the circumstances. At the hearing, the Federal

agency and-state agency may offer such relevant evidence as they

deem appropriate subject to the hearing officer's supervision

as to the extent and.manner of presentation. Tqhe hearing officer

may also accept relevant evidence offered by other interested

parties. All oral test ir,-,ony, shall be- under oath and witnesses

shall, be subject to q2qqestioning by the parties to the qCi-sz;7reemeyit

and by the hearing officer.-Heariii,qgs will. be recorded verbatim

and t.r.ansr-r'pts thereof shall be made by interested

parties;. costs of transcripts shall beborne by ths requestiiiqg

parties.

under the Minnesotat 8qF6qWqeqh2qW hvqironmental Policy Act and present regulations

to require an EIS even ' the 2qm6qo proposed action or project is not referered

to in the regulations.,
8qf8qf8qi4qv4qt 8q6
q3) 1 discussi2q4with John Herman0q@,8q@0qjqindica4q4some concern about
6q@6qXv q(N
the authority of the Environem0qntal Quality Board to adopt the coastal program
as state environmental policy and thereby bind state age0qnqc8qkes to act in

compliance with the program. Thq&s authority is notexpliq@:q@*qtqly provided,
2ql8qf8qfqk@ 6q16q10q6@8q68qmo2q@
cqkor in the Environmental Quality Board statute. that it

would be possible to get a letter from the Attorney General's Office inter-

preting the EQB's authority to include the power to adopt the program as

state environmental policy. This letter, or an equivalent docuement, should

be available for inclusion in the DEIS. There is, however, another alternative
or greater
which would provide the sameAdegree of certainty to E6qQB's
authority. The Environmental Quality Board statute states specifically

in section 116C.04 that the "powers and duties of the Minnesota Environmental

quality board shall be as provided in this section andas otherwise provided by
law or executive order..." (Emphasis supplied). Since ar4qA exeucutive order

will be issued as a part of the Minnesota program, this order could also

contain a provision that explicitly directs the 0qEQB to review the program

in light of 2q%4qW state environmental 4qpqsqa4qtqi8q&4qm8qns= policy,
and q@2qW give it the authority to adopt the program as an interpretation
of state environmental policy. In any event, the AG's letter or the Executive

Order, or both, will be necessary for program approval.
,,qF

Prior, to the hearing,. the hearing off icqer may direct

the parties to appear at a specified time and place for a

prehearinqg conference to consider: (i) the possibility of

withdrawal of the request for Secretarial medqiaqfionq@ .q(ii) tqhe

potential for. obtaining stipulations, admissions oqf. fact, and

aqgr eeqmen ts to the introduct n' (iii) a limitation
io of documqentS;

on the number of witnesses; and (qiv) any other matters which may

-ie lic
.aid in the disposition of the hearing proceedings. TqJ arqing

:q@ecord shall include an order, issued by the hearing officer,

which recites the action and agr-eements developed at the prehearqinqg

conference.

1-1

4) The Governor's Executive Order should also contain a specific

provision on the national interest requirement. This will help in avoiding

some of the problems that we have been facing with other programs * concerning

the national interest requirement. I will be happy to work with John Herman

and others on the Minnesota staff in drafting such a provisionr.

5) The discussion in Chapter Three on Amendments_4hould make reference

to refinements, in sofar as state procedures for changes in the program

ase described. See pages 3-22 and 3-23.
L L2Z

L@@e A-L-P

Zoe

-12
to
e-

(d) A state agency should inform tqhe Federal agency of its

concurrence or disaqp
,,reeqment with tqhe Fede-raql- a-qgency's consistency

determination within-45 days of receipt of the notification. The

Federal. agency may presume state agency concuqr"rence with the

consistency determination if a-state agency fails to respond

within the recommiended 45-day period; state agencies are

encouraged not to express concurrence by failure to respond

to tqbcFederal agency's notification. In the event the state

a[!
enacy d1sagrees with the Federal agency's consistency deteri,iqnq"nation.

or detaiqmiqnaqtioa that an actiqviqLty or project is not subjecIr to the

JI accc)-ilpan@
consistency rc@qqircments of rhe q@ct, the staqt-@@ agency sqfqia.)_

its response, qco the Federal agency with qits reasons for the

qdqisaqgrcieqmenqt. If tqhe Federal agency disagrees, in whc.-)le rr in part,

with tqhe state agency's position, the parties shall att-em-qPL to

setq"il-c tqlae -matter by qinqforqma' means. OCZM shall be available

upon request to assist the parties in this regard.

-4-

Land Use

Overall Coment/Recommendation

Appears to be overlap in this Part with Economic Development and

Recreation Sections.

Land Use Conditions

This is a section that has been added on in addition to the Problems

and Issues section; I recommend it be deleted in this part of the

document. Parts of it could be used for the Description of the

Environment Affected in the EIA.

Problems and Issues

Issues 5 and 6 should be deleted from this section; they represent

issues in other areas-, the remainder of the issues identified are

legitimate, but 1, 2, and 3 could be combined and 3, 4, 8 should

be edited.

In addition, there should be an issues statement on the fact that

the Shorelands Act needs implemented in munici al areas and
ip

revisions to county shoreland ordinances are needed.

Additional issues statements on shoreline erosion and floodplains

should be stated.

DRAFT:JPTolson:pd:4/4/78

Vegetation:

Overall Comment/Recommendation

Issues statement poorly developed; not related to coastal zone nor

to policies. Section should be combined with Fish and Wildlife or

Economic Development, as appropriate for a given issue.

Problems and Issues

Drop Issue #2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 11

Issues #1, 5, 8 should be combined and placed in section on

Economic Development.

Remaining issues statements should be developed and organized

according to (1) aesthetics and physical development, and C2)

use and management for wildlife habitat, water quality, and fire

prevention. (Note: Issue statements on the need for wetlands

preservation and need for vegetation standards for aesthetics,

physical development need to be developed.1

Goals) Policies, and Implementation Steps

Delete entire existing section.

Add policy statements derived from Section C r Polit*&s-and

Authorities Relating to Vegetation from #5, 6, 7, 8,,-10, 11,12.

(In most instances the policy statement will have to be an elabora-

tion of the statements now in Section C..)

FIGURES AND TABLES

Fi2ures Page

1-1 Minnesota Coastal Zone Planning Area .............. 1-2
1-2 Boundary Diagram .................................. 1-5
1-3 Boundary Maps .............. ........ 1-7
2-1 Point Sources .............. 2-17
Recreation Facilities ...... . . 2-117
2-2 .....
2-3 Major Cultural Resource Locations - Duluth-
Superior Harbor ................................. 2-152
3-1 Organization and Authorities Diagram .............. 3-16
3-2 Federal Consistency Review Process ................ 3-29
5-1 GAPC Nominations .................................. 5-16
5-2 GAPC Nominations .................................. 5-17
5-3 Duluth-Superior Harbor Area ....................... 5-18
5-4 Knife River ....................................... 5-19
5-5 Silver Bay - Milepost 7 Area ...................... 5-20
5-6 Thomsonite Beach .................................. 5-21
1-1 Existing Minnesota Generating Plants 50 MW and
Greater .................. 0................. * .... 6-8
6-2 System Load Forecast 1975-1985 .................... 6-12
6-3 7 Day, 10 Year Low Flow ...................... 0 ...0 6-15
6-4 so2 Impact Isopleths for 1600 MW Coal Fired Power
Plant .......................................... 6-17
6-5 Transmission Lines ................................ 6-22
8-1 Shorefront Areas, Access and Ownership ........... 8-3
9-1 Duluth-Superior Harbor Area ....................... 9-14
A2-1 Coastal Soil Types ................................ A2-3

Tables

2-1 Historical and Archaeologic Sites Within Minnesotals
Coastal Zone .................................... 2-137
2-2 N6rth Shorg Historic 5ite3 and Fldoe N=05 in the
Coastal Zone .................................... 2-145
3-1 Federal Consistency Table ......................... 3-30
5-1 Areas Having Potential Significance as Natural
and Scientific Areas ............................ 5-3
5-2 GAPC Nominations... ............................... 5-7
5-3 GAPC Screening Process ............................ 5-13
6-1 Minnesota Regulatory Requirements for Energy
Facilities ...................................... 6-28
6-2 Impacts of Energy Facilities ...................... 6-44
6-3 Requirements of tnergy Facilitiag ................. 6-45
1-4 Coastal Zone Energy 6-55
A2-1 Acreage of Soils in Coastal Zone Management Survey
Area ............................. 0....0 ......... A2-2
A2-2 Construction Problems Associated with North Shore
Soil Types ...................................... A2-9
A2-3 Remedies to Problems Associated with Construction
Activities in Coastal Zone.Soils ................ A2-11

trod ct

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

Boundary

The state has not identified the boundaries of the coastal zone.

The primary reason for this negative finding is that the method

of explaining the boundary is unclear.

To overcome this deficiency I recommend that q(q1) the entire back-

ground section (Section A) be deleted, and (2) the boundary
q+qkc' COa54qW q20"e -qbQ`qj'aV%I q"S
be stated directly, i.e., in rural areas,q4the 10 acre quarter

section line beyond the T.H. 61 with.bulges to include:

(a) State Parks

(b) GAPCs

quarter sectio6qh-lqine. .;[email protected]...,q;.2pp the

t he
water area,...

(3) 0qPiqa0q+,the landward boundary is built on a series of hierarchial
C@ S --q@V I (w.,is
principles in rural areas,:

(q1) q1q0q0q01-based on the principle of the Shoreland Act

(2) Highway 61 - Because of the issue of coastal development
(3) 10 acre coordinate grid system 4q6zya,,q@ q=o' c,, 6q#,'q6qkqw.NqV q@,i- qbacaQqse
(4) State Parks and GAPCs +LAC qbo'), JAV'f qi.? qiC
q4&'\t' sqtwiqp CPACqI
(q5) lots less than ten acres which cross the 10 acre

quarter section line
q+&,C q5 q@ a qle q@ e
(4) 32qT4q400qa4qtq,q,the landward boundary is built on a series of hierarchial

pri2qnc2qi les in municipal areas:
qIP

q1)

(S)@ Any exceptions to these boundary principles, e.g., the boundary

in the St. Louis River estuary.,

(6) The process and conditions under which the boundary may change.
(7), St.at Federal lands are excluded:4PIn addition, this

chapter should include:

1) the method the state will use for field inspection td

determine the boundaryAand the time this determination

will take;

2) interstate coordination on the boundary;
aVA cost
3) Availability,,of coastal zone maps;

4) A revision of maps to provide for a legend for the

boundary line and highway 61 and a north arrow-,

5) The schematic boundary map should also illustrate private

lands extending across the ten acre quarter section line

a-ad state parks and GAPCs.

INTRODUCTION 0
Minne$ota's North Shore is a special place, deserving speciga?
attention. It is a high amenity area due to the abundance of
natural resources there. The combined effects of lush-vegetation,
free running streams, abundant wildlife, diverse topographic re-
lief adjacent to the largest fresh water lake in the world
proves to be a unique attraction to tourists and a desirable
setting in which to live.

The North Shore is home for more than 112,000 residents. The
density of people and development as well as the competition for
land is greater within the narrow corridor adjacent to Lake
Superior than in many other parts of the coastal counties.
Trunk Highway 61 divides this corridor for its entire length
and serves as amajor access for development. The highway is
an international route that links the 19 coastal communities
ranging in population from over 100,000 to less than 100.
These communities, together with seven organized townships and
three county governments are all concerned with their individual
vitality.and ability to attract desirable residential, com-
mercial and, in some cases, industrial development. In addition,
several state and federal agencies carry out or regulate various
activities which include both development and land and resource
management. The questions of what kind of development is de-
sired, how much, where or when this development should be accom-
modated are not always adequately addressed or addressed in an
integrated manner by state, federal and local governments.

Both tourists and residents have perceptions of what the
North Shore should be like and both exert pressures on the
area which can create conflicts or problems. Generally, North
Shore issues and problems can be categorized into three major
areas:

management of physical development,
management of natural resources, and
management of environmental quality.

If any one of these areas is not properly managed, the potential
for degradation in the other two increases. Fortunately, the
Coastal Zone Program has given residents and visitors to the
North Shore the opportunity to participate in developing a
management program which will address each one of these areas.
Given that the natural resources of the area have historically
been the major attraction to the North Shore, and will un-
doubtedly remain so in the future, it is important that the

areals resources are used to their potential without waste or
needless destruction and that physical development be allowed
to expand with minimum feasible alteration of the Shore's
natural beauty. Harmonizing existing localf regional, state
and federal programs for guiding land and water activities can
greatly enhance the possibility that the North Shore will
always remain a beautiful place to visit as well as a healthy
place to live and work.

The Federal Coastal Zone Management Act

Man has always been attracted to water, sometimes out'of
necessity and sometimes out of design. However, after 200 years
of seeking out such areas, the*signs of neglect and abuse are
evident. During the 1960s two major studies were undertaken
on a federal level which focused on development problems along
our nation's coast. These studies were the Corrimission-on
Marine Science, Engineering, and Resources' final report,
Our Nation and the Sea, and the Department of Interior's,
National Estuary Study. The Conmission's mandate was to in-
Te-stigate and offer recormiendations on a broad'array of marine
problems including problems unique to coastal areas. Four
major findings were noted in their final report:

1. The coastal zone is the juncture of the land and sea
where the greater part of this nation's trade and
industry.take place;

2. The waters off our shore are among the most
biologically productive regions of the nation;

3. Due to the complexities of governmental jurisdiction
within coastal areas, an effective organizational
structure to coordinate planning with these areas was
needed; and

4. The state governments should establish coastal zone
authorities to plan, regulate, acquire lands and
develop public facilities.

Interior's report primarily noted that our nation's estuaries
were in jeopardy and discussed the jurisdictional-management
problems involved in their management. As a result ofthese
two reports, legislative action was initiated in 1969 when the
first bill outlining a coastal zone management program was
introduced in Congress. After much deliberation of various
alternative approaches to a management program, a bill was
finally approved and signed into law in October, 1972.

Five major national policy declarations were contained in the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972:

1. i3reserve, protect, develop, and where possible, to
restore or enhance, the resources of the nation's coastal
zone for this and succeeding generations;

2. Encourage and assist the'states to exercise effectively
their reponsibilities in the coastal zone through the
development and implementation of management programs
to achieve wise use of the land and water resources
of the coastal zone giving full consideration to
ecological, cultural, historic, and aesthetic values
as well as to needs for economic development;

3. For all federal agencies engaged in programs affecting
the coastal zone to cooperate and participate with
state and local governments and regional agencies in
effectuating the purposes of this act;

4.1 To encourage the participation of the public, of federal,
state and local governments and regional agencies in
the development of coastal zone management programsi
and

5. To encourage cooperation among the various state and
regional agencies, including establishment of interstate
and regional agreements, cooperative procedures, and
joint action particularly regarding environmental pro-
grams.

In participating in this program, Minnesota is obligated to carry
out at a minimum those national policies applicable to the state.
However, the severity and types of problems vary considerably
from state to state. Consequently, state goals were developed
which specifically address Minnesotan's concerns over its coastal
zone.

1. To develop a coastal zone program that reflects both
the needs and opinions of local residents and the value
of the coastal zone to all Minnesotans.

2. To resolve conflicts between local, state, and federal
agencies and provide a means through which they can better
coordinate their activities.

3. To produce a development plan that provides for both
growth and preservation and is agreeable to, and
enforceable by, appropriate local, state, and federal
governmental units.

4. The primary needs of maintaining homes and jobs for
North Shore residents should take precedence over out-
-side interests.

These goals reflect three major problems voiced by the public
along the North Shore:

1. The program should consider everyone's concern with the
North Shore, not just those people who use the area
as their seasonal "playgroiand."

2. Due to the many governmental jurisdictions operating
within Minnesotals.coastal zone, coordination must
be improved.

3. The program must try to maintain a balanced approach
to managing the North Shore; all growth or all pre-
servation will not do.

What the state and federal goals add up to is simply: con-
servation, coordination and consistency. Conservation means
using the natural resources of the area to the fullest possible
extent but without destroying them or neglecting those that can
be used. Coordination means that local units of government and
state and"federal agencies will be working with each other
rather than in isolation to solve problems alonq the North
Shore. And consistency means that all must adhere to the plan.

Use of this Document
This(@lan is a guid for the future growth and development of
r-n- -W@ - nore. It is a plan that recognizes that the Shore
serves two clientele - residents and tourists - and attempts
to provide a quality environment for both. The plan also rec-
ognizes that the needs of these two interest groups are not
mutually exclusive. Tourism is a significant business in the
Coastal Zone, and if conditions on the shore become unattractive
to tourists, repercussions will be felt throughout the
local economy.

This plan contains recommendations for addressing a wide variety
of North Shore problems and issues dealing with both resident
and nonresident Use. It outlines the steps to be taken by various
levels and agencies of government both individually and col-
lectively. Local governments will amend or develop plans and
local controls that reflect the special nature and conditions
of the Shore. Controls such as zoning, subdivision regulations,
sanitation codes and building permits will continue to be ad-
ministered by local governments. Some state agencies will amend
their existing rules and regulations or initiate new management
policies developed through the CM Program. Hopefully all
agencies will more actively coordinate their activities in the
future and regard the North Shore as one place as opposed to
separate jurisdictions.

This last point has been strengthened by the manner in which
the plan was prepared.. Local elected officials representing
North Shore residents and state department heads representing
all Minnesotans have come together to discuss alternatives for
the Shore. Federal agencies with jurisdiction in.the coastal
zone have contributed information and suggestions and have com-
mented on plan elements as,they eVolved. Therefore, this plan
represents many legitimate views and should not be considered
as a local, state or federal%pQ&Ab. It is a combination of all
three - a single qpNm for a single place - in recognition of the
three levels of government that have jurisdiction in the
coastal zone and the constituencies that they represent.

If the V&w is to be meaningful, those who implement it must
conduct their activities in a manner that is consistent with it.
The federal CZM act establishes that all federal activities must
be consistent with the qWmw and Congress rightfully expects
that state and local activities will be too. Therefore, all
people and public agencies with an interest in the shore have a
unique opportunity to measure future government activity and
decisions against the CZM Plan to determine if they are con-
sistent. If they are not, the law provides for remedial action.

If conditions change or new information becomes available, there
is a process for amending the CZM Plan. Thus, the plan can be
a current document through time to provide up-to-date guidelines
for decisions affecting the Shore, its residents or users.

The Policy Advisory Committee

Minnesota first became involved in the Coastal Zone Program in
June of 1974 when the Governor designated the State Planning
Agency as the lead agency to administer coastal zone' funds. To
facilitate. program development, a coastal zone management work
group was immediately established. This work group consisted
of one representative appointed by the department heads of
Highways, Natural Resources, Economic Development, Health,
Pollution Control, and State Plannning. Local representation
came from the Arrowhead Regional Development Commission and Lake,
Cook, and St. Louis Counties. 'The Lake and Cook County represen-
tatives were members of the County Board of Commissioners.

The first year and a half of program development primarily
consisted of data collection and analysis and special studies.
However, as the program moved into the second half of the
three year planning phase, a more formal decision-making body
was necessary to address the substantive aspects of the program
such as boundaries, permissible uses, organization and authorities,
and geographical areas of particular concern. Consequently,

the Coastal Zone Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) was created,
having its first meeting in May of 1976. The PAC was comprised
of six state agency heads and six local elected representatives,
one from each of the three coastal counties and one each to
represent coastal municipalities, townships, and the Arrowhead
Regional Development Commission. In October, 1977 a representative
from the City of Duluth was added to the PAC. Since 1976, the PAC
has been responsible for making the policy decisions affecting the
coastal zone which are outlined in the Coastal Zone Plan.

Members of the CZM Policy Advisory Committee are:

Edwin Hansen Lake County Board of Commissioners
Melvin Koepke Municipal Representative
Chester Lindskog Cook County Board of Commissioners
Lloyd Shannon St. Louis County Board of Commissioners
Ron Sherer Arrowhead Regional Development
Commission
John Moe Township Representative
Meg Bye City of Duluth
Peter Vanderpoel State Planning Agency
William Nye Department of Natural Resources
John Millhone Energy Agency
Sandra Gardebring Pollution Control Agency
Warren Lawson Health Department
James Harrington Transportation Department

Plan Format

Each Chapter of the Coastal Zone NdwAn is a corollary to the
federal requirements that states must meet in designing their
management programs.

Chapter 1 discusses the various boundary alternatives considered
and the methodology used in formulating the finalized coastal
zone boundary. Maps delineating the boundary are presented
at the end of the Chapter.

Chapter 2 deals with the uses of land and water that are subject
to the CZM Program. Through goals, policies and implementation
steps, the program defines the activities of state and local
government agencies in dealing with these uses and the impacts
that may result from them.

Chapter 3 discusses the rationale used in selecting the organiza-
tional FF ucture, existing authorities for controlling land
and water activities, and the federal consistency review pro-
cedure.

Chapter 4 explains how uses of regional benefit and the national
interest in the Coastal Zone have been dealt with.

Chapter 5 outlines the process used in nominating and selecting
GAPCs for designation.

Chapter 6 contains a planning process for anticipating and managing
the impacts resulting from energy-related facilities which may
locate in the coastal zone.

Chapter 7 contains a process for assessing and dealing with
the effects of shoreland erosion in the coastal zone.

Chapter 8 discusses beaches and existing and proposed beach
access for both pedestrians and the boating public.

Chapter 9 discusses the preliminary results and recommendations
of coastal zone management studies in the Duluth/Superior Harbor
Area. This aspect of the CZM Program will be completed in June,
1978.

Appendix 1 contains a chronological history of federal, state
and locai-involvement in developing the Minnesota CZM Program.

Appendix 2 contains a summary of coastal soil conditions and
a guide to overcoming the limitations they impose on construction
activities.

Appendix 3 contains the major state laws and rules and regulations
pertaining to program implementation.

Glossary contains a list of acronyms and terms which requires
defin ns.

vii

APTER 1

CHAPTER 1:

BOUNDARIES OF THE MINNESOTA COASTAL ZONE

Background
A. Minnesota Shoreland Management Program and Coastal Zone
Boundaries

The Coastal Zone Management Act includes a requirement
that each state's Coastal Zone Management Program must show
evidence that the state has in place at the time.of approval
the legal authorities necessary for the state,.-acting through
state agencies, regional or interstate bodies, and/or local
governments, to control land and water uses subject to the
management program in accordance with the terms and policies
of the program. (P.L. 92-583, Section 306(d)).

Early in the state's coastal zone program, the Lake Superior
Sub-basin Watershed was established as the planning area for
the coastal zone program (Figure 1-1). It was thought at that
time that the watershed was the proper place to assure
consideration of upstream water quality problems and de-
velopments, to promote cooperation with federal, state, local
and "208" agencies involved in water-related programs and
to collect pertinent land use data for impact analysis
that would meet the requirements of the Act. The information
ontained in the documents that were developed on the boundary
issue was subjected to extensive review by the PAC and the
public.

In discussion at several meetings the,members of the PAC
indicated a desire to develop a Coastal Zone Program which
could, to the maximum extent possible, be implemented within
the legal framework provided by existing state legislation.

Between June 7, 1976, and May 11, 1977 the PAC received
several papers and memoranda pertaining to program boundaries.
The matters of major importance that were addressed by these
materials were:

- Requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act of
1972 (Public Law 92-583) and the related federal reg-
ulations pertaining to program boundaries.

- Requirements of the Office of Coastal Zone Management
(OCZM), U.S. Department of Commerce, and OCZM's sug-
gested alternative methods for boundary identification.

- Potential natural resource features and cultural features
for use as boundary determinants including platted
lands,,designated public recreation areas, erodible
shoreline, floodprone areas, wetlands, beaches, islands,
natural and scientific areas, historic sites and
municipal areas.

NOMMIE20TA CO&OTAL ZONE PUMHOM
AM&

. .... . ...
............

All

AWAlb 91
t"PAMy

FIGURE I- I

1 2

Recommended methods for boundary identification in-
cluding biophysical, biophysical/aidministraition and
the tiered approach.

Recommended boundaries for the Minnesota Coastal
Zone that included the highway, bluffline, shore 'land
management area and sub-basin watershed lines.

On March 4, 1977, the PAC pas sed amotion to establish the
Coastal Zone boundary for Minnesota in accordance with the
Minnesota Shoreland Management Act of 1969, as amended in
1973. This legislation requires that counties and municipalities
adopt shoreland conservation ordinances. Shoreland is de-7
fined as land within one thousand feet of the no lal high
water mark of a lake and within three hundred feet of a
river or stream, The PAC's decision to use this piece of
existing state legislation would have established the
Minnesota Coastal Zone boundary approximately one thousand
feet 'from Lake Su erior.
P-1

On May 11, 1977, the PAC.refined their earlier decision
of March 4th and adopted an expanded boundary concept, going
beyond the 1,000 foot line and approved a boundary for the
state's coastal zone in unincorporated areas and adopted
minimum standards for establishing a boundary within in-
corporated municipalities,

The PAC selected a boundary that extends from the St. Louis
River at the St. Louis-Carlton County line to the Pigeon
River (International boundary between the United States
and Canada). L4keward the boundary extends to the jqrisdic-
tional limits of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Canada while inland
the boundary approximates the 1,000 foot line from Lake Superior
or T.H. 61 whichever is most landward,

As,stated earlier, an analysis of several boundary alternatives
preceded PAC approval of the existing coastal zone boundaries.
(All boundary-related documents which were reviewed by the'PAC
can be found in the Coastal Zone Repositories which are- .
located in the zoning department offices of St. Louis, Lake
and Cook Counties and at the Arrowhead Regional Develop-
ment Commission and the State Planning Agency.

B. Boundary in Unincorporated Areas

In Ma rch, 1977, the PAC appr oved a coastal zone boundary
which was to be established one thousand 'feet from Lake
Superior. Utilizing information contained in staff papers
on the boundary issue, and drawing upon advice provided
by OCZM, the PAC determined that portions of T.H. 61 which
are outside the area affected, by the statewide shoreline
regulations should be in the state's coastal zone. Sub!--
sequently, at their May meeting, the PAC approved a motion
to this effect.

1 - 3

In the same motion, the PAC included state parks that are
within the Minnesota Coastal Zone Planning Area (Lake Superior
Sub-basin) and waysides occurring along T.H. 61 in
the Coastal Zone.

C. Boundary Within Municipal Areas

The action taken by the PAC on May llth also addressed
Coastal Zone boundaries for municipalities. The PAC de-
termined that within municipalities, the boundary will be
defined minimally at a point one thousand feet inland
from Lake Superior (and also 1,000 feet inland from the
St. Louis River in the City of Duluth). The PAC further
stated that municipalities may, at their discretion, de-
termine that additional lands should be included@within
%the Coastal Zone boundary. If this occurs, the community
is allowed to include such additional areas as a Geographical
Area of Particular Concern.

D An Administratively Feasible Boundary

A boundary which is authorized by statute or by any other
legally enforceable code should be definable in clear and un-
ambiguous terms. A boundary located one thousand feet from
the shoreline of Lake Superior would be difficult to locate,
nearly impossible to define, and would require an excessive
expenditure of time and labor to establish. A principal
disadvantage in establishing a boundary of this nature is
that such a boundary does not match property and jurisdic-
tional line.

The PAC became aware of the significant difficulties in-
volved in establishing a coastal zone boundary on natural
features in boundary discussions at several meetings during
1976. Therefore, on November 23, 1976 the PAC decided
that the boundary would be defined by cultural or administrative
.features'wherever possible. Zoning administrators from the
three coastal counties who will be involved with administra-
tion of the Coastal Zone Management Plan endorsed the de-
cision of the PAC.

The actual coastal zone boundary adopted on May 11, 1977
for unincorporated areas is defined along subdivisions of the
rectangular coordinate system established in the U.S. Public
Land Survey for the purposes of dividing government land for
sale. The smallest areal unit that is used to define the
Coastal Zone boundary in unincorporated areas is the ten
acre parcel. In platted or subdivided areas outside
municipalities, any lot which is less than ten acres in size,
and is crossed by the ten acre1ine that defines the State's
coastal zone will be considered to be within the Coastal
Zone (Figure 1-2).

1 4

COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY DIAGRAM

160 ACRES COASTAL ZONE
BOLMARY

1000 FEET DISTANCE 40 ACRES
FROM

LAKE SUPERIOR 0
0% .00. 0
0 *00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
U. S. 14 IG 61
14 IG
14 IG

FIGURE 1-2

7
tu unicigal areas, the PAC agreed'that for administrative
W;"-
purpose-s-,Tne Dounaary ill be defined by the respective
municiipal zoning staf rc=cy U.Mick,
ruact-, Ucc.) :ugarest to Lhe one thousand foot distance
which the zoning staff deems appropriate or most advantageous
from an administrative view. The boundary in municipal areas
will be established prior to submission of this plan to
the Secretary of Commerce.

E. Relationship of the Minnesota Coastal Zone Boundary to Federal
Lands

The Coastal Zone Management Act states "excluded from the
coastal zone are lands the use of which is by law subject
solely to the discretion of or which is held in trust by
the Federal Government, its officers or agents."

The effect of this language in the Act on Minnesota coastal
planning activities is addressed in the Organization and
Authorities section of this plan. The Minnesota Coastal
Zone boundary extends through all ownerships consistent
with the criteria for boundary establishment discussed
elsewhere in this chapter that have been approved by the
PAC. Although the boundary has been delineated through
federally-owned parcels, these parcels are officially ex-
cluded from the boundary based upon a decision by the
Justice Department.

F. Minnesota Coastal Zone Boundary Maps

The remainder of this chapter consists of small scale maps
which indicate the approximate location of the Minnesota
Coastal Zone boundary. The information portrayed in the maps
is also contained on larger more detailed maps which are at
1:24,0'00 scale. The:exact location of the boundary in
specific areas is portrayed on larger maps which are avail-
able for public use at the established Coastal Zone Re-
positories.

13
q*00W

m Mon m "M m mi m a

.%
Ad,

V'.

MAP I WEST DULUTH S,4 IN-

Nb k
S ""m.n
FIGURE 1-3 BOUNDARY m.W- W-T... C-ti'll. n

d-ly @P-

10
eo

-2
v 1 30,

-4
eel.

jo
00

IANNESOTA POINT INSET
SEE INSET

MAP 2

MLIC A
S 1IL-T- @F- O-C
FIGURE 1-3 BOUNDARY ......... P@
1JA.1G -T

I o

FRENCH RIVER

PALMERS-

KNIFE RIVER

MAP 3 KNIFE RIVER

0 -
0-
OUNDARY 0.: Mj- EXTUCT!M
FIGURE 1-3 B

F-J

MAP 4 TM HARBOM
Bad-,
S Wly O-c@
FIGURE 1-3 BOUNDARY pcm EIT-T!.
PN"k,
-I@mlll

@xl
F-j

GWSE@ FALLS
STATE PARK
MAP 5 - SPLIT ROCK SPLIT ROCK LrMTHM.ISE WATE 'PA.RK

RESFUNTI.
FIGURE 1-3 BOUNDARY

,A,

LAW

V17-
LAgr

W@ LAAW -Wgw

SUER

BEAPER
-Y
FVVER ILAN CrT
BAY
SWE PARK
MAP 6 - BAPTISM RPJM

pf
FIGURE 1-3 BOUNDARY ft,

... .. . ....

d4
%

'b Ix

00,

FALLS a
SIXI FARK
LffTLE

MAP T - NAPIM PJVM

A AOTWIT.1
c
Sl @--
- :P,,
FIGURE 1-3 BOUNDARY @j- E.IWT!. ,:- .=1
C=l -:1: r.

Zllaz, I ly 'Pew St.

4=s e.

TEMPERANCE
RAY BERGUIND
SlATE PAFK
MAP TEMPERANCE RIVER

-01
0
R"E 1-3 BOUNDARY 6-11-
MMEW k

inn m m

kip-

4
MAP 9@ - CARIBOU CREEK LUTSEN CASCADE- RIVER STATE PAFV(

A@Q-Un
[email protected]..
TIGME I
3 BOUNDARY

Z4 6

3D 13

I C)

CASCADE RnIER.
STATE PAID(

MAP -:GRAND MARAIS

A - AGRIMM
S
FMRE 1-3 BOUNDARY :M.0
wxm.

R3 24

32 ao

R
'STATE PARK
jUDGE C.R.
RW 11 RIVER STATE PARK

A --TM
S SILV=%K
FIGURE 1-3 @.,- ExTmT!.
BOUNDARY *:

-h 11-9 --1 ly

A 14.

41/

HOWAND

MAP V AESMVATION RIVEA

A -T.U.
S SILIMM
MQUFIE.1-3 BOUNDARY
=M,

@g
71 .4

.4
3o

@-j
kD 13

011,

7L
S,

-lz 7.
Is

MAP 13 - GRAND PORTAGE

s
OPURM 1-3. BOUNDAFN M@M- EITWT.-

CP
C0 CLn
8
CHAPTE 2

CHAPTER 2:

LAND AND WATER USES SUBJECT TO THE MANAGEME14T PROGRAM
Int roduction P t.
Minnesota's Coastal Zone is an area unique to the state and to 10
the country. It is here that the Lake Superior Highlands, rem-
nants of an ancient mountain range with the most varied topo-
graphic relief in the state, meet Lake Superior, the largest
body of fresh water in the world. Bedrock cliffs, gravel
beaches, cascading streams, dense boreal forest together with
the awesome size and power of bone-chilling of Lake Superior are a
few of the factors that endear most Minnesotans to their "North
Shore."

The North Shore that most people identify with is a relatively
narrow corridor between the Lake and the Highlands. This cor-
ridor extends from Duluth to the Canadian border and is divided
for its entire length by T.H. 61. Highway 61 serves as a local
road which provides access to communities, private homes and,,..,
businesses, a major recreation thoroughfare for tourists a
a commercial route for truck traffic. W
Many of the uses that are'served by T.H. 61 are visible from
it. Today, the highway corridor has a natural, largely undeveloped
character. It is this character that lures tourists to the area,
and it is tourists that support the recreation-oriented businesses
that make up a substantial portion of the local economy. There-
fore, maintenance of the area's high aesthetic quality is an
important consideration for both visitors and residents alike
and consequently became an important component of the Coastal
Zone Management Program.

Population projections and land use studies suggest that while
the area is likely to continue to retain its low population
density, the popularity of the Lake could result in accelerated
growth of rural permanent and seasonal residential construction
as well as new commercial development. Projections also point
to continued growth in municipalities and other coastal settle-
ment areas. Major developments are expected to be few in
number. The thrust of the Minnesota CZM Program is to help
assure that future private development and public land manage-
ment occur in a manner beneficial to the region, state and
nation.

irect and Significant di %

The CZM Act requires the manag ent program for eac coastal state
to include, "a definition of hat shall constitute permissible
land uses and water uses .hin the coastal zone which have
a direct and significan mpact on the coastal water." 305(b)(2).
Regulation4923.31 (d)(1)..and (2)---6tate that, "the purpose of
determining direct and sfg--nifica'nt impacts on coastal waters or,
more broadly, on coastal resources, is to assist in a determin-
ation of uses subject to the management program and thereby
included within the management boundaries. Certain uses may
cause direct and significant impacts only in terms of water or
air quality impacts. However, once such uses have been identified,
because of these impacts, as being subject to the management
program, their management must be based on the comprehensive
_--policies of the program which will address more than just air
and water quality considerations."
For the Minnesota Coastal Zone Management Program, "direct and
significant" has been defined as any use that occurs within the
coastal zone boundary that is subject to legislatively adopted
state policy. The Minnesota Legislature has passed legislation
dealing with a wide variety of uses or impacts and behind each
of these laws, is a determination that the affected uses or im-
pacts are of state level significance.

Depending on the issue involved, the legislature has required
either state agencies or local governments to take action.
For example, the impacts of power plants were deemed to be of
a significance that required direct state level siting. On the
other hand, residential, commercial and industrial uses within
1,000 feet of lakes and 300 feet of streams are largely reg-
ulated by local ordinance. When size or impacts of these
facilities reach certain thresholds, however, they are additionally
governed by state performance standards addressing such things as
pollution, water appropriation and discharge and work in the
beds of public waters. Given this approach, the host of uses
and impacts addressed in state legislation are subject to the
Minnesota CZM Program.

For organizational purposes, these uses and impacts have been
grouped into eleven categories such as air quality, transporta-
tion and land use. Each category contains goals, policies and
implementation steps which outline desired end products and the
state and/or local actions that are necessary or desirable to
attain them. All actions are consistent with state policy, as
enumerated in legislation, and with the authority delegated to
state or local agencies by the legislature. The goals, policies
and implementation steps serve to highlight the steps required
to deal with coastal problems and issues within the context of
broader statewide laws. Each of the eleven categories contains a
listing of state policies and their statutory references. In
addition, activities subject to state or federal policies which
are likely to occur outside the coastal zone, but have the
potential for significant impacts on coastal resources are listed
for consistency monitoring in Chapter 3, Organization and
F,

cl
m a en
V Th, oa @n
,L@n ghat
. f
_s w hin th(
I mpact on

0
P.

D
a e

Authorities.

2 2

CZM Policy Development Process

The development of coastal goals, policies and implementation
steps required three major work elements.

A. Data Collection

Beginning in the first year and extending through year two
of the program, data on the cultural and natural resource
conditions of the area were collected and mapped including
data on:

Existing land use Historic features
Land ownership Scientific features
Existing zoning Recreation features
Platted lands soils
Shoreland Geology
characteristics Traffic volume
Wildlife
Minerals

These data were analyzed and used during the policy develop-
ment stage of the Program.

B. Coastal Problems and Issues

Between October, 1975, and July, 1976, SPA staff interviewed
19 divisions and sections of 7 state agencies to determine
their perceptions of problems and issues along the North
Shore as well as their future plans for the area. Each inter-
view went through three phases:

1. An interview with the program director or relevant staff
member in St. Paul; an interview with the regional rep-
resentative if one existed; write-up of both inter-
views for comment with additio nal questions attached.

2. A telephone follow-up interview to both program director
and regional representative to receive comments on the
interview summary and to receive answers to the additional
questions. First revision mailed out.

3. Follow-up call to all participants requesting comments
on first revision.

Final publication of state interviews was sent to local
residents and federal agencies for review and comment.

During June and July, 1976, 45 federal agencies received
questionnaires basically requesting the same information
solicited from the state agencies. Ninety-eiqht public and
private organizations were also contacted to determine their
perceptions of problems and issues.

2-3

During July, August, and September of 1976, staff from the
Arrowhead Regional Development Commission conducted eight
public meetings with elected officials, planning commissions,
interest groups, and general citizens along the North Shore
to obtain opinions on problems and issues. Consequently,
by September, a comprehensive list of problems and issues
had been developed. These problems and issues were or-
ganized into sixteen problem areas as follows:

air quality forestry
water quality mineral development
solid waste floodplain and shoreland
residential development recreation
economic development health/education and public
tourism development services
agriculture energy
transportation land ownership
intergovernmental relationships

As stated above, the problem and issue statements were derived
from numerous organizations and there was not unanimous
agreement on the substance, wording, accuracy or relative
importance of each statement. Although not formally adopted
by PAC the statements did provide a necessary framework for
policy development. The relative importance of each statement,
and consequently the level of activity required to solve
each problem and issue, was determined through the participatory
process used in framing goals, policies and implementation
steps.

C. Policy Development

During September, October, and November, CZM staff worked
with regional, state, and federal personnel in writing
draft goals and policies which addressed the problems and
issues identified during the preceding 11 months. Data
collected for the CZM Program was used in framing the goals
and policies. In some cases, staff was not sure what should
happen or how something should happen regarding a particular
issue. Consequently, policy questions were formulated rather
than policy. In November, a preliminary policy framework was
approved by the Coastal Zone Policy Advisory Committee, and
in December, 11 public meetings were conducted along the
North Shore to obtain comments from the public on the draft
goals, policies, and policy questions. Meetings were held
with the following groups:

Lake County Coastal Zone Advisory Committee
Township Supervisors
Silver Bay and Two Harbors Planning Commissions
East Chapter of Lake County NEMEEC
West Chapter of Lake County NE14EEC
Cook County and Grand Marais Planning Commissions
Duluth Planning Commission
Lakewood and Duluth Townships

2 - 4

Due to the length of the document, the Policy Framework could
not be discussed in its entirety at any one meeting. There-
fore, each group was requested to meet on their own and compile
comments on the portions of the document not discussed at the
@initial meeting. On'January 6, 1977, these coriunents. were
received by staff at a "spokesperson meeting" attended by
elected representatives from each of the above groups.

In February, 1977, the Policy Advisory Committee discussed
the comments received in January on the policy framework and
voted on half of the document. During February, March, and
April, the local advisory groups continued to discuss the
remaining portion of the policy framework, and in May, the
Policy Advisory Committee finalized.the-remaining goals and
_policies.@

Using the approved policies, CZM staff developed the more
detailed portions of the permissible use section. These
consisted of permissible use area maps and a listing of
permitted and conditional uses within each area. The in-
tention was to have local units of government develop
plans and ordinances that were consistent with these sectio s.

on October 17, 1977, the Policy Advisory Committee requested
staff to eliminate the maps and listings of permitted and
conditional uses. The PAC preferred a more general approach
using the CZM goals and policies which would allow local
units of government more flexibility in developing plans and
ordinances. The PAC requested staff to review the goals
and policies in the August 31 draft of the CZM Program
with local action committees to assure their accuracy and
adequacy in view of the preferred approach.

Commencing in late November, 1977, SPA and ARDC staff began
a round of meetings with each of the three county advisory
committees and local PAC members. Staff met with each com-
mittee on four consecutive weeks to review and, if desirable,
amend the goals and policies contained in the August draft.
In the case of state and local recreation, the majority of
the goals and policies were derived from the North Shore
Recreation Study conducted as part of the CZM Program.
In addition, each policy was followed by one or more imple-
mentation steps which will serve as a basis for the CZM
Action Program. The Action Program will be developed after
the CZM4Uoa& is submitted to OCZM and will contain the
implementation steps, a general work program for each step
the entity or entities that will do the work, and estimate@
cost and priority for completing each step within the five
year 306 phase. The PAC has determined that no unit of
government is required to carry out the implementation
steps contained in this Plan if CZM financial assistance is
not available.

2 5

Based on the four-week review with the action committees,
the previous list of sixteen problem areas was consolidated
into eleven. In the following sections, each of the eleven
areas is discussed in the following format:

1. Review of existing conditions (where appropriate).

2. Summary of problems and issues. (Some problem and issue
statements have been revised or eliminated by PAC members
for this draft.)

3. Coastal zone goals, policies and implementation steps.
M @@
4. Existing legislative policies and legal auth=rit

2 6

too

A. AIR QUALITY: VROBLEMS AND ISSUES

1. The impacts upon the Coastal Zone (North Shore),
including Duluth, of fugitive dust and acid rain from
the Iron Range and from major coal-fired power plants
is unknown and_potentially significant. Causes o .f
fugitive du..t emanating from the Iron Range in-
clude removal of overburden, blasting for ore, traf-
fic on unpaved roads, wind erosion of unvegetated
mine dumps and tailings disposal areas, and taconite
processing.

The extent of acid rain occurring in northeastern
Minnesota is currently not known. When fuels such
as coal or oil which contain sulfur are burned, the
sulfur is converted into S02 and, to a much lesser
extent, S03. S03,emitted to the atmosphere will
readily combine with moisture or precipitation to
form a weak sulfuric acid. If a pollution control
device such as a wet scrubber is used to clean the
combustion gasses, it is possible for droplets or
a mist of acidic scrubbing,liquid to be carried up
the stack and emitted to the atmosphere if an
adequate mist eliminator hasn't been provided.

The expansion of taconite mining and initiation of
copper/nickel mining or smelting in the Iron Range
and the curtailment of natural gas will only add
to the above two problems by creating more particulate
and S02 emissions. Additional cross-boundary. .
air emissions may result from the proposed Atikokan,
Ontario, electric generating facility.

2. Duluth air quality is affected by outside sources
including those from Superior, Wisconsin, and Wrenshall
and Cloquet in Minnesota. The PCA suspects that the
Murphy refineries in Superior and a refinery in
Wrenshall are contributing to hydrocarbon levels
in Duluth while the Northwest Paper Company in Cloquet
may be adding hydrogen sulfide to the air. The extent
of hydrocarbon or hydrogen sulfide pollution from
any of these sources is not known since the pol-
lutants are not being monitored. Hydrocarbons are
not being measured because current monitoring devices
are expensive and their operation is manpower intensive.

2 - 7

3. Ambient air quality standards for CO are being exceeded
in Duluth and more monitoring is needed, especially
in areas other than downtown Duluth. The existing
monitor is located in the heavily traveled street
canyon formed by the buildings oneither side of
Superior Street.

4. Eighty-three percent of the hydrocarbons in Duluth
come from transportation-related sources. When
hydrocarbons and,nitrogen oxides mix with sunlight,
they form photo-chemical oxidants of which over 90
percent is ozone. In March of 1975, levels of
ozone exceeding the standards for photo-chemical
oxidants were found during a month when such levels
are expected"to be low, thereby emphasizing the
need for photo-chemical oxidants monitoring.

5. Air Quality in Duluth, at least concerning particulate
levels, has improved; this is predominantly due to
the phase out of several major emitting sources and
additional control equipment placed on existing
facilities. The concentrations of other pollutants
may present additional problems. The number of
monitoring stations in Duluth for N02 02? and
particulates is satisfactory at two, thSree and seven
respectively.

6. In general, ambient air quality and emission source
standards'need to be reviewed. Specifically, PCA
regulation APC-5(d)(3) may'not be adequate enough
to handle future mining expansion and should be
reviewed relative to its effectiveness in control-
ling particulate emissions from major point sources
such as taconite processing plants. It currently
reads:

"The owner or operator of any industrial process
equipment which was in operation after July 9, 1969,
which is located outsidethe Minneapolis-St. Paul
Air Quality Control Region and the City of Duluth,
which is located not less than one-fourth mile from
any residence or public roadway, and which has control
equipment with a collection efficiency of not less
than 85 percent by weight, and the operation of the
entire emission facility does not cause a violation
of the ambient air quality standards, shall be
considered in compliance with the requirements
of subsection (d)(1)(aa) of this regulation."

If taconite mining should expand as well as copper/
nickel mining, -Ehis regulation may not be adequate
enough to ensure good air quality. The PCA has never
had to face the problem before of upgrading point
source standards as growth occurs in an area.

2 8

7. There is a need for monitoring efforts along the
North Shore and on the Iron Range. No state
monitoring is being conducted along the North Shore
currently, although the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency has monitors at Silver Bay. In order to
monitor particulates, S02, and N02. monitoring stations
need to be established. There is a need to monitor
heavy metals, although it is not required in the PCA
rules and regulations. Data collected could be used
as background information to determine the impact
on air quality of copper/nickel mining. This
monitoring would not necessarily have to be con-
tinuous, but could be periodic and could be an ex-
tension of the existing monitoring network set up
by the Copper/Nickel Study.

8. Specific major pollution sources:

For Duluth:

Name of Source Location Pollutant(s) Under Schedule

General Mills
grain elevator Duluth Particulates Yes

Capital grain
elevator Duluth Particulates Yes

Cargill Duluth Particulates Yes

U.S. Steel Particulates,
coke plant Duluth S02 Hydro- Yes
carLons

Duluth Steam Duluth S02, Particulates Yes

Duluth Missabe Particulates Needs further
Iron Range RR study
taconite piles Duluth

Continental Oil Particulates
Refinery Wrenshall S02 Hydro- In compliance
carLons

Murphy Oil
Refinery Superior Hydrocarbons Unknown

MP&L Power Particulates In compliance
Plant. Duluth S02, NOX

Northwest Cloquet Hydrogen Sulfide Yes
Paper Co. Particulates S02

Fugitive dust Taconite Particulates Additional study
mining & needed-current
processing project
in Iron
Range

2 - 9

Name of Source Location Pollutant(s) Under Schedule

Automobiles Throughout CO & Hydro- To be addressed
Duluth carbons in development
Metropolitan of control plan.
Area I I

Coal burning Particulates Yes
vessels Harbor S02

For the North Shore:

Reserve Mining Silver Bay Particulates & Yes
Co. asbestiform
fibers, S02

Erie Mining Co. Taconite Particulates In compliance
Taconite un- Harbor
loading docks

9. Automobiles are contributing to CO and hydrocarbon
levels in Duluth. (Catelytic converters do not operate
properly until after the engines are warmed; the prob-
lem is even more critical in Duluth due to colder
ambient temperatures.) Consequently, during rush hour
traffic in downtown Duluth, pollutants are being
emitted because of cold start conditions. During the
summer, higher traffic volumes in the Duluth area
add to the CO and hydrocarbon levels; however, the
problem exists year round as evidenced by CO levels
in violation of the one hour standard on January
18, 1978.

10. The possibility of inadvertent weather modification
caused by fugitive dust is a potential problem.

11. The major reason more monitoring is not being con-
ducted in Duluth or along the North Shore is because
monitoring is manpower intensive and the financial
resources are not adequate. A more accurate assess-
ment of air quality, fugitive dust, and acid rain
along the North Shore can be made if additional funds
are provided.

12. The Mesabi Iron Range, Duluth, Cloquet and Silver
Bay have been designated as areas not attaining
particulate standards. Duluth has also been designated
as a non-attainment area for carbon monoxide. The
MPCA in coordination with other state, regional,
and local agencies must develop regulations and
standards that will assure that air quality standards
are met in these areas by 1982 as required by the U.S.
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977.

2 - 10

New or modified facilities that are major sources of
air pollutants must be reviewed by the MPCA pursuant
to requirements for preventing significant deteriora-
tion of air quality and for attaining air quality
standards by 1982. These requirements'could have
significant effects on the design of any new facilities
such as smelters.

B. AIR QUALITY GOAL, POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION STEPS

Goal: A level of air quality that will enhance
and maintain the natural environment
and man's health, safety and welfare.

Policy: Air quality levels be maintained, or if
necessary attained, consistent with EPA
and MPCA standards.

Implement: 1. Collect baseline data.
2. Engage in air quality monitoring
and enforcement which is no more
restrictive than in other areas of.
the state.
3. Measure impact of atmospheric pol-
lution on water quality of Lake
Superior and its sub-basin.
4. Review and revise State Implementation
Plan to ensure air quality standards
attained by 1982.
5. Review proposals for major new
developments to ensure compliance
with applicable air quality and
emission standards, including
federal requirements for the pre-
vention of significant deteriora-
tion of air quality and conformance
with State Implementation Plan.

C. POLICIES AND AUTHORITIES RELATING TO AIR QUALITY AND AIR
!;OLLUTION.

1. State policies a nd authorities

a. Minnesota-Wisconsin boundary compact.

promoting the consideration by municipalities of
measures.for Controlling air pollution. (See Minn.
Stat. S1.31-1.40.)

b. Pollution Control Agency.
Air quality shall be improved by promoting,
in the most practical way possible, the use
of energy sources and waste disposal methods
which.-,..produce or emit the least air contam-
inants consistent with the overall goal of
reducing all forms of pollution. The
Pollution Control Agency is charged with
adopting standards of air quality and prom-
ulgating regulations or standards 'which may
relate to sources or emi-ssions of air con-
tamination or air Pollution, to the quality
or composition of such emissions, or to the
quality of or composition of the ambient air
or outdoor atmosphere, or to any other matter
relevant to the prevention, abatement, or
control of air pollution. The agency is also
charged with developing a biannual long-range
plan and program for the effectuation of air
quality policy and with giving due considera-
tion in the exercise of its powers to the
operation and expansion of business, commerce,
trade, and other economic factors affecting
the feasibility and practicability of any
proposed action. Local units of governments
may not set standards of air quality more
stringent than those set by the Pollution
Control Agency. (See Minn. Stat. SS 116.01-
116.41.)
C. Minnesota Environmental Rights Act.

Each person is entitled to the protection,
preservation, and enhancement of . . . air
* * . within the state and each person has
a responsibility to contribute to its pro-
tection, preservation, and enhancement.
It is the state's policy to create and main-
tain conditions under which'man and nature
can.exist in productive harmony in order that
present and future generations may enjoy
clean air . . . The act creates a civil
action for any person to bring a lawsuit for
the "protection of the air . . . located
within the state (See Minn. Stat.
SS 116B.01-116B.13.)

2 - 12

d. Minnesota Environmental Policy Act.

State government should use all practical
means to reduce the deleterious.impact on.
air quality from all sourcesi including the
deleterious environmental impact due to
operati,on of vehicles with internal combustion
engines in urbanized areas. MEPA requires an
environmental impact statement for any'major
governmental action having the potential for
significant environmental effects and Prohibits
any state action which is likely to cause pol-
lution, impairment, or destruction of the air
. . . located within the state so long as there
is a feasible and prudent alternative consis-
tent with,th-e reasonable requirements of the
public health, safety, and welfare and the
state's paramount concern for the protection
of its natural resources. (See Minn. Stat.
SS116D.01-116D.07.)

2. Municipal authorities

a. Municipal planning.

Municipal planning commissions may engage.in
research and study concerning the control and
prevention of air pollution-in conformity with
applicable federal and state laws. (See Minn.
Stat. SS462.392.)

2 13

11. WATER RESOURCES

A. EXISTING CONDITIONS

1. Major uses of Lake Superior are shipping, sailing
and boating, sport and commercial fishing, water for
industrial purposes as well as for drinking, and
depository for municipal, industrial, and residential
wastes.

2. Fifty-nine streams, descending as much as 1,300 feet
from their source 15 to 25 miles back, dissect Minnesota's
portion of Lake Superior's coastline. "The last 400
feet of descent occurs in a series of highfalls and
steep cascades within one to three miles of
the lake. These streams are home for rainbow, brook,
and brown trout.

3. Fish stock in Lake Superior has been limited since
about 1950. Following the invasion of parasitic
sea lanprey, all commercial trout fishing was halted
on the Great Lakes. In Minnesota the success of the
stocking efforts has been monitored by allowing fish-
ing under special permit since 1963. According to
fisheries managers, the populations are increasing
and there is a potential for a limited commercial
lake trout fishery in the future. Angler trips for
recreational fishing on the Minnesota coast have
quadrupled from 1970 to 1975 and in that same period
the actual time spent at the sport increased six-
fold. Indications are that North Shore fishing
attracts more out-of-state fishermen and fishing
tourists every year.

4. Duluth, Two Harbors, Grand Marais, Silver Bay, and
Beaver Bay use Lake Superior as their source of
municipal water. Duluth has the largest single
municipal water system and uses about 18 million
gallons per day. The Reserve Mining Company at
Silver Bay is the largest single industrial user of
Lake Superior water, using 90% of the estimated
560 million gallons per day withdrawn from the lake
for industrial purposes.

5. Lake Superior receives effluent from five municipal
wastewater treatment plants, three industrial plants
outside the Duluth metropolitan area, and numerous
industrial plants within the metropolitan area.

2 - 14

B. WATER RESOURCES PROBLEMS AND ISSUES

Coastal Zone water resource problems and issues are ranked
as follows by the MPCA: I

1. Controlling of industrial and municipal waste.
2. Non-point source pollution planning (208 planning).
3. Dredge spoil problem in Duluth.
4. Monitoring of point and non-point sources.
5. Revision of water quality standards as necessary.

1. INDUSTRIAL AND 14UNICIPAL WASTES -- POINT SOURCES

St. Louis River Sub-basin

Due to the number of dischargers along the St.
Louis and the contaminated bottom sediments, PCA
does not know whether the St. Louis River will meet
the 1983 federal goal. All dischargers along the
St. Louis River are upgrading their effluent to meet
the standards set forth in WPC 15 and 28, and it is
only a matter of time when all dischargers will be
in compliance. When new industrial treatment
facilities are completed, new permits will be is-
sued which will contain the final effluent standards.

Locations of significant point sources to the St.
Louis River and St. Louis Bay directly upstream of
Superior Bay are found in Figure 2-1.

In addition to these dischargers, there are 39 major
docking facilities heavily concentrated in the harbor,
St. Louis Bay, and Upper Superior Bay. Ships are
serviced by a harbor disposal contractor to remove
liquid wastes. A service barge picks up liquid
wastes from vessel retention devices and delivers
these to a dock, where they are pumped into the
Duluth sewer system. However, the pumpout facilities
available are not adaptable to some types of com-
mercial watercraft and some of this liquid waste
is dumped directly into the bay by vessel operators.
all Ballast, tanker hold cleanout wastes, and oil and
grease from ship operations are uncontrolled.

Based on current nutrient loadings and biological
indicators, the Duluth-Superior Harbor is in an
eutrophic condition. Nutrient and BOD loadings
contribute to low dissolved oxygen values in the
harbor. Values of fecal coliform, turbidity, phenols,
and copper are encountered in the harbor which
violate State of Minnesota water quality standards.
Contaminated sediments are also encountered which
restrict dredging disposal methods.

2 15

All Minnesota dischargers shown in Figure 2-1, except
for U.S. Steel, will be linked to the regional
sewage collection system. The treatment facilities,
both municipal and industrial, which will,be
phased out of service are:

Conwed Corporation , Jay Cooke State Park
Potlatch Northwest Paper Thompson Township*
Div.
Cloquet Municipal Nopeming Nursing Home*
Scanlon Municipal Superwood Corporation*
Carlton Municipal four municipal facilities in
Wrenshall Municipal Duluth
continental Oil Company

After the regional plant becomes operational in
1978, the industrial and municipal wastes along the
St. Louis will receive secondary treatment with
phosphorus removal.

A point source problem which PCA is just beginning to
examine is the chloro-organics which are formed when
sewage effluents are chlorinated. The chlorine atom
adheres to the organic particles in the sewage wastes
and forms a second generation chlorine compound,
which can be very toxic to aquatic organisms.
.Presently, the effect of chloro-organics is unde-
termined on fish and other organisms. This problem
should be given further study. Eventual impact
could be the end of chlorination of Duluth and
Superior's water supply.

Lake Superior S-ub-basin

Farther north along the shore, areas not in com-
pliance are Silver Bay and Two Harbors. Reserve
Mining Company at Silver Bay is continuing to
dump 67,000 tons of taconite tailings daily into
Lake Superior. Reserve will not be in compliance
until an on-land disposal site is operational on
April 15, 1980. The necessary state permits have
been issued for construction of the on-land disposal
site. In addition, the municipal sewage treatment
facility at Silver Bay cannot adequately treat both
sewage and storm runoff. Two Harbor's municipal
wastewater treatment plant (secondary with phosphorus
removal) became operational in July, 1976; however,
the Two Harbor's plant is experiencing the same
problem as the municipal facility at Silver Bay, in
that both storm water and sewage are sometimes not
adequately treated during severe rain storms.

*Dischargers not shown on-Effe-map, but will be linked to the
WLSSD regional plant.

2 16

1=1 W, me M go am go M; so am" aw up Val an ft

FIGURE 2-1 DULUTH -SUPERIOR HARBOR AND THE
LOWER ST. LOUIS RIVER

City of
Duluth

M I N N E S 0 T A Main Duluth
S.T P

Fairmount
Cloquet P r a c t a r S. T. P.

Potlatch C a r p.
Cloquet 0 (N.W. Paper Co.)
WWTP
Smittiville
S.T, P. Arrowhead
Conwed Corp. Bridge
WWTP Scanlon

Scanlon Steel Co.
S . T. P. WWTP

Gary
0 Now

C
)rlton 0'.S Thomson Dom Duluth
'
S. T. P. S.T. P.
R i Fond Du Lac 'A
Carlton I S.H. 39
Fond Du Lac
rensholl Dom '\O I i v 9 r
ON S T. R Bridge
Jay Cook J
z ICl)
State Park Z
& S.T. R a

so
Continental
Oil Refinery
WWTP

LOCATION MAP

Other point sources include Sea Villas, Best Western,
Lutsen Ski Chalet and Aspen Wood in Cook County.

Partially treated sewage and untreated paper mill
wastes are being dumped into Lake Superior at
Thunder Bay. Due to the coUnter-clockwise eddy pat-
tern of the Lake' this effluent is influencing water
quality along the North Shore.

NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION

The state is conducting a water quality manage-
ment process which is studying various non-point souce
pollution issues on a statewide basis. In the
coastal zone, 208 management planning and imple-
mentation will be coordinated with implementation
of the CZr4 Plan.

Individual sewage treatment systems along the North
Shore are causing pollution of surface and ground-
water. This problem has been surveyed through the
Coastal Zone Program, but more extensive analysis
is needed, such as dye testing and determining
correlations with soil types, bedrock, and location.

Red clay erosion is also occurring along the north
and south shore of Lake Superior; however, the erosion
along the north shore is not as severe as it is
along Wisconsin's coast which is eroding at an
average annual rate of four feet per year. On the
Minnesota side, erosion is occurring between the
Knife and Lester Rivers. Every time a storm occurs,
the clay particles become resuspended. The extent
of this problem in Minnesota is not currently known.

Contaninated sediments (i.e., heavy metals such as
zinc, copper, lead, mercury, and cyanide) are in
the St. Louis Bay. There is a need for monitoring
these sediments at least ten miles inland from the
Bay.

Groundwater contamination is also occurring along the
North Shore from landfills and open dumps. Dumps,
whether closed or open, as well as sanitary landfills
need to be monitored, and sampling conducted at
least annually.

2 - 18

3. DREDGE SPOIL PROBLEM IN DULUTH

A decision regarding where dredge spoils should be
deposited must be made. Currently, dr9dging is
causing pollution problems in the Duluth-Superior
Bay, but there is inadequate documentation on the
extent of the problem. Dredging is also occurring
at Two Harbors and Silver Bay, but problems are
minor there. Grand Marais' harbor appears to be
clean. The PCA has requested that dredging and the
disposal of the wastes be halted by the Corps of
Engineers until the potential impacts on the water
quality can be evaluated. The PCA has recommended
disposal of the wastes on land leading to the prob-
lem of identifying and developing suitable on-land
disposal sites.

4. MONITORING OF POI14T AND NON-POINT SOURCES

Water quality monitoring stations are needed along
the North Shore. Even the monitoring along the St.
Louis River, which is known to be polluted is in-
adequate. Only three stations are monitoring on
a regular basis: 1) at the old interstate bridge;
2) Fond du Lac; and 3) Duluth ship canal. The PCA
doesn't know how much it would cost to do a satis-
factory job on monitoring within the coastal zone,
because they do not know which lakes or streams need
it@ There is a lack of time and funds to study
this problem in-depth currently. There is a need
for background data on "clean" waters so any deg-
radation can be checked.

5. REVISION OF WATER QUALITY STA14DARDS AS NECESSARY

Water quality classifications.need to be reassessed
to reflect chloro-organic problems, mercury, and
heavy metals. In addition, effluent standards for
oil and phosphorus need to be upgraded.

6. OTHER PROBLEMS

a. The PCA should start to implement its non-deg-
radation policy. However, before this can be
done, PCA must collect baseline data on streams
statewide.

b. The PCA questions the level of water quality of
Lake Superior since recommendations from the
Great Lakes Environmental Contaminants Survey
suggested not eating more than one meal per
week of lake trout. In mid-lake fish, three
petrol-hydrocarbons have been identified.

2 - 19

C. The PCA recently completed the Duluth-Superior
Pollution Control Study which analyzed the ship-
board waste problem.* Conclusions were that
existing state regulations promulgated in 1971
are limited. Also Coast Guard standards for
oil -- no visible sheen of oil allowed --
should be upgraded. Currently, to avoid violation
of the oil standard, tankers durip their bilge
.water at night.

The federal government is proposing rules and
regulations for shipboard wastes, but they would
allow dumping of partially treated sewage.
The PCA wants complete containment of all vessel
wastes with discharge only allowed at approved
facilities. The PCA is petitioning EPA to allow
the use of state regulations. However, EPA
will not allow state regulations to pre-empt
federal regulations unless facilities are pro-
vided for handling the disposal of bilge water
on commercial craft. The problems of ship-
board wastes arise from the deposition of com-
mercial craft waste and not recreational.

d. The expansion of taconite mining and potential
copper mining may potentially directly influence
water quality of north shore surface waters. If
pollution does occur, it will be revealed in
the water quality of the St.. Louis and Rainy
Lake Basin. Mining will probably influence
North Shore ground water, but the extent of the
influence is not known.

7. WATER LEVELS

In the early 1970's, the International Joint Com-
mission (IJC) implemented Regulation SO 901 on an
emergency basis because of high water levels.
Regulation SO 901 regulates Lake Superior levels
with reference to the lower lakes. The intent of
the regulations is to minimize high water damages
on the lower lakes. It is likely that this regulation
of Lake Superior, which maintains a higher than
normal minimum level, in combination with naturally
occurring high water levels has contributed to ex-
cessive erosion problems along the North Shore.

*Shipboard wastes consist of sanitary wastes and bilge and ballast
water.

2 - 20

C. WATER RESOURCES GOALS, POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION STEPS

Goal: A level of water quality which will enhance
and maintain the natural environment and
man's health, safety and welfare.

Policy: Water quality levels be achieved and main-
tained,consistent with 11PCA classifications
of lakes and streams.

Implement: 1. Coordinate and classify existing water
quality data to serve as a basis for
determining the need for new data.
2. Collect baseline water quality data for
Lake Superior and North Shore strearis
and quality and quantity data for
ground water.
3. Engage in water quality monitoring and
enforcement which is no more restrictive
than in other areas of the state.

Policy: Encourage appropriate agencies and depart-
ments of the federal government to actively
seek a solution to the pollution of Lake
Superior at Thunder Bay.

Point Source Degradation

Policy: Sewage, industrial and other waste disposal
systems and other sources of pollutants
be in conformance with appropriate standards
and National Pollution Discharge Elimination
Systen (NPDES) Permits as required by
Public Law 92-500.

Implement: Monitor sewage, industrial and other waste
disposal systems and other sources of pol-
lutants to assure compliance.

Non-Point Source Degradation

Policy: Pollution from non-point sources be minimized
or eliminated if feasible.

Implement: 1. The Minnesota PCA Section 208 Water
Quality Program be coordinated with the
Coastal Zone Management Program by
establishing a schedule for PAC review
of 208 Program findings and recom-
mendations.

2. Pursue research on and minimize the
effect of salt runoff from storage areas
and roads on the natural environment,
including groundwater, and develop and
implement a plan to minimize those effects.

2 - 21

3. Minimize the effects of soil erosion on
North Shore streams and Lake Superior by:

a. adopting agricultural and forestry
management practices that are in
keeping with the soil and slope
characteristics of the Coastal Zone,
b. promoting the use of soils information
by private developers and public
agencies engaged in development
activities,
C. preparing, adopting and@enforcing
soil management standards that re-
duce the likelihood of ground and
surface water pollution.

4. Pursue research, demonstration projects
and education on on-site sewage system
alternatives which are economically
feasible and technologically sound
for North Shore conditions.

5. Minimize the effects of urban runoff
(impervious surfaces, rooftops, parking
lots, storm sewers, etc.) on water
quality.

6. Develop an assistance program,for bring-
ing existing on-site sewage systems into
compliance with local or state standards.

Dredging

Policy: Minimize impacts on water quality and fish
and wildlife habitat from dredging and
dredge material disposal.

Implement: 1. Identify environmentally sensitive
areas and areas suitable for on-land
disposal.

2. Establish standards for spoils disposal
in water and on land.

3. Evaluate the physical, biological, and
chemicAl impacts of dredge spoils on
water quality.

4. Identify alternatives for the disposal of
dredge spoils, including the development
of marsh and island fish and wildlife
habitat and geologically sound beach
nourishment.

5. Once adopted by ARDC, the Duluth-Superior
Harbor Study recommendations pertaining
to dredging and dredge material disposal
shall be incorporated into the CZM plan.

2 22

Lake Superior Shore Erosion

Policy: It is in the interest of public, residential,
commercial and undeveloped property owners
on the shore of Lake Superior to minimize
the artificial fluctuation of the water
levels in the la ke.

Policy: The levels of Lake Superior should continue
to be regulated pursuant to the policies
and limits expressed in the 1914 Orders of
Ap. oval of the IJC,and the most recent op-
e ting rule adopted thereunder, the 1955
odified Rule of 1949, which,requires
that the control works on the St. Mary's
River be operated so as to maintain the level
of Lake Superior as near as may be between
the levels of 600.@ and 602.2, such reg-
ulation to be based solely on the level
of Lake Superior. The concept of regulat-
ing Lake Superior with reference to the
lower lakes, i.e. balancing the levels of
the Great Lakes on a basin-wide basis, is
directly contrary to the policies and
limits stated in the 1914 Order and the
1955 Modified Rule and should not be adopted.

Implement: Implement CZM Program erosion control work
element to:

a. Develop data on past trends, recession
rates, and natural stream loadings in
areas affected by erosion.

b. Determine the effects of fluctuating water
levels on Lake Superior shoreland.

C. Identify where structural or non-
structural erosion control measures are
needed on the Lake Superior shoreline.

d. Identify and classify Lake Superior
beaches so that their role in dynamic
coastal processes and shoreland pro-
tection shall be maintained.

2 - 23
P,

Shipping of Hazardous and Toxic Substances

Policy: Potential pollution problems resulting from the
shipment of hazardous and toxic substances
be minimized and where possible, eliminated.

Implement: Develop and implement, in cooperation with
other Great Lakes States, standards for
shipping season, vessel design loading
facilities, etc. for the transport of hazardous
and toxic material.

Vessel Discharges

Policy: Pollution problems resulting from the im-
proper disposal of sewage, vessel wastes
and ballast should be eliminated.

Implement: 1. Enforce existing regulations and statutes
and develop and enforce additional standards
where necessary, in cooperation with
other Great Lakes States, to address the
disposal of sewage, vessel wastes and
ballast in Lake Superior.

2. Develop adequate vessel waste disposal
systems and sites for commercial ships
and recreational watercraft.

Water Appropriation

Policy: The quality of appropriated water and that
which is returned not adversely affect the
water table or the water body from which
the water is drawn.

Implement: 1. Develop baseline data on water tables.

2. Develop and enforce standards for the
quality of water being returned,
(chemical composition, temperature,
turbidity, etc.)

Policy: Any inter-basin transfer of water shall
conform to state and local,laws.

2 - 24

D. POLICIES @AND AUTHORITIES RELATING TO WATER RESOURCES AND
WATER QUALITY

1. Great Lakes Basin Compact

The Great Lakes Basin Compact has been ratified by the
State of Minnesota. The purposes of the,compact
are, inter alia, to promote the orderly, integrated,
.and comprehensive development, us_e, and@conservation
of the water resources of the Great Lakes Basin, and
to advise in securing and maintaining a proper balance
among industrial, commercial, agricultural, water
supply, residential, recreational, and other legitimate
uses of the water resources of the basin. By ratification,
the state has agreed to consider whatever action the.
Great Lakes Basin Commission, established by,the compact,
recommends with respect to stabilization of lake levels;
measures for combating pollution, beach erosion, floods,
and shore inundations; uniformity in navigation regulations;
proposed navigation aids and improvements; unitormity or
effective coordinating action in fishing laws and regulations
and cooperative action to eradicate destructive and
parasitical forces endangering the fisheries, wild life, and
other water resources; suitable hydroelectric power develop-
ments; cooperative programs for the control of soil and
bank erosion; and diversion of waters from and into the
basin. (See, Minn. Stat.,9� 1.21 - 1.25.)

@2. Minnesota-Wisconsin Boundary Compac t.

A Minnesota-Wisconsin Boundary Commission, the purpose of
which is to conduct studies and develop recommendations
relating tothe present and future protection, use, and
development of the lands, river valleys, and waters which
form the boundary between the states, is formed. The
Commission is charged with considering and promoting the
consideration by municipalities of measures for controlling
water pollution, maintaining water quality and controlling
water use; programs for the control of soil and river bank
.erosion and the.general improvement of the river basin;
and the diversion of waters -from and into the rivers. (See,
Minn. Stat. 55 1.31 1.40.)

2 - 25

3. Soil and Water Conservation Districts.

It is the state's policy to provide for the conservation
of soil and soil resoUrces and for the control and prevention
of soil erosion, for land resource planning and development,
and for the implementation of land.resource use practices
that effectively reduce siltation and loss of the land base
through various activities. Soil and water conservation
districts may be organized to conduct erosion control projects
and to develop comprehensive plans for the conservation
of soil and water resources. A district may provide
technical assistance to land owners and request assistance
from the state. (See, Minn. Stat. �� 40.005 - 40.15.)

4. Control of Public Waters.

Charge and control of the public waters of the state
are vested in the Commissioner of Natural Resources,
who is also given the authority to institute proceedings
on behalf of the state to abate or enjoin any disturbance,
obstruction, or interference with the natural flow or
condition of public waters beyond the boundaries of the
state which seriously affects the public welfare and
interests of the state. (See, Minn. Stat. �� 84.027,
84.031.)

5. Displacement of Underground Waters.

Permits from the Commissioner of Natural Resources are
required before any underground waters of the state may
be displaced by the underground storage of any gas or
liquid under pressure. (See, Minn. Stat. � 84.57 - 84.621.)

6. State Water Policy.

To conserve and utilize the water resources of the state
in the best interests of the people of the state, it is
state policy that all waters of the state which serve a
material beneficial public purpose are public waters subject
to the control of the state; that the state, to the
extent provided by law, shall control the appropriation
and use of surface and underground waters of the state;
and that the state shall control and supervise, so far as
practicable, any activity which changes or will change the
course, current, or cross section of public waters. Beneficial
public purposes; with regard to waters of the state, include
but are not limited waters supply from municipal, industrial,
or agricultural purposes; recharge of underground waters -
stratus; retention of water to' prevent or reduce downstream
flooding; entrapment and retention of nutrients and other
material which impair the quality of natural resources;
recreational activities such-as swimming, boating, fishing,
and hunting; public navigation other than for recreational
purposes; wildlife habitat areas the spawning, rearing,

2 - 26

feeding, and nesting of wildlife; and areas designated
as scientific and natural areas pursuant to section 84.03.
Permits from the DNR are required for any surface or ground-
Water appropriation and for any dredging, filling, dam
construc@_ion of other activity effecting the course, current
or cross section of the public water. See 10 and 11 infra.
(see Minn. Stat. IQ5.37 - 10.5.38...)

7. Water Conservation Program and Public Waters Inventory.

The Commissioner of Natural Resources was directed in
1947 to gevelpp 4 general water resources conservation
program for the state, in accordance with which permits
for the use and appropriation of state waters and for
the construction of water contrpl structures would be
is'sued, In 1974.he was redirected to prepare a statewide
water and land resources plan by November 15, 1975. In
1976, he was directed to inventory the water basins of
each county and to make a preliminary designation as to
which constitute public waters. (See, Minn. Stat.
105.39, 105.391, 105.403.)

Wetlands.

It is in the public interest.to preserve the wetlands
of the state and thereby to conserve surface waters,
to pFe,serve wildlife habitat, to reduce runoff, to provide
for floodwater retention, to reduce stream sedimentation,
to contribute to improved subsurface moisture, to enhance
the natural beauty of the lands cape, and to promote com-
prehensive and total water management planning. The
commissioner of:Natural Resources is authorized to
promulgate rules with regard to these purposes and to enter
into agre.em.ents with landowners for the conservation.of
wetlands. The program so established is intended to supple-
ment and complement the federal waterbank program. (See,
Mi nn.Stat. 9 105.392.)

9. Water Supply Management Policy.

The Commi,ssioner of Natural Resources is directed to
develop and manage water resources to assure a supply
adequate to meet long-range seasonal requirements for
domestic, municipal, industrial, agricultural, fish and
wildlife, recreational, power, navigation, and quality
control purposes from surface or groundwater sources.
(See, Minn. Stat. 5 105.405.).

10. Water Appropriation and Use Permits.

Permits from the Commissioner of Natural Resources are
required before any appropriation or use of the waters of
the state are made. The Commissioner is directed to
promulgatp rules to govern the allocation of permits
to potential water users based upon a series of legislative
priorities.. According to this legislative policy, first

2 27

priori ty shall be,given to domestic water supply, excluding
industrial and commercial uses of municipal water
supply and agricultural"irrigation involving consumption
in excess of 10,000 gallons per day. Second priority
shall be given to any use of water that involves con-
s.uinption of'less than 10,'000 gallons of water per'day.
Third priority shall be given to power production involving
consumption in excess of 10,000 gallons per day. Fourth
priority shall be given to industrial and commercial
uses involving consumption in excess of 10,000 gallons per
day. Fifth priority shall be given to other uses involving
consumption in excess of 10,000 gallons per day. (See,
Minn. Stat. �� 105.41, 105.415, 105.44 - 105.47.)

Permits for Work in Public Waters.

Permits from the Commissioner of Natural Resources are
required before any change in' any reservoir, dam, or
obstruction on any public water, or before any change
or diminution 'of the course, current or cross-section
of any public waters is made by any means. The Commissioner
is also given, subject to the approval of county boards,
power to grant permits-to establish, construct, maintain
and control wharfs, docks, piers, levees,, breakwaters,
basins, canals, and hangers in and adjacent to public
waters of the state except within the corporate limits
of cities. The Commissioner is directed to promulgate
standards and criteria governing the issuance and
denials of permits for work in public waters. Such
standards shall correspond to certain legislative
policies which include restricting projects to those
which will involve a minimum amount of damage to the
environment, and restricting certain types of projects
to those areas governed by shoreland conservation or
flood plain ordinances. (See, Minn. Stat. �� 105.415,
105.42, 105.44 - 105.47.)

12. Establishment of Lake Levels.

Application for authority to establish and maintain
levels on any public water and applications to establish
the natural ordinary high water of any body of public
water may be made to the Commissioner of Natural Resources
by any public body or by a majority of the riparian owners
thereon, for the purpose of conserving or utilizing water
resources of the state. (See, Minn. Stat. @ 105.43
105.47.)

13. Stream Maintenance.

The legislature find s that the removal of debris and rubble
for the purpose of cleaning of stream beds and flood plains

2 - 28

of streams is of benefit to the public health, safety,
and welfare. The Commissioner of Natural,Resources has
directed to establish and supervise a stream maintenance
program which shall include grants in aid to participating
counties. (See, Minn. Stat. 9 105.475.)

14. Construction and Maintenance of Dams.

The Commissioner of Natural Resources is given the
authority to construct, maintain, and operate all
necessary dikes, dams, and other structures necessary
to maintain uniform water levels. He is, in addition,
given certain authority to facilitate the repair and
re5toration of dams owned by the state and local governmental
units. upon application of the@governing body of'any
governmental subdivision of the state having authority
to maintain and operate dams or other control works
affecting public waters, the Commissioner, with-the
approval of the Executive Council, may transfer to such
subdivision the custody of any such dam or other wa ter
control.works belonging to the state where he determines
that the transfer will be in furtherance of the best
interests of the public. (See,Minn. Stat. 105.48,
105.482, 105.52,.105.63.)

15. Lake Improvem ents.

The Commissioner of Natural Resources, with the assistance
of the,Pollution Control Agency and the State Planning
Agency,@is directed to assess the need for particular
kinds of lake improvements, including improvements
related to pollution problems, water levels, and other
resource management considerations, and to develop
criteria for allocating state aid funds,among proposed
projects. (See, Minn. Stat. S 105.484.)

16.. Shoreland Management Act.

It is in the public interest to provide guidance for
the wise development of shorelands of public waters
and thus preserve and enhance the quality of surface
waters, preserve the economic and natural environmental
values of shorelands, and provide for the wise utilization
of water and related land resources. All counties'and
municipalities are required to adopt shoreline management
ordinances, which meet statewide standards, established
by the DNR and governing the placement of structures,
lot%sizes, land uses, @etc. Shorelands include
lands within 300 feet of streams and rivers and within
100 feet of lakes. (See, Minn. Stat. 5 105.485, Minn.
Reg. NR 82-84, Cons. TO--77.)

2 29

17@ Cooperation of,DNR with other Agencies..

The Commissioner.of Natural Resources is authorized to
cooperate and enter into agreements with the United
States, any state department of Minnesota, or any state
or-county adjacent to the state of Minnesota for the
purpose of effecting his duties with regard to water
resources. (See, Minn. Stat. 9 105.49.)

18. Wells.

For the conservation of,the underground water supplies
of the state, the Commissioner of Natural Resources is
.authorized to require the owners of wells, especially
flowing artisean wells, to prevent waste. See also 39
infra. (See, Minn. Stat. 9 105.51.)

19. Drainage or Diversion of Water to Facilitate Mining.

The Commissioner of Natural Resources is authorize:d to
grant permits for the drainage, diversion, control,. or
use of any waters under his jurisdiction when necessary
for the mining of iron.ore, taconite, copper, copper-
nickel, or nickel. Such permits may only be granted if
the proposed diversion will be necessary for the mining
of substantial deposits of the identified metal and if@.
no other feasible and economical method.therefor is
reasonably available; if the proposed diversion will
not substantially impair the interests of the public in
lands,or waters or the substantial beneficial public
use thereof and will not endanger public health or
safety; and if the proposed mining operations will be
in the public interest and the public benefits resulting
therefrom are sufficient to warrant the proposed diversion.
(See, Minn. Stat. � 105.64..)

20.
Water Resources Board.

The legislature finds that th e code of water law in
Minnesota is contained in numerous statutes which must
be considered as a whole to effect a systematic administration
of water policy. Seeming contradictions in the laws
when applied in a specific proceeding create a need for
a form where the conflicting aspects of public interest
involved can be presented and by consideration of the
whole body of water law the controlling policy can be
determined and apparent inconsistencies resolved. A
Water Resources Board.is created to resolve certain
questions of water policy, where use, disposal, pollution,
or conservation of water is a purpose, incident, or
factor in a proceeding. (See, Minn. Stat. � 105.71-
105.79.)

2 30

21. Impounding and Diversion of Drainage System Waters.

Individuals, public and municipal corporations, governmental
subdivisions, the state and its agencies, and the United
States and its agencies are authorized to petition the
county boards or the district courts for the installation of
dams or other control works in drainage ditches under their
jurisdictions to impound or divert waters for any beneficial
use. (See, Minn. Stat. � 105.81.)

22. Public Drainage Systems.

County boards and the district courts are authorized to
establish public drainage systems; to deepen, widen, straighten
or change the channel or bed of any waterway; to extend the
same into to through any municipality for the purpose of
securing a suitable outlet; and to construct all needed
dikes, dams, control works and power appliances in accordance
with certain legislatively established criteria, including
the overall environmental impact of the proposed drainage
system. If the water basin or water course is determined to
be public waters, however, the permissible drainage
activities shall be governed by section 105.391(3)and (6),
in cooperation with the Commissioner of Natural Resources.
(See, Minn. Stat. �� 106.011 - 106.673.)

23. control of Certain Shorelines in Cook, Lake, and St. Louis
Counties.

In order to preserve shorelines, rapids, waterfalls,
beaches, and other natural features in an unmodifiesd state
of nature, no dam and no addition to any existing dam shall
hereafter be constructed in or across any public stream or
body of water within or bordering upon those portions of
the area of Cook, Lake, and St. Louis Counties designated
in the Act of Congress of July 10, 1930, and no alteration
of the natural water level or volume of flowage of any
such stream or body of water shall be made and no easement
for flooding or overflowing lands adjacent thereto
shall be granted, unless specific authority has first
been obtained by an act of the legislature. (See,
Minn. Stat, � 110.13.)

24. 'Eminent Domain for Dam Purposes.

Private individuals are authorized to erect dams on their
own lands for milling or manufacturing purposes so long
as they cause the damages to lands which.are owned by
,other persons and which shall be overflowed or otherwise
damaged to be ascertained and paid. (See, Minn. Stat.
110.14 - 110.17.)

2 - 31

25. Regulation of Lake Water Levels.
In certain cases, where dams, however construc@ed or
maintained, have affected the water levels of lakes
and the lakes have been used by the public for beneficial
public purposes, perpetual flowage easements for all overflow
and other effects of water resulting from the existence,
maintenance, or operation of such dams, are presumed to
be dedicated to the state. (See, Minn. Stat. �5 110.31
110.40.)

26. conservancy Districts.

Drainage, flood control, and the control of the use of
drainage systems in the interests of sanitation and
public health are clearly within the functions of
governmental action and the exercise of the right or
authority to authorize or direct drainage carries with
it the right to care for and control the waters thus
gathered and turned into'natural or artificial channels.
It is furthermore the policy of the state to promote the
retention and conservation of all water precipitated
from the atmosphere in the areas where it falls, as far
as practicable. The district courts are authorized to
establish drainage and conservancy districts for the
following purposes: regulating streams, channels, or
water courses, and the flow of water therein; reclaiming
by drainage, or filling, diking, or otherwise protecting
lands subject to overflow; providing for irrigation;
preventing fires in areas of agricultural lands by
controlling the waters in any ditch or drain; regulating
and controlling floodwaters and preventing floods;
diverting, in whole or in part, streams or water courses
and regulating the uses thereof; and providing for
sanitation and public health by regulating the use of
streams, ditches, or water courses for the purposes of
disposing waste materials. (See, Minn. Stat. �� 111.01
111.82.)

27. Watershed Districts.

To carry out conservation of the natural resources of the
state through land utilization, flood control and other
needs upon sound scientific principles for the protection
of public health and welfare and the provident use of
natural resources, the Minnesota Water Resources Board
is vested with jurisdiction to establish watershed districts
for any or all of the following conservation purposes:
control or alleviation of damage by floodwaters; improvement
of stream channels for drainage, navigation and other public
purposes; reclaiming or filling wet and overflowed land;
providing water supply for irrigation; regulating the
flow of streams and conserving the waters thereof; diverting

2 - 32

or changing water courses in whole or in part; providing
and conserving water supply for domestic, industrial,
recreational, agricultural, and other public uses; providing
for sanitation and public health and regulating the use
of streams,-ditches, or water courses for the purpose of
disposing waste; repairing, improving, relocating,
modifying, consolidating, and abandoning drainage
systems within the watershed district; imposing preventive
or remedial measures for the control or alleviation of
land and soil erosion and siltation of water courses or
bodies of water affected thereby; and regulating improvements
by riparian owners of beds, banks, and shores of lakes,
streams, and marshes by permit'or otherwise in order to
preserve the same for beneficial use. (See ,Minn. Stat.
112.34 - 112.86.)

28. Water Pollution Control.

The Pollution Contro 1 Agency is established as the
successor of the Water Pollution Control Commission
and is charged with meeting the variety and complexity
of problems relating to water pollution in the areas of
the state affected thereby, and with achieving a
reasonable degree of purity of water resources of the
state consistent with the maximum enjoyment and use
thereof in furtherance of the welfare of the people of
the state. The Pollution Control Agency is further charged
with administering and enforcing all laws relating to
water pollution; with establishing pollution standards;
and with issuing and enforcing orders, permits, regulations,
etc. with regard to the prevention and*control of water
pollution. It is further directed to establish standards
consistent with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
and to cooperate with any agency of another state, of
the United States, or of Canada. Civil and criminal
penalties are provided for violations of certain water
pollution control measures established by the legislature
of the PCA. The PCA has established receiving water standards,
effluent standards and other water quality and treatment
standards as part of a comprehensive program of water pollution
control permits. It is authorized as the permitting agency
under the Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
(Pub. Law 92-500). (See, Minn. Stat. �� 115.01 - 115.09;
116 .01 - 11,6.02, Minn. Reg. WPC 1-36.)

29. Regional Water Pollution Control.

The Pollution Control Agency is authorized to create
sanitary districts forany territory embracing an area
or a group of two or more adjacent areas, whether contiguous
or.separate,'-but not situated entirely within the limits of
a single municipality, for the purpose of promoting the
public health and welfare by providing an adequate and
efficient system for correcting, conveying, pumping,
treating, and disposing domestic sewage and garbage
and industrial wastes within the district. (See, Minn. Stat.
115.15 - 115.37.)
2 33

30. Municipal water Pollution Control.

It is the policy of the state to provide for the prevention,
control, and abatement of pollution of all waters of the
state, so far as feasible and practical,,in furtherance of
the conservation of such waters and the protection of the
public health and in furtherance of the development of
the economic welfare of the state. The Pollution
Control Agency is directed to prepare a long-range
plan and program for the affectuation of said policy
and to make pro,' reports to the legislature biannually.
The PCA is also clirected to give due consideration,
in the exercise of its powers, to the establishment
and expansion of business and to other economic factors
affecting the feasibility and practicability of any
proposed action, including the burden on a municipality
of any tax which may result t.herefrom. The PCA is
further directed to group the designated waters of the
state into classes and to adopt classific-ations and
standards of purit- and quality therefor. The Agency
is further authorized to facilitate cooperation between
two or more municipalities, if necessary, to provide
for area waste management and treatment, with the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, or to prevent,
control, or abate pollution. Subject to the same
limitations as are applicable to statutory cities,
towns are granted the power to construct, install,
acquire, and maintain disposal systems and parts thereof,
to levy taxes and special assessments, to issue bonds,
and to do all other things necessary for such construction,
installation, acquisition, and maintenance. (See,
Minn. Stat. � 115.41 - 115.53.)

31. Regional Sanitary Sewer Districts.

For the purpose of providing a method by which municipalities
in a drainage area designated by law may join together to
prevent water pollution in excess of reasonable standards
of purity and quality as may be established by state
regulatory agencies, the creation of sanitary sewer
districts is authorized. Such districts shall be
municipal corporations, responsible for acquiring,
constructing, improving, extending, operating, and
maintaining facilities for the collection, treatment,
and disposal of sewage and industrial and other wastes
received from the sewer systems of all municipalities
within its corporate limits. (See, Minn. Stat. �5
115.61 - 115.67.)

32. Classification of Water Supply and Waste Water Treatment
Facilities.

2 34

The Secretary of the State Board of Health is directed
to classify all water supply systems used,by the'public
on the basis of their degree of hazard to public health
together with the type and loading of plant and the population
affected. The Director of the Pollution Control Agency
is directed to classify all waste water treatment facilities
used by the public on the basis of their degree of hazard
to the public health together with the type and loading of
plant and the population served. A waste and waste water
treatment operator's certification council is established
for the purpose of recommending the issuance of certificates
to water supply system operators and waste water treatment
facility operators attesting to their competency. (See,
Minn. Stat. �� 115.71 - 115.82.)

33. State Water Pollution Control Fund.

It is determined that state financial assistance for
the construction of water pollution prevention And'
abatement facilities for municipal disposal systems is
a public purpose and proper function of state government,
in that the state is trustee of the waters of the state
and such financial assistance is necessary to protect
the purity of state waters, and to protect the public health
of the citizens of the state, which is endangered whenever
pollution enters state waters at one point and flows to other
points in the state. A state water pollution control fund
is created for the acquisition and betterment of public land,
buildings, and improvements of a capital nature needed for
the prevention, control, and abatement of water pollution.
The Commissioner of Finance is directed to issue bonds of the
state of Minnesota for the purpose of providing money for
municipalities from the state water pollution control fund.
(See, Minn. Stat. �� 116.16 - 116.18.)

34. Specific Pollutants.

Certain limitation are established on the use of nutrients
in cleaning agents and water conditioners and on the use
and manufacture of PCB or any product containing
PCB. (See, Minn. Stat. �� 116.21 - 116.37.)

35. Public Water and Sewer Systems.

county boards and the district courts are authorized to
make, with respect to any area of the county or judicial
district not organized into cities all necessary orders
for, and to cause to be constructed and maintained, public
water or sewer systems or combined water-and sewer systems

2 - 35

to serve such areas, including outlets, treatment.plants,
ponds, lift stations, service connections, maihs, valves,
hydrants, wells, reservoirs, tanks, and other appurtanances
of public water or-sewer systems. (See, Minn. Stat.��
116.A.01 - 116A.26.)

36. Minnesota Environmental Rights Act.

Each person is entitled to the protection, preservation,
and enhancement of . . . water . . . located within the
state and each person has a responsibility,to contribute
to its protection, preservation, and enhancement. It is
the state's policy to create and maintain conditions under
which man and nature can exist in productive harmony in
order that the present and future generations may enjoy
clean . . . water . . . The Act creates a civil action for
any person to bring a lawsuit.for the "protection of . . .
water . . . located within the state . . . (See, Minn.
Stat. �� 116B.01 - 116B.13.)

37. Minnesota Environmental Policy Act.

The state government should use all practical means to
reduce the deleterious impact on water quality.from all
sources and to encourage advanced waste treatment in
abating water pollution. MEPA requires an environmental
impact statement for any major governmental action having
the potential for significant environmental effects and
prohibits any state action*which is likely to cause pollution,
impairment, or destruction of the . . . water . . . located
within the state so long as there is a feasible and prudent
alternative consistent with the reasonable requirements of
the public health, safety, and welfare, and the state's
paramount concern for the protection of its natural resources.
(See, Minn. Stat. �� 116D.01 - 116D.107, 6 MCAR � 3.)

38. Domestic Water Supplies.

The Board of Health is vested-with general charge of all
springs, wells, ponds, and streams used as sources of
water supply for domestic use and is empowered to take
all necessary steps to preserve the same from such pollution
as may endanger the public health. (See, Minn. Stat.
144.35 - 144.37.)

39. Water Wells.

To reduce and minimize-the waste of groundwater resources
and to protect the.health and welfare by providing a

2 36

means for the development and protection of the natural
resource of underground water in an orderly, sanitary,
and reasonable manner, the Board of Health is authorized
to regulate and license the drilling and constructing of
all water wells within the state, to examine and license
water well contractors, and, after consultation with
the Commissioner of Natural Resources and the Pollution
Control Agency, to establish standards for the design,
location, and construction of water wells within the state.
(See, Minn. Stat. � 156A.01 - 156A.08.)

r
40. ake Superior Drinking Water.

The State Board of Health is directe d to establish a
grant program for the construction of water filtration
and purification systems for those communities using
Lake Superior as a drinking water source. (See, Minn.
Stat. � 298.244.)

41. Waters and Water Craft Safety.

It is the policy of the state which is blessed with an
abundance of water, to promote its full use and enjoyment
by all of the people, now and in the future, to promote
safety for persons and property in connection with the
use of the waters of the state, to promote uniformity of
laws relating to such use, and to conform with any requirements
of the United States relating thereto. Provision is
made for the licensing and regulation of water craft and
watercraft use.. (See,-Minn. Stat. �9 361.01 - 361.29.)

42. Water Surface Uses and Lake Improvement Districts.

In order to preserve and protect the lakes of the state
of Minnesota and to increase and enhance the use and en-joyment
of those lakes, it is in the public interest that there be
established a statewide lake improvement program to:
preserve the natural character of lakes and their shoreland
environment as feasible and practical,improve the quality
of water in lakes; provide for reasonable assurance of
water quantity in lakes, where feasible and practical;
and to assure protection of the lakes.from the detrimental
effects of man's activities and certain natural processes
which are detrimental to the protection of the lakes. County
boards, subject to certain conditions, are authorized to
acquire existing dams or control works; to construct and
operate water control structures; to undertake projects
to change the course,.current, or cross-section of public
waters; to improve navigation; and to enter into agreements
for the purpose of water improvement and conservation.

2 37

County boards are also authorized to regulate by ordinance
the surface use of any bodies of waters situat'ed wholly
or partly within the boundaries of the county and not
situated entirely within the boundaries of a single
city or lake conservation district; to regulate public
beaches, public docks and other public facilities for
access to the body of water; to regulate the construction
of commercial marinas and their related facilities and
docks and moorings; to regulate the means of removing
weeds and algae from the body of water; and to regulate
the uses of the body of water at various times and the
uses of various parts of the body of water. The Commissioner
of Natural Resources is directed to coordinate and
supervise a local and state program for the establishment
of lake improvement districts by counties and cities
for lakes located within their boundaries based on
state guidelines and regulations and compatible with
all state, regional, and local plans where such plans
exist. (See, Minn. Stat. �� 378.31 - 378.56.)

43. Harbors, etc.

Variou s types of cities are given authority to establish
and regulate harbors, docks, wharfs, etc. (See, Minn. Stat.-
412.221; 458.02 - 458.03; 458.20 - 458.46.)

44. Port Authorities.

A commission known as "Port Authority of
is established in and for every city of the first class
situated upon, or adjacent to, or embracing within its
boundaries, in whole or in part, a port or harbor located
on a navigable lake or stream. It is the general duty
of any such port authority to promote the general welfare
of the port district, and of the port as a whole; to
endeavor to increase the volume of the commerce thereof;
to promote the efficient, safe, and economic handling
of such commerce; and to provide or promote adequate
docks and railroad terminal facilities open to all upon
reasonable and equal terms for the handling, storage, care,
and shipment of freight and passengers to, from, and through
the port. (See, Minn. Stat. �� 458.09 - 458.1991.)

45. Minnesota Seaway Property Conservation Fund.

it is declared that the harbors in this state are valuable
natural resources; that there are tracts of land in this
state located in harbors upon the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence
Seaway, which by reason of topography, submersion, erosion,

2 - 38

depletion, and other causes tend to impede navigati on
and are valuless for any useful riparian Purpose; that
the conservation, development, reclamation, and protection
of the'se lands so as to constitute them economically
valuable is an essential governmental function of the
state of Minnesota; that the conservation, development,
reclamation, and protection of such lands will promote
the public welfare of the state of Minnesota by developing
to usefulness certain of these lands, and that such
processes are essential to assure the inclusion of the
state of Minnesota in both domestic and foreign systems
of water-bornecommerce. A special.fund known as the
Minnesota Seaway Property Conservation Fund is established,
from which money may be appropriated to any port authority
which owns lands in a port upon the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence
Seaway, which are submerged, erroding, or depleted, and
which are so situated so as to be beneficial to the citizens
of the state if developed to their economic usefulness.
(See, Minn. Stat. SS 458.50 458.60.)

2 39

VEGETATION

A. PROBLEMS AND ISSUES

1. Demand for some forest species along the North Shore
is low because.of 'adequate supplies closer to the mills
and high.costs of logging due to the terrain.
More forest industries are locating or expanding
in the central.part of the state because the timber
land ismore accessible there. Cook County is
exporting spruce and jack pine to Canada. If a
plant expansion goes through in Thunder Bay, demand
for Cook County timber will increase and the
forestry industry wiil have'a larger role in the
economy of the:North Shore.

2. Forest management might 'conflict with aesthetic or
recreational goals. For instance, many people are
disturbed over the use of clear cutting.

3. Balsam fir is being killed.because of a spruce
budworm infestation.

4. DNR does not have an in-depth study of future supply
and demand of forest products in Minnesota. However,
there are good national projections of supply and
demand which can be applied to Minnesota. Our
weakness is our resource data which must be applied
to the national projections. This will be corrected
in several years when the statewide inventory is
completed. If shortages occur elsewhere in the
country, the pressure on our resources will in-
tensify as will the pressure to intensify forest
management.

5. The market for low grade hardwoods along the North
Shore needs improvement. A pulp and paper mill or
other fiber conversion mill of 200,000 cord con-
sumption is the primary need for the coastal area.

6. There is a general shortage of softwoods, which
is predicted to continue.

7. DNR is beginning to coordinate state forest plans
with national forest management plans. There was
little need to coordinate before because of the over-
supply of wood. However, supply is diminishing as
demand goes up, so there is a greater need to co-
ordinate between state and federal agencies.

2 - 40

8. By the year 2,000,.the' state will need all corunerbial
.@forest land* it now has. Canada has a lot of tii'@ber,
but much is unaccessible so it'will not be avail-
able for many years.

9. Cutting needs to be used as a management tool in state
parks to improve therecreational aspects of the
parks by aesthetically,improving a stand of trees.

10. A8pen, a low grade hardwood,- is not being utilized
to its full potential because of low demand for pulp-
wood. However, dernand for-pulpwood is projected to
improve. Generally where saw timber is available,
there is a good market; but the hardwoods along the
North Shore are not suitable for this purpose.

11. If 1985 timber demand projections. become a reality' '
a more intensive inventory of state land will be
needed to make comprehensive 50 to 100 year manage-
ment plans.

12. Wind storms have blown down a considerable amount
of timber in some state parks. These areas are in
need of vegetative rehabilitation.

B. VEGETATION GOALS, POLICIES MID IMPLEMENTATION STEPS

Goal: Management of the vegetative resource for
wood products, aesthetics, recreation, wild-
life habitat and controlled quality and
quantity of water.

Policy:. Public agencies develop management plans
which recognize the multiple use value of
Coastal Zone vegetation.

Forested Areas

Policy: Long term multiple use of the forest re-
sources be preserved.

Implement: Develop and.-implement integrated forest
management practices for all public lands
and for voluntary private participation to
include:

*Land which is either growing timber or capable of growing
timber. It does not include forest land dedicated to a speci&1
use such as-recreation.

2 41

a. Maximizing timber production and
harvesting of pulp timber and other
. I
forest crops, consistent.with other
values, where land is of relatively
suitable product *ive quality. (assumes
larger boundary)
b. Recreational use.
c. Re-forestation, including species of
tree to replant for future balance of
yield and healthy stands.
d. Protection of soils and waters from
erosion and chemical pollution.
e. Protection of rare and/or distinctive
native species of flora and,fauna.
f.; Management of a natural diversity of
wildlife habitats.

Vegetation and Physical Development

Policy: The vegetation along the Coastal Area is
recognized as a great aesthetic resource
in controlling views, screening storage
and unattractive material and separating
areas of development from the highway and
adjacent land uses.

Implement:.. Develop guides for:,

a. areas where vegetation should be removed
for enhancing views and sightlines for
road safety.
b. areas where vegetation should be used
for noise control, privacy and for
screening areas such as gravel pits,
vehicle storage, industrial activities,
maintenance facilities, etc.
C. Appropriate plant species for these uses.

These guides shall be implemented on public
lands and offered to private owners as sug-
gestions.

Wetlands (assumes expanded boundary)

Policy: Wetlands are valuable for water retention
and purificationi habitat for aquatic and
terrestrial animals, and areas of land-
form diversity and shall be protected.

Implement: 1. Wetlands should be identified.

2. Local development and implementation of
wetland protection measures.

3. Incorporate wetland protection measures
into all public management and reg-
ulatory programs.

2 42

C. POLICIES AND AUTHORITIES RELATING TO VEGETATION

1. Constitutional Provisions.

School and other public lands of the state better
adapted for the production of timber than for agriculture
may be set apart as state school forests, or as other
state forests as the legislature may provide. The
legislature is authorized to provide for their
management on forestry.principles. (See, Minn. Const.,
Art. 11, Sec. 11.)

2. Authority of Commissioner of Natural Resources.

Charge and control of-all the public lands, parks, and
timber of the state are vested in the Commissioner of
Natural-Resources... (See, Minn. Stat.-� 84.027.)

3. Lands Dedicated for Co nservation.

For the purpose of vesting and revesting the state with
title to lands suitable primarily for the development
of forests and the prevention of forest fires, and for
experimenting and advancing afforestation and reforestation,
or for the purpose of impounding, controlling, and
regulating the waters of meandered lakes and the flow
of natural streams of.the state, county boards are
authorized to request that certain lands on which taxes
are delinquent be taken over by the state for afforestation,
reforestation, or flood control projects. (See, Minn.
Stat. H 84A.20 84A.37.)

4. Outdoor Recreation.

An outdoor recreation system is established which is
composed of natural state parks; recreational state
parks; state trails; state scientific and natural
areas; state wilderness areas; state forests; state
wildlife management areas; state water access sites;
state wild, scenic, and recreational rivers; state
historic sites; and state rest areas. Standards for
the administration of each type of unit are established.
(See, Minn. Stat. SS 86A.01 -,86A.11.)

5. The Director of the Division of Lands and Forestry in
the Department of Natural Resources and county boards
are authorized to exercise certain powers with respect
to the prevention and abatement of forest fires and to
the clearing and improvement of land by the removal
from such land of trees, brush, and other substances
which contribute to the danger of forest fires. Provision
is made for the creation of auxiliary forests from any
tract of land in the state containing not less than

2 43

35 acres, which is generally suitable for the planting,
culture, and growth of trees for the production of timber
or forest products. The Commissioner of Natural Resources
is authorized to furnish owners of forest lands certain
forest management services consisting of advice in
management and protection of timber, selection and
marking of timber to be cut, measurement of product.s,
aid in marketing harvested products, and other services.
(See Minn. Stat. � 88.01 - 88.79.)

6. Prairie and Waste Lands and Control over Forests.

The Commissioner of Natural Resources is directed to
ascertain the best methods of reforesting cut-over and
denuded lands, foresting waste and prairie lands, preventing
destruction of forest and lands by fire, administering
forests on forestry principles, encouraging private owners
to preserve and grow timber for commercial purposes, and
conserving the forests around the headwaters of streams
and on the watersheds of the state. He is further directed
to execute all rules and regulations pertaining to forestry
and forest protection within the jurisdiction of the state.
(See Minn. Stat. 5 89.01.)

7. State Forests.

A system of state forests is established for growing,
managing, and harvesting timber and other forest crops,
for the establishment of recreational areas, and for the
protection of watershed areas and the preservation and
development of rare and distinctive species of flora
and fauna native to such areas. Management and control
of all state forest lands are vested in the Commissioner
of Natural Resources who has the authority to make and
enforce all necessary regulations for their administration.
(See Minn. Stat. 99 89.021 - 89.28; GGA.05.)

8. Tree Planti ng.

The Commissioner of Natural Resources is authorized to
supply planting stock for use on any public or private
lands within the state for the purposes of forests, wood
lots, windbreaks, shelter belts, erosion control, soil
conservation, water conservation, provision of permanent
food and cover for wildlife, and afforestation and reforestation.
Educational units are also authorized to establish and
maintain forests. (See Minn. Stat. SS 89.35 - 89.43,)

2 - 4A

9. Timber Lands.

It is the intent and desire of the legislature to
provide equal opportunity for all seqments of our
society to participate in the [state timber] sale
process; and to attempt to prevent the purchase or
acquisition of excessive volumes of the state's timber
resources by any one individual or corporation. The
Department of Natural Resources is directed to enact
regulations to reach this objective, including provision
for sale of all timber species by both the informal and
the auction sale method. The Commissioner of Natural
Resources is directed to make thorough inquiry into
the extent, character, and value of the timber on all
state lands, and to take such measures as will protect
timber from damage or loss by fire, trespass or otherwise;
and to make such regulations for the care and control of
the lands and for the sale of the timber thereon. A system
of permits for the sale of state timber is established.
(See Minn. Stat. SS 90.005 - 90.50.)

10. wetlands.

It is in the public interest to preserve the wetlands
of the state and thereby to conserve surface waters,
to preserve wildlife habitat, to reduce runoff, to
provide for floodwater retention, to reduce stream sedi-
mentation, to contribute to improved subsurface moisture,
to enhance the natural beauty of the landscape, and to
promote comprehensive and total water management planning.
The Commissioner of Natural Resources is authorized to
promulgate rules with regard to these purposes and to
enter into agreements with land owners for the conservation
of wetlands. The program so established is intended to
supplement and complement the federal water bank program.
(See Minn. Stat. � 105.392.)

11. Minnesota Environmental Policy Act.

The state government should use all practical means to
assure for the people of the state aesthetically pleasing
surroundings; to preserve important natural aspects of
our national heritage; and to improve the management of renewable
resources in a matter compatible with environmental protection.
MEPA requires an environmental impact statement for any
major governmental action having the potential for significant
environmental affects and prohibits any state action which
is likely to cause pollution, impairment, or destruction,
of the state's natural resources so long as there is a
feasible and prudent alternative consistent with the reasonable
requirements of the public health, safety, and welfare.
(See Minn. Stat. SS 116D.01 - 116D.07.)

2 - 45

12. Little Shipstead-Nolan Act

All state lands bordering on or adjacent to meandered
lakes and other public waters and watercourses and the
live timber growing thereon are withdrawn from sale
except under specific conditions, and the Commissioner
of Natural Resources is authorized to sell such timber
as otherwise provided by law under such conditions as
he deems necessary for the protection of watersheds,
wildlife habitat, shorelines, and scenic features. In
addition, the timber on state lands in certain areas of
Cook, Lake, and St. Louis Counties are subjected to the
same restrictions as are imposed by the federal Shipstead_
Nolan Act with regard to timber on federal lands. The
federal act promotes the principle of conserving the
natural beauty of shorelines for recreational use, and
prohibits logging to a depth of 400 feet from the natural
waterline of any lake or stream used for boat or canoe
travel which is within or contiguous to certain areas
within Cook, Lake, and St. Louis Counties.(Minn. Stat.
�92.45; 16 U.S.C. �577-577b.)

2 46

IV, MINERAL EXTRACTION

A. PROBLEMS AND ISSUES

1. There is inadequate information on the availability,
distribution, and value of metallic minerals and
their mining potential in the Coastal Zone area.,

2. The location, extent, and useability of sand and
gravel resources within the Coastal Zone have not
been evaluated.

3. Future use of limited sand and gravel resources
within the Coastal Zone may be preempted by other land
use decisions.

4. M'in'ing reclamation standards have not been adopted at
the local or state level.

5. Beach deposits on Lake Superior have been mined as
a source of gravel in the past.

MINERAL EXTRACTION GOALS, POLICIES, AND IMPLE14ENTATION STEPS

Goal: Manage the extraction of mineral resources
to avoid conflict with, other land uses,
observe health, safety, welfare and property
rights of individuals, allow for the con-
tinued availability of minerals and pro@
vide for the reclamation of land following
extraction.

Policy: open pit mining of hard rock minerals shall
not be allowed in shoreland management
areas as defined by M.L. 1969, Chap. 777.

Implement: State pernits shall not be granted.-

Policy: Mining of beach deposits for sand and gravel
on Lake Superior shall not be allowed.

Implement: State or local permits shall not be granted.

Policy: Consider long-term availability of mineral
resources in land use planning.

Implement: 1. Evaluate hard rock mineral res.ources
within coastal zone.
2. Conduct a detailed analysis o f gravel
source locations within and adjacent
to the coastal,zone as basis for developing
a plan which would insure the avail-
ability of adequate gravel resources
for the area.

2 - 47

3. Provide for continued availability of
sand and gravel resources in local
land use plans.

4. Develop and enforce mineral extraction
standards for mining of sand and gravel
in the coastal zone and for hardrock
minerals outside of shorelands based
on:

a. impacts on existing and future land
uses.
b. management of affected public
lands.
c. pollution control standards.
d. reclamation and re-use of lands.

5. Place high priority on development of
gravel sources on state lands other
than state parks.

6. Close and reclaim existing gravel pits
in state parks, when alternative sources
of gravel are available.

7. Reclaim all depleted gravel pits on state
lands in a manner beneficial to land
management objectives.

8. The Environmental Quality Board should
work closely with the PAC in reviewing
any proposed hardrock mineral excavation
in the coastal zone.

C. POLICIES-AND AUTHORITIES RELATIXG TO MINES AMD MINERALS

1. Powers of the Commissioner of Natural Resources.

The Commissioner of Natural Resources is vested with
charge and control of all of the minerals of the state
and of the use, sale, leasing, or other disposition
thereof. (See Minn. Stat. �84.027.)

2. Reservation of Minerals.

The state reserves for its own use all the iron, coal,
copper, gold and other valuable minerals on land which
now or hereafter may belong to it by virtue of any
act of Congress, and reserves to itself all iron ores
and other minerals on, in, or under lands within the
state which lie beneath the waters of navigable lakes
and rivers, together with the right to enter upon such
lands and to explore for and mine and remove such iron
ore and other minerals. (See Minn. Stat. 9993.01-93.07.)

2 - 48

3. Permits and Leases for Prospecting and Mining.

A system of permits and leases for prospecting and mining
iron ore, taconite iron ore, copper, copper nickel, and
other minerals is established. (See Minn. Stat. SS
93.016 - 93.335, 93,043, Minn. Reg. NR 94, 99f 104f 109,
114.)

4. Mining and Prospecting Under Certain Waters.

The discovery and mining or removing of gold, silver,
copper, cobalt, coal, graphite, petroleum, sand, gravel,
stone, natural gas, and all minerals, excepting iron ore,
from the land under public watersin the state is a
matter of public interest. The Department of Natural
Resources, with the approval of the Executive Council,
is directed to adopt rules and regulations for such
prospecting and mining. Certain laws governing the
prospecting and mining of iron ore from under public
waters are also established, and the Executive Council is
given the authority to permit the draining of certain
public lakes for the purpose of mining iron ore owned
by the state beneath the beds of such lakes. (See
Minn. Stat. SS 93.13 - 93.14; 93.34 - 93.357; 105..44(l)(a),
Minn. Reg. NR 94, 99, 104, 109, 114.)

5. Reclamation of Mine Lands.

In recognition of the effects of mining upon the
environment, it is hereby declared to be the policy
of this state to provide for the reclamation of cer-
tain lands hereafter subjected to the mining of
metallic minerals where such reclamation is necessary,
both in the interest of the general welfare and as
an exercise of the police power of the state, to
control possible adverse environmental effects of
mining, to preserve the natural resources, and to
encourage the planning of future land utilization,
while at the same time promoting the orderly develop-
ment of mining, the encouragement of good mining
practices, and the recognition and identification
of the beneficial aspects of mining. The Cc;mmissioner
of Natural Resources is directed to conduct a compre-
hensive study to determine the extent to which the
regulation of mining areas is necessary; and mining
operations for metallic minerals within the state are
prohibited without a permit from the Commissioner.
Persons applying for a permit must submit a proposed
plan for the reclamation or restoration, or both,
of any mining area affected by mining operations to
be conducted on and after the date on which permits
are required for mining. (See Minn. Stat. SS 93.44 -
93.51.)

2 - 49

6. Minnesota Environmental Policy Act.

State government should use all practical means to
minimize wasteful and unnecessary depletion of non-
renewable resources, and to provide for reclamation
of minelands and assure that any mining is accomplished
in a manner compatible with environmental protection.
MEPA requires an environmental impact statement for
any major governmental action having the potential
for significant environmental effects and prohibits
any state action which is likely to cause pollution,
impairment, or destruction of the air, water, land,
or other natural resources located within the state
so long as there is a feasible and prudent alternative
consistent with the reasonable requirements of the
public health, safety, and welfare, and the state's
paramount concern for the protection of its natural
resources. (See Minn. Stat. SS 116D.01 - 166D.07, 6
MCAR S 3.)

7. Eminent Domain and Taconite Mining Companies.

The business of mining and beneficiating taconite is
declared to be in the public interest and necessary to
the public welfare, and the taking of private property
therefor is declared to be for a public use and purpose.
Any corporation engaged in the business of mining and
beneficiating taconite is authorized to acquire-for
the purposes of such business-easements, rights-of-
way, and surface rights over, through, or across any
lands not owned by the state or devoted to a public
purpose. (See Minn. Stat. SS 117.46 - 117.461.)

8. Deposits of Mining Wastes.

The Commissioner of Natural Resources is authorized
to grant permits and licenses or leases on and across
,lands owned by the state for the depositing of strippings,
lean ores, tailings, or waste products of a taconite
mining business. (See Minn. Stat. S 117.47.)

9. Mine Inspectors.

County boards of counties where there are at least five
mines are authorized to appoint an inspector of mines.
Such inspectors are authorized to condemn all such places
where they shall find that the employees are in danger
from any cause, and to require certain safeguards for
operating idle mines. (See Minn. Stat. SS 180.01
180.13.)

2 50

V. FISH AND WILDLIFE X00,
A. PROBLEMS AND ISSUES 3

1. Many existing managed streams are being over-used
leading to the destruction of streambanks and
vegetation.

2. Barriers exist in many streams which limit the
habitat available for fish spawning.

3. Siltation caused by adverse development along streams
poses a serious threat to existing spawning areas.

4. In some areas, fishing pressure exceeds the natural
reproduction rate.

5. Access to Lake Superior for recreational fish is
inadequate.

6. Habitat for game species is deteriorating. In
particular, there is a need for logging to create
and maintain forest openings near deer concentration
areas.

7. Many deer are being killed by automobiles on T.H.
61. Currently deer are being fed by North Shore
residents, but feeding stations are not located
properly. In many areas, vegetation grows close to
the roadway and motorists cannot sight the deer in
time to avert hitting them.

B. FISH AND WILDLIFE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ITIPLEMENTATI ON STEPS

Goal: 1. -To maintain and develop diverse habitat
to insure a variety of both game and non-
game fish and wildlife species.

2. To establish management priorities based
on natural resources as well as human
needs.

General 1. Insure coordination among all resource
Policies: management agencies and programs to
maintain or increase fish and wildlife
populations and to determine the manage-
ment requirements for the Coastal Zone.

2. Preserve endangered, threatened and unique
species.

3. Identify critical or rare habitats which
should be avoided by intensive development.

2 - 51

Fisheries

Policy: To improve recreational and commercial fish-
ing in the Coastal Zone on Lake Superior
and in adjacent lakes and streams.

Implement: 1. Protect, maintain and improve habitat
in streams and lakes for the natural
propagation of fish sPecies through
stream improvement, spawning area
development, and preservation of
existing spawning and harvest areas.

2. Provide free access on public lands
to streams and Lake Superior to allow
fishing while protecting water quality
and other natural resources.

3. Continue to stock streams and lakes where
natural propagation of game species
is not possible or is insufficient
for expected fishing demand.

4. Provide lamprey and smelt control, lake
trout restoration and fish utilization
in Lake Superior. Continue efforts to
control rough fish and rehabilitate
Wildlife inland lakes.

Policy: To provide habitat types which maintain pop-
ulations of a variety of game and non-
game species within the Coastal Zone.

Implement: 1. Maintain and enhance vegetative species
and age group diversity to insure adequate
wildlife habitat and to promote manage-
ment practices through cooperative pro-
grams involving state, county and federal
personnel and private land owners.

2. Determine which lands and waters are best
suited for wildlife management purposes
based on land and water capability and
socio-economic needs.

3. Evaluate existing game refuge lands to
insure that they continue to meet wild-
life management needs.

state and federal lands.
4. Consider wildlife values in managing all

2 - 52

5. Develop and implement deer management
programs, as a first priority, in the
Cascade and Brule River Management Areas.

6. Determine the need for additional
wildlife management areas as manage-
ment conditions change.

7. Develop management programs for moose,
bear, grouse and other s,pecies where
needed and appropriate.

C. POLICIES AND AUTHORITIES RELATING TO FISH AND WILDLI FE

1. Great Lakes Basin Compact.

The Great Lakes Basin Compact has been ratified by the
state of Minnesota. The purposes of the compact are,
inter alia,, to promote the orderly, integrated, and
compre hensive development, use, and conservation of the
water resources of the Great Lakes Basin. By,ratification,
the state has agreed to consider whatever action the
Great Lakes BasinCommission, established by the compact,
recommends with respect to uniformity or effective
coordinating action in fishing laws and regulations,and
,cooperative action to eradicate destructive and parasitical
forces endangering fisheries, wildlife, and other water
resources. (See Minn. Stat. �� 1.21 - 1.25.)

2. Commissioner of Natural Resources.

Charge and control of the wild animals of the state are
vested in the Commissioner of Natural Resources. (See
Minn. Stat. S 84.027.)

3. Certain Game Preserves.

Management of games preserves established within
reforested areas is vested in the Commissioner of
Natural Resources, who is directed to care for, protect,
and preserve all species of wildlife therein. (See
Minn. Stat. SS 84A.20 - 84A.32; 84A.55.)

4. Ownership of Wild Animals.

The ownership of wild animals, insofar as they are
capable of ownership, is in the state in its sovereign
capacity for the benefit of all of its people, and no
person shall acquire any property therein, or destroy
the same, except as authorized by law. (See Minn.
Stat. 99 97.42 97.43.)

2 - 53

5. General Game and Fish Laws.

The Commissioner of Natural Resources is authorized to
extend protection to any species of wild animal by
further limiting or closing open seasons established by
law, whenever he finds such action necessary to guard
against undue depletion or extinction, or to promote
the propogation and-reproduction of such animals; he is
authorized to enter into contracts with Wisconsin
relatin g@to the removal of ro.ugh fish in boundary
waters between Minnesota and that state; and he is
authorized to make any and all regulations
for the taking, possession, and transportation of
wild animals, fish, and mussels from any boundary
waters between Minnesota and adjacent states and from
international waters. He is further authorized to
set aside and reserve, for any period he deems advisable,
public waters of the state in aid of the propagation
and protec-t:ion of any wild animals., and to acquire by
gift, purchase, or otherwise real property desirable
for game farms, hatcheries, game refuges, and wildlife
development programs. A predator control program is
e.stablished to systematically control predatory wild animals
doing damage to public or private property, and provisions
are enacted to prevent the taking, import,,transport, or
sale of any endangered or threatened species of wild
animal. Certain laws with respect to the possession and
transportation of wild animals are established, and the
power to enforce such laws is vested in the Commissioner
of Natural Resources. (See, Minn. Stat. SS 97.40
97.85.)

6- Taking of Game and Fish.

A system of licenses and regulations for the taking
of protected and unprotected wild animals and fish is
established. (See, Minn. Stat. �� 98.45 - 98.52;
101.26 - 101.37; 101.41 - 101.51; 102.23 - 102.30.)

7. State Game Refuges.

A system of state game refuges, which includes all state
parks, is established and its management vested in
the Commissioner of Natural Resources. (See, Minn. Stat.
99.25 - 99.26.)

2 54

Minnesota Environmental Policy Act.

@The-state government should use all practical means to
preserve important existing natural habitats of rare and
endangered species of plants, wildlife, and fish, and
provide for the wise use of our remaining areas of natural
habitation, including necessary protective measures where
appropriate. MEPA requires an environmental'impact statement
for any major governmental action halving the potential
for significant environmental effects. and prohibits any
state action which is likely to cause pollution, impairment,
or destruction of the natural resources of the state so long
as there is a feasible and prudent alternative consistent
with the reasonable requirements of the public health,
safety, and welfare, and the state's paramount concern for
the protection of its natural resources. (See, Minn.
Stat. SS 116D.01 116D.07.)

2 55

VI. TRIU4SPORTATiON f

A. PROBLEMS MID ISSUES

1. Traffic congestion is created on T.H. 61 by the
influx of tourists during summer months and winter
weekends, local use of the highway, and the increased
number of-commercial trucks.

2. There are problems with portions of T.H. 61 between
Two Harbors and Illgen City including road alignment
and sight lines, lack of passing lanes, width, lack o
nine-ton carrying capacity, and the danger of rock
slides. 0&

3. Road access onto T. H. 61 is unsafe in some cases.
Current county zoning ordinances permit a driveway
for each 200 foot lot. Counties have not developed
subdivision regulations which minimize the number of
access points to T.H. 61 and still provide proper
access to property. Counties should also control
the location of and access to highway-oriented
commercial establishments in a manner that prevents
hazardous situations from occurring in the future.

4. The Minnesota Department of Transportation has al-
lowed access roads onto T.H. 61 that conflict
with the administration of local zoning ordinances.

5. Transportation alternatives have not been explored,
thus the pressure on T.H. 61 continues to grow.

6. There is a need to provide standards for highway
construction and right-of-way treatment that are
uniform throughout the Coastal Zone and enhance the
scenic qualities of the area.

7. There are no safe bikeways along most of the North
Shore.

8. There is a need to brush and prune vegetation along
T.H. 61 to increase highway safety by improving
visibility and to enhance the view of Lake Superior.

9. Heavy tourist usage of county roads increases county
maintenance costs.

2 - 56

B. TRANSPORTATION GOALS, POLICIES AND IMPLEAENTATION STEPS

Coal: A transportation system which allows for the
safe, efficient movement of people, goods,
and services; complements existing and proposed
development patterns; and reflects the en-
vironmental considerations and multi-modal
possibilities of the North Shore.

Policy: Develop a transportation system which utilizes
the full potential of coastal resources.

Implement: 1. Conduct a transportation study for the
Coastal Zone which examines the potential
of all modes of transportation - air,
water, rail and highway - to determine
the most desirable means of moving people
and goods.

2. Generate data for various modes on the
following:

a. Economics
b. Safety
C. Resource efficiency (BTUs/ton, etc.)
d. Convenience to user
e. Seasonal limitations
f. Impact on land and water uses.

Policy: All public transportation plans and activities
in the Coastal Zone shall be coordinated
among all levels of government.

Implement: 1. DOT shall periodically report the
findings and recommendations of its
statewide transportation plan to the
PAC for review and conment.

2. All levels of government shall exchange
information pertaining to proposed trans-
portation'activities including access
permit applications, improvements,
land acquisition, public and private
development proposals which would
change existing types or levels of traffic
and any other activity which would have
an impact on the movement of people
and goods.

2- 57

Trunk Highway 61

Policy: Conflicts between residential an&rec-
reational traffic and through commercial
truck traffic shall be reduced.

Implement: 1. DOT and ARDC shall coordinate with
local units of government in formulat-
ing and implementing a short range plan
for separating throuqh truck traffic
from local and recreational traffic.
The study shall consider existing
traffic data, proposals to increase
truck traffic and the physical condition
of the existing roadway including
width, lack of shoulders, vertical and
horizontal curvature. The study shall
also consider such alternatives as
restricting truck traffic to certain
days of the week or hours of the day.

2. DOT and ARDC shall investigate, in co-
operation with trucking companies and or-
ganizations familiar with waterborne
transportation, alternative means of mov-
ing goods between Canada and the United
States to provide a long-term solution
to truck/automobile conflicts.

Policy: Trunk Highway 61 shall be upgraded to pro-
vide a safe facility for moving traffic.

Implement: 1. DOT, in cooperation with ARDC and local
units of government,shall place high
priority on the earliest possible com-
pletion of Project No. F001-4, to up-
grade T.H. 61, between Two Harbors and
T.H. 1 (Illgen City).

2. In designinq the Project, DOT shall:

a. Provide design solutions to ex-
isting hazardous conditions at
Chapin's Curve, Silver Creek Cliff,
Lafayette Bluff and the eastern
approach to the Gooseberry Falls
bridge and the 9 miles of roadway
west of Beaver Bay.
b. Select a roadway design that is
in keeping with the aesthetic and
topographic character of the North
Shore, and design future bridges,
overpasses, parking areas, guard-
rails and other such transportation
appurtenances along T.H. 61 in a
manner which complements the natural
landscape.

2 58

C. Provide for additional,passing,
lanes, shoulder widening and turn
lanes to speed.;the flow of traffic and
improve highway'safe'ty.
d. Maximize opportunities for highway
users to pull off the highwayto view
the scenery of the North Shore-
in a safe manner. Highway wayside
recommendation-s contained in the
North-S hore Recreation Study and
approved by PAC shall be implemented.

Portions of former and existing road-
bed that may be eliminated from the
highway as a result of realignments
and have value' for use as scenic
lookouts@ rest stops, bicycle
trails, etc. shall be retained in
state ownership.
e. Consider existing land use patterns
and future land use plans of local
government.
f. Develop frontage roads or'6ther
means of consolidating driveways and
entrances where possible.
g. Prepare plans for upgrading T.H.
61 from Illgen City,to Grand Marais
using the same considerations
listed above.

Policy: The deer kill problem on T.H. 61 shall be
minimized.

Implement: DOT shall brush the T.H. 61 ditch to pro-
vide greater sight distance in accordance
with A plan approved by the counties and PAC.

Policy: Safe bikeways within the T.H. 61 corridor
shall be provided.

Implement: 1. DOT, in cooperation with local units of
government, shall develop and implement
a,plan for state construction of bike-
ways along T.H. 61 that provides adequate
separation between bikers and highway
traffic and adequate signing and en-
forcement to assure that bikers stay off
vehicular traffic lanes,.

2. DOT shall cooperate with-local units of
government in making bikbway grant
money available for local bikeways.

2 59

All Coastal Highways

Policy: Highways in the Coastal Zone be aesthetically
attractive and complement the natural
landscape. Pa.
a
Implement: Prepare, implement, and fund a vegetative
management program for improving the
aesthetics of roads within the Coastal
Zone which addresses:

a. appropriate screening of highway storage
maintenance areas.
b. view enhancement of Lake Superior from
T.H. 61.
c. plantings for improvement of the aesthetics
and safety of expressway median from
Duluth to Two Harbors.

Policy: Signs should be in keeping with the aesthetics
and image of the North Shore.

Implement: Examine existing sign conditions in the
Coastal Zone and develop a model signing
guide for possible adoption by local units
of government.

This signing model should address:

a. Height
b. Area
c. Materials
d. Setbacks
e. Colors
f. Lighting, direct or internal flashing
g. on vs. off-premise locations

Policy: DOT shall not issue sign permits without the
written approval of the affected unit of
local government.

Implement: DOT shall submit all application for
sign permits to local units of government
for written approval.

Policy: Adequate signing for public recreational
areas should be established consistent
with local sign ordinances.

Implement: Establish a cooperative state/local effort
to develop a sign program to provide adequate
highway signing for public recreation lands
and facilities in the Coastal Zone and to
standardize sign appearance within state rec-
reational facilities.

2 - 60

C. POLICIES AND AUTHORITIES RELATING TO TRANSPORTATION

1. Public Highway System.

The state is authorized to construct, improve, and
maintain public highways, and to assist political
subdivisions in this work. A trunk highway system,
a county state-aid highway system, and a municipal state-
aid street system are created. A highway user tax
distribution fund, a county state-aid highway fund,
and a municipal state-aid street fund are also created.
(See, Minn. Const., Art. 14, �� 1-11.)

2. General Provisions for Highways, etc.

Provisions are enacted governing the establishment,
operation, and financing of trunk highways, county
state-aid highways, municipal state-aid streets,
county highways, town roads, trunk highways, bridges,
and ferries. (See, Minn. Stat., Ch. 160-167.)

3. Department of Transportation.

In order to provide a balanced transportation system,
which system includes aeronautics, highways, motor carriers,
ports, public transit, railroads and pipelines, a
Department of Transportation is created, which is super-
vised and controlled by the Commissioner of Transportation.
The Commissioner is directed to maintain close liaison
with the private sectors of transportation, the Upper
Great Lakes Seaway Development Commission Corporation,
and any multistate organization involved in transportation
issues affecting the state. It is further directed to
participate in the planning, regulation, and development
of the state's port authorities. In order to best meet the
present and future transportation needs of the public, to
ensure a strong'state economy, to make the most efficient
use of public and private funds, and to promote the more
efficient use of energy and other resources for transportation
purposes, the Commissioner is directed to develop and
monitor a statewide transportation plan, which incorporates
all modes of transportation and provides for the inter-
connection and coordination of different modes of trans-
portation. It is directed that the statewide plan recognize,
established national transportation policies and that the
Commissioner and the Public Service Commission take no
action inconsistent with the state's plan. The Commissioner

2 - 61

is directed to develop and monitor a statewide rail
tran-sportation--plan-as.part of the statewide transportation
planning process, and he is directed to consider the
social, economic, environmental, and energy effects re-
sulting from existing and proposed transportation facilities
and to make continuing efforts to mitigate any adverse
effects. Finally, it is directed that any state agency
which receives an application from a regional development
commission, metropolitan council, public transit commission,

subdivision of the state for financial assistance for
airport commission, port authority, or other political

transportation planning, capital expenditures, or operations
to any state or federal agency, shall first submit the
application to the Commissioner of Transportation for
review to determine whether it contains matters that
substantially affect statewide transportation planning
and priorities; the director of the Pollution Control
Agency is also directed to inform the Commissioner of
Transportation of all activities of the PCA which relate
to the adoption, revision, or repeal of any standard or
rule concerning transportation. (See, Minn. Stat.
174.01 - 174.51.)

4. Railroads.

Provisions are enacted regulating the construction and
operation of rail transportation systems and regulating
the operations of common carriers. (See, Minn. Stat.,
Ch. 218, 219, and 222.)

5. Aeronautics.

The Commissioner of Transportation is vested with
general supervision over aeronautics within the state
and is empowered and directed to encourage, foster, and
assist in the development of aeronautics and to encourage
the establishment of airports and other navigational
facilities. He is further authorized to issue rules,
regulations, and procedures for the purpose of protecting
the general public interest and safety with regard
to aeronautics. A provision is also made for the
Commissioner to cooperate with the United States in the
planning, acquisition, and construction of airports; and
municipalities, groups of municipalities, and counties are
authorized to acquire and operate airports. To prevent
creation or establishment of airport hazards, provision
is further made for municipalities or joint airport zoning
boards -- created where airports owned or controlled by

2 - 62

one municipality are located within the territorial
limits of another county or municipality -- to adopt and
enforce airport zoning regulations. Provisions regulating
the use of aircraft and the construction of airport
structures are also adopted. (See, Minn. Stat. SS
360.011 - 360.93.)

Port Authorities.

A commission known as "Port Authority of
is established in and for every city of the first class
situated upon, or adjacent to, or embracing within its
boundaries, in whole or in part, a port or harbor located
on a navigable lake or stream. It is the general duty
of any such port authority to promote the general welfare
of the port district, and of the port as a whole; to
endeavor to increase the volume of the commerce thereof;
to promote the efficient, safe, and economic handling
of such commerce; and to provide or promote adequate
docks and railroad terminal facilities open to all upon
reasonable and equal terms for the handling, storage,
care, and shipment of freight and passengers to, from,
and through the port. (See, Minn. Stat. SS 458.09
458.1991.)

2 63

VII. LAND USE

A. LAND USE CONDITIONS

1. General

--within a one to five mile corridor extending the
length of the North Shore, recreational, residential
and agricultural land uses cover, respectively,
4%, 3%, and 2% of the land, while 90% of the land
is used for forestry or other non-intensive uses.

--The existing low development density appears to
be one of the major attractions of the area.

--Many coastal communities contain vacant land and
have the potential for future urban growth. The
Areawide Comprehensive Sewer and Water Plan com-
pleted for the Arrowhead Region provides a framework
for extending public sewer and water services
within coastal communities. The plan also recom-
mends that future urban development be phased in
accordance with sewer and water extensions.

--The Duluth-Superior Harbor is among the world's
largest inland ports and consistently ranks among
the top ten ports of the United States in total
tonnage with more than 40 million tons of inter-
national and domestic cargoes shipped during an
average Great Lakes navigation season (early April
through mid-December). Peak year for the Duluth-
Superior Harbor was 1953 with 77,243,545 short
tons of shipments, while 1973 shipment was
43,741,912. Forecasts on commercial cargoes in-
dicate an upswing but vary on that upswing's
magnitude.

Silver Bay, and Taconite Harbor accommodate ship-
--Other harbors also dot the north shore. Two Harbors,

ping of taconite, while Knife River, King's Landing
(west of Beaver Bay), Grand Marais, and Grand
Portage accommodate small recreation craft. The
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has substantially com-
pleted plans for construction of two small-boat
harbors-of-refuge at Silver Bay and Schroeder.

2. Specific Land Uses

Residential

--The State Demographer projects that the permanent
population in coastal counties (entire county) will
increase by the following amounts between 1975 and
the year 2000:

Cook County +200 people
Lake County +700 people

2 64

In.the. City of Duluth and in.Duluth and Lakewood
Townships aggregate population is proj,ected'to
remain stable through . the year-2000. WhIle
Duluth is expected to decline somewhat.in pop-
ulation,, the townships are expected to increase
at about.the sane rate,.

--In 1.973, 77% of Cook County's pernanent.population
lived within 1/2 mileof Lake Superior. These
residents were.equal.ly-divided between Grand Marais,
and the, rest of the shore.

--In,1973, 8.8% of Lake County's permanent population
lived- within 5 miles of Lake Superior. About. 701
these residents- lived.in the municipalities- of
Two Harbors, Silver Bay and Beaver Bay..

--Fbrty-e1ght percent.of St. Louis County's permanent
population lived in Duluth. or the two urban town-
ships! adjacent to Lake Superior.

--In.St.. Louis County permanent housing units out-
number seasonal housing-units within.a half mile
of the@shore. The reverse is truefor@Lak-eandCook
Counti.ea, where seasonal units outnumber permanent
units:.

Commercial

--Commercial.development in the Coastal Zone Plan.-
ing Area is confined mainly to the T.H. 61
corridor. Most commercial development that is
located.in the rural area is highway-oriented
service.-commercial that caters to the travelling
public and resort industry. More conventional.
types of commercial activity are found.in the
major urban communities, particularly Duluth and
to a lesser degree Two Harbors, Silver Bay, and
Grand Marai.a. Such uses. include department
stores,, food outlets andoffices.

--Future commercial uses in rural areas should be
located with care so as to provide a suitable
level of goods and services, safe access, retain
the-natural beauty of the area and be adequately
served with sewer, water and other necessary services.

1ndustrial

industrial use" is defined as,
any-industrial use that cannot exist if it is not
located on the immediate shore of Lake Superior
or,cannot directly*use Lake Superior water.

2 - 65

--Current coastal-dependent industrial uses are located
at Duluth, Two Harbors, Silver Bay and Taconite
Harbor. Future coastal-dependent industrial uses
could also locate in these places because public
services such as roads, sewer, water, police and
fire protection are either available or can be
provided for at lower cost. (Taconite Harbor does
not have municipal sewer.) In addition, service
commercial facilities such as gas stations, grocery
stores, drug stores and the like are available in
Duluth, Two Harbors and Silver Bay, as are medical
services and housing.

--Existing industrial and manufacturing uses which
are not coastal-dependent occur primarily in the
Duluth-Superior Metropolitan Area and in Two
Harbors. Minor industrial activities occur in
scattered locations throughout the North Shore and
include sawmills and logging operations, junk-
yards, gravel pits, and equipment storage areas.

--Future industrial expansion is most likely to occur
in the Duluth-Superior Metropolitan Area and Two
Harbors because these areas are closest to state
and national markets and are best served by a
variety of transportation facilties. The new
industrial park in Two Harbors is expected to
accommodate most new industrial expansion in that
community.

Public Land Uses

--Public uses comprise an unusually high percentage
of the land base in coastal counties, totalling
60.3% in St. Louis; 77.4% in Lake and 92% in Cook
County.

--Within the watershed, the federal government owns
617,160 acres (44.2%); the state owns 208,400
acres (14.9%); the counties own 182,880 acres
(13.1%); and private ownership accounts for
338,608 acres (27.3%).

--The total area within the CZM boundary is 41,145
acres. Public ownership is as follows:

Federal - 6,953 acres (16.9%); State - 8,521 acres
(20.7%); County - 803 acres (2.0%); and Private
24,869 acres (60.4%).

These totals include 5,693 acres of Federal and
1,211 acres of privately held land within the Grand
Portage Reservation.

2 - 66

3. Status of Local Land Use Plans and Ordinances

a. County

The Coastal Zone Management Program by no
means represents the first planning effort
along the North Shore. Between 1964 and 1968,
Lake, St. Louis and Cook Counties hired consultants
to assist their planning commissions and staffs
in preparing comprehensive plans. The consultants
prepared general county guide plans, background
studies on natural resources, population
characteristics, economics, land use, transporta-
tion, public facilities, outdoor recreation and
historical resources, and county map atlases
(unpublished) which contain overlays of existing
and proposed land uses, traffic volumes and
accidents, housing conditions, topography, land
ownership, and vacant land classifications.

Since current coastal-zone planning efforts
deal with portions of the three counties, the
county plans were reviewed by CZM staff. The
plans were not adopted by the counties, so they
were considered as reference documents as
opposed to official county positions. The plans
were useful in that they provided a base for
measuring change and recommended solutions to
problems that existed at the time of their prep-
aration.

Since the inception of the CZM Program all three
counties have undertaken major amendments and
additions to their implementation ordinances.
Cook County is currently amending its zoning
ordinance and addressing many issues raised through
the CZM Program. The text portion of the new
ordinance has been produced in draft form and
the Planning Commission is beginning work on the
zoning map. Cook County has also begun work on
a new health code. Lake County adopted a county-
wide zoning ordinance, has initiated efforts on
subdivision control ordinance and has developed
new goals for land use planning countywide.
St. Louis County has adopted a revised zoning
ordinance text, but has not as yet amended the
zoning map. The St. Louis County Planning
CommAssion has recommended that land use
studies be completed before mapping takes place.
The St. Louis County Board has responded by
passing a resolution on December 17, 1977 that
authorizes the preparation and adoption of an
ordinance entitled "Comprehensive Plan for St.
Louis County."

2 67

b. Municipal

In 1973, the Arrowhead Regional Development
Coninrission prepared guide plans for the following
North Shore comm, unities:

Grand Marais Beaver Bay
Silver Bay Knife River
Two Harbors

These plans were prepared as a prerequisite for
obtaining sewer and water grants from the
Farmers Home Administration, In developing the
plans, ARDC evaluated existing land use patterns,
population, public services and other factors
and made recommendations pertaining to future
residential, commercial, industrial, public and
transportation development as well as future
sewer and water needs. Although the localities
did not adopt the plans, ARDC did and uses them
as a basis for reviewing sewer and water grant
applications.

The municipalities of Grand Marais, Silver Bay
and Two Harbors have developed various plans in
the past. However, there are no adopted con-
prehensive plans. These municipalities have
adopted zoning ordinances.

The municipality of Beaver Bay does not have
zoning. Knife River and other unincorporated
settlements and rural townships are governed
by county zoning ordinances.

The provisions of Minnesota's Shoreland Manage-
ment Act were extended to municipalities during
the 1971 Legislative Session. The DNR published
rules and regulations for managing municipal
shoreland areas in 1976. Thus far, none of the
North Shore municipalities have been contacted
by DNR to initiate the shoreland management process.
Duluth recently decided to begin on its own.
When notified by DNR, Two Harbors, Beaver Bay,
Silver Bay and Grand Marais will be required to
develop shoreland management ordinances within
1,000 feet of Lake Superior and 300 feet of
streams.

2 - 68

B. LAND USE PROBLEMS AND ISSUES

1. Commercial recreation use is extremely scattered and
is intermixed with a substantial amount of seasonal
dwelling development.

2. County zoning ordinances, in certain instances, do
not address development patterns which are often
difficult and expensive to service with county and
community facilities.

3. Although the majority of residentsnow reside within
the corporate boundaries of North Shore communities,
there is scattered residential development in a
narrow band immediately adjacent to the shore and
T. H. 61. Development of additional access points
to T. H. 61 could further reduce the carrying capacity
and safety of the roadway. In addition, this de-
velopment pattern is prohibitively expensive to serve
with public sewer and water because of distances
involved and the rocky substratum in the area. In
Lake County, the R-3 zoning district is based on the
possible provision of municipal services and en-
courages development far beyond municipal boundaries
even though it is doubtful that these services could
be provided economically.

4. Local residents perceive the high amount of existing
public land, and the intentions of state and federal
agencies to acquire more land, as a major problem
in terms of self determination and tax base and
development options. Most of the private lands in
Lake and Cook County are found along the shore of
Lake Superior or along highways leading to the in-
terior portions of the counties. Since ownership
patterns and roadways are the major determinants
in current land-use patterns, state and federal public
ownership policies have had the effect of concentrat-
ing development in the T.H. 61 corridor along Lake
Superior. There is an obvious need for greatly improved
cooperation between federal, state and local in-
terests. Federal and state agencies continue to push
private development closer to Lake Superior and, at
the same time, oppose additional private develop-
ment on the shore. Reasonable plans must be de-
veloped and coordinated, by all three levels of
government, to achieve the proper balance of local,
state and national interests.

2 - 69

5. Most state recreational areas are in dire need of
sound planning, development and management. Many
areas are unsightly, are not developed in a manner
that affords appropriate use and appreciation of
the resources and do not bear any relationship to
privately developed recreational facilities.

6. State, federal and county forest lands have not
been adequately assessed to determine areas which are
commercially productive. Active management for
forest production can achieve a better return on
the public's investment and aid the local economy.

7. Local units of government have not adopted land use
plans to serve as a basis for implementation or-
dinances. This is due to various reasons including
lack of financial or professional resources and lack
of good information such as soils, geology, slope,
land use and forest cover. In addition, there has
been a general feeling that local planning is futile
in view of the dominant public ownership patterns.
The Coastal Zone Management Program provisions for
funding, reliable data and consistency have renewed
the emphasis on local decision-making.

8. Through the CZM Program, the U.S. Soil Conservation
Service prepared a detailed soil survey. The
survey was prepared for the Cook, Lake and South
St. Louis Soil and Water Conservation Districts and
provides the first comprehensive look at detailed soil
conditions along the North Shore.

For the most part, the survey confirms what many
people knew through their own experience, namely,
that problem soils are widespread along the shore.
Clayey and shallow, stony soils with steep slopes
predominate along the shore. Many of these soils
have certain characteristics which create severe
limitations for development activity if corrective
measures are not employed. Failure to use these
corrective measures can result in erosion and
sedimentation, septic tank failure, structural de-
terioration, ground and surface water pollution and
excessive maintenance costs.

more specifically, the CZ11 soil survey revealed that:

virtually all soils in the coastal zone impose one
or more restrictions to common development
activities. While most soils do not preclude de-
velopment, special construction techniques will

2 - 70

often be necessary to achieve satisfactory results.
A limited amount of land in the coastal zone has
soil, geological and/or slope characteristics that
either impose severe limitations on development
or would, if developed, result in erosion and
sedimentation of public waters or other damages to
the public interest. Local governments should
consider soil properties in developing plans and
ordinances and in approving building permits and sub-
division plats.

Conventional septictank-drain field combinations
do not appear suited to most coastal zone soils.
Research on alternative sewage treatment systems
is lacking.

C. LAND USE GOALS, POLICIES A14D IMPLEMENTATION STEPS

Goal: Land use plans which provide realistic
growth opportunities for commerce and in-
dustry; protect the lifestyles of existing
residents and provide for a choice of
future living situations; provide for public
uses, and reflect both the values provided
and limitations imposed by natural resources
in the Coastal Zone.

'Policy: To provide financial and technical resources
to units of local government in the Coastal
Zone to enable them to review, revise or
develop if necessary and to adopt and im-
plement land use plans and regulations to
include land use plans, erosion control
ordinances, zoning and shoreland ordinances,
subdivision regulations and sanitation codes
consistent with the Coastal Zone Plan.

Implement: Local units of government develop and adopt
land use plans which:

1. General

a. examine existing land use and ownership
patterns to determine the current
scale, type and location of develop-
ment and use and to identify potential
conflicts between land uses.
b. examine trends and future projections
of permanent and seasonal population,
recreational demands, economic
base and natural resource base to determine
demands for land and resources
and to project a desired carrying
capacity for land use activities.

2- - 71

c. examine soils, geologic, topographic,
hydrologic, vegetation, fish and
wildlife and other relevant natural
resource data to determine opportunities
or limitations created by these re-
sources.
contain land use goals and policies
which reflect the steps above (a,
b, and c) and the desires of local
residents as to the type, location
and intensity of future land uses.
e. contain land use districts'which
reflect land use goals-and,pblicies.
f. assess the type, level and.-cost
of public services required-to sup-
port the desired pattern, type and
intensity of future land use. I. I
g. assess the effects of land develop-
ment patterns on highway access and
traffic flow.
h. identify public lands that should
be sold or exchanged to the private
sector to accomplish the objectives
of the land use plan.
i. contain guidelines for treating
conditional uses in a manner that
assures consistent application and
maintains the integrity of the land
use plan.

2. Residential

a. Provide a variety of residential
densities observing existing de-
velopment and the potential for
providing public services.

1) Provide for higher density in and
around developed areas.
2) Determine legal obligation of
counties to provide services in
rural or remote areas. (assumes
larger boundary)
3) Recognize various levels of
potential public services.

b. Consider locating future large
scale residential development in
already urbanized areas.

c. Provide for planned cluster develop-
ments with common water and waste
disposal systems.

d. Discourage residential development
in areas where slope, geologic, soil,
erosion, or flood conditions impose
hazards or excessive public costs.

2 - 72

3. Commercial

a. Provide for the seasonal and year-
round retail and service needs in
a manner that'is compatible with
other land uses and the character
of the area.

1) Provide for new general
commercial uses in a manner that
strengthens existing service
areas.
2) Provide for location-dependent
commercial uses such as resorts,
ski areas, marinas, airports,
etc. to meet standards for
parking, screening, setbacks,
etc. and to insure compatibility
with adjacent uses and the highway
corridor.

b. Provide for high density commercial
development in urban cornercial areas
where services are available.

c. Establish appropriate standards
for landscaping and screening new
commercial development.

4. Industrial

a. Encourage future heavy industrial
development, including nineral pro-
cessing activities and associated
power generation, to locate in
Duluth, Two Harbors, Silver Bay
and Taconite Harbor where industry
has already located along the North
Shore.

b. Provide for light industrial de-
velopment which would not detract
from the tourist economy and would
be planned to harmonize with ex-
isting land use and the character
of the Coastal Zone.

c. Develop appropriate industrial
standards proportionate to the
potential impact of various types
and intensities of industrial use that
address siting, minimum service
requirements, screening, noise,
traffic generation, hours of operation
and other industrial factors.

2 - 73

5. Coastal Dependent Uses

a. Identify coastal dependent commercial
and industrial uses that are likely
to occur in the Coastal Zone and
determine those which are most de-
sirable and consistent with coastal
zone land use policies. Coastal
dependent commercial and industrial
land use is defined as any com-
mercial or industrial use that
cannot exist if it is not located
on the immediate shore of
Lake Superior or cannot directly
use Lake Superior water.

b. Identify land areas best suited for
desirable coastal dependent con-
mercial and industrial uses.

C. Assess methods of reserving suitable
land areas for desirable coastal
dependent uses.

6. Recreation

Provide for local recreational facilities
consistent with goals and policies con-
tained in Section X of the Plan.

Implement: 1. Prepare and adopt necessary codes and
ordinances to implement the provisions
of the local land use plan including:

a. zoning standards which include but
are not limited to lot size; type
of use; building height; bulk and
density; setbacks; sign standards;
conditional use criteria; floodplain
controls; parking; screening;
erosion control and soil management.
b. health codes which include standards
for solid waste disposal and transpor-
ation; recycling; sewage treatment
and disposal; licensing of contractors
and servicers; and permitting.
C. standards for the use, appearancel
operation and reclamation of sites
used for the extraction of sand,
gravel, rock and other materials.
Standards should include setbacks;
screening; noise; dust; hours of
operation; drainage, waste disposal
erosion and sedimentation control;
transportation routes; safety pre-
cautions such as fencing; duration

2 - 74

of operation and rehabilitation of
excavated land including slope
stabilization, revegetation; wet pits
and post-operational use.
d. subdivision regulations which include
but are not limited to standards
for lot and block numeration;
dimensional notation and recording;
external and internal traffic access
and circulation; water treatment;
sewage and waste disposal; protection
of natural drainageways; re-sub-
division, if appropriate; soil and
topographic factors; lot size and
configuration and setback.
e. standards for the manageMent of
shoreland areas within 1,000 feet
of lakes and 300 feet of streams in
accordance and consistent with ML
1969, Chapter 777 and Minnesota
Regulations Conservation 70, in-
cluding provisions-for land use
zoning districts; water supply;
sewage and waste disposal; lot size;
placement of structures on lots;
shoreland alterations; subdivision
regulations and general administration.

Policy: The potential long-range use of public
lands be assessed.

Implement: 1. In developing land use plans local units
of government shall identify public -'
lands that should be sold or exchanged
to accomplish the objectives of their
land use plan.

2. Public agencies shall assess lands
and resources under their jurisdiction
to determine the best use, management
and ownership.

2 75

Policy: Public lands shall be managed to achieve
their best use.

Implement: 1. Public land parcels best suited for
private management and ownership shall be
sold or exchanged for land of equal valuel
within the same county whenever possible.

2. All levels of government shall cooperate
in a land sale or exchange program which
bal'ances local, state and federal
land use policies.

3. Public agencies shall exchange lands
when it would result in more efficient
and effective resource management and
public use.

Policy: Future acquisition of private land by public
agencies shall be in accordance with published
plans which have received public review and
comment and shall minimize the negative
effects on the local tax base.

Implement: 1. Public agencies shall prepare manage-
ment plans for areas under their jurisdiction
which clearly identify the intended use
of those areas, outline the associated
management and development activities
and identify the actual land area re-
quired for that use, management and
development.

2. Public agencies shall prepare an annual
or biennial report of properties to be
acquired. The agency shall file this
report in the courthouse in each
county, publish the report in local news-
papers and notify all affected property
owners.

3. Public agencies shall submit annual
acquisition plans to PAC for review and
comment.

4. For each additional private parcel
purchased in fee simple.by a state or
federal agency, that agency shall offer
to sell or exchange public land of
equal value in the same county.

2 76

Policy: All public and private land use develop-
ments shall comply with all applicable local,
state and federal standards and codes for
setback, screening, building construction,
soils management, sanitation, erosion
control and other factors governing con-
struction.

Implement: Public agencies shall notify local land use
Authorities of their proposed activities.

D. POLICIES AND AUTHORITIES RELATING TO LAND USE

1. State policies and authorities

a. Minnesota-Wisconsin boundary compact.

A Minnesota-Wisconsin Boundary Commission,
the purpose of which is to conduct studies
and develop recommendations relating to the
present and future protection, use, and
development of the lands, river valleys,
and waters which form the boundary between
the states is formed. The Commission is
charged with considering and promoting the
consideration by municipalities of Joint
regional planning for the development of
boundary areas, programs for control of
soil and riverbank erosion, and the general
improvement of the river basins, and restric-
tions and regulation of land use development
designed to preserve the scenic and recrea-
tional attributes of the river basin.
(See Minn. Stat. �� 1.31-1.40.)

b. Statewide comprehensive planning and land
classification.

It is in the public interest that a statewide
planning agency be created to engage in a
program of comprehensive statewide planning.
The planning agency shall act as a directing,
advisory, consulting, and coordinating agency
to,harmonize activities at all levels of gov-
ernment. The .-.tate planning agency also has
the authority to classify all public and pri-
vate lands in the state With reference to the
uses for which those lands are adapted. (See
Minn. Stat..�� 4.10-4.25; 92.35-92.36.)

C. Subdivided Land Sales Practices Act.

Subdivided lands, unless exempted, must be
registered and meet federal and local environ-
mental quality standards and state environ-
mental standards idhiCh are established by the

2 - 77

Environmental Quality Board. (See Minn. Stat.
SS 83.20-83.42.)

d. Conservation restrictions.

The Commissioner of Natural Resources and cer-
tain non-profit charitable corporations may
acquire by gift or purchase from private land-
owners conservation restrictions in the form
of easements, covenants, or conditions, which
are enforceable by injunction and which will
be effective to retain land or water areas
predominantly in their natural, scenic, open,
or wooded condition, or as a suitable habitat
for fish and wildlife. (See Minn. Stat.
99 84.64-84.65.)

e. State parks.

A system of state parks is established and its
management is vested in the Commissioner of
Natural Resources. Under recently adopted
legislative policies, the management of natural
state parks shall seek to maintain a balance
among the plant and animal life of the park
and to re-establish desirable plants and animals
formerly indigenous to the park area, and park
use shall be primarily for aesthetic, cultural,
and educational purposes, rather than designed
to accommodate all forms of recreational use.
Recreational state parks shall be administered
to provide as broad a selection of opportunities
for outdoor recreation as is consistent with
maintaining a pleasing natural environment.
(See Minn. Stat. �� 84.027, 84.03; 85.011 et seq.;
8@_A_. 05 (2) - (3)

State forests.

A system of state forests is established and its
management is vested in the Commissioner of
Natural Resources. Under recently adopted
legislative policies, state forests are admin-
istrated for growing, managing, and harvesting
timber and other forest crops and for the estab-
lishment and development of recreational areas,

2 78

for the protection of watershed areas, and for
the preservation and development of rare and
distinctive species of flora and fauna. (See
Minn. Const., Art. 11, 9 11; Minn. Stat.
�� .001 et seq., 86A.05(7)).

g. Wildlife management areas.

Game refuges or wildlife management areas are
established and their management vested in the
Commissioner of Natural Resources. Under recently
adopted legislative policies, wildlife manage-
ment areas are to be administrated for the pro-
tection of those lands and waters with a high
potential for wildlife pr oduction; for public
hunting, fishing, and trapping; and for other
compatible outdoor recreational uses. (See
Mi.nn.. Stat. �� 86A.05(.8); 99.25 et seq.)

h. Flood plain management.

The public interest requires sound land use
development, and the flood plains of the state
are a land resource to be developed in a manner
which will result in minimum loss of life and
threat to health, and reduction of private
and public economic loss caused by flooding.
It is the state's policy to reduce flood damages
through flood plain management, stressing such
measures as zoning, flood proofing, and flood
warning practices. DNR has established state-
wide standards specifying requirements for local
zoning and subdivision ordinances applicable
to the flood plains, floodways, and flood fringe
areas. The regulation's set detailed structural
standards for such areas. All counties and
municipalities are required to have ordinances
which comply with those standards for areas
that are flood prone when the Commissioner of
DNR finds there is sufficient data to determine
the flood plain and floodway on a watercourse.
(See Minn. Stat. SS 104.01-104.08, Minn. Reg.
NK 85-93.)

Wild and scenic rivers.

It is the state's policy to preserve and pro-
te.ct certain state rivers that possess out-
standing scenic,-recreational, natural, his-
torical, scientific, and similar values. DNR
may develop management plans for designated
rivers, establishing allowable setbacks, struc-,

2 - 79

ture heights, subdivision regulations, etc.
Land use controls which comply with those plans
must be adopted and enforced by local govern-
ments, and land may be acquired by the
Commissioner of Natural Resources. General
standards for such land use controls have been
established by the department by regulation.
(See Minn. Stat. �� 104.31-104.40; 86A.05(10)1
Minn.- eg. NR 78-84.)

Shoreland Management Act.

It is in the public interest to provide guidance
for the wise development of shorelands of public
waters and thus preserve and enhance the quality
of surface waters, preserve the economic and
natural environmental values of shorelands, and
provide for the wise utilization of water and
related land resources. All counties'and
municipalities are required to adopt shoreline
management ordinances, which meet statewide
standards, established by the DNR and governing
the placement of structures, lot sizes, land
uses, etc. Shorelands include lands within 300
feet of streams and rivers and within 1000 feet
of lakes. The regulations require consideration
in the land use zoning which includes: soils,
geology and biological features; appropriate
classification of land use districts; centralization
of commercial development and industrial uses;
ownership; natural and historic features and
sanitary concerns. (See Minn. Stat. 105.485,
Minn. Reg. NR 82-84, Con!i-.70-84.)

k. Minnesota Environmental Rights Act.

Each person is entitled to the protection,
preservation, and enhancement of . . . land
. . . located within the state and each per-
son has a responsibility'to contribute to its
protection, preservation, and enhancement.
It is the state's policy to create and maintain
condi-ions under which man and nature can exist
in productive harmony in order that present and
future generations may enjoy . . . productive
land . . . The act creates a civil action for
any person to bring a lawsuit for the "protection
of . . . land . . . located within the state . . . ...
(See Minn. Stat.'�� 116B.01-116B.13.)

1. Power Plant Siting Act.

The EQB may designate power plant sites and
powerline routes via certificates of compat-

2 - 80

ibility which will supersede all local controls,
and such certificates must be issued in ac-
cordance with criteria established by regulation
that will minimize adverse effects on the environ-
ment, including many land use related factors
such as urban land uses and settlement, agricul-
tural uses, recreational and historic lands,
visual impact, natural systems and areas, soils
and geology, and forest and mineral areas.
(See Minn. Stat. �� 116C.51-116C.69, Minn. Reg.
MEQC 71-75.)

M. Minnesota Environmental Policy Act.

State government should use all practical means
to assure for the people of the state aesthet-
ically pleasing surroundings; develop and
implement land use and environmental policies,
plans, and standards for the state as a whole
and major regions thereof through a coordinated
program of planning and land use control; define,
designate, and protect environmentally-sensitive
areas; and prohibit, where appropriate, flood
plain development in urban and rural areas.
MEPA requires ah environmental impact statement
for any major governmental action having the
potential for significant environmental effects
and prohibits any state action which is likely
to cause pollution, impairment, or destruction
of the . . . land . . . located within the
state so long as there is a feasible and prudent
alternative consistent with the reasonable re-
quirements of the public health, safety, and
welfare, and the state's paramount concern for
the protection of its natural resources. Land
use effects are a significant factor in the decision
whether a,.n EIS i.s needed under EQB regulations
implementing the EIS program. (See Minn. Stat.
116D.01-116D.07, 6 MCAR 3.621-3.047.)

nj Critical Areas Act.

The state should identify those areas possessing
important historic, cultural, or aesthetic values,
or natural systems which perform functions of
greater than local significance, and assist and
cooperate with local units of government in the
preparation of plans and regulations for the
wise use of those areas. The governor may desig-

2 - 81

nate critical areas upon the recommandation
of the Environmental Quality Board, after which
land use plans and regulations are prepared
and enforced by local authorities with assis-
tance from the state in compliance with minimal
standards set by the state, Regulations pro-
viding general guidance on the critical areas
process and the land use zoning requirements
thereunder have been adopted by the 'EQB. (See
Minn. Stat. �� 116G.01-116G.14, Minn. Reg. ME_QC
51-57.)

0. Historic sites and districts.

It is in the public interest to provide for the
preservation of historic sites, buildings, struc-
tures, and antiquities of state and national sig-
nificance. Certain sites, under various ownerships,
are designated state historic sites and the state
and other instrumentalities of government are
.prohibited from changing or altering the physical
features or historic character of those sites
without first obtaining the prior approval of
the Minnesota Historical Society. Certain
structures, sites, and open spaces of historical
and architectural significance, which together
combine to give such an area historic signifi-
cance are designated state historic districts,
and the governing bodies of the subdivisions
of the state in which those districts are located
are given the power to'create boards or commissions
to provide special zoning conditions for the
districts to impose regulations governing their
alteration and use, and to adopt other measures
appropriate for their preservation and protection.
(See Minn. Stat. �� 138.51-138.65; 138.71-138-75;
8 A.0 (11)).

2. Municipal authorities

a. Municipal planning.

Municipal planning will assist in developing
lands more wisely to serve citizens more
effectively, will make the provision of public
services less costly,.@and will achieve a more
secure tax base. Municipalities are given the
authority to prepare and adopt comprehensive
municipal plans and to implement those plans
through a variety of implementation measures.
(See Minn. Stat. �� 462.351-462.364.)

2 - 82

3. Township authorities

a. Township planning.

Townships may plan and zone, subject in some
cases to the approval of the voters.. (See
Minn. Stat. SS 394.33, 366.10-181; 368.01.)

4. County authorities

a. Coun ty planning.

Counties'are authorized to prepare and adopt
comprehensive plans and to implement those
plans through a variety of implementation
measures; to enter into agreements with the
federal government for various programs of
land conservation and utilization; and to
enter into agreements with other counties
for the conduct of regional planning activ-
ities. (See Minn. Stat. �9 394.21-394.37;
375.471; 462.371.)

5. other authorities

a, Soil and water conservation districts.

It is the state's policy to provide for the
conservation of soil and soil resources and
for the control and prevention of soil
erosion, for land resource planning and,
development, and for the implementation of
land resource use practices that effectively,
reduce siltation and loss of theland base
through various activities. Soil and water
conservation districts may be organized to
conduct erosion control projects, and to .
develop a comprehensive plan for the conservation
of.soil and water resources. A district may
provide technical assistance to landowners
and request assistance from the state.
(See Minn. Stat. �5 40.005-40.15.)

b. Regional development commissio ns.

It is the policy of the state to facilitate
intergovernmental cooperation and to insure
the orderly and harmonious coordination of

2 83

state, federal, and local comprehensive
planning of development programs for the
solution.of economic, social, physical, and
governmental problems. Regional development
commissions may be established by combinations
of counties and municipalities. Such com-
missions may adopt comprehensive regional
plans concerning physical, social, and economic
needs, and may review the plans of local units
of government and special purpose districts.
(See Minn. Stat. 462.381-462.397.)

2 84

VIII. SOLID WASTE

A. PROBLEMS AND ISSUES

1. The nature and extent of, and practices and pro-
cedures for handling hazardous and special wastes
along the North Shore have not been determined.

2. The linear development pattern along the North
Shore adds to the cost-of solid waste collection and
disposal. Wildcat dumping continues because some
canisters or landfill sites are not accessible.

3. Land ownership patterns and poor soils limit the
number of suitable landfill sites.

4. Due to large seasonal population fluctuations,
.solid waste facilities must be flexible, thereby
adding to costs of.providing and planning for such
facilities.

5. Counties lack adequate funds to carry out and en-
force comprehensive solid waste management programs.
Unique factors of the Coastal Zone (see problems
2, 3, and 4 above) only add to the costs.

6. Solid waste generated at state and federal recrea-
tional facilities has not always been handled in a
manner consistent with state standards.

7. Potential leaching problems from old dumps or
existing sanitary landfills have not been examined.

8. Small, illegal dumps are appearing in Duluth due to
lack of door-to-door collection, which is required
by the county solid waste plan.

B. SOLID WASTE GOALS, POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION STEPS

Goal: A solid waste management program that is
economically feasible, accessible to users,
and consistent with the regional solid
waste plan and state and federal laws and
regulations.

Policy: Complete an evaluation of existing solid waste
rules and regulations to determine whether
they should be modified.to reflect the low
population densities in the Coa stal Zone.

2 - 85

Policy: All public agencies comply with regulations
governing collection, deposition, and trans-
portation of solid waste.

Implement: 1. Prepare, adopt and implement procedures
to improve refuse collection and disposal
at state parks, waysides, rest areas,
campgrounds and all other state facilities
used by the public.

2. Prepare, adopt and implement pro-
cedures that consider seasonal'varia-
tions in use, including the smelt season,
and provide for adequate funding and
manpower.

3. Determine the extent of leachate.prob-
lems at closed dumps and at landfills
and modified landfills so that proper
controls and remedial measures may be
taken if necessary.
Policy: Portions of the county solid waste manage-
ment plans which apply to the Coastal Zone
be eligible for CZM Section 306 funding for
implementation.
C. POLICIES@ AND AUTHORITIE: IS ;]RELATING TO SOLID WASTES

1. Pollution Control Agency

The Pollution Control Agency is established to meet the
variety and complexity of problems relating to water,
air, and land pollution in the areas of the state
affected thereby, and to achieve a reasonable degree of
purity of water, air, and land resources of the state
consistent with the maximum enjoyment.and use thereof
in furtherance of the welfare of the people of the
.state. The agency is charged with promoting-solid
waste disposal control by encouraging the updating of
collection systems, the elimination of open dumps, and
improvements in the incinerator practices. The agency is
also directed to adopt standards for the control of the
collection, transportation, storage, and disposal of
solid waste for the prevention and abatement of water,
air, and land pollution. The agency is further authorized
to issue or deny permits, u *nder such conditions as it
may prescribe, forthe collection, transportation, and
disposal of solid wastes, or for the installation or
operation of any system or facility related to the
collection, transportation, or disposal of solid wastes.
Regulations regarding solid waste have been adopted by
the PCA. (See, Minn. Stat. SS 116.01 - 116.11, Minn. Reg.
SW 1-11, 75=7-9, 3-1.)

2 86

2. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities.
The Pollution Control Agency is authorized to classify
facilities for the disposal of solid waste according to
the degree of hazard, to the public'health or the environment
involved in their operation, and according to the volume
or hazardous character of solid waste disposed of at the
facility-The agency may develop standards of competence
for persons operating various classes of facilities for
the disposal of-solid waste. (.See, Minn. Stat. 116.41.)

3. Minnesota Environmental Policy Act.

State government should use.all practical means to reduce
wasteful practices which generate solid-waste and should
conserve natural resources and,minimize environmental
impact by encouraging the extension of product lifetimes,
by reducing the number of unnecessary and wasteful
materials practices, and by recycling materials which
would conserve both materials and energy.. MEPA:requires
an environmental impact statement for any ma3or governmental
action having the potential for significant environmental
affects and prohibits any state action which is likely
tocause pollution, impairment,,or destruction of,the
air, water, land, or other natural resources located
within the state, so long as there is a feasible and
prudent alternative consistent with the reasonable
requirements of the public health, safety, and welfare,
and the state's paramount concern for the protection of
its natural resources. (See Minn. Stat. SS 116D.01
116D.07, 6 MCAR S3.)

A. Recycling of Solid Waste.

The legislature seeks to encourage both the reduction.
of the amount and type of material entering the solid
waste stream and the reuse and recycling of the materials.
It is declared that solid waste represents discarded
material and energy resources, and it also represents
an economic burden to the people of the state. The
recycling of solid waste materials is one alternative
for the conservation of material and energy resources,
but it is also in the public interest to reduce the
amount of materials requiring recycling or disposal. A
grants-in-aid program is established to provide appropri-
ations for regions, municipalities, or institutions.for
the development of resource recovery systems and programs
to encourage solid materials conservation. The Pollution
Control Agency is directed to promulgate rules for the
administration of such grants-in-aid, and to advise and
assist industry and business in providing and developing the
packaging of containers consistent with the environmental
policLes of the state. In exercising its powers, the
agency is directed to seek those alternatives which
maximize.the conservation of energy and materials while
minimizing the environmental impact of the cost to the
people of the state. It is directed to consider economic
factors, including but not limited to,effects on the labor
force. (See Minn. Stat. SS 116F.01 - 116F.08, Minn. Reg.
SR 1-6.) 2 - 07

Solid Waste Manaqement.

In order to protect the state's water, air, and land
resources so as to promote the public safety, health,
welfare, and productive capacity of its population, it
is in the public interest that counties conduct solid waste
management programs. Counties are authorized to establish
solid waste management programs and to promulgate rules,
regulations, and 'Standards for solid waste management and
pollution. The *counties are further directed to cooperate
with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency in the
development and implementation of systems for the
recovery and use of materials and energy from solid
waste, and toward that end, shall modify applicable
county ordinances consistent with the rules, regulations,
and standards of the agency concerning that subject.
(See Minn. Stat. �9 400.01 - 400.17.)
6. Municipalities and Rubbish Disposal.

Statutory cities are authorized to provide facilities
for rubbish disposal and to regulate such disposal by
ordinance. (See Minn. Stat. SS 412.221(22); 443.015
443.35.)

2 88

IX. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

A, PROBLEMS A11D ISSUES

1. Industrial development opportunities are hampered
because:

a. the area is remote from large consumer markets,
b. transportation options are limited,
c. the employment pool is small and skills may be
limited to certain areas of expertise, i.e.,
mining, forestry,
d. the demand for wood products used in the
paper industry is currently very low, and
e. the potential for mining is unknown.

2. Commercial development opportunities are hampered
because:

a. the area is remote from large consumer markets,
b. transportation options are limited,
C. existing primary industry is limited.

3. The lack of a diversified economic base is a major
long-term problem on the North Shore. Major full-
time employment currently depends on extractive re-
source type industries which has created single in-
dustry communities.

4. Because of limited industrial and commercial de-
velopment, there is a strong reliance on seasonal
activities. such as forestry and tourism, in some
parts of the Coastal Zone.

5. Some North Shore residents are under-employed due to
the lack of full-time employment opportunities.

6. The nature and extent of economic opportunities,
including tourism, along the North Shore have not
been adequately determined.

B. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS, POLICIES, AND IMPLEMENTATION
STEPS

Goal: A stable year-round economy with employment
opportunities for the existing North Shore
labor force, increased economic security for
residents and economic flexibility for local
units of government.
k

2 - 89

Policy: The efforts and capabilities of private
interests and federal, state and local
agencies involved in economic develop-
ment be coordinated.

Implement: 1. Analyze the economic development op-
portunities of the Coastal Zone and
develop a strategy which reflects the
geographic location, labor force
characteristics, natural resouce base,
land use, transportation and other
potentials of the area.

2. Utilize this strategy in referring pros-
pective developers to the North Shore
area at the state level and to assist
in prioritizing the use of development
grants and loans at the federal level.

3. Develop procedures for more effectively
delivering economic development technical
services and funding to local units of
government including the evaluation
of costs and benefits of economic de-
velopment and the funding of public
services such as sewer and water.

4. Develop a cooperative program for better
informing visitors to the Coastal Zone
of the recreational opportunities.

a. develop materials which better in-
form North Shore Vi:�itors of the
public and private recreation op-
portunities.

b. study the feasibility of building
and operating a visitor center at
Pigeon River and other locations.

C. POLICIES AND AUTHORITIES:RELATING TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

1. Pollution Control Agency.

In exercising its powers, the Pollution Control Agency
is directed to give due consideration to the establishment,
maintenance, operation, and expansion of business, commerce,
trade, industry, traffic, and other economic factors and
other material matters affecting the feasibility and
practicability of any proposed action, including, but not
limited to, the burden on a municipality of any tax which
may result therefrom, and it is further directed to take
or provide for such action as may be reasonable, feasible,
and practicable under the circumstances. (See Minn.
Stat. 9116.07(6) .) 1

2 - 90

2. Minnesota Environmental Rights Act.,

The Minnesota Environmental Rights Act create's a civil
action for any person to bring a lawsuit for the protection
of air, water, land, or other natural resources located
within the state, and further provides that economic
considerations alone shall not constitute a defense to
such a lawsuit. (See Minn. Stat. SS 116B.01 -@- 116B.13.)

3. Minnesota Environmental Policy Act.
The Minnesota Environmental Policy Act prohibits any
state action which is likely to cause pollution, impairment,
or destruction of the air, water, land, or other natural
resources located within the state so long as there is
a feasible and prudent alternative consistent with the
reasonable requirements of the public health, safety,
and welfare, and the state's paramount concern for the
protection of its natural resources. It further provides
that economic considerations alone shall not justify such
conduct. (See Minn. Stat. SS 116D.01 - 116D.07.)

4. iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation.

The Office of Commissioner of Iron Range Resources and
Rehabilitation is created, and an Iron Range Resources
and Rehabilitation Board is created. Whenever the
Commissioner or Board shall determine that distress and
unemployment exist or may exist in the future in.any
county by reason of the removal of natural resources or
a possible limited use thereof in the future and that the
decrease in employment will result therefrom,they
are authorized to take certain actions with regard to
appropriations and property acquisitions for the purpose
of developing the remaining resources of the affected
county and for the purpose of promoting the vocational
training and rehabilitation of the county's residents.
(See Minn. Stat.� 298.22.)

5- Regional Tourism Development Credit Corporations.

Provision is made for the creation of regional tourism
development credit corporations,for the purpose of
assisting, encouraging, developing, and advancing the
tourist,and recreational business and the prosperity
and economic welfare of the state; for the purpose of
encouraging'and assisting in the location of new tourist
and recreational businesses in the state and for rehabilitating
the existing tourist and recreational businesses; and
for the purpose of stimulating and assisting in the
expansion of all kinds of tourist and recreational
activities which will tend to promote the tourist and
recreational development and maintain the economic
stability of the state, while providing maximum opportunities
for employment. (See Minn. Stat. SS 301A.01 - 301A.14.)

2 91

6. Rural Development Finance Authorities.

Any county or combination of counties is permitted to
establish a rural development financing authority f 'or
the purposes of, inter alia, promoting new job opportunities
through the development of natural resources and the agri-
cultural industry by cooperating with private companies
and with agencies of the federal and state governments and
with agencies and political subdivisions of other states
and of foreign nations to engage in the processing of
agricultural products. (See Minn. Stat. H 362A.01
362A.08.)

7-. Economic Development Department.

A department of economic development is established to
investigate and undertake means of promoting the prosperity,
development, and protection of the legitimate interests
and welfare of Minnesota business, industry, and commerce;
to locate markets for manufacturers and processors' and
to aid merchants in locating and contacting markets; to
investigate and disseminate information concerning the
conditions affecting Minnesota business; to conduct
research to further new and more extensive uses
of the natural and other resources of the state and to
develop new products and industrial processes; to serve
as a clearinq house for business and industrial problems
of the state; to encourage and develop commerce with
other states and foreign countries; and to cooperate
with interstate commissions engaged in formulating and
promoting the adoption of interstate compacts and agree-
ments helpful to business, industry, and commerce. The
department is also directed to advise and cooperate with
municipal, county, regional, and other planning agencies
within the state for the purpose of promoting coordination
between the state and localities as to plans and develop-
ment in order to maintain a high level of gainful employ-
ment in private profitable production and to achieve economic
advancement-in social and cultural welfare. (See Minn.
Stat. 99 362.07 - 362.40.)

8. County Agricultural Development.

County boards are authorized to appropriate money
to any incorporated development society or organization
of the state which, in the opinion of the board, will use.
such money for the best interests of the county in p'romoting,,
advertising, improving, or developing the economic and
agricultural resources of the county, and such other matters
as may tend to the development of the county. (See Minn.
Stat. S 395.08.)

2 92

9. Port Authorities.

A, commission known as "Port Authority of
is established in and for every city of the first class
situated upon, or adjacent to, or embracing within its
boundaries, in whole or in part, a port or harbor located
on a navigable lake or stream. It is the general duty
of any such port authority to promote the general welfare
of the port district, and of the port as a whole; to endeavor
to increase the volume of the commerce thereof; to promote
the efficient, safe, and economic handling of such commerce;
and to provide or promote adequate docks and railroad
terminal facilities open to all upon reasonable and equal
terms for the handling, storage, care, and shipment of
freight and passengers to, from, and through the port.
(See Minn. Stat. �� 458.09 - 458.1991.)

10. Area Redevelopment Act.

The legislature finds that there exist in the state
certain areas of substantial and persistent unemployment
causing hardship to many individuals and their families
and that there exist certain rural areas where development
and redevelopment should be encouraged; that to overcome
the problem, the powers and facilities of the state govern-
ment and local communities, in cooperation with the
federal government, should assist rural areas and areas
of substantial and chronic unemployment in planning
and financing economic development by private enter-
prise. It further finds that economic insecurity due to
underdevelopment and unemployment or under-employment in
certain regional or local areas of the state can
be eliminated by the promotion, attraction, encouragement,
and assistance of commerce, industry, and manufacturing in
such areas. Provision is made for a municipality or
group of municipalities to establish a public body to be
known as the local or area redevelopment agency for the
purpose of promoting a development project. (See, Minn.
Stat. �� 472.01 - 472-16.)

11. Municipal Development Districts.

The legislature finds that there is a need for new
development in areas of municipalities which are
already built up to provide employment opportunities,
to improve the tax base, and to improve the general
economy of the state. Municipalities are authorized
to develop a program for improving such districts
to provide impetus for commercial development;
to increase employment; to protect pedestrians from
vehicle traffic and inclement weather; to provide the
necessary linkage between the peripheral parking
facilities and places of employment and shopping; to
provide off-street parking to serve the shoppers and
employees of the district; to provide open space relief
within the district; and to provide other facilities
as are outlined in the development program adopted by
the governing body. (See, Minn. Stat. S 472A.01 - 472A.13.)

2 - 93

12. Municipal Industrial Development Act.

The'legislature finds that the welfare of the state
requires promotion, attraction, encouragement, and
development of economically sound industry and commerce
through governmental actions for the purpose of preventing,
so far as possible, the emergence of blighted and
marginal lands in areas of chronic unemployment. It is
the policy of the state to facilitate and encourage
action by local government units to prevent the economic
deterioration of such area to the point where the
Process canbe reversed only by total redevelopment
through the use of local, state, and federal tax funds.
The legislature further finds that a primary factor
necessitating such action is technological change in
agriculture, mining, forestry, and other traditional
industries of the state. The legislature further finds
that unless existing and related industries are retained
and new industries are developed to use the available
resources in each community, a large part of the existing
investment of these communities and of the state as a
whole in educational or public service facilities will
be lost. The Municipal Industrial Development Act
grants to municipalities and redevelopment agencies the
powers in addition to those prescribed elsewhere by the
laws of the state, for the purpose of aiding in the
redevelopment of the existing areas of blight, marginal
land, and substantial and persistent unemployment.
These powers include the powers to issue revenue bonds,
to enter into agreements with other municipalities,
political subdivisions, and state authorities for
planning, constructing, leasing, purchasing, mortgaging,
or otherwise acquiring redevelopment projects. (See
Minn. Stat. H 474.01 - 474.15.)

2 - 94

X, OUTDOOR RECREATION

Introduction

As part of the Coastal Zone Management Program, the Depart-
ment of Natural Resources conducted a North Shore Recreation
Study. The primary purpose of this study was to evaluate
the recreational potential of local, state, federal and
private facilities and recommend how they might be improved
and coordinated.

Public lands were studied as to their location and accessibility
by various means of transportation; theirnatural chardcteristics
such as wildlife suitability, vegetation types, soils dnd
topographic relief; their recreational features, both fiatural
and historical; existing types and numbers of recreational
facilities, and problems related to management for recfeation.
Patterns of use were determined through interviews with local
residents, resort and private campground owners, and state
and federal agency personnel familiar with local conditions.
Park attendance figures over a five year period, Univeksity
of Minnesota Extension Service Reports, DOT studies, and various
economic studies for the region also helped define the long-
term trends.

Study recommendations deal with the overall role each ex--
isting facility should play in satisfying a portion of the
North Shore recreational demand, how each facility should
be managed, the agency best suited to manage it and proposed
new sites, if required, to serve certain recreation demands in
the future. In determining the type of management best suited
to the various publicly-owned areas on the North Shore, the
study considered:

a. the relationship between privately-owned recreational
facilities and publicly-owned lands;

b. the type of management that is deemed most appropriate
for specific resources by resource managers; and

C. the total range of public and private recreation lands
and facilities within the study area.

The recommendations emphasize the need for greater cooperation
between various public agencies as well as the public and
private sectors. Major recommendations have been incorporated
into this section as policies or implementation steps. They
will serve as the basis for monitoring consistency with the
CZM Plan and serve as guidelines to state agencies in de-
veloping more detailed management plans for specific state
parks, forests, wildlife management areas and rest areas.

2 - 95

Local involvement played'a mal'or role in the development of
the study and its recommendations. Many meetings were held
during the study to determine local perceptions of recreational
issues. Following the preparation of a draft study report,
two sets of informational meetings were held in Two Harbors,
Grand Marais, Lutsen, and Finland. These meetings were
publicized in area newspapers.

A. Recreation Problems and Issues

General

1. Planning for the use of public lands for recreational
use must be coordinated with recreational activities
provided by the private sector.

2. A large portion of public lands are not being actively
ma.naged while others suffer from over-use.

3. Publicity for the north shore is insufficient. More
visitor centers are needed.

4. The recreational loading factor along the north shore
is a problem. There is a need to know at what point
over-saturation or over-utilization of the natural
resources occurs.

State Parks

1. Many of the existing parks are being over-used and
there is a lack of adequate controls. Campers
often use areas for overnight camping which are
not designated for this type of use. Vandalism and
littering, during the peak of the summer season,
are deteriorating the beauty of the present parks
and the shore.

2. There is a shortage of facilities at the existing
parks. More picnic tables, benches, toilet facilitiest
and better information about how to use the park
are needed.

Trails

1. There is a need for more and better maintained
trails, especially bicycle trails, long distance
cross-country ski trails, and backpacking trails.

2 - 96

2. Coordination of trail development is needed, especially
in the linking of trails with other adjacent trailsf
service nodes, and recreational clusters.

3. Lack of coordination in trail development has led
to extension of trails rather than their proper
maintenance. Currently, many are in a state of
disrepair.

Boating

1. Demand for recreational boating within the coastal
zone is increasing. Currently, existing facilities
do not match the demand. More small boat harbors
and harbors of refuge are needed and current access
sites improved.

Rivers and Lakes

1. Concentrations of fishermen during the spring smelt
run create congestion and enforcement Problems for
local residents. Associated concerns include camping
in non-designated areas and roadside parking.

State Forests

1. State forest properties need to be evaluated for future
recreational use.

2. Forest management policies could conflict with
aesthetic or recreational goals, i.e., the use of
clear cutting.

3. Several problems can occur when using state forests
for recreation: fire danger, damage to trees and un-
surfaced roads during wet periods from snowmobile
and four wheel drive vehicles.

Highway Rest Areas

1. The no-camping policy needs to be enforced in the
waysides.

2. More rest room facilities are needed, and they are
inadequately marked.

3. Improvements are needed in the maintenance of existing
waysides; Garbage cans are not emptied.

4o Coordination needs to be improved between DNR and
DOT in developing and maintaining rest areas.

2 - 97

5. Additional modernized rest areas are needed as well
as upgrading existing waysides by adding modern
facilities.

'Roads and Recreation

1. The North Shore attracts a great volume of sight-
seeing traffic. The impact of the crowds of tourists
has had adverse effects on the flow of the daily
commercial traffic in the area. It also has de-
tracted fron the quality of experience of those
tourists currently using the area.

2. Futur'e planning of T.H. 61 needs to be coordinated
with recreational interests so that safe, efficient,
commercial and commuter traffic can co-exist with
the pleasure driving of tourist traffic.

Scientific and Natural Areas

1. Fragile areas need to be identified and management
policies developed accordingly.

Interpretive Programs

1. There are few interpretive programs along the
North Shore. More are needed.

Miscellaneous

1. Swimming areas are needed along the North Shore,
especially ones with lifeguards.

2. Winter recreation activities need to be promoted.

3. Support facilities for state parks are now funded
by the local people - law enforcement, health care,
and ambulance facilities. The counties bear the
burden of providing'these facilities for tourists
from all over the state.

4. There is no clear policy on use of park gravel by
the public.

5. There is inadequate collection and storage of solid
waste within the parks and waysides.

2 - 98

B. Goals, Policies and Implementation Steps

Goal: To provide diverse, year-round opportunities
for public recreation by integrating public
recreation programs with those of the private
tourism service industry. Diverse op-
portunities range from those that.are
aesthetic or educational in nature and pri-
marily benefit the human mind and spirit
to those that require strenuous physical
exertion and are primarily physical fit-
ness oriented.

Policy: Strengthen the communications link among
federal, state and local recreational
agencies and the tourism industry to
broaden understanding of the roles,
capabilities and plans.of each and to achieve
the best planning, development, operation,
maintenance, protection and visitor use of
coastal zone recreational resources. ,

Implement: 1. Periodically hold joint meetings be-
tween respective agency staffs to dis-
.seminate program information and to
provide opportunities to comment on
plans prior to final approval.

2. Hold periodic meetings of agency person-
nel,.local officials and private entre-
preneurs to keep each other informed
of plans and programs and provide a
forum for discussing issues of mutual
concern.

3. Develop an information distribution system
to enable state agencies and local
governments to notify concerned parties
of proposed actions.

4. Establish a liaison position to maintain
communiciations and provide current in-
formation on proposed programs and projects.

5. Formalize decisions whichaffect more
than one agency through written agreements.

2 - 99

Federal Recreation Goals,- Policies and Implementation Steps

Federal Goals

To develop, maintain, and upgrade existing federally-
administered recreational facilities and to identify other
federal lands having potential for federal recreational
management.

To manage or assist others in managing those natural or
man-made resources of national significance.

Federal Policies

The PAC shall encourage federal agencies with jurisdiction
over recreational activities to review proposed recreational
management plans with them in order to improve the coordination
of efforts between levels of government.

U.S. Forest Service

Source: Guide for Managing the National Forests
in the Lake States, Eastern Region,
Forest Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, August, 1975.

Implement: a. Provide a fair share proportion of
the varied recreational experiences ap-
propriate to the Superior National
Forest.

b. Encourage, cooperate and avoid com-
peting with private industry or
other public agencies in providing
new, highly developed recreation
facilities.

c. Complete development of existing
national forest recreational
facilities to achieve optimum
site utilization.

d. Restrict Lakeshore development to
those lakes, or portions thereof,
that can support facilities with
acceptable environmental impact.

2 - 100

e. Evaluate for closure under-utilized
and/or high-cost recreation facilities,
which do not offer a better than
average-recreation experience.
Forest supervisors will perform
indicated closure(s).

f. Establish criteria for the protection
of undeveloped lakes and rivers.

9- Establish, as needed, regulations
to control motor vehicle access
to lakes.

h. Coordinate the design and management
of facilities (roads, trails,
buildings, etc.) with the rec-
reational experience level selected
for the particular area.

i. Consider constructing new downhill
skiing facilities in the Superior
National Forest provided environ-
mental procedures support such a
project.

j. Plan and develop trails to meet
the needs of a variety of
uses. Where possible, design
trails to allow compatible uses
on the same trail (e.g., horses
during thesummer, snowshoeing
during the winter). Where con-
flicting uses (e.g., cross country
skiing/snowmobiling) occur during
the same season, trails shall be
designed for, and use limited.to,
a specified use.

k. Construct a limited number of
bicycle trails to test the demand
for this type of forest recreation.

1. Provide trails and/or areas
where off-road vehicles are allowed.

m. Consider a carry-in/carry-out
policy where refuse facilities are
not provided.

2 - 101

n. Provide visitor information services
in a fashion which responds to the
forest users' interest in, and
desires for, interpretation of the
local environment and to their
need for knowledge about nearby
recreation opportunities. Federal
information services shall be
coordinated with those services
provided on the state level as to
material content and dissemination.

Department of the Interior

i
Implement:, 1. Consider, through the Bureau of
Outdoor Recreation, the recreational
priorities established by the Policy
Advisory Committee in funding public
recreational facilities within the
Coastal Zone.

2. The National Park Service shall:

a. ensure that planning and
development activities of the
Grand Portage National Monument
and the National Natural Land-
marks Program are coordinated
with the Minnesota North
Shore Recreation System Plan;
and

b. continue its liaison with Minnesota's
State Historic Preservation Officer
for administration of grant programs
and identification of sites eligible
for listing on the National Register
of Historic Places.

3. The Bureau o-f Land Management shall;

a. manage its recreation resources
to provide recreation opportunities
commensurate with public needs and
resource capabilities. BLM's Rec-
reation Resource Management Program
shall be oriented toward natural
and cultural values. The Bureau
shall manage public use of its
national resource lands to protect
the resurces, to promote visitor
safety, and to enhance the visitor's
recreation experience.

2 102

b. Will manage and protect, in
both its marine and upland management
,programs, the cultural resources
under its jurisdiction or control
and avoid inadvertent loss or
destruction of cultural resources.

C. Plan, design, and implement re-
source management activities in a
manner which minimizes adverse
effects on the visual resource.

d. Manage national resource lands
to protect representative areas of
unique and/or typical natural history
resources.

Corps of Engineers

Implement: 1. Coordinate implementation of the
Harbor of Refuge Program and Small
Boat Harbor Program with state and
local recreation programs.

State and Local Recreation Goals, Policies and Implementa-
tion Steps

Policy: When requested, the state shall assist
private enterprise in developing high
quality recreation facilities by pro-
viding technical assistance.

Policy: Provide for the management, protection
and development of appropriate support
facilities and visitor use programs
at all state recreational areas.

Implement: 1. Prepare management plans for ad-
ministering all state facilities,
as required by the Outdoor Recreation
Act of 1975.
2. Give highest priority to the de-
velopment, maintenance, and general
upgrading of existing state facilities
and assure that all improvements
comply with state fire, safety and
building codes and state health and
pollution standards.

2 - 103

3. Adopt an'architectural theme for
state facilities which combines
styling and materials in keeping
with the North Shore environment.

4. Develop facilities for the handicapped
where such use is feasible and ex-
plore new designs that enable the
handicapped to participate in more
activities.

5. Provide facilities on public lands
which minimize the competition with
privately-owned facilities.

6. Where appropriate, provide access
by all segments of the.population
to all public trails and facilities.
Such access should be rated accord-
ing to the Accessibility Rating
System contained in the Trails
Section of the North Shore Recrea-
tion Study and provided in a manner
that does not cause undue altera-
tion of the site. Encourage pri-
vate trail owners to utilize the
rating system.

State Parks

-Policy: Acquisition of land within state parks
should be consistent with the philosophy
of improving park management through
consolidation.

Implement: Whenever possible, parcels within
legislatively authorized boundaries
of state parks should be acquired
through land exchanges.

Policy: Development of camping facilities
should be coordinated between the state
and the private sector.

Implement: The state should provide camping
when the private sector cannot and
should continue to provide the type
of camping that the private sector
cannot afford.

2 - 104

Policy: State parks shall be developed in a manner
which:

--is appropriate to the natural charac-
teristics of the park;
--is coordinated with development in
state forests;
--is coordinated with the private rec-
,reational/tourism industry;
--protects areas closest to the Shore
that are less suitable for develop-
ment than areas further inlahd;-
--provides for more primitive camping
and backpacking;
--does not provide uses normally as-
sociated with rest areas;
--considers, and where appropriate
utilizes power line right-of-way;
--considers the provision of access
links to the North Shore Trail;
--provides for passive interpretive/
educational experiences.

Implement: State park management plans shall re-
flect the above considerations.

Policy: Development of sewage systems in state
parks should emphasize experimental
or new technology systems and.the re-
sults of these systems should be made
available to local residents.

Implement: 1. The DNR, in cooperation with PCA,
should experiment with different
sewage disposal systems and
publicize the results.

2. Seek funding for the immediate up-
grading of sanitary facilities and
water systems at Gooseberry River
State Park, Split Rock Lighthouse
State Park, Baptism River State
Park and Cascade River State Park.

3. At a minimum, on-site sewage disposal
systems should comply with county
sanitation ordinances and PCA's
regulation WPC-40.

2 - 105

Policy: state parks will serve as experimental
sites for applying the Trail Acces-
sibility Rating System.

Trails

velopment in the coastal zone.
'Policy: Coordinate trail planning and de-

Implement: l. Provide a forum for discussing
public and private trail plans.

2. Offer the expertise of public
agencies in trail development
and maintenance to private en-
terprise.

3. Inform local citizens and officials
of the state Grant-in-Aid Trail
Program which provides funding for
trail development and maintenance.

Policy: Develop long distance corridor trails
which accommodate multiple use, are
serviced by adequate collateral facilities,
and-are located so that major population
centers are linked and scenic vistas
preserved.

Implement: 1. Complete construction of the North
Shore Trail to Grand Portage., Trail
links should connect service areas,
multiple-season recreation nodes
and state parks as recommended.

2. Locate trail service nodes at Duluth,
Two Harbors, Silver Bay, Schroeder,
Grand Marais and Grand Portage.

Policy: Develop trail systems which expand
public understanding and enjoyment of
coastal zone resources and are compatible
with the coastal environment.

,Implement: 1. Develop a separate system of trails
for hiking and ski touring which
connect Crosby-Manitou State Park,
Finland State Forest and Baptism
River State Park.

2 - 106

2. Extend existing backpacking trails
in Crosby-Manitou State Park and
Judge C.R..Magney State Park 'to
provide longer backpacking ex-
periences.

3. Develop trails, primitive campsites
and hike-in picnic areas at scenic
locations along river fall zones.

4.- Maximize use of existing linear
corridors such as utility rights
of-way, abandoned railroads and
roadways for trail use when such
use complements the area's other rec-
reational opportunities and potentials.

5. Develop trails for bicycle use along
T.H. 61 and at other appropriate
locations.

6. Develop trails at Class II Rest
Areas which are accessible to the
handicapped whenever possible.

7. Develop trails to provide access to
publicly owned beaches which are
not susceptible to damage.

8. Prepare trail guides for self-guided
trail interpretation.

Policy: State trails-shall be developed in ac-
cordance with the following guidelines:

a. Trails should be designed so that
they are capable'of being maintained
by a standardized-maintenance system.

b. All publicly-owned trails should
be located on public land wherever
legally possible.

C. Ski-touring trails should be de-
veloped in accordance with the
Ski Touring Trail Ratinq System.
,Trails, other than ski-touring trails,
should be developed according to
the Trail Accessibility Rating
System.

2 107

Boating

Policy: Facilities for recreational boating in
Lake Superior shall be promoted and
enhanced.

Implement: 1. Develop authorized small boat
harbors at Silver Bay, Schroeder and
Grand Portage.

2. Harbors of refuge should be de-
veloped according to the following
priorities:

First priority - Split Rock River
Bluebird Landing

Second priority - Lutsen
Sugarloaf Landing

Third priority - Pork Bay
Temperance River

Fourth priority - Good Harbor Bay
Baptism River

3. Existing public access sites, both
pedestrian and vehiclular, should
be improved through the addition of
hard surfaced ramps and parking areas.

Policy: Coordinate development of service areas
for@the proposed small boat harbors with
the development of trail service facilities
to avoid duplication.

Implement: Develop service areas at Duluth, Two
Harbors, Silver Bay, Schroeder, Grand
Marais and Grand Portage.

Policy: Boating use of North Shore streams should
not be encouraged or developed except on
the St. Louis River.

Implement: DNR shall not provide any facilities for
boating on North Shore streams
except on the St. Louis River.

Policy: Due to high construction costs, the
need for boating facilities shall be
weighed against the need for other
types of recreation facilities.

2 108

Implement Feasibility studies should be conducted
to determine the actual need for each
additional harbor beyond those authorized
at Schroeder, Silver Bay and Grand
Portage. Such studies should consider
the user analysis done by the Minnesota
Marine Advisory Service and any data
which subsequently becomes available.

Policy: Potential access and harbor sites should
be carefully evaluated to determine
the probable impacts of future de-
velopment.

Rivers and Lakes

Policy: Provide adequate recreational facilities
along wild and scenic rivers in order
to enhance the recreational values
of the river and insure that public
use of the river will not adversely
affect the scenic, natural, historical
and scientific values of the river.

Implement: 1. Develop management plans and rules
and regulations for any designated
wild and scenic river.

2. DNR should coordinate plans for
wild and scenic rivers in the
coastal zone with the coastal
zone plan and the Policy Advisory
Committee.

Policy: Improve opportunities for recreational
fishing.

Implement: 1. Accelerate fisheries management,
including t@e development or re-
development of appropriate fisher-
men access sites, on the following
rivers:

St. Louis River Lester River
Stewart River Gooseberry River
Sucker River Baptism River
Knife River Temperance River
Silver Creek Devil Track River
Split Rock River Brule River
Beaver River French River
Talmadge River

2 - 109

2. Consider fisheries management pro-
grams for trout streams in Duluth.

3. Coordinate the stream easement
acquisition program with the ac-
celerated fisheries management
program and cooperate with private
land owners to discourage tre's-
passers where stream easements
cannot be obtained.

4. Design and develop the DNR Fisheries
Division property at Knife River
in a manner that provides for the
needs of recreational shore fishermen
while meeting local interests.

5. Apply shoreland management ordinances
in a manner that is consistent with
fisheries management objectives.

Policy: Provide adequate public access to Lake
Superior, streams and beaches in re-
lationship to the characteristics of
these areas.

Policy: Continue and upgrade, if necessary,
the cooperative program between DNR,
the State Highway Patrol and local
officials and groups designed to al-
leviate problems associated with the
smelting season. Local government should
be reimbursed for equal costs incurred
as a result of program participation.

State Forests

Policy: Develop the full potential of state
forests for outdoor recreation, con-
sistent with other established purposes
for forest management.

Implement: 1. Integrate dispersed types of rec-
reation with timber management
where there is potential for both
uses.

2. Conduct as soon as possible, a
Phase II Intensive Inventory of
the Finland, Grand Portage, Cloquet
and Pat Bayle State forests.

2 110

3. Conduct a recreation demand study
to determine the needs that can
be provided for by state forests.

4. Evaluate forest areas with high
wildlife and recreation values for
cooperative management similar to
the Cascade Area.

5. Investigate the potential of the
Horseshoe Bay Area as a state forest
recreation site.

6. Investigate state forest boundaries
to determine the most manageable
unit configuration.

7. Manage state forest lands along
all major recreation routes to
maintain high scenic quality.

Highway Rest Are as

Policy: To provide an adquate system of highway
rest areas for visitor safety and
comfort, information dissemination
and appropriate visitor use of associated
recreational resources.

Implement: 1. DOT shall

a. Develop a Class I Rest Area
at the Pigeon River entry on
the Canadian Border.
b. Upgrade existing rest areas
at Knife River and 14t. Josephine
to Class II standards.
C. Develop new Class Il Rest
Areas at Split Rock River,
Baptism River, Tofte and Cut
Face Creek.
d. Review turn lanes and monitor
traffic at rest areas.

2. County and municipal rest areas and
information centers should be organized
into a coordinated system which
complements the state rest area
system and enhances the scenic
character of T.H. 61.

2 111

Roads and Recreation

Policy: Coastal highways should be developed and
maintained to decrease safety hazards
and enhance the scenic and recreational
facilities of the area.

Implement: 1. Upon DNR's request, DOT should re-
view and monitor areas on T.H. 61
where pedestrian congestion or
sight distances create a hazard,
including Gooseberry, Cross River and
Temperance River State Parks.

2. DOT shall undertake and implement
another design study of T.H. 61
in cooperation with DNR. Implementation
of the study should begin in the
biennium beginning July 1, 1979.
State and local agencies should
cooperatively develop design and
construction guidelines specific
to the North Shore at the beginning
of the design study. The design
guidelines should include a system
of loop routes which would provide
access to other recreational op-
portunities, relieve traffic con-
gestion by providing an alternate
recreational route, or serve as an
emergency route in case of bridge
washouts, or other disasters.

3. Plan and develop bicycle routes
along area roads.

4. Vigorously enforce existing speed
limits and control pedestrian
circulation on T.H. 61.

5. Develop and map an inventory of
significant T.H. 61 views and vistas.

6. Clear vegetation along T.H. 61 in a
manner that protects the character
of the site and retainsprotective
screening of adjacent properties.

7. Screen vistas which create an un-
safe attraction at critical points
along T.H. 61 such as curves or
provide other safety protection.

2 - 112

8. Adequate turn-off lanes should be
studied and developed at Temperance
and Cascade River State Parks and
considered for Judge C.R. Magney and
Baptism River State Parks when and
if they are developed.

Scientific and Natural Areas

Policy: Establish a system of scientific and
natural areas on public lands along
the North Shore to protect the rare
and unique resources of the area for
research and education.

Implement: 1. Evaluate the CZM inventory of po-
tential scientific and natural
areas to determine those worthy of
designation.

2. Prepare and implement management
plans and interpretive programs for
designated sites.

Interpretive Program

Policy: Provide interpretive programs to ex-
plain and broaden the understanding
and appreciation of natural and cultural
resources.

Implement: 1. Expand existing interpretive pro-
grams in state parks and develop
new programs where-none now exist.
Interpretive programs should also
be developed for other state lands
as appropriate.

2. Form a committee of private citizens
and local, state and federal agency
representatives to coordinate the
development of a regional inter-
pretive program covering public and
private resources.

3. Develop interpretive displays in
conjunction with the proposed Class
II Rest Areas at Knife River, Split
Rock River, Baptism River, Tofte,
Cut Face Creek and mt. Josephine.

2 - 113

4. Form a committee of private'citizens
and local,,state and federal agency
representatives to coordinate the
development of a regional inter-
pretive program.

5. The DNR should develop basic inter-
pretive packages for state lands
which will complement federal, local
and private facilities.

6. Expand the interpretive program at
Gooseberry Falls State Park.
Develop a program as soon as possible
for Cascade River State Park. Similar
programs at Baptism River, Temper-
ance River and Judge C.R.,Magney
State Parks should be instituted
as these parks are developed.

7. Develop a Species Richness Experi-
mental Program near Kodonce River
State Park. This program would
be used to validate the ecological
community/species richness matrix.

8. Use the ecological community/species
richness matrix as a guide by wild-
life managers, interpretive naturalists
and foresters in their respective
programs.

Policy: State interpretive centers should be
designed to allow for shared space
by various state agencies offering inter-
pretive programs.

Miscellaneous

1. Recreation Data

a. Conduct a vegetation inventory of
state forests to provide supplemental
information to that commonly gathered
in forest inventories.

b. Conduct a micro-climate study of
the North Shore to provide additional
localized data on precipitation,
temperature, winds and other
factors pertinent to recreation
development.

2 - 114

c. Encourage all state, federal and
local agencies to monitor resources
under their jurisdictions on a
periodic basis.

d.- Establish a clearinghouse for pro-
jects, studies and data pertaining
to the North Shore. A possible
location for this facility is the
University of Minne'stoa-Duluth
with a branch at either Temperance
River or Baptism River State Parks.

2. Publicity and Promotion

Develop a publicity/information program
which would provide the traveler with
information on available facilities,
distances, rates, type of accommodations
and recreational opportunities along
the Shore. This information could be
disseminated through the Tourism Division
of the Department of Economic Develop-
ment, the Minnesota Arrowhead Association,
other local groups and through sign malls,
information plazas, and rest areas.

3. Cooperative Maintenance

a. A system of maintenance zones
should be developed along the North
Shore to coordinate maintenance
and management activities of
DOT and DNR.

b. Plans for development of a Class
A maintenance shop by DNR should.be
4. Waste Disposal coordinated with the DOT shop facility.

a. The DNR and DOT should continue
to work with the counties on de-
veloping equitable cost formulas for
the collection and disposal of
solid waste from all state facilities
by the county.

b. The DNR and DOT should work with
the counties to develop a solid
waste collection/disposal system
which provides the most efficient
level of service. The agencies
should seek funding within their
budgets to assist in developing
such a system.

2 - 115

c. Facilities for dumping the sewage
holding tanks in travel trailers
should be provided by the private
sector as well as the state. To
minimize competition, the state
should only provide dumping facilities
where the private sector cannot or
does not wish to meet the demand.

5. Energy Conservation

State recreation development should
be designed to stress energy conservation.

6. Future large-scale recreation developments

a. Consideration should be given to the
development of a major park/recreation
area adjacent to the High Falls of
the Pigeon River.

b. If needed in the future, a committee
comprised of representatives from the
private sector and state and local
agencies should be established to
develop recommendations for the
development of a cooperative rec-
reation system for the Tettagouche
Area.

c. If needed in the future, a co-
operative recreation system should
be developed for the Caribou Lake/
Lake Agnes area in Cook County
through the combined efforts of
local citizens and state and
federal agencies.

2 116

KEY TO FIGURE2-2 RECREATION FACILITIES

Facilities Existing Proposed
Small Boat Harbor 0
Harbor of Refuge

Access

Rest@Areas

Class I

Class 2

Service Node

Corridor Trail

Recreational

Cluster

Priority Fisheries Management

(Rivers)

Trail Linkages

(Generalized)

2 117

%
00

MAP 1 WEST CMULUMTH T
SA

A - MTCRTM
3 - OW, -IV,
poll
sw.:*!tt

Nblo
c W.Vgmu ".I,
FIGURE 2-2 ZRECR@EATION FA ILITIES [mitt&

il't

do, so 'In IWO MI on" aw go

men MI) no,"

0 4 0

l�ra
Vk,

-po

MAP 2 D/L;
A it=M%
5 W
RECREATION FACILITIES awrACT9210 ... ....
FIGURE 2-2 13

Ar
ol

t1i

FRENCH RIVER
PALMERS- m

IVER

MAP 3 KNFE RIVER

A
BMW=
FIGURE 2-2 RECREATION FACILITIES

Iml dw 4m. so w an ON' do 4110. as so w

TWO
MAR

Ilk

MAP4 TWO HARSM
wim
U:
FIGU -2 RECREATION FACILITIES
RE 2

"X
5-

V lb

GOOSEBERRY'. FALLS
STATE PARK

SPLIT ROCK LIGHTHOUSE STATE PARK
MAP 5 - SPLIT ROCK

A
FIGURE 2-2 RECREATION FACILITIES* M::,:,.

Mae mqw IM m mfm am "I"

.0 ep

el
WAR

1c,
frAV LAIS
A%

Ampam LAAr

SILVER

I'd

113MIM BE MPTISM EN CrrY
VER
SAY
PALI STATE PARK
SAY

MAP 6-SAirnsm RIVER
F-
FIGURE 2-2 RECREATION FACILITIES

Al A

4
MAD P.%VW Ar
Irv -M7

ftft
'V,,,oo
41

4-Ab

.00

ep
lp

4p 0
1-*

aEORGE H. BY
MANrfOU-
CARIBW FALLS
Ll MARAJS STATE, STATE PARK.
MAP 7. -'MANrrOtJ MVER suL
% P.Y'- BAy

A WIMMM C,@-
I lltvtmfm
W.Wtt'.
FIGURE 2-2 RECREATION FACILITIES
a. huff sf.l V-0

qooo

1001-4

awe

Acf
FEW.-
4(R

13 'SCHROEDEFL TEM
..----TACONrTE BOR TOFTE' RAY BERGL N
RIVER
0 STATE PA.F!K
MAP 8 - TEMPERANCE Ph JER

A -IM11"
3
a
FIGURE 2-2 RECREATION FACILITIES MAIR a.

000
Z%

000
.vr@
AD

CA@

ji
jo ..

1.a9
MAP 9 CARIBOU CREEK L E f LpeA,T101a. CASCADE RIVER STATE PARK
T

A WWW a
5m u
-2 RECREATION FACILIT mus.
FIGURE 2 IES m

mom IM

11 71
loo

OR ID
AG

411
CASC E ni ER
sTArE PARK
MAP 10 - GRAND MARAIS 1$0 K.
c
e> Ay*
QAP

A -Imtm

FIGURE 2-2 RECREATION FACILITIES

#I. Ji is

A@14111 oo#

0000

Jb
00

J, 7-4

K
E AIVER
PARK'
JUDGE C. mm
MAGI
MAP 11 - KODONCE RIVER
STATE PARK

Int
@!4
llulmrm
9
m
1@1" "ll",
FIGURE 2-2 RECREATION FACILITIES
ol I'll . .....

41
ej

woo*

tj
,Atf

IL A

IL
30

-Mb

V-1

N.
D
ky
MAP V RESERVATION RIVER

A mnalft
11 "Allm LIZ ul-Lv Vt
-2 RECREATION FACILITIES
FIGURE 2

A IL

.14

cz?

MAP 13- GRAND PO RTAGE

awl A w nw t"l
snumm F.1
U.
FIGURE 2-2 RECREATION FACILITIES "VA
0 - foll

da m m m IMI, Iml m m

C.. POLICIES AND AUTHORITIES RELATING TO RECREATION

Minnesota-Wisconsin Boundary Compact.

A Minnesota-Wisconsin Boundary Commission, the purpose
of which is to conduct studies and to develop recommendations
relating to the present and future protection, use, and
development of the lands, river valleys, and waters which
form the boundary between the states is formed. The
Commission is charged with considering and promoting the
consideration by municipalities of restrictions and
regulation of land use development designed to preserve
the scenic and recreational attributes of the river
basins. (See Minn. Stat. �9 1.31 - 1.40.)

2. Powers of the Commissioner of Natural Resources.

The Commissioner of Natural Resources is vested with
control and supervision of all public lands and parks
of the state and is charged with certain responsibilities
relating to boat safety and with the overall coordination
of acquisition of state recreation land, development of
recreation programs and comprehensive statewide recreational
planning programs required by state or federal law.
He is further authorized to establish and operate
recreational areas, including but not limited to trails
and canoe routes, for the use and enjoyment of the public
on any state-owned or leased land under his jurisdiction.
He is further authorized to acquire by gift, purchase,
or lease, easements or other interests in land for various
types of recreational use. Finally, he is authorized
to adopt rules and regulations governing the use and
enjoyment of state lands reserved from sale, state
parks, state water access sites, state trails, state
monuments, state scientific and natural areas, state
wilderness areas, and recreational areas owned by other
state, local and federal agencies and operated under
agreement by the Department of Natural Resources.
(See Minn. Stat. SS 84.028 - 84.03, 84.033, 89.032,
9T-.40@85.)

3. Regulation of Recreational vehicles.

Certain regulations governing the manufacture, use, and
registration of snowmobiles and other recreational vehicles
are established. (See Minn. Stat. SS 84.81 - 84.90.)

4. State Trails.

The Commissioner of Natural Resources is directed to
establish and operate certain trails designated by the

2 - 131

legislature and to develop trails on state lands. The
Commissioner of Transpoktation..is:charged-:with developing
a program for an.inter-connecting statewide system of
bicycle trails primarily on highway rights-of-way. In
addition, the Commissioner is directed to provide
technical assistance to local units of government
planning bicycle trails systems. (See Minn. Stat. 55
85.015 -85.021, 160.265.)

5. Omnibus Natural Resources and Recreation Act of 1963.

The natural resources of the state include, but are not
limited to, forests, parks, historic sites, wildlife
areas, access to lakes, rivers, streams, scenic areas,
and camping grounds. It is the intention of the legislature
to study and examine anticipated future needs and the
extent to which private and commercial facilities will
need supplementation of publicly subsidized and operated
facilities and opportunities. A legislative commission
on Minnesota resources is established to study state
policy relating to public access and to study a system
of user fees and permits and concession awards with a
view toward making provision for adequate maintenance
and improvement of facilities. The Commission in its
inquiries is directed to recognize that, wherever
feasible, outdoor recreational facilities may be provided
by private enterprise, and that the responsibility of
government is to supplement such facilities and opportunities
rather than to compete with them. The Commission is
further directed to recognize that lands, waters,
forests, wetlands, wildlife, and such other natural
resources which serve economic purposes also serve to
varying degrees and for varying uses outdoor recreation
purposes, and that sound planning or resource utilization
for the full welfare of the state must include coordination
and integration of all such multiple uses. The Commission is
further directed to report biannually to the legislature
with regard to its investigations and studies. A
provision is also made for appropriations from the
natural resources account to be made to local units of
government for land acquisition and development for
recreational purposes, so long as such appropriations
are first reviewed by appropriate county boards and
county and regional planning commissions. (See Minn.
Stat. S� 86.01 - 86.75.)

Outdoor Recreation System.

The legislature finds that the unique natural, cultural,
and historical resources of Minnesota provide abundant
opportunities for outdoor recreation and education, and

2 - 132

that these opportunities should be made available to
all Minnesota citizens. It further finds that the
preservation and proper utilization of the state's
outdoor recreational resources is becoming increasingly
important to the health, welfare, and prosperty of
the state's citizens because of the growing demand for
outdoor recreational facilities and the spread of
development and urbanization. It further finds that
the outdoor recreational needs of the people of Minnesota
will be best served by the establishment of an outdoor
recreational system which will preserve an accurate repre-
sentation of Minnesota's natural and historical heritage
for public understanding and enjoyment, and provide an
adequate supply of scenic, accessible, and usable lands
and waters to accommodate outdoor recreational needs.
An outdoor recreational system is established which
is composed of natural state parks; recreational state
parks; state trails; state scientific and natural
areas; state wilderness areas; state forests; state
wildlife management areas; state water access sites; state wild,
scenici and recreational rivers; state historic sites;
and state rest areas. Standards for administeri:.g each
of these various recreational units are established.
(See Minn. Stat. �9 86A.01 - 86A.11.)

7. Public Use of Private Lands.

It is the policy of the state, in furtherance of the
public health and welfare, to encourage and promote
the use of privately owned lands and waters by the public
for beneficial recreational purposes. The liabilities
of a landowner whose land is used by others for recreational
purposes is defined and limited by the legislature.
(See Minn. Stat. H 87.01 -87.03.)

8. Wild, Scenic and Recreational Rivers.

It is the state's policy to preserve and protect certain
state rivers that possess outstanding scenic, recreational,
natural, historical, scientific, and similar values. DNR
may development management plans for designated rivers,
establishing allowable setbacks, structure heights, sub-
division regulations, etc. Land use controls which comply
with those plans must be adopted and enforced by local
governments, and land may acquired by the Commissioner of
Natural Resources. (See Minn. Stat. H 104.31 104.40;
86A. 05 (10)

2 - 133

9. Local Recreational Facilities.

Local units of government, including counties, are
authorized to operate programs of public recreation and
playground. (See Minn. Stat. SS 471.15 471.1921.)

2 134

XI. HISTORIC PRESERVAT ION 5@
A. EXISTING CONDITIONS-

Minnesota's coastal zone is steeped in history, reflect-
ing time passed when the Chippewa tribe had dominion over
the North Shore, when the first white man saw the Lake
Superior Region, when voyageurs capitalized on the
European craze.for fashionable furs, and finally when
settlers arrived to make the area their permanent home.
This history is revealed by the abundance of historic
and archaeological sites within the coastal zone. Table 2-1
lists by county, a comprehensive view of the'existing
historical and/or archaeological sites within Minnesota's
coastal zone.

Currently, there are 12 sites within the coastal zone which
are on the National Register of Historic Places. (See
Table 2-1 for location and historic theme.) Criteria for
evaluating properties for nomination to the National
Register by the National Park Service are as follows:

"The quality of significance in American history, archi-
tecture, archeology, and culture is present in districts,
sites, buildings, structures, and objects of State and
local importance that possess integrity of location,
design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and
association, and@

(a) That are associated with events that have made a
significant contribution to the broad patterns of
our history; or
(b) That are associated with the lives of persons sig-
nificant in our past; I

(c That embody the distinctive characteristics of a
type, period, or method of construction, or that
represent the work of a master, or that possess
high artistic values, or that represent a significant
and distinguishable entity whose components may lack
individual distinction; or

(d) That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, in-
formation important in prehistory or history."

SOURCE: Federal Register, Part II, Department of the
Interior, National Park Service National
Register of Historic Places, 60.6 Criteria for
Evaluation.

2 - 135

In addition to the 12 National'Historic Places, there are
six sites within the coastal zone which are on the
State Historic Sites Registry. (See Table 2-1 for..'
location and historic theme.1 Criteria for evaluating
sites for designation as a State Historic Site are,as
follows:

(1) "Is the site of or directly associated with a significant
historical event; or

(2) Is associated with persons whose lives and accomplish-
ments are historically unique or important; or

(3) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of an
architectural style or method of construction which
represents a particular and significant historical
period, or the work of a master builder, designer,
or architect; or

(4) Has yielded or is likely to yield, historical or
archaeological artifacts, records, or other original
data or information; or

(5) Is a geographical feature of outstanding significance
and includes, by way of example, the highest point
in the state, the continental divide, and the
source of theMississippi River."

Source: Outdoor Recreation Act of 1975

2 136

.TABLE 2-1
HISTORIC AND ARCHAE LOGICAL SITES WITHIN MIN ESOTA'S COASTAL ZONE

U)
Pi w H 0
H Ua
z to
U) >4 U w U W
P4 P4 > H U
H z 94 4
U 0 En 0 1.4
H H H F4 44 En
04 En a U)
0 U
H Hw H N
M U) @ 9 1 .
0 W 0 -
P W Z P@ H W
U U) H z M
0 H z H 44 H
SITE z 0 U) U) H :F, 0 M
Cook County

Grand Portage Sec. 4, 9, Aboriginal Americans: X X X Administered by
National Monument T63N, R6E Prehistoric, Historic, National Park
Fur Trade, Religion, Service, U.S.
Exploration Dep@_. of Interior

_j Witch Tree Sec. 11, Same as above. X
T63N,R6E

Holy Rosary Church Sec. 4 Same as above X
and Cemetery T63N, R6E

Lightkeeper's Grand Marais Architecture, Transpor- X
House Sec. 21, tation
T61N, RlE

Naniboujou Lodge Hovland Architecture,-Recreation X
Sec. 34,
T62N, R3E

Parkerville Ghost Pigeon River Inmigration and X
Town Sec. 20, Settlement
T64N, R6E

St. Francis Xavier Grand Marais Aboriginal Americans: X
Church Sec. 22, Historic, Religion
T61N, RlE

Thompsonite Beach Sec. 33, Physical Science X
T61N, RlW

ILE 2-i
HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN MINNESOTA'S COASTAL ZONE

P4 W P 0
Z E-4
W z U)

H 04 H
W % E-4 z r4
U 0 U) 0
P H E-i
U) 0 P 4 (n
U 0 Q H U
0 = H @4
M @ 9
Ej 0 0 H W U) W 0
W W z P4 P Pq
E-4 P z U) P
0 P4 H H z H P4 F4 H
SITE z 0 rn rn H 2: 0 (A
Lake County
Split Rock Light- Sec. 32, 33, Transportation x x Administered by the
house T55N, R8W Minnesota Historical
Society. A new
interpretive program
is planned for-1977,
when the site will be
opened year-round for
the first time. Long--
range plans call'for
a n.ew interpretive
center. Efforts will
be made to coordinate.
interpretation with
that offered in the
Lake Superior Marine
Museum in Duluth and
to avoid duplication.

Tugboard "Edna G" Agate Bay, x
Two Harbors

Mallet Locomotive Two Harbors Transportation x

Three Spot.Locomo- Two Harbors Industry x
tive and Cars

Two Harbors Two Harbors Engineering,
Lighthouse Transportation x

MMMMMMMMMMM"Mmm men

TABLE 2-1
HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN MINNESOTA'S COASTAL ZONE

p 0
W U Z p
W Z EA
U U W
H P4 H FA
C4 E-4 Z
U 0 (A OPI
E-4 P H E-4 P4 W
ca 0
0 1-4
p 0
U) @
0 0 94 U) 0
04 E-4 W
U) E-4
Z H N H H
SITE Z 0 Z 0 W. rn

Lake County cont.

Lake County Two Harbors. X Adninistere d by the
Historical and Lake County Historical
Railroad Museum Society. An.op-
portunity exists to
better coordinate
and mutually re-.
inforce interpre-
tation'in this
Museum with that at
Soudan Mine located
outside the coastal
St. Louis County zone.

Aerial Lift Bridge *All sites Engineering X
are located
in Duluth

Duluth Central Architecture, X Preservation and res
High School Education toration work cur-
rently being under-
taken.

TABLE 2-1
HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN MINNESOTAS COASTAL ZONE

P 0
Z E-4
N z U)
U) N U @ U @ U w
P4 E-4 z 14
0 H 0 @4
P H P 04
U) 04 En
z @4 0 E4 H E)
0 0 m
0 W 0
H W W aA E-4
E-4 H W E-4
P4 E-4 H z rX4 H H
SITE m z 0 CA m H 0 w En

St. Louis CountY cont.
F-:j Duluth Union Depot Architecture, x x Acquisition of track-
0@ Transportation age. Restoratio'
n.
and preservation
work on depot.
Minnesota Point Transportation x x
Lighthouse
Endion Passenger Architecture, x
Depot Transportation
Fire Hall #1 on lst Architecture x
Ave. East & 3rd St.
East

Kitchi Gammi Architecture x
Club

Traphagen, Oliver G., Architecuure x
House

Morgan Park Architecture, Urban X,
Historic District Planning

TABLE 2-1
HISTORIC A14D ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN MINNESOTA'S COASTAL ZONE

P 0
z P
rj3z In
U @ U @ U W
H P4 H U
0 P4 14 z C4 4
U 0 In H 0 @4
H E-4 F-1 E-4 a4 (A
P4 E,1 4 M
U 0 P H U
E-4 HM 0 W F1 .4
F-i z M ri) P4 a4
0 0 W rn W 0
E-i W W z a4 P W
< E-H E-1Z En E-4
P H Z H rY4 H H
SITE M zo (n M H 0:z IM

St. Louis County cont.
NJ Duluth Ship Canal industry, Engineering X X

Brewer:,,Frank A., House Architecture X

Chester Terrace Architecture X

Congdon, Chester A., House Architecture X

Cotton, Joseph B., House Architecture

Crosby, George H., House Architecture X

Cutter, Dwight G., House Architecture X

Duluth Board of Trade Architecture, Commerce X,
Building

Duluth Civic Center Architecture, Landscape X
Complex Architecture

First Presbyterian Architecture, Religion X
Church

Fish Lake Dam (SL-15) Aboriginal Americans: X
Prehistoric

Fitger's Brewery Industry, Commerce, X
Architecture

TABLE 2-1
HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN MINNESOTA'S COASTAL ZONE

P4 W E-4 0
w ri Z E-1 a
p @ . 0 >4 w z to
U) U @ U w
04 r4 " U
9 E-4 0@ 4
U 0 rn 0 @4
Fq p H E-4 04 U)
r4 En 0 E-4 F:4 u) 2;
U @4 0 H N H H U 4
4 p w OW 0
z (n (n @
0 0 F4 0
W E-i En E-i
0 rZ4 E-4 Z rX4 H H
SITE z 0 cn C11 H 0:z rn

St. Louis County Cont.

Fond du Lac Historic Aboriginal Americans: x
District Prehistoric, Historic

Glen Avon Station Architecture, Transpor- x
tation

Hartley Office Bldg. Architecture x

House, F.E., Residence Architecture x

Hunter, Donald M., House Architecture x

Jefferson School Architecture, Education x

Meyers, H.H., House Architecture x

Munger Terrace Architecture x

Olcutt, Wm., J., House Architecture x

Ordean, Albert L., House Architecture x

Patrick, Frederick A., Architecutre x
House

Police Station and Jail Architecture x

TABLE 2-1
HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN MINNESOTA'S COASTAL ZONE

P 0
ta
E- rM (a
U) 0 0 U U W
H 04 H C4 H
0 ly, E-4 Z ix
U 0 W H 0
E-4H H E-1 A4 U)
to 0 P 4 Lo
z
0
z (1) P@ W P4
0. 0 W rn % W 0
E-4 W W Z 04 E-1 CA
E-4 P z 0 E4
SITE 4 44 Eq H z rZ4 H H
z 0 W 0 :z
bi

St. Louis County Cont..

Selwood Hall Architecture x

William Crooks-Locomotive x

Lake Superior Marine x
Museum

St. Louis County x
Historical Society
Museum

Lake Superior Museum x
of Transportation
and Industry

Chisholm Children's x Administered by a
Museum private non-profit
corporation. Plans
include galleries
dealing with imMigra-
tion to the Duluth
area and natural
history and the en-
vironment.

In addition to sites already on the State and/or National
Register of Historic Places and those inventoried by
the Minnesota Historical Society, two special studies
were conducted which expanded awareness of historical
and archaeological sites within Minnesota's coastal
zone.

The first study, Historical, Natural, and Scientific
Sites of the Lake Superior North Shore, was published
in-May, 1975, by the Arrowhead Regional Development
Commission. The historic inventory contained in this
report was primarily a re-compilation of work pre-
viously conducted by John Fritzen, noted area historian
and member of the St. Louis County Historical Society.
In addition, the state and-county historical societies
were most informative and should be recognized for
their assistance and contributions in compiling this
inventory. Sites identified by this report and
located within Minnesota's coastal zone are'as
follows:

2 144

TABLE 2-2

-qic Sites ii. oiieo to me naw, "Onpota" is rroqm
".North Shore Histor q1;ql'tqi8qf8qf"qarea q(qQ. Oneuta). St. Lqoui
arid Place Names in the Coatal Zone located here in 1856. The Villqaqiqlqe
Prior to incorporation the settqiqcq-q1q1q1
Oneota was the site of the fi rst qP
1. Roussian Gravqpyard: Located in Fond du Lac Park, this is the burial or the first frame school building
q- qZ_
site of t0q9 Fq@2qTn ois Roussiaii family and Indians of the Fond du Lac bell is now on display at the St.
area. Several stone markers and carved wooden crosses are found within
these run-down cemetery grounds. 12. The sawmill si
6qf6qf-qWaiqi'-q61111-qCiln-Taq%, arid was oqnqe
2. Peter J. Peterson House: This is the oldest existing home in Duluth.
qfq_twqa*qs-0qYtq7qiqTq_tqiq_nTq9_67q_at 13323 West 3rd Street. 13. Enqger Tower: This is, amemorial t
1,6qU17, lqni. Mr. Inger was r
3. Lake Superior and Mississippi Railway Do ot: A one and one-half story The Lower wo@ designed by A. N. qMqlqe
qPqa-T
structure erected as a depot for the first train to come to the head of Sons, and cost $30,000. The tower
the lakes. The structure is presently a restaurant, however the exterior
is unchanged since 1870.
14. The Old Silver Mine Site: This is
4. Fond du Lac- Means "Head of the Lakes" and refers to the Duluth-Superior qNiqlqlqiigan street. TIqT2qTqiTqraft was di
metro area. Site of the old American Fur Company Trading Post built in back in the 1880's. At one time a
1816-17, and Mission, 1834. A mar@cr, flag post and smill park at
133rd Avenue West mark tire site of the pnst and 1679 camp of Sieur Duluth. 15. Saviiiii I I s :Several early sawmills
qR-2q5q-nes qCL-a Point.
5. Brownstone q2.qqiqrqrqy: The site was operated in the 1880's along Mission
7 rq-al qUf Duluth's buildings were constructed with the stone a. George Nettl etqoqn
2qMq@ 2q@4. Sq6ve b. Hugh's Iqll I I
from this quarry (Board of Trade and First American National bank). c. Samuel McQuade Mi
The remains of the quarry can still be located today.
6. St. 2qL0qM4qMq@ Serbian Orthodox Church- This church was built in 1923 and d. Asa Daly and John
Ts-qlocated a*qf-lqfl'qZq1'q64qEll-TvqTnt-jqY-6qFest. The church is rioted for its e. Scott arid Holstqoqiqt
f. I-lu!iger 14111 (Loco
superb murals painted by David Erickson in the 1940's.
7. Railroad Route of the Old Lake Sq@qRnrior arid Mississi qI Railroad: The 16.* qjqLqrifon qQqqp@qqjqt: Built in 1892.
-2qFq-2qMisqTqGle m ab Sth A Tid s
OTT q_Fq@ q@11 ad grade is stqi e 17**Duluth Civic Center- Built in 190
was the original railroad line from Duluth to Carlton and eventually
tied into a line to St. Paul.
18.* Ship Canal and Aerial Lift qPqE 32qDdqe
8. Morgan Park Planned Commuiflq@qX: This town area was developed between 8q7q@s a qCq-q3
T'Zjql-q4'-q@iiq-d7-9-i2qTq!oq-proqi,idq-c q-6qMitable ITousing for the adjoining steel plant finally finished iii 1871.
iabor force. Morgan Park contains some very historic architecture as 19. Located In
indicated: Minnesota Point.
a. Good Fellowship Club Building
b. St. 1`13ry Margaret Catholic Church 20. Stu-it, Cabin arid Dock: In 1853 Ge
c. Cement block residences 2qUqT2qY5-;t permanent resident oqt qOu
warehouse, arid dock. All of these
9. Bardon's Peak: Also known as "Spirit Mountain" was used in the 1700's Point near, no prosent, Old Liqgqh4qtqi
post. A small copper vein reportedly
crosses the peak area. 21 * Minriesota Point [iqght.11OUre: Was b
- _qT- , the 1
about @ 5.00U. qTt qj6qW 1111C
10. Old Indian C8qyp- At one time there existed an Indian camp at 62nd Avenlir on the Iakei;. Only about 2/3 of t
West and qiqTqeq-Day Front. This was one of a series or camps located along
an Indian trail between Minnesota Point and Fond du Lac, 22.* Central High School Built in 1q8

-Minnesota sites on the National Regist
-Minnesota sites on the state Inventory

51. CI if toil -Platted in 1855, it was
23. Elevator A: The site was located near 4th Avenue East and Michigan St. 8qFiq-y-6qM-aring frow Lake Superior to
q@q_hefi_r7sq_tshipment of grain was on May 30, 1871 on the Propeller important log landing and rafting It
St. Paul. Elevator A. was destroyed by fire in 1866.

24. Vermilion Trail- Near Brewery Creek, was the site of an old Indian 52. French River- Originally the India
portage trail to- Island Lake. In q1865 money was appropriated for the im- 'q6q_rq9_q)6qT6qRq_wqJqod River". The French
provemant of the portage which became known as the Vermilion Trail. There attempts to mine copper. In the 1q3
is a bronze plaque at the base of a street light standard at the intar- R.B. Carl ton. compiny, French River
section of 7th Avenue East and Ist Street to comremorate the beginning Mining. All three companies spent
of the Vermilion Trail. attempt to find workable attiounts of
area was also the site of extensive
25. Vikiqqqa_q@hip- The replica of a Viking Ship is located within Leif The Lesure Lumher Company headquqart
qrrq-icqksotqiq-qPark near 10th Avenue East and London Road. The ship was sailed rafting to their savsidll in West Du
to Duluth from Bergen, Norway in 1927. 53. Sucker River: Translated from tqhe
26. Leif Erickson Park. 1rcq_arp_0qrr0qTqG_cker river". In 1856 Vo
Montezuma here but it never materia
27.*Endion Passenger Depot: A railway passenger depot was built in 1899 at operations this was the site of a b
a cost of q$10,q=. lhe Depot is located at 15th Avenue East and South
Street. The Depot still stands and is functional as a freight line 54. Stony point: Prior to railroad sqe
checkpoint. 6qTt_2qW'q@8qMw -qFqer-facility. It was used
between Duluth and Two Ilarbors. Ln
aft point.
26. Chester A. Congdon 11ouse: 1907-08 r,
29. CTqleq-ste-rq-qTeq-rrace Apartments: 1890
30 Joseph B. Cotton House: 1906 55. nen: A wayside marker and pqlqa
31q: Gcorqe H. Crosley House: 1902 tqoqwIM te of Buchanen, platted in 18
32 Vl8qNht G. Cut 2qTrq-qMo-quq@q@e' 1906 Items 28-48 all included oil the North Shore, as well as a U.
33q: 'Duql u t 8qFiBqkqTa rqd- u in the existing statewide first North Share newspaper, "North
34. Uld Fire House No. I : 139U historic sites inventory. in 1857-1853. In 1859 the town qbLq9
35 qCrq@8qE8qy-2qT2qwqo was relocated and was later destroy
36q: _b8qTq6qWqT6q5q_n_qStation: 1892
37 qj1a__
CqLqTq-e- q6q-
qy 0 56. Knife River: The findings of veins
qIfq:i e Building 1914 0qWnq-mLqicq-h q_exq@loring. Several mining
38q: qTq6nald 1-1. Huri-tq-erHouse: 1392
39. Jeffersqonq-SchooqT' 1-q99q-0 pits and shafts in search of copper
40. qKi_6q02q7 2qTaq-irmi- _2qMuqlb : 1912 SW 1/4 - SE 1/4 Section 26 Township
1 q71q-c
qTI J4qF qyqj,:rs liouqj.q!q@: 1909-10 Little Knife River which still can
42q: 'q@q@2qEr qYqerraqv. qf9q1-92
43 .I i. qJ. 0q12qTuEt House: 1904-05 Cotqmercial fishing and small scale
44. A) bert L. Ordea@' -Hoi se! *1905 until 1898 when the Alger, Smith an
45 qTF-q670qFqI-E0qTT.--q@q-at-rik To-use: iqgol moved and built their shops. rai0qlro
46q: qNoql -ice 6qVtat q@onnd I` i-reqFal I . 190809 at Knife River. Construction was t
47. qY8q78qFio_4qTlqfa2q= _qT2q7_ railroad system, th ouluth and qNo
48. 2qW@q1q9_jq_ their Ilorth Shore timber holdings.
2qT 4qLaqphaqmn House: 1892 Duluth. The average production of
49. Lester River Fish Hatchery: 18851887, was built by the U.S. Department board feet of lumber a year. Aqlge
o2qT-nter- . It was the only Federal fish hatchery in Lake Superior in 1919, and their tracks were reqnqu
i @or
to art ficially propagate fish. The building was losed in 1946 and is Off Knife Island there were two sqit
now the property of U14. Knife River was incorporated as a
50. Lakewood P4qKiping St tion: In the days of large-scale lumbering operations township status.
q7tiq-sviq-asan import,nt banking grounds and rafting point. Also, it is
presumed that the ship wreck, Benjamin Noble, which went down in 1914 57. Larsmont: Was the site of big lqogg
between hife River and Duluth, lies off the shore of Lakewoud. Tq-twq@sq-an irfiporLnt log rafting lqjo
*Minnesota sites on the National Register of Historic Placs.

Eli

58. Two Harbors: qWas named because it ha two good harbors, Agate Bay and
Burlington Bay. A sawmill wasoperational in 1857 on Burlington Bay, the
mill quickly closed down during the Panic of 1857 and commercial fishing 70. Castle Danger: There is no sati
was the only activity until the early 1880's when logging operations returned. Danger. It was the site of a qc
Both Agate and Burlington Day were used as landing and raf-ting points. scale logging operations (q1890q's
Furthermore, at that time construction began on the Duluth and Iron Range
Railroad, ore docks, shops and headquarters. In 1880, Agate Bay become the
Village of Two Harbors, and in 1907 it became a city and the County seat. 71. Gooseberry River and State Park:
0qRq_qChq_e1qb0qTU'0qTiqT6qTt 0qTc_,q70qWr qT-e-aqTqf4q-yq,
Iron ore shipping was a primary activity but was supplemented by tqhe large scale logging operation wa
handling of lumber, pulpwood and other forest products. Michigan lumber company located
at the river's mouth. The compa
59q@*Hallet Lo No. 229 came to Two Harbors in 1943. In
__0qW q- 8qgotqi8qge: Engine logs were shipped to tqhe river qn
wo 1q@9 er lie Locomotive weighs 699,700 lqbs. The locomotive is Also at the mouth of the river I
located adjacent to the Lake County Historical Society. sank on April 29, 1903 during a
60.*Three S ot Locomotive and Cars: First locomotive of the Dulu th and .Iron In 1920 the State of Minnesota a
0q- I q'qU4q7q- of Wisconsin and developed this I
8qTan9qF i i 10q7q6a
house: The federally owned lighthouse was built In 1892 state park.
lo Hq"'or4qhiq"qI't 72. S lit Rock River: The name, Split
_61. 'k2qLvqd I
an s qToc 6q@ on the point-between Agate Bay and Burlington Bay. It is
78 ft. above the water; is of 325,000 candle-powers and can be seen on a "qi cast ofthe mouth
clear night for 17 miles in any direction. The lighthouse is operational from certain positions on the lak
today. split apart.*
Prior to 1900 there were several
62. Sample Ore: Ore from the first Minnesota Mining operations in 1884. largest operation began in 1899 w
63. Ore Docks: The first shipment come from the Mesabi Mines in 1895. formed. A logginU railroad was
established at the mopth of tqhe
Merill and Rink. sawmill in West D
64. The Ori inal Plant and Quarry Office of the Minnesota qjqjiq@8qLqi2q@ai8qLd
14anufacturqiq7ng Cq5i-ii2qFq28qUq_,q_6q7qT_9_U_?q)q_ Also, Split Rock River is the sit
1905. The steamer went down as
'65. Flood BaX- During the large-scale logging days this was an Important log towed at the time. 1he steamer w
0qM6qUq@ing and rafting site. It was also the site of a steam sawmill in 1857. shore and can be seen on a calqnqi d
66. Stewart River: Was known to the Indians as Bitobigo-zibi which meant 73. S lit Rock Point: The two big cl
1rP-qarq_aqF1_4qTTr`6q�r "Double River". The river mouth was originally the townsite qT. The rock forma
of lqirmota. In the 1880's and q1890's. this area was the site from wiq0ch
believed to be a forin of corundun
large shipments of logs were sent to Superior, Wisconsin to the Page and Abrasives Company fit the western
Sexsmith sawmill. Remains of the river's splash dams can still be seen today. time and then merged with tqhe Min
which operated the plant until I
q67. Silver Creek: During the 1890's this area was a large log landing and Corundum Point today.
ra tqing ite. Silver Creek Cliff had always been an obstacle to North
Shore travel. In 1923, the Highway 61 right of way was carved out of the 74.* q@qplit Rock Liqyhthoy@e and State
cliff's rock formation. opq@-r-at8q7o-ri-aT-0qrrq5iiiq-i-qqitq-j-ql'qqq6qT -for tqt
waters of the area. The lighthou
6q8, EncaT6qLxnent Island- Around the 1830's the American Fur Company operated a power I qIght. The lighthouse and
station on the island. It served as a good land and newly foivieqd State Park.
shelter for small boats as-well as a camping area for early North Shore
75. King's Landiqgqg- Prior to, the 1q4q09
travelers.
sqbippeqd bqj'0qTaqFer front landings.
69. Lafayette Bluff- On November 2q8, 1905 the Steamer Lafayette was wrecked foreman of a logging camp (Mr. Ki
here during a big storm on Lake Stiperior. landing area. Amarqina exists be

*Minnesota sites on State Historic Sites Registry. *Minnesota sites on the National Reg

76. Beaver B2qM: This is the only North Shore townsite that has had a continuous 83. Pork_2qLaqX: has a history strongly
qiqxq-istqi-n-ce from the time of its founding in 1856 until th 'e present. The qB`6qayq@as the headquarters for sqeve
area was explored and platted by Thomas Clark of Superioq@. Gernan settlers shipped from here as well. The L
from Ohio moved into the area and began to build homes. In 1869 The Wieland at thqis point as well as several
Brothers built a waterpowerd sawnill. Logging operations existed along the
Beaver River and east of Beaver Bay. The mill operated until 1884 when 84. Caribou River: At one time woodl
the Wieland family moved on. After closing the people relied on coinmercial state, and it is likely that tqhqey
fishing and fanning for support. valley of the river is now Caribo
In 1866 Beaver Day became the Lake County seat until 1888, when it was 85. Thomasville: This is a small No
transferred to Two Harbors. ear2qTyq_sqFq1q_iooT teacher. The McIver
During the November stann of 1905
Rail, foot and by boat were the only means of early travel to Beaver Day. schooner Amboy were destroyed qher
In 19214-25 the present U.S. Highway #61 was completed. Prior to that a
foot trail existed from Duluth to Grand Portage, and the Duluth and Northern 86. Sugar Loaf: Through the years ha
Minnesota Railway reached Lax Lake at Mile Post q#43. orest products. The name probab
on the skyline which, from the lqa
An Indian graveyard exists today and is found along tqhe highway. A bronze loaf hat.
inarker lists the names and marks the location of the site. Also the burial
plot of the Wieland family can be located below the highway.
87. Two Island River: lhe name comes
77. Silver 2q4qy: The origin of the name Silver Day is somewhat questionable. qinouth of the river. lit 1856 tqhqe
ring tie days of large-scale logging Silver Bay went by the name of river, but went out of existence
Ko ss I and'ing. In 1905 the steamer Hesper struck. a reef and the ship
destroyed. Also, some silver deposits were supposedly found in this area. This section of the North Shore w
operations. As early as 1894, tqhqe
78. Palisade: At one time this was the site of an Indian Village. Palisade orders for pulp wood with North S
q;q7aq_s6qM_o a very important shipping point for forest products. On Christmas
Day of 1879, two steam tugs - Amethyst and Siskqiwit sank here. 88. Taconite Harbor: Site of the doe
I% Mining Company.
79. Baptism R ver: This is the site of the Baptism River State Park. The
park has the highest waterfall within the state and contains the colorful 89. Cross River: In 1846, the noted
formation - the Little Palisades. Alq@o, the old stage coach road can be _w2qMne crossing Like Superior in a
seen between the highway and the lake. North Shore, was caught in a sqevqe
land at the mouth of the river.
80. Crystal Day: The nante for the bay Is derived from the big anorthsite memorial for his safe passage. A
outcrops 'in the hills above the highway. In 1902 five men from Tw Harbors Baraga's wooden cross once stood.
formed the Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (3M) to mine and
mill the abrasive material. In 1903 a six-story grinding and crushing plant In the 1990's, the Cross River wa
was erected along with dockage for boats. By 1910 the plants had been this time the Schroeder Lumber Co
closed and operations moved to St. Paul. improvements were made to allow I
were built on the headwater lakes
drives. The Company ceased opera
81. Little Marais: In 1858, the General Land Office Survey denoted a trading and Company. Looking up-river fr
post in existence here. The operator of the post was a man named Phillips. remains of the flumes that guided
A sawmill was erected here during the large-scale logging days of the late
1890's. The Warren sawmill ran front the late 1890's until 1902. Little 2ppTemperance River: The Temperance
Marais was also the site of an important log rafting point. lqiaqFa8qHeristq5cs. First. it has n
river has cut deep ravines in the
82. Manitou River: or Spirit River as the Indians called it, was named because developed as the Temperance River
of the hqFa-vy mysterious mists along the lower rapids and falls. Today
.this is the-site of the Crosby Manitou State Park.

91. Torte: The name Torte honors settlers with this surname who came from the
q@ergen D istrict of Norway. Carlton Peak is a prominent qlandmark here, In the early days it was hoped t
and was named for R.B. Carlton, an early resident of Fo rlqd'du Lac and promoter the development or Grand Marais,
of copper mining. A quarry or the Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing not very significarit.
Company was found at Carlton Peak. Tile Carlton Peak area Is often times
denoted as having tqhe "mystery mines". A very old boat landing is also 99. L i(ilitouse'K!q@0qjqgers Residence: qB
still existent in the Torte area. sLorical
92. Onion River: Many wild onions were found here in tile early days. Ray q100. Chi ewa Cil : This is an old
BergqlundK-tate Wayside is at the highway crossing of Onion River. Ray Xavlor Chur0qX is a historic land
Berglund, was a prominent lumberman and conservationist, and after his death service local Indian-., and was op
friends contributed to a memorial fund for the purchase of the 54 acre In 1907 the Benedictine Fathers
tract as a public recreational area. Minnesota, took charge. North o
Indian Cemetery.
93. Lutsen or Lock Port: The name Lutsen was given to honor a village in 101. Devil Track River: The Indian n
West Saxony (Genitan where a great battle was fought in 1632. At one time'- Walking Place
Lutsen was an important shipping point for forest products. used the river for logging drives
were visible up until a few years
94. [email protected] Creek, This is the site of an abandoned copper mine operating In
q10q0q-8--6q0q-.6qrPproximately 1200 to 1500 pounds of ore was shipped from this 102. Red Cliff: This was the headqua
mine. Spruce Creek was also the site of a CCC camp in the 1930's. from early 190q0 on
of the area was the use of a cab]
95. Cascade River: The site of the Cascade River State Park, it is noted for steep grade from tile voods to tqhe
its sari beautiful waterfalls and rapids above the highway. 03. Kindunce River- Also known as Of
96. Good Harbo ile Beach and Terrance Point: All refer to the 2qM2qU2qF The lower, section
Thom son State Park.
beach is one of the maqI6qT-sources of
Thompsonites, a semi-precious stoqhe that fonned in tile gas bubbles in lava
f 1 ows .No foliage exists along this beach area. 101. Brul e-or Arrowhead River: Known
area
97. Rosebud River: in 1874 two men by the names of Johnson and Maguire mined C.R. Magney State Park.
a deposit of copper a mile and a half above tile lakeshore,in Section 24-61-q1W. 105. Itoviand: An early settler named
They did secure some copper, however it only amounted to several hundred
qT-1q6q-te Iced River flovis into the I
pounds. name because or tile rlute-like re
98. Grand Marais: A French work meaning. "Big I-larsh". The name Grand Marais
was used 4qW-carly as 1804. In 1823 the hnerican Fur Company had a trading Commercial fishbig his always be(
post and a storehouse for the cownercqial fishing company. Little activity Scale logging Via-; operational fr
last big rifts or loqs wore ship
prevailed until 1854 when a second trading post was built. Finally in remain *oil the viaLerfront today.
1q871 the Village was platted by Henry Mayhew and Sam Howenstitia. historical pqla(ILe marking the loc
In 1883 a breakwater was built and commercial fishing began to boom. Tqhis qIn use as the mail route from Duql
continued until tile late 1890's when large scale logging began, Charles 106.* Grand Pot6qMe, This is the qolqdqe
J. Johnson operated a mill on the bayqfront in q1903, From 1901-1908 logs, oqn-e-qiq@0q70q7q6 inland headquarters
lumber and other@orest products were shipped from Grand Marisi ti
received its name from the nine qt
The area around Grand Marais was subjected to serious forest fire Superior to the navigable waters
destruction around 1908-q1910. Tile fires were responsible for the destruction provides an excellent harbor wit
of mvch improved property, forest products and standing tlinbor.

*MqlnqhellOta sites on the National qR42q94q1
**Minnesota sites on the State Inventqo

The portage trail had been used for centuries prior to white mans 109. Parkersville: A half-mile west of
appearance in the area. La Verendrye was the first man [email protected] any sqViql-qT-e. at onp time an impor
account or his presence in 1731. The French fur traders'were active traffic. and early settlers.
until after 1763. From 1763 until the War of 1812 this was part of the
Dritish Territory. In 1795 a post wits opened here by
Portage post. By 1804 differences
Grand Portage was the site of the Northwest Company's inland headquarters Grand Portage.
and a large settlement was built to accommodate the fur trade business.
There were sixteen buildings enclosed in a StOLkade. They had a dock In 1837 the Parker Family again qmqo
for loading and unloading boats and canoes and a canoe yard that produced the post store and built a largeq.f
about seventy canoes annually. 1860's and a Mr. Jackson ran the s
left, and the place abandoned.
During the Revolutionary War, the only activity in Minnesota took place
in Grand Portage. In 1778 the British built a fort here to protect the 110. IlighFlls of the PJ_qqqon River- A
establishment from te coqlonials. 2qM`qgT2qFV'2qM vqihq6t@'qJ The iqiiq! -1nqi q6f a
of pulpwood that have been brought
The Northwest Company moved in 1803 to a depot at Fort William. The in 1942.
settlement was largely deserted except for the Indians. In 1820 the
American Fur Company operated a post until about 1840. From 1840 and on,
only limited development took place as small fur traders made a living.
In 1842 the Webster-Ashburton Treaty established tile American-Canadian
boundary and the Portage was declared open to usage by citizens from both
countries.

The Grand Portage Indian Reservation was established in 1854 at the signing
of the treaty of La Pointe.

In 1838 a mission was established In a log chapel. In 1851 a second log

chapel was built and this was replaced by the present Holy Rosary Church
in 1865. It i's the oldest existing log church in Minnesota. Services are
held here regularly and is the oldest active white man's church in
Minnesota.

During the 1930's an effort was made to replicate the stockade buildings
and Great Hall. This work was completed by the WPA archaeolgical crew.
In 1960 Grand Portage became a National Monument.

107. Susie Island or Governor's Island: Located in Wausewaqugning Day, is a
qTo-0qFpq-cr 'min nqg qEistorical po-qT-n-t-oqT interest. Between 1882-1884 Major
T.M. Newton sunk a deep shaft and mined copper ore.and some silver. The
miners encountered a body of red granite and halted work. A second shaft
was dug in 1905-1907 which existed and operated until a storm destroyed
the project and killed the owner and operator,

111, on Pigeon River: Named because of tile groups of wild pigeons
,q@IgL 8qM and
,qF,i2qg Inhabitated the area. About four miles above the mouth of the river
is the site of the Father Pierz Mission, established in 1842. In 1849
the mission was moved to Fort William and burned therehortly after.
*Minnesota sites on the State Inventory.

The second study, Duluth-Superior Harbor Cultural Re-
sources Study, was initiated in August of 1975 when
Russell W. Fridley, Director of the Minnesota Historical
Society and State Preservation Officer, suggested to the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that a study be conducted
to evaluate the cultural resources in the Duluth-Superior
,Harbor. Although not prepared for, or funded by,
Minnesota's Coastal Zone Program, the study has proven
useful in developing the historic preservation component
of Minnesota's Coastal Zone Plan.

One of the major goals of the study was to locate,
inventory and evaluate the significance of perhaps
hundreds of historic sites of widely varying types
in and around the harbor. This viewpoint was borne out
by the approximately 330 sites which have now been class-
ified into some 16 categories. Inevitably, the project
focused upon the larger and more significant develop-
ments within the harbor. Listed below are the major
cultural resource sites which were identified:

2 151

MAJOR CULTURAL RESOURCE SITES

First Grain Elevator, Elevator A, c. 1872-1886. This
wooden structure was built initially to serve as a
shipping point for wheat from southern Minnesota.
Although this hope never materialized profitably, by
1876-1877 wheat from eastern Dakota Territory began
to pour into the harbor via the Northern Pacific Rail-
way. Duluth became in time, as it remains today, the
major port for the shipment of this grain. In a sense,
Elevator A remains the symbol of a dream fulfilled and
reflects the role the port has played in the past 100
years for the shipment of wheat from Montana and North
Dakota to eastern and world markets.

Lake Superior & Mississip pi Railroad Terminal, c. 1870-1940s.
Men of vision foresaw the role that the Duluth-Superior
Harbor would play as a railhead and transshipment point
for raw materials, such as grain, iron ore, coal and
lumber. The Lake Superior and Mississippi Railroad
was the first to reach Duluth in 1870. Shortly there-
after this dock facility was built to handle goods to
be shipped eastward by water and those received in
turn from the eastern manufacturers to be consumed
locally or transshiped further westward. As such,
this terminal became the first linking of rail and
economical water transportation and represents the first
wave of a future that was to see as many as eight dif-
ferent railroads serve the port at one time.

Duluth Aerial Lift Bridge, 1905-present. This bridge
was placed on the National Register of Historic Places
in 1973 in recognition of it as an engineering achieve-
ment.

Duluth Ship Canal 1871-present. The canal has been
placed on the National Register of Historic Places.

U.S. Topographical Engineers Original Survey Markers and
Baseline, 1861-present. These markers were 1-n-stal-fed
by a U.S.T.E. field party headed by William H. Hearding
in the summer of 1861. Slightly less than four miles
apart along the inner face of Minnesota Point, they
provide reference points for the baseline drawn between
them. This baseline, in turn, was connected to survey
points in Wisconsin and served as the base from which
the triangulation and accurate measurement of all of
western Lake Superior was accomplished. Both points,
carefully preserved and protected by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, warrant nomination to the National
Register of Historic Places.

2 152

First Lighthouse, Minnesota Point, 1858-1878. In 1974
it was placed on the National Register of Historic.
Places.

Pirst Blast Furnace, Duluth Blast Furnace Company, c. 1870-
c. 1888. About 1870, the Northern Pacific Railway made
financial arrangements for developing a steel.mill in
Duluth in order to provide itself with rails, boxcars,
and other iron components. This development in the
center of Rice's point, with dock facilities on the
harbor basin, was never a success because of the expense
of importing both the iron ore and coke necessary to
produce pig iron. It did however herald the arrival of
later steel plants to operate in the harbor area, which
after 1892 had Mesabi ore at hand and a more advantageous
cost structure. Several of these early plants, in-
cluding the extensive West Superior Iron and Steel
Company, were consolidated around the turn of the
century, and in 1908 the U.S. Steel Company built its
large facility at Morgan Park, which made steel until 1973.
Although the local production of iron and steel never
fulfilled the early expectations of a "second Pittsburgh,"
it would be proper to conmemorate this industry at this
pioneer location.

McDougall-American Steel Barge Company, 1889 - c. 1890.
.This revolutionary shipyard at the very end of the bay
front slip at 15th Avenue West and Railroad Street on the
Duluth harbor basin was of short duration but nonetheless
inaugurated-one of the most colorful chapters in the
harbor's history. It was here that Captain Alexander
McDougall constructed the first five of his personally-
designed whaleback vessels, before moving to larger quarters
in West Superior. These distinctive, snub-nosed boats were
prominent in bulk cargo shipping on the Great Lakes for
many years thereafter. This site is of National Register
caliber.

Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Railroad ore Docks, 1914-
Present. These two dominant concrete and steel docks stand
on the same site as.their four original predecessors on the
Duluth side of St. Louis Bay between 33rd and 36th Avenue
West. The first wooden ore dock was built in 1893 by the
pioneering Merritt brothers and helped open up the harbor'
to the newly discovered Mesabi Range iron ore traffic.
Soon millions of tons were being shipped annually to the
eastern blast furnaces from this expanding dock complex.
The present Docks No. 5 & 6 were begun during World War
I and contributed mightily to the record shipments of iron

2 153

ore from'the harbor during world War II as well. Both
facilities, each capable of loading four freighters si-
multaneously, are still in service today, with No. 6 remaining
the largest structure of its kind on the Great Lakes.
This impressive site is certainly of National Register
quality.

First-Sawmill, Oneota Lumber Company, 1855-1870.
Although it antendated by a quarter century the-height of
the lumbering era at the harbor, this modest mill built
on St. Louis Bay in the pioneering settlement of Oneota
.wastypical of the early sawmills which served local needs
and helped fuel the early building boom on the harbor.
It was built by Henry W. Wheeler of St. Paul and supplied
with machinery brought up from Detroit through the newly-
opened Sault Canal. It seems fitting to commemorate this
great industry, now wholly disappeared, by placing the site
of the first sawmill on the National Register.

Imperial Flour Mill, 1889-1911. This distinctive six-
story brick structure on the east side of Rice's point in
the midst of "elevator row" symbolized the harbor's
aspirations to become a leader in the flour milling in-
dustry. Although more than a half-dozen mills were to
flourish across the bay in Superior during the 1890s,
these early hopes were never realized. Nonetheless, this
site would fittingly document an important period of
harbor growth and corrimercial development if placed on the
National Register.

North West Company Fur Post, 1793-c.1816. J. B. Perrault
built this stockaded fur trade post on the Superior bay
front channel in the vicinity of Connor's point. Located
on one of the three natural portages at the western end
of the lake, it served for a time as district headquarters
for the entire Fond du Lac region and grew to considerable
size as well as importance in the early fur trade. Although
its ruins could be seen as late as 1855, its present location
remains in doubt. If identified, it would certainly be
of National Register significance.

George R. Stuntz Cabin, Dock, & Trading Post, c. 1853-unknown.
Traditionally identified as the original settler of Duluth,
Stuntz had a hand in a number of enterprises that were to
shape the future of the harbor as well as the entire region.
In addition to.a sawmill on the Iron River and survey work
on the Vermilion Iron Range, his local activities included
government surveying and helping to construct the famous
Military Road to Superior. His homesite on the end of
Minnesota Point near the Superior entry, where for many
years he operated a licensed trading post as well as an
exclusive ferry service to mainland Superior, would fit-
tingly commemorate this energetic pioneer spirit and should
be considered of National Register caliber.

2 - 154

go so IMF

D U L U T N M I N N E 9 0 T A

V t

S U P E R 1 0 R
-n w 1 9 c 0 N 9 1 N

m
ul 30
ul
FIRST VAN RLSIATOR, ELEVATON 'A'
2-LANS SUPERIOR IS MISSISSIPPI RAILROAD TZRMWAL
3- DULUTH ARMAL LIFT BRID69
4-OULUTH OW CANAL
5-1961 U.B.T.R. SURVEY MARK9018
6-FINST LISOTHOUGE, MINNESOTA POINT
?-FIRST BLAST POMACE, DULUTH @LAST FURNACE CO.

INDOUSALL-AWRICAN STEEL MRSE CO,-FIRIT 'WHALEBACK' SHIPS
9- ONE DOCKS, DULUTH, MWISADE 6 PON RANGI RAILROAD

FIRST SAWMILL, ONEOTA LUMBER 00.
10- 1000 0 6000
11-IMPERIAL FLOUR MILL in Fat
12- 090MM ITUNTZ CADIN, DOCK, & TRADING POST

MAJOR CULTURAL RESOURCE LOCATIONS- DULUTH-SUPER

Additional Cultural Resources Which Should Be Preserved

Indian Portage-across the base of Minnesota Point. Now
in Government Park.

The "Thomas Wilson," (1892-1902) a sunken whaleback, out-
side of the harbor entrance.

An Indian-White.Cemetery used in the 1860s, and the Indian
Village.of the same period. Located on Minnesota Point
west of the lighthouse..

The.Stedmship,'"Meteot" (1896-1976) at dock in Superior,
Wisconsin as a museum.

The' Northern Pacific Railway drawbridge, 1885-1976; spans
the inner harbor.

B. PROBLEMS A14D ISSUES

The Minnesota Historical Society is concerned with the
preservation and protection of historic and archaeological
sites. Based on the numerous inventories and surveys of
such sites within,the -coastal zone, an evaluation must be
conducted to determine what sites should be restored and
interpreted and who should,ladminister them based on their
significance.

C. HISTORIC PRESERVATION GOALS, POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION STEPS

Policies: 1. 'To preserve, restore, and interpret
buildings and other structures, locales,
sites, antiquities and related lands
which illustrate significant events,
personalities, and features of local,
state, and national historical and
archaeological importance within the
coastal zone..

Implementation 1. Assess currently identified historical and
Steps: archaeological sites to determine
their significance, interpretive
potential, and appropriate level
of administration.

2. Continue to carry out the mandate
established in the:National Historic
Preservation Act of`1966, PL 89-665,--
to conduct historical and archaeological
surveys and planning for preservation,
acquisition, restoration, and
development projects. Surveys shall
be coordinated with the State Historic
Preservation Office,

2 156

3. The projects generated by the Coastal Zone
Manageme'nt Plan will be reviewed for
their effect on cultural resources,
as required under the National
Historic Preservation Act.

D. POLICIES.AND AUTHORITIES RELATING TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION

1. Federal

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, PL 89-665:
Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to expand and
maintain a national register of districts, sites,
buildings, structures and objects significant in American
history, architecture, archaeology and culture. This
register is called the National Register of Historic
Places. Under this Act, the Minnesota Historical Society
is authorized to conduct statewide surveys of historic,
architectural, archaeological, and-cultural resources
and prepare and review the state historic preservation
plan. The Society is also mandated through this Act
to comment on federal funded or licensed projects which
may impact historic sites.

Executive Order 11593, Protection and Enhancement of the
Cultural Environment: This order requires federal agencies
to take a leadership role in preservation in two par-
ticular ways. First, for all property under federal
jurisdiction or control, the agencies must survey and
nominate all eligible historic properties to the
National Register. Second, for every action funded,
licensed or executed by the federal government, the
agency involved must ask the Secretary of the Interior
to determine if any property in the environmental impact
area is eligible for the National Register.

Archaeological and Historical Pre servation Act of 1960,
as amended in 1974: This Act places responsibility on
the Secretary of the Interior to coordinate and administer
a nationwide program for the recovery of archaeological
and historic data which otherwise would be lost as the
result of federal construction and federally licensed
and assisted land modification'programs and activities.
This program is administered through liaison with other
federal agencies, identifying program needs and con-
tracting with qualified state and private educational
and scientific institutions to perform the necessary in-
vestigations.

Antiquities Act of 1906: This Act provides the Department
3-f-Interior with protective and research powers with
respect to archaeological and historic resources on
federal lands. In support of these activities the De-
partmental Consulting Archaeologist grants permits to
educational and scientific institutions for the purpose
of conducting archaeological and historical investigations
on federal lands.

2 - 157

Historic Sites Act of 1935: This Act authorizes the
Secretary of the Interior to make a survey of historic
sites and buildings to identify those of national sig-
nificant Sites and structures found nationally
significant by the Secretary are eligible for designation
as National Historic Landmarks and are included in the
National Register., Upon the owner's agreement to adhere
to accepted preservation precepts-, landmark designation
is recognized by the award of a bronze plaque and a
certificate. The program began in 1960.

2. State

Outdoor Recreation Act: This Act establishes an outdoor
recreation system in which all existing or proposed
units must be classified according to the unit's purpose
or function. Master plans must be prepared indicating
how the units will be administered and managed. This
Act authorizes the Minnesota Historical.Society to pre-
pare such management plans for state-owned historic
sites and to assist the Commissioner of Natural Re-
sources in preparing and distributing a registry of
units.

Minnesota Historic Sites Act: The Minnesota Historical
Society is authorized to _@dminister and control certain
historic sites within state parks for the purpose of
preservation and interpretation. The Society is des-
ignated as the agency to accept federal funds for
surveys, restoration, construction, equipping, or other
purposes relating to the state historic sites program;
and further, it is authorized to do what is necessary
to obtain such funds. The director of the Society,
as State Historic Preservation Officer, is responsible
for the preparation, implementation and administration of
the state historic preservation plan and the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-665). The
director of the Society must review and approve in writing
all grants-in-aid for architectural, archaeological
and historic preservation made by state agencies with
state funds or a combination of state and federal funds.
The Minnesota Historical Society must approve all
acquisitions of lands containing historical or archaeological
resources by the board of county commissioners of any
county. The director of the Minnesota Historical Society
is authorized to license (and revoke said license) any
qualified person and institution to conduct archaeological
work on state lands and to enforce the prohibition pro-
viding for the protection of archaeologicalresources
on state lands. The Minnesota Historical Society is

2 - 158

authorized to protect the integrity of historic resources
located on lands owned by the state, counties, and cities
as the law provides, that neither the state nor any of
the instrumentalities of government enumerated in Chap.
138.60, subd. 1 shall cause to change or alter the
physical features or historic character of any site
designated in the State Historic Sites Registry contained
in sections 138.56 without first obtaining the prior
approval in writing of the Minnesota Historical Society.

Minnesota Field Archaeology Act: This Act reserves to
the Minnesota Historical Society the exclusive right and
privilege of field archaeology on state sites, in order
to protect and preserve archaeological and scientific
information, matter, and objects. The Department of
Natural Resources, the Department of Transportation,
and all other state agencies must cooperate with the
Historical Society and the state arch 'aeologist in carry-
ing out the provisions of this Act.

2 159

rr
w

0
ani 0
rg zat
MCI
AuthoritiesC'O'-ASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

Chapter 3:

LEGAL ORGANIZATION AND AUTHORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT OF THE
COASTAL ZONE

Introduction
The Federal Coastal'Zone Management Act (hereafter,"Act") l/
mandates that the state establish a comprehensive and coordi-
nated mechanism for administration and control of land and
water uses at the state and local level within the coastal
zone. Second, it provides for a review, by the state, of federal
activities to determine their consistency with the state and
local CZM. Plans. It also has a number of other organizational
requirements for technical implementation of the CZM process,
including the designation of a lead agency at the state level,
a procedure for plan amendment and a process for interim control
prior to full plan implementation. Each of the above organi-
zation and authorities requirements are discussed in this chapter.

Critical in the evaluation of- organization and control
of land uses in the Coastal Zone are two factors: (1) the
boundary established for the coastal zone and (2) the definition
of those uses having a direct and significant impact on the
coastal area necessitating CZM regulation. Both are discussed
and described in detail in chapters 1 and 2. Considerinq
these factors, in the context of existing laws and inter-
governmental relationships, Minnesota has determined to utilize
a mel'--hod of interweaving or "networking" of existing state
laws to satisfy the requirements of the Act and insure that
land and water uses will be appropriately regulated. No
new laws will be necessary. The State Planning Agency,
traditionally involved in land use planning and intergovern-
mental relations, will be the lead agency and heavy emphasis
will be placed on co-operation and consultation amongst
governments at different levels.

In Section 1 of this chapter, the most important element
of the organization and authorities part of the plan, coastal
zone land use controls are examined in three parts: (A) the

Pub. Law 92-583 (1972) as amended by Pub. Law 92-583 (1976)
codified at 16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq., regulatio*ns regarding
state CZM programs have been proposed, 43 Red. Reg. 43552
(Aug. 29, 1977).

legal requirements specified in the Act; (B) a summary of the
key state laws utilized for implementation of the "networking"
method of compliance; and (C) the specifics of Minnesota's
"networking" approach. In Section 2, other organizational
requirements of lesser complexity will be indicated, including
the basis for selection of State Planning as the lead agency
and the mechanism for Plan amendment. In Section 3, the Act's
requirement regarding federal-consistency will be examined as
well as the Minnesota proposal for federal and state/local
consistency evaluation. In Section 4, the Minnesota approach
to interim controls will be described.

SECTION 1: - AUTHORITIES FOR CONTROL OF LAND AND WATER
ACTIVITIES IN THE COASTAL ZONE

A. Requirements of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act.

With respect to necessary regulatory authorities over land
and water uses, the Federal CZM Act requires:

"(d) prior to granting approval of the management
program, the Secretary of Commerce shall find that
the state, acting through its chosen agency or
agencies including local governments, area wide
agencies designated under section 204 of the Demon-
stration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966,
regional agencies, or interstate agencies, has
authority for the management of the coastal zone
in accordance with the Management Plan. Such
authority shall include power--

(1) to administer land and water use regulations,
control development in order to insure compliance
with the management program and to resolve conflicts
among competing uses . . . ... Act, �306(d) (Emphasis
supplied).

This general requirement of adequate regulatory controls is
supplemented by a specific indication of the extent and techniaues
of state involvement necessary for program approval.

"(e) prior to granting approval, the secretary
shall also find that the program provides: (1) for
any one or a combination of the following gen ral
technicrues for control of land and water uses
within the coa stal zone;

(a) state establishment of criteria and standards
for local implementation subject to administrative
review and enforcement of compliance;

3-2

(b) directstate.land and water use planning and
regulation; or

(c) state administrative review for consistency
with the management program of all development
plans, projects, or land and water use regulations,
including exceptions and variances thereto,
proposed by a state or local authority or private
aeveloper, with power to approve or disapprove
after public notice and an opportunity for hearing."
Act, 5 306(e)(l)(a)-(c) (Emphasis supplied).

These authorities must be in place at the time of approval
of the Coastal Zone Management Plan or the state must imDlement
suitable interim controls. 42 Fed. Reg. 43566, �923.42(c)(3), (4)
(Proposed regulations).

The organization and authority section o f the regulations
fleshes out the requirements of the three techniques for control
of land and water uses enumerated in the Act. In the Minnesota
networking approach, all three methods will be utilized,
depending upon the type of action and level of government involved.
For state actions, methods 2 and 3 are both in place, and will
operate concurrently. In summary form the methods are:

(1) State establishment of land use "criteria and standards for
local implementation." In this case the CZM Plan must
indicate certain policies regarding permissable use concerns
and regulatory devices in various portions of the
coastal zone. See Chapter 2. Local governments are
then required to adopt local land use plans and ordinances
consistent with these policies. The local ordinances
must be reviewed by the state and subject to state
approval as in conformity with the CZM Plan's "criteria
and standards." State enforcement of consistency will
result in the event a local government consistently
fails to implement the ordinance. 42 Fed. Reg. �43565-
67, S 923.42(c).

(2) Direct state planning and regulation of land and water
uses in the coastal zone. All state permitting programs
and state construction programs are examples of such an
an;proach, since in these programs the state agency
directly plans the actions or regulates the use. 42
Fed. Reg. 43567-68, 5923.42(d).

(3) State or local implementation of programs and
adoption of regul ations consistent with the
Coastal Zone Management Plan, without prior preparation
of state standards and criteria. -Thereafter, each
governmental decision, e.g. each permit, within the

3-3

coastal zone related to such regulations must be subject
to administrative review by a state agency. 42 Fed. Reg.
-69, �923.42(e)..
43568

B. Summary of Existing State Legal Authorities. This section
will briefly indicate the most important existing state laws
utilized or available for use in theMinnesota "networking"
approach to implementation of the Coastal Zone Plan.

1. Shoreland Management Act, Minn. Stat. �105.485.
The Shoreland Management Act allows the Commissioner of
the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to promulgate stan-
dards and criteria regarding land use, subdivision, and
development of shoreland areas and requires local governments
(both counties and cities) to adopt zoning ordinances consistent
with the standards. DNR has issued regulations for both
counties, Minn. Reg. Cons. 70-77, and cities, Minn. Reg. NR
82-84. "Shoreland" is defined as land within 2@ne thousand
feet of the normal high water mark of a lake.- The areas to
be covered in the standards and criteria include, but are not
@limited to the following:

"(a) the area of a lot and length of water frontage
suitable for a building site;
(b) the placement,of structures in relation to
shorelines and roads;
(c) the placement and construction of sanitary and 13
.waste disposal facilities;
(e) changes in bottom contours of adjacent public
waters;
(f) preservation of natural shorelands through
the restriction of land uses;
(g) variances from the minimum standards and
criteria. Minn. Stat. �105.485,
Subd. 3.

Ordinances must be submitted to the Commissioner by local
governments for review. In the event the Commissioner finds
an ordinance inconsistent with the promulgated criteria, he
shall adopt acomplying ordinance appropriate for the county
or city. Every county in,the coastal zone boundary currently
has a Shoreland Management zoning ordinance, however, none of
the cities has as yet adopted any ordinance for shoreland.

2/ It also includes areas within 300 feet of a river or
stream or the landward side of the flood plain, however
this is of minimal relevance for the CZM plan since the
boundary relates to Lake Superior.

3-4

The Shoreland Management Act has no provision for
administrative review and disapproval of locally granted
variances, but notice to the Commissioner is reauired of each
variance application and its disposition. Minn. Reg. Cons.
75(a), NR 84(c). Note, variances cannot be granted allowing
for a us'e not permitted in the zoning ordinance. M nn. Stait.
S.9462.357, Subd. 6; 394.27, Subd. 7. Thus, a change in use
in the ordinance would reauire its resubmission for DNR
review and approval. Standards for granting conditional
uses are suggested by the DNR regulations in the Model
Ordinance. Minn. Reg. Cons. 77(7.4).

@With respect to land within cities, the act provides:.

11municipal planning and land use controls for land
other than shoreland in the vicinity of shoreland
shall be, to the maximum extent practical, compatible
with planning and land use controls for shoreland.
. . . Minn. Stat. 9105.485 Subd. 7.

This creates.an enforceable standard to require consistencv
in the coastal zone area within municipalities beyond the
one thousand foot boundary, but no comparable standard for
land use beyond the defined shoreland areas where there is
county jurisdiction is provided in the law.

With respect to a systematic failure by a county or
municipality in enforcing the shoreland standards, several
options are available. First, the DNR or the lead agency,
the State Planning Agency, can intervene in selected local
zoning proceedings pursuant to the Environmental Rights Act,
see discussion below, to attempt to influence the outcome in
that specific case. Second, a state agency could seek judicial
review either of the reasonableness of any variance granted by
the local governmental unit or under the Rights Act's feasible
and.prudent alternative language. Third, selected variance
applications could give rise to Environmental Impact State-
ment (EIS) review if they resulted in "potential for signi-
ficant impact on the environment." Minn. Stat. 5116D.04, Subd. 1.

The Shoreland Management Act satisfies the Coastal Zone
Management Act method 1 for land use control; state criteria
and local ordinance adoption, subject to state review.

2. Critical Areas Act, Minn. Stat. Chapter 116G.
A criEical area can be designated, by the Governor,
upon the recommendation of the Environmental Quality Board
(EQB), if among other things, the area has "historical,
natural, scientific or cultural resources of regional or
statewide importance." Minn. Reg. MEQC 52. The evaluation

3-5

of an area by the EQB for critical area recommendation may
be initiated by the Board itself or the Regional Development
Commission. No such evaluation of the North Shore coastal
zone has been initiated at this time and it is not now
anticipated that this device will be used in the Minnesota
Coastal Zone Plan. However, it would be a method to deal
with a systematic failure to implement the plan by local or
state units of government. It also provides a legal mechanism
satisfying the Coastal Zone Management Act (technique one)
for state establishment of criteria and mandatory local
ordinance adoption in the coastal zone beyond the Shoreland
Management ordinance boundary. Again, this use is not contemplated
here, since local governments have indicated they will enter
voluntarily agreement with the state to adopt ordinances
consistent with the CZM policies in this area. The
Critical Areas approach is mentioned here only for tho-roughness.

The order of the Governor designating an area of critical
concern shall contain:

"Standards and guidelines to be followed
in preparing and adopting plans and regulations
[governing land use and development by counties
and cities within the,critical area] and to indicate
what development, if any, shall be permitted. . .
pending the adoption of plans and regulations."
Minn. Stat. S116G.06, Subd. 2(b).

Thus the Critical Areas Act operates in the same manner as
the Shoreland Management Act. Standards and criteria are
developed by a state agency, and then local counties and
municipalities must adopt zoning ordinances and land use
plans consistent with the promulgated criteria and guide-
lines. If the plans are not adopted or, if after review,
they are found inconsistent, the state agency may promulgate
regulations which the local governmental unit must enforce.
The Critical Areas Act differs from the Shoreland Management
Act in that during the interim between promulgation of
criteria and the adoption of plans, the Critical Areas Act
allows state regulation of all specific development decisions.
See Minn. Stat. �116G.12.

After local plans are adopted, Critical Areas, again
like Shoreland Management, provides for no state administrative
review of each specific local land use decision, however,
it does provide:

"If plans and regulations for an area of critical
concern have become effective under the provisions

3-6

of �116.07, the local unit of government shall
permit development only in accordance with those
plans and regulations." Minn. Stat. �116G.12,
Subd. 3 (Emphasis supplied).

This would establish the state adopted criteria and standards
as the test for local government in granting variances and
conditional uses. The Critical Areas Act, unlike Shoreland
Management, also provides for a direct legal cause of action
by the EQB to mandate "proper enforcement of the plan's and
regulations," if the "administration of the local plans and
regulations are inadequate to protect the state or regional
interest." Minn. Stat. �116.09, Subd. 4. This direct
authority to sue to require consistency would strengthen the
hand of the state in challenging a systematic failure to
implement the CZM Plan.

The Critical Areas Act provides for state grants to pay
for "nonfederal cost of preparing and adopting plans and
regulations for areas of critical concern. Minn. Stat.
�116.14. A critical area designation is effective for only
three years, unless ratified by the applicable regional
development commission or the state legislature.

3. Subdivided Land Sales Act, Minn. Stat. Chapter 83.
Minnesota has a typical Subdivided.Land Sales Act the
fundamental purpose of which is to require prior registration
of large subdivisions and full and complete disclosure to
prospective buyers. It is, however, unique, in that the
Commissioner of Securities can prevent sale of subdivided
land which fails to conform to environmental standards. The
Act provides that:

"The state envir onmental quality standards
for the subdivision and development of land in
this state shall be established by the Environmental
Quality Board." Minn. Stat. �83.29, Subd. 3.

The EQB in implementing the Coastal Zone Management Plan can
promulgate as an environmental standard for any subdivision
within the coastal zone a requirement that the subdivision
comply with the land and water use controls of the Plan.
Then, with respect to any regulated subdivision, there would
be a.direct state review of development and a requirement of
plan consistency. This, in most cases, is the only state
permit which will regulate residential housing development.

The value of the Subdivided Land Sales Act as a regulatory
device in the coastal zone is limited by the Act's exemption
of small projects. Fewer than ten lot subdivisions which

3-7

are offered in any period of twelve months are absolutely
exempt. Offers of fifty.lots within twelve months are exempt
unless the Commissioner of Securities specifically limits
this exemption by rule or order. Similarly, lands in
subdivisions located in proximity to cities of various sizes
are exempted, but again, the Commissioner may revoke or
condition this exemption. See generally Minn. Stat. �83.26.
In the latter two cases, the exemption would be limited to
developments demonstrating complete compliance with the
Coastal Zone Plan.

4. Minnesota Environmental Policy Act (MEPA)
Minn. Stat. Chapter 116D.
The Minnesota Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) is the
fundamental environmental law of the state. It provides
policies to guide state actions affecting the'environment, as
well as the requirement that an EIS be prepared when an
action involving a governmental entity (either directly or
in terms of a permit) has "potential for significant environmental
affect." Minn. Stat. S116D.04, Subd. 1.

Two policies established in the Act relate specifically
to land use and the protection of the coastal zone.

"(f) develop and implement land use and environmental
policiesi plans, and standards for the state as a
whole and major regions thereof through a coordinated
program of planning and land use control;

(b) define, designate, and protect environmentally
sensitive areas." Minn. Stat. S5116D.02, Subd. 2
(f), (g). (Emphasis supplied).

A number of other policies relate indirectly or partially to
coastal zone planning. See Minn. Stat. SS116D.01-02.

Under Minn. Stat. �116D.04, an environmental impact
statement is required for any "major [state of local] govern-
mental action," see Minn. Reg. MEQC 22 (L), having "potential
for significant environmental effects." The EIS must consider
the environmental effect of the proposed action as well as
all reasonable alternatives to the action. The EQB is
authorized to prescribe by rule those circumstances in which
an EIS is required. These regulations will be amended to
require an EIS in any circumstance where a major action
is proposed that would be in violation of the Coastal Zone
Plan policies. Such an inconsistent activity would presumptively
have potential for significant environmental impact. While
an EIS is only an informational document,. such a detailed
review should help lead to decisions which are sound in
terms of coastal zone planning.

3-8

Another provision of the Policy Act requires that:

"No state action significantly affecting the
quality of the environment shall be allowed, nor
shall any permit for natural resources management
and development be granted, where such action or
permit has caused or is likely to cause pollution,
impairment, or destruction of the air, water, land
or other natural resources located within the
state, so long as there is a feasible and prudent
alternative consistent with the reasonable require-@-
ments of the Public health, safety, and welfare
and the state's paramount concern for the pro-
tection of its air, water, land and other natural
resources from pollution, impairment, or destruction.
Economic considerations alone shall not justify such
conduct." Plinn. Stat. S116D.04, Subd. 6 (Emphasis
supplied).

Compliance with the Coastal Zone Plan arguably represents a
"feasible and prudent alternative," which must be chosen
under this reauirement.

The EQB is also given direct authority to review, and, if
appropriate, reverse or modify, decisions on "any state
project or action significantly affecting the environment if
the Board finds'-. . . that the action or project is incon-
sistent with the policy and standards of �116D.01 to 116D.06."
Minn. Stat. S116D.04, Subd. 9 (Emphasis supplied). The Board
will prospectively indicate that any decision by a state agency
in violation of the Coastal Zone Plan will occasion a hearing
and, where appropriate, reversal.

Thus, with respect to state agency actions, an administrative
review mechanism is available to monitor, on a case by case
basis, CZM Plan compliance. The lead agency, PAC, another
state agency, a local government or a private citizen or business
could ask the EQB to hold 'a hearing and consider revising the
agency action. This is the third.method indicated in the
Act. 5. Environmental Quality Board Statute, Minn. Stat.
S116C.01-08.
The EQB, the implementing agency for MEPA, is composed
of seven state agency heads (State Planning, Energy, Trans-
portation, DNR, Agriculture, Health, PCA), a representative
of the Governor's office, plus four citizens (three appointed
by the Governor and one by the Chairman of the Citizens
Advisory Committee to the.EQB). All the state agency heads on
EQB except Agriculture were on the CZM Policy Advisory Committee
(PAC). The Chairman is the State Planning Director. EQB
is given strong powers to act as the environmental coordinating
body by statute, including authority to:

3-9

"(b) . . . review L)rograms of state agencies that
significantly affect the environment and coordinate
those it determines are inter-departmental in
nature, and insure a . enIcy compliance with state
environmental policy.
(c) . . . review environmental regulations and
criteria for granElng and denying permits by state
agencies anT . . . .,resolve conflicts involving
state agencies with regard to progr ams, regulations,
permits and procedures significantly affecting the
environment, provided that such resolution of
conflicts is consistent with state environmental
policy." Minn. Stat. S�116C.04, Subd. 2(b), (c)
(Emphasis supplied).

As noted above, two of the state's environmental Dolicies
relate directly to the coastal zone planning effort.
These two sections given the EQB authority to review all
direct activities as well as regulations, permits and procedures
of state agencies, to insure consistency and compliance with
the Coastal Zone Plan. Again, as with the �116D.04, Subd.'9
authority of the Board to administratively review and
reverse decisions of state agencies, no authority is given
here to review ordinances, activities, or decisions of local
governmental units.

6. Minnesota Environmental Rights Act, Minn. Stat.
Chapter 116B.
The Environmental Rights Act creates a civil action allowing
any person to bring a lawsuit for the "protection of the
air, water, land, or other natural resources located within
the state, whether publicly or privately owned, from pollution,
impairment, or destruction.", Minn. Stat. �116B.01. "Natural
resources" is defined to include, but not be limited to:
11all minerals, animal, mechanical, air, water, land, timber,
soil, quietude, recreational and historical resources."
"Scenic and aesthetic resources" are also natural resources
"when owned by any governmental unit 'or agency." Minn. Stat.
�116B.02, Subd. 4. Many of the grounds for the coordinated
approach to water and land use control on the north shore and
development of the Coastal Zone Plan are within the list of
resources enumerated. This law creates an action for any
person, including the state CZM lead agency, to judicially
review a decision involving a land or water use in the
coastal zone. The standard of the Act requires the court to
order use of a "feasible and prudent alternative" if it is
less environmentally harmful. Minn. Stat. �116B.04.

Another provision-of the Act allows intervention as a
party to "any person" in "any administrative, licensing, or

3-10

other similar proceeding." Upon intervention, environmental
considerations must be part of the proceeding and the govern-
mental entity.is advised that it must meet the "feasible and
prudent alternative" standard. See generally Minn. Stat.
�116B.09. Thus, the state CZ14 lead agency, or DNR
will, where appropriate, intervene in local or state permit
proceedings to influence those decisions in a manner consistent
with the Plan. Thereafter, the Rights Act would provide a
basis for judicial review with a more favorable standard in
-terms of Plan compliance than the normal administrative challenge
of a permit decision.

7. Administrative Procedure Act, Minn. Stat.
5115.0411 - 15.052.
The Administrative Procedure Act of Minnesota contains
one provision which will be helpful with reppect to the
coastal zone process. As noted above, there are a number of
provisions for reviewing the consistency of state agency
regulations. Nonetheless, early participation in rule
making by the designated CZM agency in Minnesota can help to
insure state agency regulations which appropriately dovetail.
Minn. Stat. �15.0415 provides the following:

"Any interested person may petition an agency
requesting the adoption, suspension, amendment or
repeal-of any rule. The petition shall be specific
as to what action is requested and the need for
the action. Upon receipt of such a petition an
agency shall have sixty days in which to make a
specific and detailed reply in writing as to its
planned disposition of the request. If the agency
states its intention to hold a public hearing on
the subject of the request, it shall proceed
according to 515.0412. The attorney general shall
prescribe by rule the form for all petitions under
this section and may prescribe further procedures
for their submission, consideration, and disposition."

Thus the lead agency will, as appr opriate, propose rule
provisions for other state agencies at the initiation of the
CZM rule amendment process.

8. Direct State Permit Programs.

Direct state permits are required from a number of
Minnesota agencies prior to a wide variety of land and water
development activity. The vast majority of these permit
programs are implemented by state agencies having membership
on the EQB, thus they have been direct participants in CZM
program development. Where necessary, regulations of these

3-11

agencies, as well as others with permitting responsibilities
not on the EQB, such as the Securities Division on subdivided
land sales, will be amended to insure consistency with the
Coastal Zone Plan. State permits will not be granted for
activities inconsistent with the CZM Plan. Amongst the
permits expected to be required most frequently on activities
in the coastal zone are the following:

a. Modifications of Public Water, Minn. Stat. Chapter 105.
State law requires a permit from the DNR prior
to the construction, improvement, abandonment, or
other change of a "reservoir, dam or waterway obstruction
on any public water," or resulting in a change or
diminution in the "course, current or cross sect-ion
of any public waters. . . by any means, including
but not limited to, filling, excavating, or placing of
any materials in or on the beds of public waters . . . .
"Minn. Stat. 5105.42. Public waters are broadly
defined to include all waters having a "material
beneficial public purpose." Minn. Stat. �105.38. In
turn, "beneficial public purpose" is defined to include
but not be limited to, a wide variety of water related
benefits. Minn. Stat. �105.37, Subd. 6. These include
water supply, recreational activities, and public
navigation, activities generally related to large
bodies of water or major rivers as well as recharge of
groundwater, storm water runoff retention, entrapment
of nutrients, and wildlife habitat, concerns which enlarge
the class of public waters to include most wetland and
marsh areas.

Consistency of permits regarding public water with
the CZM Plan will be significant in terms of rivers,
on shore water bodies, and Lake Superior itself. For
example, the protection of delineated areas from
dredging and filling operations to preserve fish spawning
locations will be implemented through the denial
of this DNR permit.

b. Pollution Abatement-Permits, Minn.'Stat'. Chap. 115 116.
Minnesota administers a comprehensive air, water and
solid waste permit program through the Pollution Control
Agency (PCA). Numerous specific permits are required .
for installation of equipment producing air pollution.or
water pollution. Most industrial development requires
one or more of such permits. In addition, direct
permitting of all solid waste facilities is conducted by
the agency.. Permits are also required for any sewer
system. See Minn. Stat. �115.01-09.

3-12

Amongst the regulations of the PCA regarding
sewer facilities, Minn. Reg. WPC 40, has been to
hearing and should in place shortly, requiring individual
sewage treatment systems utilizing subsurface soil treat-
ment and disposal to meet certain standards. As proposed,
this will require that if the system services a facility
generating more than 15,000 gallons per day, a combination
of facilities generating more than 5,000 gallons per day,
or more than 15 dwelling units on a single system, it
must receive a PCA permit. Under the Shoreland Management
regulations of the DNR, Minn. Regs. Cons. 72(b)(2), NR
83(d)(2)(bb) Shoreland Management ordinances of counties
and cities are required to conform to "applicable standards,
criteria, rules and regulations of the Minnesota Department
of Health and the Pollution Control Agency. . . in terms
of size, construction, use and maintenance" of septic
tank systems. Thus, upon adoption, the standards of WPC
40, will be mandatory for the shoreland ordinances in the
Minnesota coastal zone.

9. Soil and Water Conservation Districts Minn. Stat.
Chap. 40.
Minnesota law provides for the creation of local soil
and water conservation districts having powers which can be
dovetailed to assist in the implementation of the Coastal
Zone Management Plan. Soil and water conservation districts
are authorized in part to undertake activities designed to
control and prevent soil erosion; foster land research
planning and development; implement land resource use.practicies
that reduce siltation and loss of land base through activities
associated with farming, mining, construction and forestry;
prevent flooding; assist in maintaining navigability of
rivers and highways; preserve wildlife areasr protect the
tax base;and protect public lands. See, inter alia, Minn.
Stat. S�40.02, .07, .071, and .072. In oi@_der t6 -accomplish
these purposes, soil and water conservation districts may
"develop comprehensive plans for the conservation of soil
and water resources and for the control and prevention of
soil erosion within the district."' These plans are required
to be consistent with "the state plan for water and related
land resources." Minn. Stat. 540.07, Subd. 9, Thus, the
plans of these districts would have to be consistent with
the Coastal Zone Management Plan. A soil and water conservation
district is also empowered to undertake works of improvement
to accomplish its purposes. Many of these will require state

3-13

permits, however, even in cases where such permits are
not required, such plans are subject to a finding by the State
Water Resources Board that they are consistent with "systematic
administration of state water policy." Minn. Stat. �40.072,
Subd. 3. Again, a state agency is therefore given authority
to review and require consistency of the conservation district
improvement projects.

C. Minnesota Networking Ap2.roach for Organization and Control.
of Land and Water Uses.@ As noted above, the CZM Act
specifies three alternative techniques, or a combination of
these alternatives, as mandatory to satisfy the organization
and regulatory authority requirements for control of land and
water uses. Although a number of states have passed new legi-
slation creating coastal zone agencies to implement these
responsibilities, the majority of states are implementing
the necessary controls through "networking" of existing
state authorities and state and local agencies. This is
the technique Minnesota will pursue. Emphasis will be on
coordination and cooperation amongst state agencies, the
Arrowhead Regional Development Commission (ARDC) and local
units of government. The result is satisfaction of the Act's
requirements utilizing a combination of the three methods:
me@hod 1 for local governments and methods 2 and 3 for state
governments.

No new legislation is required or proposed, however
state agencies will have to change their programs or proposed
projects, and amend their regulations in appropriate ways, and
local units of government will have to modify existing
zoning ordinances as necessary to conform. to CZM policies.
These changes are in response to the new policies relating
to land and water uses in the Coastal Zone Plan. These
permissibile use policies are described in detail in Chapter
2. The coastal zone boundary defines the area in which the
network approach will operate, and is discussed in Chapter
1. It recognizes both the importance of development in the
immediate land-water interface, the Shoreland Management
area and the importance of the transit/ visual/land use
interface along highway 61.

In the Minnesota approach to land use controls, two
zones or tiers are subject to differing regulatory authority,
in terms of the CZM Act methods. Nonetheless, the permissible
use policies indicates the general concern of Minnesota regarding
land uses throughout the zone. In the Shoreland Management
area all land use activities, whether local or state, will
be regulated in a manner conforming to one or another of the
prescribed methods defined in the CZM Act.

3-14

In the area beyond the Shoreland Management tier, only
matters of the larger.size involving a state permit will be
regulated by one or another of the techniques specified in
the Act. The state will strictly review residential develop-
ment by preclusion of exemptions under the Subdivided Land
Sales Act for developments not in'conformity with the Coastal
Zone Plan. Thus, only very small scale residential develop-
ment, less than 10 units per year in this area will not have
a state review. Beyond the Shoreland Management area amendment
of local zoning ordinances to accomplish consistency with
the Coastal Zone Plan will technically be voluntary, however,
because of the participation of local representatives in the
development of the permissable use policies specified in the
plan, the major role assigned to local and regional government
with respect to consultation and coordination in the Minnesota
networking approach, and the logic o@'including T.H. 61 and
using the quarter-quarter-quarter section lines for zoning
purposes, it is anticipated that local governments will
enter contracts to undertake such ordinance adoption in this
area in virtually every case. Because of the supportive
nature of these activities to the Coastal Zone Plan, it is
proposed that Coastal Zone Management Act implementation
funds be used to support ordinance adoption activities of
local governments pursuant to contract, as well as the
mandatory ordinance adoption within the Shoreland Management
zone.

The organization and authorities diagram, Figures 3-1
indicates the inter-relationship of agencies and legal
authorities proposed in the Minnesota networking approach.
The following discussion will more fully describe the organi-
zation structure, different local and state government
agency functional responsibilities, and techniques of
compliance with the Act's specific land and water control
methodology requirements.

Structure: All existing public agencies at all,levels
of government will continue to exercise their existing
authorities within the coastal zone, but in a manner consistent
with the policies specified in the Plan. New regulations,
and revised programs and policies, as approporate, for state
agencies, a review against the CZM plan policies of existing
and amended Shoreland Management ord-inances, and new zoning
ordinances, where needed to meet the policies, at the locai
level, will be adopted and utilized to carry o ut appropriate
portions of the coastal zone "control of land and water
uses." In addition, the Governor will act to approve the CZ1!
Plan and mandate state agency action of a consistent nature
by Executive Order. The present PAC, composed of local and
state officials, is now a non-statuto'ry advisory body, but

3-15

FIGURE 3-1 GOVERNOR OCZM
ORGANIZATION AND AUTHORITIES DIAGRAM 1. approve CZM plal@ & a'ltendments 1. approve qCZM
2. designate lead agency 2. allocate CqZM
3. mandate state agency compliance 3. secretarial
by executive order arbitration
consistency

LOCAL ADVISORY COMMITTEES [1ppppppADVISORY COMMITTEE
Tat opt-ion of local PAC 1. review and recommend approval of amendments
members) to CZM plan
?. general advisory role
1. serve as citizen advisors 1. review and recommend allocation of CZM funds
to local PAC members on 4. review complaints of governmental non-
I CZM activities. I cmpliance with CZM plan

ARDC LEAD AGENCY - STATE PLANNING AGFNCY ENVIRONMENTAL QU
1. monitor local governmental 1. provide general staffing and administration 1. adopt CZM pla
plans & actions for com- 2, report to OCZM 2. require amen
pliance with CZM.plan 3. receive, disburse & audit CZM funds rules
2. advise lead agency 4. monitor A evaluate implementation of CZM 3. review incons
3. provide technical assistance plan ' decisions un
4. coordinate local comments to 5. coordinate & suggest plan amendments Subd. 9
EQB on consistency of state 6. coordinate development of work programs 4. require EIS o
and federal activities 7. coordinate CLM program with other avail- state, local
5. prepare or cooperate in pre- able sources of funding with signifi
8. coordinate federal consistency reviews, 15. Advise lead a
paring plans, studies, etc.
necessary for plan imple- make consistency determination, attempt to
mentation & approved by PAC resolve conflicts with federal agenciesand
on federal permit and grant applications,
seek secretarial mediation, and seek STATE AGENCIES
consistency judicial review (see
LOCAL GOVERNMENT consistency diagram) 1. amend rules c
9. monitor state and local activities for plan
1. prepare and adopt lan(i use consistency & coordinate comments on state 2. act in manner
plans, zoning ordinan(es, and local consistency CZM plan
subdivision regulations & 10. q!ssure systematic local/state/federal 3. provide notif
sanitary codes consistent onsistency actions for
with CZM plan. 11. provide technical assistance and comments
2. act in a manner consistent 12. prepare or cooperate in preparing plans,
with CZM plan. studies, etc. necessary for plan
implementation & approved by PAC
review state/federal actions
for consistency

DiVAIRIMENT f,f N:@NWAL kl',SOIJI?Cf@
1. review & approve local shoreland ordinances
for consisteocy with Shoreldnd Rules and
C71-1 Pul icies.
2. pertorm activities indicated for all state
agencies

its role was actually that of the directing entity in the
CZM plan preparation process. It will be formally recognized
and continue to operate pursuant to the CZM Plan and the
Executive Order adopting the plan. Up to now its role has
been the key one of preparation of the draft plan for hearings.
In the future the PAC role@will include review of comments
on the draft plan and preparation of the final plan for
submission to the Governor, recommendations of later amendments,
and CZM funding allocation, plus a continuation of its
general advisory role. At the discretion of local PAC members,
local advisory committees for local PAC members will be
recognized as a formal part of the CZM implementation process
and established.

Control of Land and Water Uses and Resolutions of Conflicts
Amongst Competing Uses:

The Coastal Zone Management Planning process identified
local land use planning as a critical element of the CZM process.
The permissible uses section indicates a two-step process of
local governmental land use plan development and later ordinance
adoption. Specific policy areas for examination and@consideration
in the land use plan are identified, and necessary codes and
ordinances to implement the land use plan, including zoning/
land use, conditional use, health, highway access, sanitary,
gravel pit operation and reclamation, and subdivision standards,
as well as other areas of Shoreland Management concern are
identified. As regards the coastal zone area, two key factors
in the importance of local land use planning and zoni.ng are
(1) the new,information generated@in the Coastal Zone Management
study, including information on soil types, highway access
and future state recreational develouments As it relates to
local planning, and (2) the need to aevelop local land use
control as part of the Coastal Zone Plan to make it applicable
to federal and state governments under the consistency
requirements.

'Within the Shoreland Management Zone, counties along
the North Shore currently regulate land use pursuant to
Shoreland Management zoning ordinances. These ordinances
have been approved as in accordance with existing criteria
promulgated by the DNR. Municipalities have not yet adopted
such ordinances, but are required to be adopted by law.

Upon adoption of the Coastal Zone Management Plan by
the EQB, the DNR would have to implement the Shoreland
Management program in accordance with the EQB adopted Coastal
Zone Management Plan pursuant to Minn. Stat. S116C.04, Subd.
2. Thus, the policies and implementation criteria and
standards in Chapter 2 of, the CZM Plan would be the measure
against which local government zoning and land use ordinances
'would be compared by DNR. Existing local ordinances would
be reviewed for consistency by the DNR after EQB action.
This procedure is identical to the one followed in the

3-17

initial adoption and re view of the present ordinances,
however, the benchmark for comparison would include not only
the terms of the existing Shoreland Management regulations,
but also the overlay of information regarding appropriate
action in.this area from the Coastal Zone Management Plan
policy chapter. It is anticipated the DNR review would be
completed prior to OCZM Plan approval, but new land use plan
and ordinance adoption would stretch over several years there-
after.

In the coastal zone area beyond 1,000 feet or 300 feet
from a river or stream, the Shoreland Management Act does
not provide for state criteria or standards and later adoption
of zoning or land use plans by local government. However,
the DNR would review ordinances in these areas as well as the
1,000 foot area against the CZM policies. Thus, the DNR
review will be designed to provide guidance for ordinances
to cover this area. The lead agency, PAC and ARDC will also
provide technical assistance and aggressively urge adoption of
consistent zoning ordinances in this area. Formal contracts
between local government and the lead agency to. implement
planning and zoning consistent with the CZM plan will be
entered into after gubernatorial and EQB action.

In all areas of the coastal zone, matters requiring
state agency action or approval will be regulated to insure
Plan consistency and subject to EQB review pursuant to Minn.
Stat. �1160.04, Subd. 9. Similarly, direct state actions
will be required to be in conformity with the Plan, and the
EQB will mandate that programs and regulations of all state
agencies be consistent Minn. Stat. 5116C.04, Subd. 3. In
appropriate cases, SPA will initiate rule changes (including
possibly the EIS regulations and Subdivided Land Sales Act
environmental standards) pursuant to the Administrative
Procedure Act petition provisions.

EQB reg ulations will also be amended to require EIS
review of any activity (state, local.or private), anywhere
within the CZM boundary, if it has potential for significant
environmental effects and involves major policy choices or
disagreements in terms of the CZM Plan. For purposes of
this test, non-conformity with the Plan will be a major con-
sideration indicating significant effect. Prior to regulation
amendment EQB has authority to order EISs on a case by case
basis.

State Consistency: Under the EQB statute, the EQB, in
cooperation with the lead agency, will review, on a regular
basis, agency regulations and programs to monitor consistency.
State Planning will suggest such a.review whenever an apparent
inconsistency is identified either by CZM staff or through
public or other governmental agency or unit comments. Individual
actions by state agencies will be subject to an administrative

3-18

review mechanism in the EQB under the Environmental Policy
Act, Minn. Stat. �116B.06, Subd. 9. Again, the lead agency,
the general public, or another governmental entity can trigger
such an EQB review. EIS preparation, where appropriate will
also foster consistency. Finally, through the Executive
Order of the Governor, all state agencies will also be
subject to the charge to act in a consistent manner. State
agency consistency is discussed in further detail in section 3 of
this chapter.

Local Consistency: In the event of systematic non-
compliance by a local agency in the implementation of the
shoreland zoning ordinanace, the lead agency or DNR will pursue
one of a variety of options: (1) intervention in important
local variance or conditional use decisions affecting the
coastal zone as a party under the Environme'ntal Rights Act
in order to directly affect the outcome of the proceeding; (2)
judicial review to require compliance with the ordinance either
by a direct review, arguing the decision is arbitrary and
capricious, or under the Environmental Rights Act, arguing
plan compliance is a feasible and prudent alternative. In
addition, in tandem with the above, the 14EPA requirement for
an EIS will be applied in appropriate circumstances as a
tool to provide greater information on impacts and foster
sound decisions. The consistency monitoring of local govern-
mental decisions is discussed in more detail in section 3 of
this chapter.

Compliance with Federal Requirements: The above-described
networking of existing state regulations results in compliance
with the Coastal Zone Management Act requirements. As to
local governmental decisions within the Shoreland management
area, there is compliance pursuant to method one. All three
elements under �306(e)(1)(A) exist: state setting of criteria
and standards (in the Shoreland Management regulations and CZM
Plan), state review and approval of locally adopted ordinances
as consistent with the CZM Plan, and state author'ity to seek
judicial review in the event of a pattern of inconsistent
enforcement.

In the small area of the boundary beyond 1,000 feet
local governments will enter into contractual agreements to
have their ordinances treated as if within the Shoreland
Management area and DNR will provide the same review function.
Thus, although the area has only state controls under the
Act �306(e)(l)(B) and (C), it will be subject to "adequate
state overview" and will be, pursuant to the contracting
agreement, "part of the approved management program." 42
Fed. Reg. 43580, �923.83(b). Thus, the use of �306 funds
for land use planning in this area will be appropriate.

3-19

With respect to state actions within the coastal zone, coin.-
pliance results under both methods two and three, Act, �306
(e)(1)(B) and (C). There are direct state permit controls
under consistent regulations for all regulated actions and
mandatory consistency,of all programs, plus there is an
administrative review availabie in the EQB of every individual
decision for plan consistency.

3-20

I
I
i
I
i
I
i
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I SECTION 2:
MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZATION
REQUIREMENTS INCLUDING
LEAD AGENCY SELECTION AND
I PLAN AMENDMENT
I
I

SECTION 2: MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZATION REQUIRE14ENTS
INCLUDING LEAD AGENCY SELECTION AND
PLAN AMENDMENT.

In addition to the requirement that the state have
appropriate authority for control of land and water uses, the
Act imposes a number of other legal requirements with"respect to
CZM organization and plan adoption.

A. Descriptive Requirements. The Act imposes many requirements
that are merely descriptive of the plan elements, such as
the requirement of �305(b)(6) that the Plan include "a
description of the organization structure proposed to implement
the management program. These are complied with
throughout the Plan.

Gubernatorial Approval. The Act requi res that:

"The management program and any changes thereto
have been reviewed and approved by the Governor."
Act, 9306 (c) (4).

Such approval will occur only at the time of plan submission.
It will be accompanied by an Executive Order requiring state
agencies to act in compliance with the Plan. In addition,
as discussed above, there will be an EQ.B.Plan adoption
resolution indicating that the Plan represents state environ-
mental policy. Thereafter, pursuant to both the Executive
Order and the EQB's authority to require state regulations,
programs, and procedures be consistent with state policy,
all state agency actions will be required to be consistent.

C. Lead Agency: The federal Act requires that:

"The governor of the state has designated a
single agency to receive and administer the
grants for implementing the management program.
Act, �306(c)(5).

This state coastal zone lead agency is a critical factor in
the Plan in terms of working with other agencies and insuring
coordination and consistency. Noted above was the authority
in the Administrative Procedure Act to petition for rule
adoption, a function the lead agency will, where appropriate,
utilize to trigger state agency rule making proceedings. Also
the lead agency will be the focus for monitoring compliance
by local and,state agencies,with the Plan. It will seek
judicial review or trigger EQB inquiry under 9�116D.04.
Subd. 9 or 116C.04, Subd. 2 as appropriate. It will also
ask for EIS's where this will foster study desirable in

3-21

ascertaining whether a particular action is appropriate in
the CZM area. The PAC considered three agencies for this
role, however one was the unanimous choice of the state and
local PAC representatives involved in plan develoPment
the State Planning Agency.
,@he State Planning Agency has a number of advantages
for this task. First the Chairman of the EQB is the director
of the State Planning Agency, thus providing a direct link
between those agencies. Generally the State Planning Agency
has staffed the EQB on various matters. The State Planning
director is also chairman of the PAC. State Planning has
acted'as the staff for PAC and the Coastal 'Zone studies
undertaken up to this time. It is thus the agency most
familiar with the legal and proposed land use plan requirements
of the CZM. Further, it has experience with respect to land
use planning that is broader than any other state agency and
has the general statutory responsibility to insure coordination
amongst various agencies. See Minn. Stat. ��4.10-12. The
lattej@ is a key concern with respect to Minnesota's proposed
organizational plan, given its heavy emphasis on obtaining
comments from other agencies and coordinating multi-level
governmental actions by networking a number of existing
state laws. Finally, it has long been involved in grant
administration to local governmental units.

D. Amendment Process. The Coastal Zone Management Act
indicates future ameH_dments are to be expected. Act, �306(g).
The proposed regulations for program approval, 42 Fed. Reg.
43582-83, ��923.92, 923.93, recognize the Plans will be
subject to both major amendment and minor refinement. The
two sections provide standards for each type of change,
indicate procedures for state action on the changes and
establish the review procedure for major and minor amendments
at the federal level. Approval "prior to initiation of the
change contemplated" is required, and prior implementation
where a "approved program goal, objective, policy, authority
or other technique" is involved, can result in termination
of federal funding. Act, 5312(b), 42 Fed. Reg. 43583,
9923.94(b)(1)(iii). The review in terms of a major amendment
is the same as for initial plan approval. 42 Fed. Reg
43579, �923.72.

The Act provides no guidance on how the states should
initiate amendments, and the regulations only require approval
by the Governor, 42 Fed. Reg. 43582 �923.92(e)(1). Thus, the
structure of the Plan with respect to amendments is within
the discretion of the state. Because Minnesota will be utilizing
a "networking" approach with respect to organization and
authorities for control of land and water uses, the implementation

3-22

of an amendment will depend upon the particular state law being
used to effectuate the Plan in the area where the amendment
occurs. For example, if the amendment would change the Plan
with respect to uses regulated by local ordinances within
the Shoreland Management zone, it would be effectuated by:
(1) adoption of the amendment by the Governor and Environmental
Quality Board, (2) a change in DNR implementation of the Shore-
land program, including a new review of local ordinances, and (3)
amendment of local ordinances by local governmental units.
If the amendment deals with an area beyond the shoreland
tier or where the activity was subject to a state permit, it
would be implemented in two steps, with plan adoption as in
(1) above and then (2) modification of state agency regulations,
permit procedures or other consistent action.

This indication of how formal implemen *tation of an
amendment would occur, does not answer the question as to
how amendments will be generated and approved. The state's
current development of the Coastal Zone Plan heavily utilized
a Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) made up of local and
state officials. The PAC will continue to act as the super-
visory entity with resp(@ct to Coastal Zone Planning. The
continued existence and role of the PAC will be indicated
by the Governor in his approval of the Coastal Zone Plan
and accompanying Executive Order. Amendment suggestions
could come from many sources, including the State Planning
Agency (The CZM lead agency), or any local governmental unit,
the ARDC, a state agency, a federal agency, the EQB, an
interested citizen or business entity, or the PAC itself.
The PAC would then study and review such amendments, with
staffing from the lead agency, and submit them with comments
and recommendations to the Governor.

E. Land Acquisition Authorities. The Act requires state
legal authority to acquire inte!@_ests in land "when necessary
to achieve conformity with the management program. Minnesota
law gives ample authority to meet this test to state and
local authorities, for acquisition of recreation and wildlife
lands, water access sites, trails, rest stops and overlooks,
and harbor improvement sites, amongst others. A comprehensive
list of these authorities follows:

Minn. Stat. SS:

84.029 authorizes the Commissioner of DNR to acquire by %
gift, purchase, or lease easements or other interests in
land for trails or recreational uses related to trails.

84.033 authoi@izes the Commissioner of DNR to acquire by
gift, lease, easement, or purchase lands or interests in
lands suitable and desirable for establishing and maintaining
scientific and natural areas.

3-23

84.64 authorizes the Commissioner of DNR to acquire conservation
restrictions by gift, purchase, or exchange from private
land owners.@

84A.29, .39 grants to the Department of Natural Resources the
power of eminent domain and authorizes him to acquire certain
lands or interests in lands which he deems necessary for
state ownership or use with regard to reforestation or
aforestation oi projects.

84A.55 authorizes the Commissioner of DNR to acquire by
purchase or eminent domain any land or interest therein for
purposes related to the development and management of certain
state game preserves.

85.012 authorizes the Commissioner of Administration to
acquire certain identified lands for state parks.

86.41 authorizes the Commissioner of Administration to
acquire certain identified lands and directs him to work
with the Leaislative Commission on Minnesota Resources with
regard to certain purchases. It further provides that
certain land for park purposes may be acquired in any manner
and to any extent authorized by the Act establishing the
park for which the acquisition is made, but that all other
identified land for recreational or conservation purposes
may be acquired only by gift, purchase, lease, or license.

86A.07 provides that any unit of the outdoor recreation
system shall be deemed authorized upon enactment of a law (1)
describing the land, water, or facility which shall comprise
the unit, (2) designating the land, water or facility which
shall comprise the unit, and (3) directing and authorizing
acquisition of the unit thus described.

89.032 authorizes the Commissioner of DNR to purchase lands
or interests in land within state forests created by law
which he deems necessary for state use and development.

89.033 authorizes the Commissioner of DNR to accept on
behalf of the state any gift, bequest, or devise of land
which he deems suitable for use in connection with the
development of state forests.

92.31, and 94.341 et seq establish certain provisions for
the exchange of state lands.

94.47 authorizes the Commissioner of DNR to purchase or to
accept by gift or lease any land owned by the United States
within townshiDs in which state forests or state parks or
game refuges or public shooting grounds have been set apart.

3-24

282.017 authorizes county boards to convey to the United
States an t e state o M nnesota permanent or temporary
easements for highways,'roads and trails, or flowage for the
development of fish and game resources, stream protection,
etc.

375.26 authorizes county boards to receive by grant, or
devise real property, not to exceed forty acres in any one
county, for use as park or recreation grounds.

398.32 authorizes counties to acquire by purchase, lease,
gift or condemnation any land or water areas or interests
within or outside of the county suitable for use by county
residents for public park purposes or related outdoor recreation
purposes.

400.04 authorizes counties to acquire by gi ft, lease, purchase,
or eminent domain, any land or interest or land within or
outside the county for solid waste management purposes.

412.211 authorizes every city to acquire within or'outside
its corporate limits such real property as the purposes of
the city may require by purchase, gift, lease, condemnation,
or otherwise.

412.491 authorizes any statutory city to establish, improve,
maintain, and manage parks and recreational facilities.

412.511 authorizes the Park Board or council of any statutory
city to-acquire land for park purposes.

429.021 authorizes the council of any municipality to acquire
and improve parks.

440.08 authorizes cities of the first class to acauire by
purchase, gift, devise, or condemnation lands or-property
needed for public streets, highway uses and purposes.

440.38 authorizes any city of the first class to acquire by
gift, devise, purchase or condemnation property necessary
for streets or for adjacent public parks.

448.03 authorizes any city of the fourth class to acquire*by
purchase or condemnation tracts of land, not exceeding 25
acres, within the corporate limits,of the city,for public
park purposes.

448.21 empowers any city of the first class to exchange for
other lands to be used for parks or playgrounds any land
acquired by the city for parks or playgrounds.

3-25

448.22 authorizes any city of the first cla,ss or any such
city acting jointly with any county in which it is located
to purchase from the federal government property needed for
public park purposes.

450.19 authorizes cities and towns to acquire by lease,
purchase, or gift suitable lands within or without their
corporate limits for use as public tourist camping grounds.

450.23 authorizes the Boa rd of Park Commissioners or other
governing body having control of the parks within a city of
the first class to receive and accept by gift or devise land
to be used for public parks or recreational centers.

458.24 authorizes cities of the first class to condemn lands
for harbors, wharves, or boat landings

459.06 authorizes any county, city, or town to accept donations
of certain lands for forest purposes.

459.07 authorizes any city of the first class to purchase or
obtain by condemnation land bordering upon a lake for the
purpose of establishing a municipal forest, and provides
that the city may reserve any part of such land for use as a
public bathing beach.

465.03 authorizes any county, town, city, or school district
to accept a grant or devise of real property.

465.035 authorizes any county, town, city, or other public
corporation to lease or convey its lands to the state or the
United States.

471.15 authorizes any city, town, county, or school district
to operate a program or public recreation and playgrounds,
and to acquire and maintain land for such purposes.

471.191 authorizes any city operating a program of public
recreation and playgrounds to acquire and maintain land for
such purposes.
1 1
471.64 authorizes any county, city, town, school district,
or other political subdivision to enter into contracts with
the United States or its agencies for the nurchase, lease,
or other-acquisition of real property, withoutregard to
statutory or charter provisions.

3-26

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I SECTION 3:
1 FEDERAL AND STATE/
LOCAL CONSISTENCY
REVIEW MECHANISMS
I
I
I
I
I

SECTION 3: FEDERAL AND STATE/LOCAL CONSISTENCY
REVIEW MECHANISMS

A major element in inducing states to implement a CZM
program is the authority in the Act allowing states with
approved CZM Plans to review federal actions for consistency
with the state Plan. Minnesota will utilize its lead agency
to coordinate this program. The input of local and state
governmental entities in this review is essential and ARDC
will coordinate local input. A parallel state/local "consistency
review" operating format will be implemented to insure
maximum intergovernmental input, coordination and consistency
at those levels. By using a parallel approach, maximum
efficiency should result.

A. Federal Consistency Review.

1. Legal Authorities. Section 307 establishes the
CZM procedure for insuring federal activities are consistent
with the state's Coastal Zone Plan. Generally consistency
review can be considered in two categories. First are
federal activities including development projects, undertaken
by the federal agency itself. Act, ��307(c)(1), (2). These
actions are subject to a consistency finding if they "directly"
affect the coastal zone. The consistency review is undertaken
by the federal agency carrying out the project or program.
The agency must find that its program is "consistent to
maximum extent practicable" with the state Plan or it
cannot be pursued without modification. The state must be
provided notice of the proposed federal action and the
federal agency's consistency finding, along with sufficient
information for state review a minimum of 90 days before any
commitment. The state then has 45 days to review consistency
and, if it does not respond within that time, state concurrence
in the federal finding is presumed. More time may be requested,
for cause. If the state disagrees with the federal finding
it can discuss the matter informally with the federal agency
or seek mediation by the Secretary of Commerce. It cannot
administratively prevent the federal agency from taking the
action, but judicial review is available at any time.

The second class of cases are federal license and
permit activities and federal assistance to state and local
governments. Act, ��307(c)(3)(A), 307(d). Federal license
or permit activities and grants to local,and state governments
for projects "affecting" the coastal zone must be "consistent"
with the Coastal Zone"Plan. This is a broader class of

3-27

covered actions than with respect to direct federal activities,
since it includes secondary effects. The responsibility for
notifying the state rests with the license applicant or
grant seeking governmental agency. In the first instance,
the state may establish a particular method for the applicant
to utilize. In the second case, the use of the A-95 notificati
procedure through the regional agency (here ARDC) is mandatory.
If the state makes a finding of non-consistency with the
Coastal Zone Plan, the federal agency may not approve the
license or permit or make the grant. The state must concur
with or object to the consistency of the proposed activity
at the earliest practicable time after receipt of a notification
from a license applicant accompanied by sufficient data to'
support its consistency finding. A failure by the state to
act within six months from receipt of the information,
results in a conclusive presumption of consistency. With
respect to grants, the review time is the same as under the
A-95 procedure. In both license and grant cases, a binding
secretarial administrative appeal mechanism is available and
the possibility of ultimate judicial review exists.

Tables compiling these various federal consistency
provisions are attached as Figures 3-2 and 3-3. See 42
Fed. Reg. 43586.ff. (Proposed regulations).

The two critical implementation requirements of the
Act, which the Plan must-indicate, are: first, who will make
the state consistency determination, and, second, what
activities will be subject to consistency review. The Act
provides that the state lead agency is responsible for
making the consistency determination, but that this responsibility
may be delegated to any other state or local agency. With
respect to actions subject to a consistency review under
�307(c)(3) (permits) and �307(d) (grants) the state is required
to enumerate in theP-@ the geographic areas and categories
of permits which will automatically be subject to review.
This tabulation follows this section. Other non-enumerated
permits may be reviewed on a case by case basis and the
list of permits can be updated and modified at any time subject
only to approval by the Associate Administrator of OCZM. Grants
and permits outside of the described geographical area may be
reviewed only with the approval of the Associate Administrator.

2. Minnesota Consistency Review Format. As noted
above, the lead agency may delegate the consistency review
function in whole or in part. Minnesota will do this,
utilizing a pairing approach where federal agencies, whether
acting directly or by permit or grant, are paired with
their respective state counterparts, e.g. Environmental
Protection Agency -- Pollution Control Agency; Department
of Interior or Forest Service -- Department of Natural Resources.

3-28

FIGURE 3-2

FEDERAL CONSISTENCY REVIEW DIAGRAM

1. FEDERAL ACTIVITY (conducted by a Federal AqtnSy)
Federal Agency makes consistency determination
subject to state review. LPAD AGE4CY - SPA State concurren(.p
with federal
Federal agenc,, submits notification and 1. review time 45.days. Federal agency nay assume consistency
consistency determination to lead agency concurrence if no response within 45 days. determination.
at least 90 days prior to federal State may request more time for review. project proceeds
commitment. 2. determine consistency after consultation with
state, local & regional agencies. including
discussion to resolve consistency disagreements State fiiids inconsistent,
of commenting agencies. federal voluntary project
1. seek mediation by Secretary of Commerce or modification or abandon-
judicial review if appropriate. ment; federal agency can
.1 ignore and proceed.
LOCAL GOVERHMFNT, COUNTERPART STATE AGENCY, ARDC I -
OCZM COURTS
1. review and comment on consistency of activity. state may State may
seek seek
secretarial judicial
mediation review
2. FEDERAL LICENSE OR PERMIT

Applicant submits notification and LUAU AGENCY SPA Project consi@ tent
applicant's indication of consistency federal permit
to lead agency. 1. state must complete review at the earliest may be issued.
practical time after notice with sufficient
information. State can require more Information. Grant inc
If state does not respond in 6 months, applicant ma not be made.
may presume finding of consistency.
2. see 2 above. give public notic of review.
3. participate in review by Secretary of Commerce if OUM COURTS
state consistency determination is appealed.
4. seek judicial review if state determination is Applicant Judicial
overturned. may seek review of
secretarial secretarial
review decision
LnCAL GOVQNMENT, COUNTERPART STATE AGENCY, ARDC
11. review and comment on consistency of permit.

3. FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
LEAD AGENCY - SPA Grant con ten
t 'is
ay m,
Applicant notifies the regional A-95 may be made
clearinghouse (ARK). Pegional 1. review times same as for A@95, 30 days with 15 Fm I
clearinghouse notifies state A-95 day extension possible. If no state response
clearinghouse (SPA, the CZ!1 lead applicant may presume finding of consistency.
agency). seq&% 3 and 4 in permit and license diagram

Project incon0stent,
LOCAL GOVERNMENT, C(KqN3E p-?rmi t rannot he
T.ARLSTATE AGENCY, AROC Is ued
H

G -01 E
1. review and comment on consistency of application] OCZM COI)RTS
Applicant Judicial
may seek review of
secretarial
review df@r: i ; i Oq

TABLE 3-1
FEDFRAL COMSISTENCY TABLE,

CZMA SECTION 307(c)(1) & (2) 307(c)(3)(A) 307(c)(3)(B) 307(d)

Federal Action Federal activities Federally licensed and Not applicable to Federal assistance
including development permitted activities Minnesota Shoreland. to state and local
projects see 43 U.S.C. governments
�1331

Coastal Zone Impact "Directly affecting the "Affecting land or.water "Affecting the coastal
coastal zone" uses in the coastal zone"*
zone"

Responsibility to Federal agency proposing Applicant for federal State or local govern-
notify state the action license permit required ment applicant for
to notify lead state federal assistance
agency required to notify,
A-95 clearinghouse

Notification Alternatives chosen by Consistency certification A-95 notification
procedure federal agency (subject by applicantor equivalent proceiure
to NOAA regulations) notice procedure set
forth in CZMP

Consistency Consistent to the maximum Consistent with the CZMP Consistent with the CZMP
requirement extent practicable with
CZMP

Consistency Made by federal agency Made by state agency and Made by state agency
Jetermination (Review by state agency federal action must follov and federal action
but no authority to state determination must follow state
block federal activity) determination

Federal agency Federal agency not Federal agency may not Federal agency may not
obligations required to disapprove approve license or grant assistance following
action following state permit following state state agency objection
agency disagreement agency objection

Table 3-1
Page 2

CZMA SECTION 307(c)(1) & (2) 307(c)(3)(A) 307(c)(3)(B) 307(d)

Administrative Voluntary mediation only Voluntary mediation on Voluntary mediation on
Conflict Resolution by the Secretary appeal to the Secretary appeal to the Secretary
by applicant agency or by applicant agency or
independent Secretarial independent secretarial
action within 30 days of action within 30 days of
state decision, secretary state decision. secretary
may override state decision may override state
if: 1) consistent with decision if: 1) consistent
objectives of the Act, or with objectives of the Act,
2)-necessary in interest or 2) necessary in interest
of national security of national security

Tining of State Notice time: 90 days Notice time: by applicant Notice time: notice is as
Action Prospective before any commitment; Rev. time: 6 mo. after provided in A-95 review
Rev. time: within 45 approval with sufficient program. Rev. time: same
days, an automatic data, if no rev. within as under A-95, 30 days
30 day extensi *on avail- time.can.presume with a 15 day extension.
able, if no response agreement.
concurrence presumed,
can ask for more time.

Activities, Grants, Federal agency must state must give notice of Same as for permits. rev.
Permits Pending on review & give determina- intent to rev. within 45 time as in A-95, OCZM may
Date of �306 approval tion to state within days after �306 approval or disapprove within 15 days.
120 days of �306 approval, waives authority; time 6
state review 45 days with months from original licens
30 day automatic extension approval notice, but not
less than 3 months, OCZM
can disapprove review e@
within 15 days after
state notice of intent
to review.

Table 3-1
Page 3

CZMA SECTION 307(c)(1) & (2) 307(c)(3)(A) 307(c)(3)(8) 301(d)

Identification of Done by federal agency State list or case-by Same as for permits
Actions to be state may have advisory case identification,
Reviewed list and case-by-case OCZ11 can disapprove
identification other within 15 days.
actions, if federal fails
to review listed on
identification, only
remedy is mediation

Judicial Conflict Judicial review available Judicial review available Judicial review avail3ble
Resolution

Location In or out of zone if Same Same
show test of impactment

*These terms have the same meaning and include-secondary effects, which the test for federal activities does not.

Notice from the federal agency or permit plicant will be
made to the lead agency, State Planning- Grant applicants
already give notice to the ARDC and.t t agency will notify
the lead agency. The lead agency w then refer each
consistency matter to the appropri e state agency or
agencies for review and comment. In addition, a method of local
involvement will be necessary. The ARDC will be utilized
as the local clearinghouse for this input. Referrals will
go the ARDC for review and comment with the understanding
that this body (itself composed of local officials) will
consult with other governmental entities, its own advisory
boards, and local PAC members, as appropriate. The EQB
will also receive and provide inter-agency notification
so that the views of non-paired agencies can be provided by
way of an EQB comment as to consistency. The lead agency will
serve as the clearinghouse for comments from local and
state agencies, transmit these comments to'the appropriate
federal agencies initiate, where appropriate, mediation,
arbitration,, o judicial review. In cases where comments of
state agencie , EQB, RDC, or local governments are inconsistent,
the lead agen y wo mediate, and informally seek to achieve
consensus state level. If necessary, the lead agency
will e the final decision as to the state's position.

As with respect to the amendment mechanism, the law
nd regulations allow great latitude to the states as to
the organization of the consistency review process. Aside
from the denomination of the lead agency as the initial
responsible agency, much flexibility is allowed in terms of
consultation devices. Because of the large number of actions
to be reviewed and the short time periods involved, it is
necessary to establish a protocol for review of consistency
to insure timeliness of comment. Thus, the procedure vests
final comment authority and conflict resolution in the lead
agency. On cases,where the commenting agencies reach differing
conclusions and an agency is dissatisfied with the lead agency
action, review by the PAC will be available. Such review would
be triggered by a commenting agency requesting the matter be
placed on a PAC agenda.

B. State/Local Consistency Review and Mechanism for Local/
ARDC Input into Federal Consistency Review.

Explicit in the Minnesota "networking" approach inter-
weaving existing state authorities, as discussed previously,
is the review of local and state direct activities and
programs as well as permits to ensure CZM Plan consistency.
To comply with the Act, �306(e)(1)(A), there must be a-program
of state review of local activities to allow identification
of a systematic failure to comply. Similarly, the administrative
0
P
r permit
lann ng -
p
Gra
1 cant wl 11
n @aa
t ppl Ic n
g w
C and t ta ency i1 1not
ncy W. 1 then refer each
opr i te state agency or
t. In addjt ion,a method
The ARDC wi11be ut 1iz@

3-33

n. Stat. 5116D.04, Su d. 9,
review authority of the EQB, Min
will be used to present deviations by_%t_&@ @ @es from
the Coastal Zone Plan under �306(e)(1)(C) of the Act. While
different from the federal consistency review provisions
there is a kinship between the two programs which argues for
a dovetailing of the mechanisms for reviewing compliance.

With respect to state and local activities, the lead
agency working with DNR is the entity ultimately responsible
for checking local decisions against the standard of systematic
non-compliance. The EQB is responsible for checking those
of state agencies. The lead agency will also interact with and
trigger EQB review. In both cases, a close relationship to
the ARDC and local governments is critical. In terms of the
local consistency review, ARDC has been identified as the
agency responsible for regular monitoring of local actions
and plans for compliance with the CZM plan. ARDC will also
coordinate local comments to EQB on consistency of state activities.
The discussion which follows will address the state, local,
and ARDC roles and responsibilities in the state/local
monitoring process and describe the procedures to be followed
in monitoring various activities. This process has been
designed to parallel the federal consistency review procedure,
thereby minimizing confusion regarding the handling of
comments on consistency. The types of state and local actions
which will be regularly monitored are listed at the end of
this section.

1. Role and Responsibilities of ARDC.
Under the auspices of the Regional Development Act of
1969, ARDC has played the role of conducting area-wide
planning, research, and review for the seven-county area of
northeastern Minnesota. The Comission has two basic review
authorities. (1) ARDC is the regional A-95 clearinghouse
under the federal Intergovernmental-Cooperation Act of
1968. ARDC is thus already responsible for reviewing federal
actions and applications for federal grants and loans in the
Arrowhead Region in terms of impacts on area and community
plans. (2) Paralleling the Federal mandate, the State,
through the Regional Development Act of 1969, requires ARDC
to review state and federal programs, applications for
grants and loans from state and federal agencies, and local
government and independent agency comprehensive plans or
other actions which have a substantial effect on regional
development. While ARDC's review role under these laws is
strictly advisory, in essence, ARDC has in place, under its
current authorities, a framework to monitor and review actions
and plans for consistency in the coastal zone. ARDC's
responsibilities in the CZM monitoring process will include
monitoring local land use activities in the coastal zone,
attempting to resolve conflicts in an advisory capacity,

3-34

providing local units of government with information and
analysis regarding state and federal actions, and coordinating
local comments on those actions for the EQB and lead agency.

2. Process for Monitoring Federal and State Actions
!T-sing Existing A-95/PNRS Review.
Under OMB Circular A-95 rules and regulations and the
requirements of the Regional Development Act of 1969, ARDC
has designed and is operating a regional review mechanism, 3/
known as the Project Notification and Review Procedure (PNRS).

3/ PNRS operates as follows: Whenever a local unit of
government, or state or federal agency intends to apply for
federal or state aid to adopt a plan in the region, the
applicant must notify ARDC of the intended action. In CZf1.1
ARDC will receive parallel notice of federal consistency
matters, other than grants, and state consistency actions. They
will be handled in the same manner as grants under the A-95/
PNRS system. ARDC has developed what is referred to as
a PNRS Form 100. The form 100 is completed by the applicant
and provides basic background information on a proposed action.
ARDC, upon. receiving a completed Form 100 responds within
twenty-four (24) hours with a letter indicating the date of
notification, project number, staff person assigned to review
the project, and a date when final review comments will be
forwarded on the project. In addition, at the same time the
applicant is notified, ARDC contacts the State Planning Agency
(State Clearinghouse) to ensure that proper Regional-State coordi-
nation is maintained in the PNRS system.

Once the Form 100 has been received and acknowledged,
ARDC begins the formal review process. The staff person assigned
to the project will identify appropriate government units,
agencies and organizations and notifies them of the intended
action within forty-eight hours. All notified government units
and agencies are given ten (10) days to respond with their
comments on the application. After comments have been received,
the staff person (Project Review officer) will determine if there
is a need to hold a conference to discuss the project application
in greater detail or prepares final comments. The conference
determination is based on the responses of agencies affected
and the Project Review officer's own knowledge of how the pro-
ject fits into the overall plans of the region, or how it
may affect the region.

Assuming no conference is required, the Project Review
Officer has eighteen (18) days to complete final review comments
on the application and notify the applicant of the review by
ARDC. Final comments address themselves to, or include information
about:

3-35

This process will provide timely input to the lead agency
regarding the local and regional view of federal and
state actions and their consistency. PNRS times are
consistent with the time lines in the Act and regulations for
federal consistency review.

1) The extent to which the project is consistent with
overall planning for the state, regional or locality;
2) The extent to which the project contributes to the
achievement of state, regional, and local objectives;
and
3) In the case of a project for which assistance is
whether the unit of general local government
within the jurisdiction in which the project is to
be located has applied or plans to apply for
assistance for the same or similar type project.

In the CZM consistency review, the relationship for the
reviewed action to the CZM Plan will be the standard for measure
against these considerations. If conflicts concerning the
review of a project do develop, several mechanisms exist to
deal with the problems. For example, if a project is being
reviewed by an affected local government unit and they
require additional review time over and above the ten (10)
day allotment, the deadline can be extended a maximum of
fifteen (15) days. In addition, if it is determined that
further discussion of the project is necessary, the Project
Review Officer may conduct a conference. The purpose of the
conference would be to identify and resolve questions,
issues, conflicts and mutuality of interests. Conference
procedures for notifying affected agencies, government
units, applicant, and general public are outlined in the PNRS
guidelines. Essentially, the ARDC Board of Directors are
contacted, the conference date' time and location is set,
affected interests and the general public are notified ten,
days prior to the conference, and a verbatim transcript of
the conference is kept as a record on file. Following the
conference, a written report is prepared for the ARDC Board
and a decision made on ARDC's final review comments. Under
CZM such comments will go to the lead agency. (It should be
noted that ARDC has a standardized PNRS reporting format
comprised of various forms, letters and filing procedures.
This information is available at ARDC). Note, the PBRS
system will provide timely input to the lead agency in terms
of the times for CZM consistency review of federal actions.

3-36

The ARDC staff responsible for monitoring local land
use actions will also be charged with coordinating local
comments on inconsistent state and federal actions in the
Coastal Zone. It should be noted that State Planning and
EQB are the agencies responsible for monitoring all state
agency actions, andindividual state agencies monitor appropriate
federal agency actions for consistency. However, there
needs to be a process whereby local units of government and
ARDC can report and comment on actions regarding consistency
with the CZM plan. ARDC would serve the function of soliciting,
coordinating, and reporting local comments on any state or
federal actions regarding consistency with the CZM plan
using the PNRS system.

In addition, even if a matter is not referred to ARDC
for consistency review, a local unit of government could
contact ARDC directly to initiate a review. In this instance,
ARbC would examine the proposed action, discuss the issue
with the local government unit and take appropriate action,
including requesting lead agency review. In any case where
there are local comments or concerns ARDC would prepare a
statement for submission to the lead agency and EQB reflecting
this input.

3. Process for Monitoring LocalLand Use Actions in
the Coastal Zone.
The DNR will continue its present practice of reviewing
major local land use actions which occur within 1,000 feet
of all lakes and 300 feet of all rivers and streams, thus
mebting the �306(e)(1)(A) requirement of the Act. However,
the local CZM monitoring agency, ARDC will play the major
role in examining local land use actions and will advise
the lead agency and DNR. A major difference in the two
processes is that ARDC would work very closely with local
units of government to analyze and resolve conflicts prior
to DNR, lead agency, PAC or court involvement.

ARDC will meet with the counties and municipalities to
discuss the ARDC monitoring task and urge use of the stand-
ardized land use permit process. The land use permit forms
are designed to be computerized and can provide a variety
of land use information for planning and other purposes. Use
of the standard land use permit reporting format would provide
easy access to permit action information in the Coastal Zone,
and would also assist local planning commissions and zoning
administrators in their understanding of.the types of character-
istics of land use actions taking place in their respective
areas. At the present time, all CZM area counties use the
standardized permit form. A major initial work task would
be to introduce the land use permit forms to municipalities
and coordinate the overall reporting procedure.

3-37

With the standardized land use permit reporting process
operational, ARDC would be in a position to begin monitoring
permit proposals. Staff would periodically examine permit actions
within the Coastal Zone to determine if the pattern of decisions
are in compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Plan. ARDC
would monitor only major land use actions: variances, conditional
uses, zone district changes and subdivisions. In order to - I
operate this process smoothly, ARDC will work very closely with
zoning administrators and planning commissions at the locallevel.

If an inconsistent pattern of land use permit decisions
is identified, the following procedures would be followed by
ARDC. The zoning administrator and local government governing
body (county board, city council or town board) would be
contacted to apprise them of the pattern of inconsistent
actions. ARDC would compile advisory comments outlining
the rationale for the inconsistency interpretation and.provide
these to the local government. Reference would be made to
pertinent sections of the CZM Plan and examples of inconsistent
actions cited. As necessary, meetings would be held with
local officials and other affected persons. ARDC would,
in every case, be available to explain the comments and
respond to questions. In an effort to resolve problems at
the local level, ARDC would reques t the local unit to review
and formally respond to the advisory comments and inconsistent
actions cited. Based upon the formal local unit response,
ARDC would either continue to monitor activities for* recurring
inconsistent actions or would forward ARDC's comments and
the local government unit response to the lead agency for
any further action.

This process is designed to identify any patterns of
land use inconsistencies and make professional planning
expertise available to discuss the issues and resolve problems.
In order for this process to function in a timely manner, close
cooperation and coordination will need to be maintained between
ARDC and local north shore governments. In the long run,
local decision making will be strengthened, and coastal
management planning implemented with minimum involvement of
state and federal government.

Note, the ARDC role in monitoring should not be confused
with its major role as a technical advisor to local governments.
This task will continue and ARDC will consult with local
governments on all areas of zoning and land use. In this
later role ARDC staff will also be in close.and regular
contact with local units of governments and would, as appropriate,
attend various local north shore planning commission meetings,
assist in instituting the standardized land use Permit
application in those areas that are not presently using the

3-38

format, monitor pending local land use permit and subdivision
actions to advise on potential problems or effects regarding
coastal zone management, informally aid in resolving conflicts,
and provide staff support for the local CZM Policy Advisory
Committees.

3-39

Compendium of State and Federal Actions fo r Consistency Monitoring

A. Federal Permits and Licenses

1. Department of Agriculture

16 USC 522, 523 Under Section 522, the USFS issues
(Watershed) permits for water plants, dams, canals,
ditches and other water easements
on the Natiodal Forest lands. Rights-
of-way for power and communications
facilities are issued under Section 523.

16 USC 497 The Forest Service issues permits for
(Watershed) the construction and-maintenance of
hotels, resorts, summer houses, stores
and facilities for industrial, commercial,
educational, or public use on National
Forest Service lands.

2. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
The Bureau of Land Management is responsible for a range of
permitting and licensing activities associated with its land
and resources management programs on the National Resource
Lands, Outer Continental Shelf, certain acquired,lands, and
Federal mineral ownership under private surface.

The following is a list of the Bureau's permitting and
licensing activities. (NOTE: The activities and authorities
cited are not all inclusive.)

Rights-of-Way Permits for:

43 USC 956 Tramroads, including tramways, railroads,
(Watershed) motor-truck roads (used in connection
with mining, quarrying, logging, and
manufacturing of lumber).
23 USC 107, 317 Roads and highways
(Watershed)

43 USC 959 Power Transmission Lines
(Coastal zone)

43 USC 959 Water Plants
(Coastal zone)

30 USC 185 Oil and Natural Gas Pipelines and Pumping
(Coastal zone) Plant Sites under the Mineral Leasing Act

3-40

3. Department of Transportation

U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)

33 USC 401 This section grants the Coast Guard
(Coastal zone) authority for issuing permits for the
construction and modification of bridges,
causeways, dams or dikes in navigable
waters of the U.S.

4. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was established by the
Energy Reorganization Act of 1972 (42 USCA 5801-91). In this Act,
the licensing authorities of the Atomic Energy Administration were
transferred to the NRC (42 USCA 2011 et. seq.) -

The NRC licenses, among other things, the construction and operation
of nuclear power plants; the production, transfer, import and export
of fissionable materials; and the disposal of radioactive waste.

42 USC 2131-2140 Full information on the licensing
(Watershed) responsibilities of the NRC can be
found in Subchapter IX, Atomic Energy
License.

5. Department of Defense

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE)

The COE is responsible for a wide range of permitting activities.
The complete Army permit programs can be found in.the Code of,Federal
Regulations Title 33, Section 209.120.

33 USC 403 Rivers and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10.
(Coastal zone) This section prohibits the creation of
any manmade obstruction in the navigable
waters of the United States. In addition,
it is unlawful to excavate or fill in
the navigable waters of the United States
without a Section 10 permit. Under this
act, the term navigable waters means those
waters which have been used in the past
for commercial navigation, are being used
or are susceptible to bT@ng used for
commercial navigation.

l/ In certain cases where there is jurisdictional overlap both a Section 10
and a Section 404 permit would be required for the discharge of dredged
materials.

3-41

33 USC 1344 Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
(Watershed) Section 404. This act requires that a
RJ permit be issued for the discharge of
dredged or fill material at specific
disposal sites in tthe 2)avigable waters
of the United Sta es.- Under this act
"navi-gable waters" means the waters of
the United Statesl)ncluding the
territorial seas.-
6. Federal Power Commission @V
16 USC 791 et. seq. Under the Federal Power Act the has
(Watershed) the authority to issue permits and
licenses for the construction and operation
of hydroelectric power plants and trans-
mission on land or waters subject to
Federal jurisdiction. See Sec. 797(e),
General Powers of the Commission, Issue
of License for Contracting, e c @J
@(X
43 USC 717 The Natural Gas Act allows th C'to
(Coastal zone) issue permits for the constru ti and
operation of interstate gas pipelines
and storage facilities. See Sec. 717(f),
construction, Extension and Abandonment
of Facilities.

7. Environmental Protection Agency

33 USC 1857 to 1857(f) Clean Air Act. Under the Clean Air Act,
1857(f) to 1857 F-7, the Administrator of EPA sets standards
1857 (f)(g) to 1857 (e) or criteria.for air pollution which must
(Watershed) be met. EPA does not issue a clean air
permit or license, however, waiver from
compliance can be granted under Section
1857 C-5(e) which allows an extension
of the time for meeting the national
primary and ambient air quality standards
in the implementation plan; and Section
1857 C-7, which covers exemptions for
stationary sources.

l/ In certain cases where there is jurisdictional overlap both a Section 10 and
a Section 404 permit would be required,for the discharge of dredged materials.
XC
and

'c*
e\ C'
c
ctjo@
0

?J Environmental Protection Agency guidelines are used for determining whether a
permit will be issued.

3-42

B. State Permits and Licenses

Respon-
sible Statutory Name of
Agency Topic Reference Permit* Description

DNR Conser- MS 84.415 Utility permit needed for telephone, telegraph, and
vation (Coastal Crossings electric power lines, cables, or conduits,
Zone) of Public underground or otherwise, or mains or pipelines
Lands/ for gas, liquids, or solids in suspension
Waters

MS 84.58 Under- permit needed for underground liquid and gas
(Coastal ground storage
Zone) Storage

MS 84.62 Certifi- no use shall be made of gas or liquid storage
(Coastal cate of reservoir until the right to use the property
Zone) Use involved has been issued a certificate of need
MS 84.621 Storage permit needed for storage.of any gas or liquid,
(Coastal in Natur- except water, below the natural surface of the
Zone) al Forma- ground by using naturally occurring rock materials
tions as a storage reservoir
Forestry MS 89.17 Use of permit needed for the use of any state forest land
(Coastal State for any purpose which is not inconsistent with
Zone) Forest the maintenance and management of state forest
Lands

MS 89.18 Roads permit needed for public highways, other than a
(Coastal through state trunk highway
Zone) State
Lands

MS 90.151 Cutting permit needed for cutting and removal of state
(Coastal -an d timber sold at public auction
Zone) Removal
of Tim-
ber
Informal permit needed for cutting and removal of sale
Sale of timber sold informally
State
Timber

MS 90.50 Leasing leases for any state-owned lands for the
(Coastal of Unsold purpose of taking and@removing sand, gravel,
Zone) Lands clay, rock, marl, peat, and black dirt, for
Subject storing ore, waste materials from mines, or rock
to Sale and tailings from ore milling plants, for roads,
or railroads, or for any other uses not
inconsistent with the interests of the state
*Also includes plan review and approval, leases, and certificates.

3-43

Respon-
sible Statutory Name of
Agency Topic Reference Permit Description

DNR Lands MS 93.08 Pros- permit required for prospecting for gold, silver,
and Watershed) Oecting copper, cobalt, coal, graphite, petroleum, sand
Minerals for gravel, stone, natural gas, and all minerals,
Minerals excepting iron ore, under the waters of any public
under lake or stream in the state
Waters
and
Meandered
Lakes/
Streams

MS 93.14 Prospect permit required for prospecting for iron ore and
(Watershed) for Ores other ores upon state lands or in whi ch state has
an interest

MS 93.24 Mining of permit needed to mine gold, copper, silver,
(Watershed) Other cobalt, coal, graphite, manganese, iron sulphides
Than Iron or other sulphur ores, titaniferous magnetites
Ores or any other valuable mineral believed to exist
on lands included within a prospecting permit or
lease not covering such mineral

MS 93.25 Prospect- permits needed to prospect for gold, silver,
(Watershed) ing Per- copper, cobalt, graphite, coal, and petroleum and
mits, other minerals than iron ore
Other than
Iron

MS 93.34 Mining permit needed to mine any mineral below the low
Subd. 1 under water mark of any public lake or river
(Watershed) Public
Waters

MS 93.43 Permits, permits or licenses on and across lands owned by
Watershed) Licenses, the state to any corporation or association
and engaged in the business of or preparing to engage M
Leases to in the business of mining, producing or beneficia-
Copper, ting copper, copper-nickel or nickel for pipelines
Cu/Ni. pole lines, conduites, sluiceways, roads, rail -
or roads, tramways or flowage, and to lease any lands
Nickel owned by the state to any such corporation or
Producers association for the.depositing of stripping, lean
ores, tailings, or waste products of such business

MS 93.481 Permit permit needed to engage in or carry out a mining
(yatershed) to operation for metallic minerals within the state
Mine (rplication must include a proposed plan for
the reclamation or restoration, or both, of
any mining area affected by mining operations)

3-44

Respon-
sible Statutory Name of
Agency Topic Reference Permit* Description

DNR Game/ MS 98.48 Aquatic permit for the control of aquatic nuisance so
Fish Subd. 9 Nuisance as to provide maximum recreational and other
(Watershed) Control beneficial use of public waters without
significant damage to fish and wildlife
populations and l,ake ecosystems

Dra in- MS 105.41 Appropria- permit for the appropriation or use of any
age and (Coastal tion and state waters, surface or underground, for any
Waters zone) Use of purpose except-for domestic use serving less
Water than 25 persons

Temporary permit needed for water appropriation involving
Water a one-time limited time (not more than 12
Appropria- months, non-recurring appropriation of state
tion waters)-does not include domestic use serving
less than 25 persons

MS 105.42 Work in permit to construct, reconstruct, remove,
(Coastal Public abandon, transfer ownership, or make any
zone) Waters change in any reservoir, dam, or waterway
obstruction on any public water; or in any
manner, to change or diminish the course,
current, or cross-section of any public waters
by any means, including but not limited to
filling, excavating, or placing of any
materials in or on the beds of public waters

permit to establish, construct, maintain and
control wharfs, docks, piers, levees, break-
waters, basins, canals. hangars in or adjacent
to public waters of the state except within
the corporate limits of cities

3-45

Respon-
sible Statutory Name of
Agency Topic Reference Permit* Description

DNR Drain- Alterations permit nee ded for the alteration of natural
age and of Natural water courses, in whole or in part
Waters Water
Courses

Beach permit needed for the development of public
Sand and private beach areas along lakeshore
Blankets wherever such a desired alteration would be
feasible and practical without contribution
of excessive fill material to the lacustrine
environment or unwarranted destruction of fish
and wildlife habitat

Bridge and permit needed for the const ruction of public
Culvert and private roadways which cross or encroach
Installa- upon public waters
tions

Construc- permit needed for the construction, reconstruc-
tion or tion removal or abandonment of permanent docks
Reconstruc- in public waters consistent with lacustrine
tion of and shoreline conditions
Permanent
Docks

Dam Con- permit needed to construct or reconstruct,
struction remove, transfer ownership, or make any
or Recon- change in any dam
struction

Dredging permit needed for dredging within public
of Public waters except for barge facilities
Waters

Filling permit needed for the placing of fill materials
into into public waters
Public
Waters

Inland permit needed for any excavation intended to
Excava- extend the cross section of public waters land-
tions ward of the natural or pre-existing shoreline

Intakes permit needed for constructing water intake and
and Out- storm sanitary sewer outfall structures in
falls public waters

MaintenanCE permit needed for the periodic maintenance
Excavation excavation of existing boat harbors and
of Existing channels located on public waters of the
Channels/ state to maintain their utility without
Harbors damage to material resource values

3-46

Res,po,n-
sible Statutory Name of
A.qency Topic Reference -Permit* Description
DNR Drain- Naviga- permit needed for tonstruction'of navigational
aqe an,d tional, access facilities within the public waters of
Waters Access the state
Jacilities

Off-Shore permit needed for the construction of harbors,
Marinas marinas, and breakwaters which extend water-
ward of the shoreline-of,public waters

Private permit needed for the construction of harbors
Off-Shore and breakwaters which extend waterward of the
Breakwater shoreline of public waters
& Harbors

Public permit needed for the construction of harbors,
Off-Shore marinas, and breakwaters which extend water-
Harbor ward of the shoreline of public waters
Projects

Retaining permit needed for the construction of retaining
Walls walls along the shores of public waters to
achieve shoreline stabilization and/or
direct shoreland docking

Riprap permit needed for correcting or preventing
Shore bank erosion problems along the shorelines of
Protection public waters by the placement of riprap shore
protection

Water permit needed for controlling water levels
Level
Controls

Watermain permit needed for the construction of watermains
and Sewer storm and sanitary sewer lines across public
Crossings waters of the state

Waterway permit needed to construct, reconstruct, or
Obstruc- relocate offshore structures, cables other than
tions utility crossings, pilings, permanent diving
platforms, or other facilities constituting
waterway obstructions

Wharves permit needed for construction or reconstruction
of wharves in public waters
MS 105.64 Drainage permit needed for drainage, diversion, control,
Natersh.ed) or Diver- or use of any waters under DNR jurisdiction
sion of when necessary for the mining of iron ore,
Water to taconite, copper-nickel, or nickel.:.
Facilitate
Mining

Respon-
sible Statutory Name of
Agency Topic Reference Permit* Description

DNR Eminent MS 117.47 Use of permit.needed for taconite mining activities
Domain (Coastal State to occur on or across state owned lands for
zone) Lands for the depositing of stripping lean ores, tail-
Taconite ings, or waste products of such business
Mining

MS 117.48 Use of permit needed for transporting crude petroleum,
(Coastal State oil, their related products and derivatives
zone) Lands for including liquified hydrocarbons by pipeline
Crude Oil as a common carrier on or across state-owned
Pipelines lands

3-48

Respon-
s ible. Statutory Name of
Agency Topfc Reference Perm8qf8qt* Description

DOT 4qKqigh-ways/ MS [email protected]'8 Acqress permit needed to provide vehicle, access, from
Roads Subd. 2 to Roads abuttqing property to the highway for
('Coastal (Entrance agricultqural, resqi;dential or commercial
zone)- Pe-mi t) use i ncl u0qdq1ng i ntersec4q0ng! muni ci pa-1 ,
county or township. roa:ds onto state hi-ghways,

MS q160,.27' Limited permit needed to authorize the u;sef
CoqastaI Use, exqts6qting right-of-wayby anouts-ide agency
zoneql

0qW 1,61q1. 45' qFu b.ql. i- c permit neededfor electric transmission,
Coast a.q1 Uti 1 iti.es telephone,, or telegraph lines, pole lines,,
zo,ne:q), 4q& Works communiity, antennas, t8qeql-evis@ion 1q!i-nes.,
on Trunk. rai1wayqs, ditches,. sewers, water, heat
Highways. or gas mains, gas and, other pqi@pe,ql.ines,
fliume, or-other structures to, be
constructed, placed, or maqintaiqnqed across
o4qraql:ong any-trun0qk highway

qMqS q173.03 Permits permit needed for the erection or
(Coas@tall within maintenance of any advertising device
zone) Scenp located within a scenic area
Areas

qMqs 173.13 Devices permit needed for the erection or
(Coastal along maintenance of advertising devices
zone) Inter- adjacent to interstate and primary
State High- system of highways
ways (Adver-
tising
Permit)

3-49

Respon-
sible Statutory Name of
Agency Topic Reference Permit* Description
Energy Environ- MS 116H.13 Certifi- certificate of need required for the siting
Agency mental (.Watershed) cate of or construction of a large energy facility
Protec- Need
tion
(energy)

Environ- MS 116C.57 Certifi- 'certificate needed for large electric power
mental Subd. 1 cate of generating plants indicating that site is
Quality (Watershed) Site compatible with site selection standards
Board Compati-
bility

Executive Lands MS 93.13 Draining permit needed for draining and removal of iron
Council and (Watershed) of Lakes ore from lake bed when surrounded in part by
Minerals and Leasing state land upon which a state mineral lease
of Ore has been issued
Lands in
Beds

MS 93.34 Draining permit needed to drain any meandered public
Subd. 2 of , lake for the purpose of mining of minerals
(Watershed) Meandered
Public Lake
for 'Mineral
Purposes

3-50

Respon-
sible Statutory Name of
Agency -Topic Reference Permit* Description

Health Health MS 372.10- Licence plan review prior to construction of new
Department .28 for facilities or additions
(Coastal Mobile Home
zone) Parks &
Recreational
Camping Areas

3-51

Respon-
sible Statutory Name of
Agency Topic Reference Permit Description

PCA Environ- MS 116.07 permits needed for the emission of air
mental Subd. 4A contaminants, or for the install.ation or
Protec- (Coastal operation,of any emission facility, air
tion zone) contaminant treatment facility, treatment
(air facility, potential air contaminant storage
quality) facility, or storage facility, or any part
thereof, or for the sources or emissions of
noise pollution

Installa- permit needed for the installation or con-.
tion struction of an emission facility or air
Permit quality control equipment
(APC 3)

Operating permit needed for the operation of an emission
Permit facility or air quality control equipment
(APC 3)

Indirect permit needed for the construction of any of
Source the following: highways/roads; parking
Permit facilities; retail, commercial, and industrial
(APC 19) facilities; recreation, amusement, sports, and
entertainment facilities; airports; office and
government buildings; apartment and condominium
buildings; and educational facilities
(noise) no per- variances can be issued when by reason of
mits, but exceptional circumstances strict conformity
variances with any provisions of any noise regulation
can be would cause undue hardship, would be unreasonable,
issued impractical, or not feasible under the circum-
stances

3-52

Respon- Statutory Name
sible Topic Reference Permit* Description
Agency
PCA Environ- MS 115.03 Storage permit needed to construct or modify safeguards
mental Subd. (e) or Keep- for prevention of the escape or movement of a
Protec- (3) ing of substance or a solution from a storage facility
tion WPC 4) Oil and whereby pollution of any waters of the state
(water Mastal Other may result
quality) zone) Liquid
Substances
(Liquid
Storage
Sites)

MS 115.07 Construc- permit needed to construct, install, or operate
Subd. 1 tion and a disposal system
M
WPC 36@ Operation
asta of a
zone) Disposal
System
(State Dis-
posal System)

MS 115.07 Sewer permit needed to make any change in,
Subd. 3 Extension addition to'or extension of any
(Coastal sanitary sewer system
zone)

PL 92-500 National permit needed for construction of
Federal Pollutant wastewater treatment facilities and
Water Discharge the discharge of wastewater to surface
Pollution Elimina- waters of the state (authority to issue
Control tion federal permits given to PCA)
Act Amend-
ment of 1972
(Coastal
zone)

PL 92-500 Section state certification that any application
Federal 401 for a federal license or permit to conduct
Water Certifi- any activity which may result in any
Pollution cation discharge into waters of the state will
Control comply with the applicable state and
Act Amend- federal water quality laws and regulations
ment of 1972
(Coastal
zone)

-53
3

Respon-
sible Statutory.. Name.of
Agency Topic Reference P6rmit* Descrietioh

PCA Environ- MS116.07 permits needed for the collection, transporta-
mental Subd. 4A tion or disposal of solid waste, or for the
Protec- (Coastal installation or operation of Any,system or
tion zone) facility, or any part thereof, related to the
(solid collection, transportation, or d'isposal of
waste) solid waste 'oil
permits needed for the treatment or disposal
or both of hazardous waste, or for the
installation or operation of any system or
facility or any part thereof
and
MS 116.081 permit needed to construct, install or
(Coastal operate an emission facility, air contaminant
zone) treatment facility, treatment facility,
potential air contaminant storage facility,
storage facility, or system or facility
related to the collection, transportation,
storage, or disposal of solid waste

Construction permit needed for construction and operation
and Opera- of sanitary landfills and demolition land-
tion of a fills (includes modifled landfills and other
Solid Waste land burial sites)
Disposal
System
(Sanitary
Landfill)
(SW 6)

Incineration permit needed for solid waste and hazardous
(SW 7) waste incinerators

Composting permit needed for composting of solid waste
(SW 8)

Transfer permit needed for placing into operation
Stations a transfer station

Proposed Hazardous permit needed for transportation and storage
.Regulation Wastes of hazardous waste
(Coastal
zone)
MS 116.37, Polychlor- certificate of exemption needed to use,
Subd. I inated possess, sell, purchase or manufacture
WPC 38 Biphynels PCB or products containing PCB
CWatershed)

3-54

Grant
Administering Authorizing Program
Agency Legislation Title* Nature and Purpose of Program

DNR Session Laws Acquisition, To provide trails for snowmobiling,
'77, Chap. Development, skiing, snowshoeing, horseback riding,
455 & Maintenance bicycling, hiking, and backpacking
(Watershed) of Recreational
Land Trails

DOT Session Laws State To develop local bicycle trails primarily
77, Chap. Bicycle on existing road rights-of-way
421 Trails
(Coastal
zone)

MS 162 County State For construction and maintenance of county
(Watershed) Aid Distribu- state aid highways
tion

Title 23 Federal/County For improvement and development of local
US Code Highway roads and streets utilizing federal and
(Watershed) Development local funds
Assistance

Historical Session Laws Historic To assist historic preservation projects
Society 1969, Chap. Grant-in-Aid not currently receiving state funds
956 (Coastal
zone)

Session Laws Historic To locate, identify, and develop a statewide
1969, Chap. Sites historic sites program
894; 1139, Survey
Sec. 48
(Coastal zone)

National Historic To assist in acquisition, restoration, or
Historic Preservation preservation of sites listed in the
Preservation Grants-in-Aid National Register of Historic Places
Act of 1966
(Coastal zone)

Soil and Session Laws Sedimentation To solve sedimentation and erosion problems
Water '75, Chap. and Erosion relating to lake shore, stream bank and
Conservation 204, Sec. 55, Control roadside erosion (only applies to roads
Board Subd. 6(f) & built before 1971) and, within corporate
Laws '77, Chap. limits of a municipality, upland gully
455, Sec. 33, erosion
Subd. 7(n)
(Watershed)

*State financial as'sistance.or federal funding, but state administered
program.

3-55

Grant
Administering Authorizing. Program
Agency Legislation Title* Nature and Purpose of Program

'Session Laws Minnesota Cost/ To provide for long-term conservation
'77,:Chap. Share Program practices on lands (funds go to private
304 (Coastal landowner, not local' units of government)
zone)

SPA Sessicn Laws Parks and Open To provide financial assistance to local
'77, Chap. Space Grants units of government for the acquisition
455 (Coastal and development of parks and open space
(includes harbors of refuge program)

Session Laws, Grants for To provide for hiking, bicycling, and
'77, Chap. Developing cross country skiing trails
421 (Coastal Trails
zone)

Session Laws Grants for To acquire and develop parks, trails,
'77, Chap. Regionally conservatories, zoos, and special use
421 (Coastal Significant facilities, all of which must have regional
zone) Parks in significance (in coastal zone, only
Outstate applies to St. Louis County)
SMSAs

MS 4.27- Land Use To provide counties and municipalities
4.31 Planning with financial assistance to conduct land
(Coastal Grant use planning activities
zone) Program

3-56

Agency
Respon-
sible Activity Nature or Purpose of Activity

DNR Acquisition preserve, protect, and manage lands and waters possessing inherent
of Scientific natural values, including soils, waters or sediments, sites of
and Natural scientific value, habitats of rare or endangered species of plants
Areas (Coastal and animals, places of historic or prehistoric interest and scenic
zone) beauty, and areas uniquely suitable for teaching natural history
and conservation

Development develop management plans for each designated area to protect such
and Manage- lands from adverse use and to assure their protection and
ment of perpetuation for public use for research and education
Scientific
and Natural
Areas (Coastal
zone)

Acquisition acquire land, or interests in land (particularly scenic easements)
for the Wild along rivers designated components of the wild, scenic and recrea-
and Scenic tional rivers system; to preserve the scenic views and vistas,
Rivers Pro- protect the natural character of the shorelines, and maintain the
gram open space (including agricultural lands)
(Watershed)

Development prepare and implement management plans necessary to protect wild
and Mainten- -and scenic river corridors
ance for the
Wild and Scenic
Rivers Program
(Watershed)

Forest Roads construct new forest roads and reconstruct and maintain existing
(Watershed) forest roads which provide fire, timber management, and
recreational access

Forest Pests control of forest pests through forest management techniques,
(Watershed) biological controls, and chemical controls

Acquisition bring habitat areas threatened by destruction under the protection
and Develop- of public control either through acquisition of fee title or
ment of Fish easement for specific fishery uses and restore or artificially
Habitat replace missing features on waters where the habitat has
(Watershed) deteriorated or critical elements have been lost

Acquisition, protection of wildlife habitat through acquisition, easements,
Protection, review of development projects, wildlife refuges, zoning, hearings,
and Evalua- permits, legal actions and commissioner's orders
tion of
Wildlife
Habitat
(Watershed)

3-57

Agency
Respon-
sible Activity Nature or Purpose of Activity

DNR Habitat develop and maintain wildlife habitat to produce a sustained
Development yield of wildlife resources
and Main-
tenance
(Watershed)

Land Sales selling of land best suited for private development or land
(Watershed) deemed surpl.us to the state
State Land investigation, appraisal, and processing of land exchange proposals
Exchange as submitted by private individuals, corporations and public agencies
(Watershed) to consolidate state, private, federal, and county land ownership
for more efficient management and administration
Land acquisition of land for parks and-recreation areas; public access to
Acquisition rivers, streams, and lakes; habitat, food, and cover areas for wildlife;
(Watershed public hunting areas; forest management areas and to preserve fish
spawning areas; natural and scientific areas; historic sites; etc.
Acquisition acquisition by purchase or gift within existing state park areas for
of Park and protection and preservation of the natural environment; includes
Recreation reviewing, inspecting, selecting and proposing boundary expansions
Areas of existing state park areas or adding new park areas to the existing
(Watershed) state park system

Development of construction, development, improvement, and rehabilitation of
Park and visitor use facilities
Recreation
Areas
(Watershed)

Maintenance & duties performed to keep recreational use facilities safe, clean, and
Operation of enjoyable, such as mowing grass, grading roads, enforcement of rules
Park and Recre-and regulations, giving directions, cleaning toilets, garbage
ation Areas removal, etc.
(Watershed)

Acquisition of land selected for its unusual beauty and other natural features
Forest Recre- located within an expanse of government land not only being
ation Areas managed for timber, game, erosion control, etc., but also for
(Watershed) recreation

Development of involves planning and construction of campgrounds, day use areas, and
Forest Recre- trails
ation Areas
(Watershed)

Maintenance & includes all duties necessary to keep forest recreational facilities
Operation of safe, clean, and enjoyable, such as removal of hazardous limbs and
Forest Recre- fallen trees, policing, providing firewood, cleaning tables and toilets
ation Areas and treatment of the pits, repair and replacement of acilities, groom-
(Watershed) ing snowmobile trails, grading of service roads, etc.

3-58

Agency
Respon-
sible Activity Nature or Purpose of the Activity

DNR Acquisition, acquisition, development, and maintenance of corridor, state
Development, forest, state park, and grant-in-aid trails to meet various
& Maintenance kinds of trail needs throughout the state (hiking, backpacking,
of Recre- skiing, equestrian, bicycle and snowmobile)
ational Land
Trails
(Watershed)

Acquisition acquisition of leases or use easements for areas to-be developed
of Canoe and for public recreational use on canoe and boating route rivers
Boating Route
River Sites
(Coastal zone)

Development & develop and maintain river-oriented recreational facilities, such
Maintenance of as portages and primitive canoe campsites and the marking of ,
Canoe/Boating hazards, points of interest, and recreation sites along canoe and
Route River boating rivers
Sites
(Coastal zone)

Acquisition, purchase, develop, and maintain good quality public access on lakes
Development, and rivers (all lakes 150 acres in size and meandered are eligible
& Maintenance for consideration as well as lakes under,150 acres in size if
of Public intensive fish management is to be carried out on them)
Access (Coastal
zone)

Acquisition acquisition of tracts within existing forests for recreational
of State as well as timber production purposes
Forests
(Watershed)

Outdoor maintain state eligibility for federal Land and Water Conservation
Recreation Fund Grants and provide direction and priorities for state and local
Planning actions in outdoor recreation programs; policies in the State
(Coastal Outdoor Recreation Plan serve as a basis for regional and state
zone) priorities of needs for outdoor recreation lands and facilities

Water and development of a framework plan for the development and management
Related Land of the state's water and related land resources
Resources
Pianning
(Coastal zone)

Land Use provide optimum management of those lands under jurisdiction of the
Planning DNR through proper land use classification, selection of management
(C'oastal zone) units, and interdisciplinary resource management planning

3-59

Agency
Respon-
sible Activity Nature or Purpose of Activity

Historical Acquisition to preserve, restore, and interpret buildings and other structures,
Society and Adminis- locales, sites, antiquities, and related lands which aptly illustrate
tration of significant events, personalities, and feature s of the history
Historic and archaeology of the state or nation
Sites
(Coastal zone)

PCA Solid Waste: *prepare state resource recovery plan
Pollution *complete a statewide hazardous waste management plan
Control
(Coastal zone)

Water *issue guidelines for the on-land disposal, of municipal sludges
Pollution and for sludges from septic tanks and water treatment facilities
Control *draft land application guidelines for the proper disposal of
(Coastal zone) industrial-effluents and sludges

Water *prepare a model wastewater facilities plan for small rural
Quality communities with a thorough examination of all alternatives
Special presently available for improved wastewater treatment with
Studies emphasis placed wproper consideration of on-site residential
(Coastal zone) sewage disposal
*coordinate the development and operation of thelstatewide water
quality management planning (208) effort and maintain coordination
with inter agencies

Air Quality *an analysis of emission sources and development of control
Control strategies for Duluth's air quality maintenance area
(Watershed) *sampling and evaluation of taconite plant emissions
*designation of boundaries for Class I air quality regulations in
the vicinity of the coastal zone

DOT Policy and development of the Mn/DOT PLAN for all modes of transportation;
Planning plan will include a decision-making process, policies, improve-
(Coastal zone) ment program and a financial needs assessment

Highway to improve the condition of the physical structures that comprise
Development the interstate and trunk highway system (primarily made up of the
(Coastal zone) roadway and bridge system, also includes buildings, rest areas, and
weigh stations)

EQB Power Plant to provide for power plant site and transmission line route
Siting. selection while minimizing adverse human and environmental impacts
(Watershed) and maximizing public participation. This includes the development
of procedures and criteria for siting and routing and the development
of an inventory of large electric power generating study areas.

*Short-range tasks (or sub-c6'm__Ponents) of an on-going activity (i.e., solid waste
pollution control).
3-60

I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I SECTION 4:
q

INTERIM CONTROLS
I
I
I
I

SECTION 4: INTERIM CONTROLS.

Under the Minnesota Coastal Zone Management Plan, with
respect to state activities, an administrative review mechanism
on a case by case basis exists in statute as of this time.
11inn. Stat. S116D.04, Subd. 9. Thus, a method utilizing
technique three is in existence at the time of plan submission.
While regulatory changes by state agencies will be initiated
upon plan approval by the EQB and Governor, these may not in
place prior to final OCZM review. Howeveri since the case
bv case review is available, there is no need for interim
controls regarding state actions.

As regards local activities regulated pursuant to
technique one, DNR review of local ordinances will be under-
taken immediately after gubernatorial and EOB Plan adoption.
It is anticipated that Coastal Zone Management funding will
support personnel in the DNR to undertake this activity, and
that it will take from three to six months after EQB action
to be completed. Obviously, thereafter, local land use
planning and ordinance development and adoption will stretch
over a number of vears and be funded with CZM grants.
TH-us, the need arises for interim controls during the period
prior to final approval of all local ordinances as conE
with the plan.

A. Legal Requirements. Referencing �306(e)(1) of the Act,
the regulations make clear that:

11states using [state criteria setting, local
ordinance adoption and state review of adequacy of
ordinances] may seek �306 approval after all
requisite local ordinances or programs have been
reviewed and approved." 42 Fed. Reg. 43566,
9923.42 (c)(3). YJ
However, the regulations also indicate that any state: J14YAW

"may seek program approval prior to final approval
of all local ordinances and programs provided
that:

(i) a reasonable time and procedure for
local compliance has been established. . .

(ii) the state policies, standards and criteria
are sufficiently specific. . . ; and

(iii) there is sufficient interim authority to
insure that land and water use decisions
subject to the management program will

3-61

be consistent with the policies, goals,
and objectives of the management program
between the time of �306 approval and
the time when our local programs are
adopted." Id. at 435661 �923.42(c)(4).

Because Minnesota is seeking immediate �306 approval,
its plan relies, in part, upon local ordinances adopted
under the Shoreland Management Act. Since DNR review and
implementation of ordinance adoption at the local level will
not be completed by the time of plan approval, a technique
for interim control is necessary.

B. Minnesota Interim Control Approach. The legal authority
to challenge specific decisions under the tlinnesota.Environmental
Rights Act, with its statutory test requiring choice of a
feasible and prudent alternative has been discussed in
detail in section 1 (B) of this chapter. Also indicated
there is the existing statutory framework under the Environmental
Policy Act for requiring an EIS on Drolects not consistent
with the Coastal-75-ne Plan. These two tools wil_l___@provide
tne-"n-M,for tectuating interim control pending local
o dinance review and adoption.

Monitoring of local decisions currently occurs on a
regular basis through the DNR, in terms of notification
regarding variance s and subdivisions in the shoreland area.
In addition, local monitoring by ARDC, as described in section
3 of this chapter will commence prior to �306 approval. Of
course, the PAC, with its representatives of all three
counties, Duluth, the townships, and other municipalities
will also meet during the interim period. Through the moni-
toring programs and the personal knowledge of PAC members,
problems of inconsistent development during the interim
period, should any occur, can be brought to the attention of
the lead agency. The state agencies, which are members of
the PAC, also sit on the EQB. Thus, a direct linkage to the
agency responsible for the EIS program is in place. These
agencies will also often have knowledge of actions proposed
in the coastal zone area, even if they do not require a state
permit.

When an action that is inconsistent with the Chapter
2 Coastal Zone Management policies is proposed in the
CZM area during the interim period, the state has standing
and a legal basis to challenge the decision under the Rights
Act or the EQB can order review of the acti 'on, prior to
implementation, by means of an EIS. These two tools Drovide
adequate techniques to police against any action during the
interim period resulting in significant adverse affect due
to inconsistency with the Plan.
@
E
t

f
d
t
P

0
4
A

3-62

Uses of
ional Benefl
ancl the
t
R"
,77
Natm*Ml I[ COXSTAL ZONE MANAGEMEW

Chapter 4:

USES OF REGIONAL AND NATIONAL BENEFIT

Introduction

Two sections of the Coastal Zone Management Act relate
to uses in the coastal zone of regional or national interest.
The focus of these reauirements is to insure adeauate con-
sideration of the broader interest in such facilities, prevent
their arbitrary or inappropriate exclusion from the coastal
zone, and insure that such-regional and national benefit
facilities have been considered in the CZM planning process.
Discussed below are the statutorv requirements in these areas
and the Minnesota program response. Both are discussed jointly,
because, although they are separate sections, in large part
the uses of regional and national benefit in Minnesota are
viewed as coinciding.

1. Legal Requirements. The Act requires that prior to
management program approval the Secretary of Commerce must
find that:

"The management program provides for adequate
consideration of th@ national interest involved
in planning for, and in the siting of facilities
(including energy facilities in,Ior which signi-
ficantlv affect, such state's coastal zone) which
are.necessary to meet requirements which are other
than local in nature . . . ... Act, �306(c)(8).

With respect to regional interest facilities, the require-
ment is slightly stronger, going beyond mandating consideration
and requiring for program anproval that the Plan have:

"a method of insuring that local land
and water use regulations within the coastal
zone do not unreasonabl@r restrict or exclude
land and water uses of regional benefit." Act,
�306(e)(2).

Thus, national and reaional benefit uses must be identified,
appropriate planning ior such uses must be insured, and in-
appropriate or arbitrary exclusion of such uses may not be
permitted in the CZM Plan.

2. Minnesota Approach to R6gional and National Interest Uses.
Prior to discussing Minnesota's consideration of various
uses and/or facilities having a national or regional interest,
it is appropriate to note that requirements for such facilities

4-1

"must be met within the context of balancing a national
interest in the planning for and siting of such facilities
with other national interests related to coastal resource
conservation and protection." 42 Fed. Reg. 43571, 5303.52(a),
Act, �303. The clear import given by the policy of the Act,
and made more specific in the regulations, is that CZD! is a
planning process and that the unique natural resources of
the coastal area must be considered. Further, the natural
resource may itself be a national or regional interest.
Resources in which there may be a national interest are
enumerated in the regulations, and include such preservation
concerns as water, and air quality, wetlands, endangered
flora and fauna, flood plains and erosion prone areas,
wildlife habitat, areas of unique cultural significance, and
historic sites. See 42 Fed. Reg. 43572, Table 2. To date,
the major federal involvement of Minnesota's North Shore has
focused on the conservation and recreation side of the
national interest use spectrum. Of the comments solicited
from federal agencies regarding their interest in the coastal
zone during the CZM planni Ap
ing process, see pendix 1, no
particular national concerns other than in the areas of harbor
development, recreation, and resource protection were identified.
Thus, Minnesota's coastal zone, unlike"*that of many other
states, currently is not facing numerous proposals for
industrial, commercial, military, transportation or energy
projects potentionally inconsistent with resource protection
and enhancement and resulting in major national interest or
regional benefit conflicts.

A second significant factor with respect to national
and regional interest uses and the Minnesota coastal zone
relates to the boundary of the zone. In general, it is
a narrow strip relating only to the lake land/water interface
and T.H. 61. Thus, facilities needing proximity to the coast,
but not adjacency, will generally not be affected by the
Minnesota program, except in terms of consistency review.
Only coastal dependant industrial uses would be excluded
from Minnesota should the coastal zone area not be available
for development. While T.H. 61 also is included in the
oastal zone boundarv, there is no restriction in the Minnesota
program regarding access to the highway for any type of
facility outside the coastal zone, and, in faci, -highway
policies recognize the responsibility of the highway to meet
its commercial use obligations. See Chapter 2.

Interms of facilities which mav be of national or regional
benefit, the federal regulations provide some guidance as to
specific facilities in which there may be a national interest.
These include national defense and aerospace, energy production
and transmission, recreation, transportation, regional water

4-2

and sewage treatment plants, prime agricultural areas, major
mineral deposits, fisheries resources, and forest land. In
terms of regional benefit, a logical definition is a use which
affects more than a particular local area. Such potential
activities, which relate to the coastal zone, inciude the
uses and concerns listed above regarding the national interest,
and also major industrial and commercial facilities, particularly
if outside existing nodes of population development.

As noted above, the major concerns with respect to the
national interest facilities and regional use facilities are:
adequate consideration in the planning process and avoidance
of arbitrary and capricious exclusion. Of course, the level
of concern regarding any facility or use relates in part to
its likelihood of locating within a particular state's
coastal zone. As noted above, the comments of federal
agencies, existing plans for the area, and the results of
the CZM.planning process indicate only a small likelihood
for a number of the enumerated national interest facilities.
ongoing regional planning and the CZM plan has provided for
certain regional facilities and indicated the lack of necessity
to extensively consider certain others. These kinds of
factors have been built into the coastal zone planning
process and are reflected in the specific policies in Chapter
2. For example, the minimal incidents of agricultural land in
the Minnesota coastal zone area has resulted in a lack of
emphasis on this use. On the other hand, mineral and forestry
resources have been considered in some detail although the
small size of boundary makes CZM effect in these areas
small. Similarly, the absence of a likelihood for national
defense or aerospace installations on the North Shore has
resulted in a lack of consideration of these uses in particular,
as comDared with recreation, where major attention was
focusea on park, forest and lake-related recreation facilities
and fisheries and wildlife habitat.

The following types of regional and national uses require
further comment: 0101

(a) Energy production and transmission. Two types of
energy facilities appear likely on the North Shore: energy
shipment facilities and energy generation or conversion lei
facilities utilizing water from the lake. With respect to
shipping facilities, such a use is coastal dependant and
local land use plans are required under the Shoreland Managemen
Act to identify areas appropriate for this.and other industrial
use. See Minn. Reg. Cons. 72(b), NR 83(a). The policies in
Chapter 2 of the Plan made clear the availability of
already existing ports on the North Shore for further coastal
Tic:

Z$J

4-3

dependent industrial development, including shipping facilities.
The key area will be Duluth/Superior harbor and this is the
focus of a special chapter of the Plan.

With respect to energy facilities desiring access to Lake
Superior water, water intake structures would be permitted within
the coastal zone, however the energy production facilities them-
elves might well be excluded from the zone as not requiring
ater adjacency. See Minn. Reg. MEQC 74(c)(1)(ee), (@)(bb).
innesota has an elaborate program for energy facility need
evaluation and siting, which is discussed in Chapter 6.
With respect to electrical energy generation and transmission
facilities, these laws provide for preemption of local
zoning. See Minn. Stat. �116C.51 et sea. Because of the
Minnesota concern regarding visual effects of development on
the North Shore, as exemplif-ied in several policies, concentrated
location of industrial development in urban areas and avoidance
of adverse visual effects would both be major concerns in
energy facility siting.

(b) Recreation Facilities. Numerous policies in Chapter 2
relate to development of major recreational facilities on the
North Shore. -So-ecific priorities for acquisition of access
points to fishing streams and the lake have been identified.
Priorities in terms of park land development and trail development
have been specified. There currently exists substantial park
and other recreational facilities on the North Shore, and no
major increments, within the coastal zone area, to the current
holdings have been proposed. No comments indicated major additional
areas appropriate for acquisition. Completion of acquisition
programs regarding already established recreational areas
are recognized as appropriate in the plan. Appropriate author-
ities exist in state law for recreation and other public land
acquisition at the state level in Minnesota, see Chapter 3(C).

(c) Transportation. Continued development of the Duluth/
Superior Harbor as a major port has been recognized as a
key development of the Coastal Zone Plan. Major emphasis
in the Duluth/Superior Harbor Study has been on appropriate
policies to respond to navigational needs and dredging/water
pollution concerns. other harbors on the North Shore which
are currently developed for major bulk commodity shipment are
also recognized as appropriate locations for laie related com-
mercial shipping development. Policies regarding small boat
harbor development and highway improvements related to land
transportation and considering the effect of strip development
on highway capacitv are included in Chapter 2. Thus, the
national and regional interest in appropriate commercial harbor
facilities, harbors of refuge for small recreational boats, and
land based transportation is recognized and built into the
Plan.
f

z
M

4-4

'00,

(d) Water and Sewage Treatment Facilities. The Minnesota
CZM Plan contains a number of policies designed to focus
development on existing population nodes to preclude the
need for expensive extension of sewer and water. Planning
for sewer and water facilities for these areas has been
undertaken by the ARDC, and is the basis for ARDC comment on
sewer and water facility grants. Similarly, the.PCA recognizes
the need to.respond with regional sewage treatment facilities
appropriate for the existing population areas. No policies
would preclude such facilities from being developed within
or adjacent to the coastal zone area.

(e) Minerals. Specific policies in Chapter 2 recognize the
appropriateness of identifying mineral deposits within the
coastal zone area, but, because of the small size and unique
natural environment of the' area, mining within the Shoreland
Management area and gravel taking in beach areas, is precluded.
This represents a case where the material adverse effect of
mineral development within this narrow zone or on beaches was
identified in the CZM process as having adverse effects
which outweighed benefits. Mining beyond the Shoreland area
is not precluded, and policies to guide such decisions are
provided.

(f) Forest Resources. Forest management is recognized as a
priior!-ty for the North Shore area in general, however, within
the coastal zone, in most instances, aesthetic considerations
will outweigh timber removal values. Where appropriate, the
Coastal Zone Plan in Chapter 2 calls for management of
forest resources for timber production. Note, this balancing
with the recreational and aesthetic value of forest in the
coastal zone area is another example of appropriate weighting
of the miscellaneous national and regional interests in this
particular resource (timber uroduction vs. aesthetics and
recreation).

(q) Large Scale Commercial and Industrial Facilities. As
noted in the discussion above, the Minnesota plan calls for
specific zones to be established for industrial development
and commercial services as appropriate. Policies in Chapter
2 recognize the desirability of focusing this development in
the existing population nodes, to avoid disruption of the.
T.H. 61 corridor and uneconomical dispersal of larger scale
commercial and industrial facilities. Local land use planning
considerations and land use ordinance requirements would
i,.nsure appropriate, but not arbitrary or unreasonable exclusion
or restriction for such facilities. The location of such
facilities is considered in the ARDC regional water and
sewer planning process. Commercial and recreational development

4-5

on T.H. 61 is recognized as appropriate, subject to various
policy considerations regarding access, clustering, etc.
CZM policy favors siting of heavy industry in the four areas
(Duluth, Two Harbors, Silver Bay and Taconite Harbor) where
it is currently located. The CZM land use planning process
will identify commercial and industrial uses likely in the
coastal zone, and those which are coastal dependent. Appropriate
areas for such coastal dependent uses will be identified in
the local plan implementation process.

Three Minnesota laws provide the framework to insure
that both national interest and regional interest considerations
are incorporated into the ongoing decision making process
in the Minnesota coastal area. First, the Shoreland Management
Act allows a state review of local zoning ordinances in the
area within 1,000 feet of the-lake. The DNR, followinq EQB
adoption of the CZM Plan, will reevaluate local ordinan"ces and
measure them against the policies in Chapter 2 of the Plan.
These policies, as noted above, specifically recognize both
national and regional interest concerns. Thus, any arbitrary
or exclusionary local zoning or zoning which did not consider
these concerns would not meet the test of comparison against
the CZM policies. Second, the Environmental Policy Act
authorizes th'e EQB to order an EIS on any proposed action
with potential for significant environmental affects. Proposed
uses of'regional or national benefit will often entail
significant environmental effects and occasion EIS review.
In the course of such review, the Minnesota law requires a
number of considerations which are broader than those in a
usual EIS that relate to the regional and national benefit
of a facility, particularly in terms of the economic benefit
of such facilities, as measured against adverse environmental
effects. These include consideration of the "economic, and
employment effects" of a proposal, the "predictable increased
future development of an area because of the existence of a
proposal," and the "multi-state responsibilities associated
proposed action." See Minn. Stat. 91-16D.04, Subd. 1. Thus,
the consideration of the economic affects of an action are
built into the Minnesota EIS process, and the concern about
"multi-state responsibilities" directly relates to the
national or multi-state regional affect of an action.
Third, the Minnesota Power Plan Siting Act provides the
state decision on power plant and transmission line locations
is preemptive of local zoning.. Specifically recognized
in the regulations thereunder is the appropriateness of
location of water intake structures even within otherwise
excluded areas for facility location. See e.g. Minn. Reg.
MEQC 74 (c)(1)(ee), and (2)(vv).

4-6

Utilizing these three laws, and evaluating the minnesota
Coastal Plan policies in Chapter 2 indicates that regional
and national interest facilities and concerns have both been
considered in the Minnesota planning process and &llow6d
as appropriate in the coastal zone area. Thus, the requirements
of the Act and regulations regarding regional and national
interests and uses have been complied with in the Minnesota
Plan.

4-7

GA
PC

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

CHAPTER 5: to.'

GEOGRAPHIC ARE-AS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN

Introduction

The federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 requires that the
state's Coastal Zone Management Plan must identify and designate
"Geographic Areas of Particular Concern" (GAPCs). By definition,
GAPCs are those coastal land and water areas which deserve special
planning attention; that is, they are not or cannot be managed
adequately either Ehrough local land use controls or through the
land and water portion of a state's overall Coastal Zone
Management Program. Those areas may also represent significant
opportunities with regard to the Coastal Zone Program which
suggest coordinated action between several levels of government.
These areas may have siqnificant natural or historic value or
they may be already developed areas with various uses competing
for space. They may be in ne7ed of reclamation-or restoration
or they may be relatively undeveloped regions which may be
expected to come under considerable development pressures in
the future. In any case, GAPC designation is an additional e6
tool that the state or local units can use to manage specific
areas of concern within the larger coastal zone.

A. Federal Requirements for the GAPC Process

The federal legislation allows latitude for each state to
develop its own process for nominating and designating GAPCs and
for producing management programs. Certain factors, however,
must be considered by every state.

Federal regulations demand consideration of certain types
of areas for possible GAPC designation, but each state need
not designate one area from each category. The categories for
consideration are:

(1) "Areas of unique scarce, fragile or vulnerable natural
habitat, physical feature, historical significance,
cultural value and scenic importance;

(2) Areas of high natural productivity or essential habitat
for living resources, including fish, wildlife and the
various trophic levels in the food web critical to their
well-being;

(3) Areas of substantial recreational value and/or opportunity;

(4) Areas where developments and facilities are dependent upon
the utilization of, or access to, coastal waters;

(5) Areas of unique geologic or topographic significance to
industrial or commercial development;

(6) Areas of urban concentration where shoreline utilization
and water uses are highly competitive;

(7) Areas of significant hazard if developed, due to storms,
slides, floods, erosion, settlement, etc.;

(8) Areas needed to protect, maintain or replenish coastal
lands or resources, including coastal floodplains, aquifer
recharge areas, sand dunes, ... reefs, beaches, offshore
sand deposits ... (923.13(a) of the Rules and Regulations).

In addition, federal regulations require that the following
steps must be covered in the overall management plan sent to the
Secretary of Commerce for approval:

(1) The boundary of the GAPC.

(2) An identification of the state's interest in designating
an area as a GAPC. This discussion should include the
important values or unique characteristics of the area
and any problems, present or anticipated, with the use
of the area. In addition, a general scheme of use
priorities should be laid out.

(3) An initiation of planning and policy-making efforts.
Final plans do not have to be completed before the over-
all management plan is sent to the Secretary of Commerce
for approval. However, the state must demonstrate its
intention to fulfill this requirement of the Act. Such
demonstration of effort might include planning studies
underway, meetings with affected groups to discuss policy
options or drafts of policies.

B. Potential GAPCs in Minnesota's Coastal Zone

In order to arrive at a listing of areas to be considered as
GAPCs, Minnesota used two approaches:

(1) A survey of potentially significant natural and cultural
features was conducted during the first year of the Program.
Sites contained in this survey were evaluated in the North
Shore Recreation Study to determine the most appropriate
treatment of them. Table 5-1 lists the areas considered.

5 - 2

TABLE 5-1

AREAS HAVING POTENTIAL SIC714IFICAIICE AS
SCIENTIFIC AND NATURAL AREAS(b)

Level I Sites(c)
Priority for
Site Name Major Feature ownership Consideration(d)

Minnesota PoJnt Bay Mouth Bar Private 2-4
Oatka Beach (a) Unique Plant Con- municipal
munity

Hawk Ridge View of hawk Municipal 1
Pigration County

Moose Mountain Diabase sill Private 4

Stoney Point Plant Comiunities Private 4
Birding Area municipal

Knife River Gravel Beach State 1
Gull Rookery Federal
Private

Silver Cliff and Diabase sill Private 4
Encampment Forest Plant communities County

Bud Hill Virgin Maple Private 4
County
Good Harbor (a) Concentration of Private 1-4
Beach the mineral State
Thonpsonite

Grand Marais Tombolo 4
Point Vegetative Com- Private
munity Municipal

Devil's Track Diabase State 1
River (a) Plant community Private

Grand Rock Volcanic rocks Federal 4
Gull rookery

Maple Lake Plant comiunity Federal 4

Big Noise Plant community Private .@4

Embarass Mountain Plant community Federal 4
State
Private

5 - 3

Table 5-1 continued Priority for
Site Nane Major Feature Ownership Consideration(d)

Weber Lake Bog succession Federal 4

Kodonce River Plant communities Federal
Trout spawning area State 1

Paradise Beach Beach process State 2
Plant community

Josephine and Teal Bog succession Federal 4
Lake Geologic Processes-
Susie Islands (a) Plant communities Federal 1
Geologic processes Private

Level II Sites

Blueberry and Pan- Grull rookery Federal 4
cake Islands (a)

Big Bay Geologic processes Federal 4

Hovland Woods Plant community State 3
Private

Mineral Center Plant community Federal 4
Hardwood Ridge

Hollow Rock Geomorphic pro- Private 4
cesses

Pigeon Falls Geologic processes Federal 4
Private

Lester River Trout habitat Municipal 4
Amity Creek

French River Trout habitat State 3

Sucker River Trout habitat Private 4

Lighthouse Point Birding Area ? ?

Gooseberry Plant Community ? ?
Beaver Island(a) Gull Rookery ? 4

5 - 4

Table 5-1 continued

Priority for
Site Name Major Feature ownership Consideration(d)

Palisade Head Geologic processes State 3
Private

Shovel Point Fish habitat State 1
Baptism

Crystal Bay Sea coves ? ?

Tettagouche High- Geologic processes Private 4
lands

Sugar Loaf Cave(a) Tombolo, ? ?

Schroeder Hardwoods Plant community Federal 4

Two Island River Plant community Federal 4
Hardwoods

Gull and Bear Gull rookery Federal 4
Islands(a)

Tofte Tom Park Geologic processes County 4

Carlton Peak Geologic processes ? ?

Cascade River Deer yard State 1
Federal

Brule River Deer yard State 1-2
Trout Federal
Private

(a) Also nominated as GAPCs through the public nomination process.
(b) Not all of these areas are within the Coastal Zone boundary
as adopted.
(c) Level I sites are those where the potential for exploitation
or resource damage is high. Level II sites are those where
such potential is lacking or minimal.
(d) Priorities are as follows:
(1) State-owned areas whose management is consistent with the
goals of a Scientific/Natural Area.
(2) Level I sites on State land whose current management is
not consistent with Scientific/Natural Areas.
0) Level II sites on state-owned land whose management is
consistent with the goals of a Scientific/Natural Area.
(4) Level I and II sites on non-state owned land.

5 - 5

(2) A nomination process was conducted whereby public agen Iciest
private citizens, and various organizations could submit
their ideas as to what constituted a GAPC. This process
involved the mailing of nomination packages which contained
a discussion of the types of areas which could be considered
as GAPCs, a brief discussion of the implications of GAPC
designation,, the procedures to be followed in nominating
GAPCs and a nomination form to be filled out which de-
scribed the area and the reasons why it should be
considered as a GAPC. Nomination forms were also placed
in the repositories along the North Shore and published
in local papers. In response to this mailing, 25 responses
were received nominating various areas as GAPCs. Table
5-2 summarizes the results of the nomination process.

As noted in B-1, above, significant natural and cultural features
were evaluated in the North Shore Recreation Study. That report-
contains a more detailed description and inventory of each site or
feature and recommendations as to how each site should be treated.

Of the 43 sites listed in Table 5-1, ten were nominated as
GAPCs by the public and are included in Table 5-2. The remainder
are recomnended for consideration as state scientific and natural
areas which are designated, by law, by the Commissioner of Natural
Resources.

The nominated.areas were submitted to a screening process to
determine which areas should be recommended for designation as
GAPCs. The following describes the steps in the screening process.

Step 1: GAPC nominations were evaluated to see if they fell
within one or more.of the categories listed in the Federal
CZM Act. The categories are:

1. "Areas of unique, scarce, fragile, or vulnera:ble natural
habitat, physical feature, historical significance,
cultural value and scenic importance;

2. Areas of high natural productivity or essential habitat.
for living resources, including fish, Wildlife and the
various trophic levels in the food web critical to their
well-being;

3. Areas of substantial recreational value and/or opportunity;

4. Areas where developnents and facilities_are dependent upon
the utilization of, or access to, coastal waters;

5. Areas of unique geologic or topograph -ic significance
to industrial or commercial development;

6. Areas of urban concentration where shoreline utilization
and water uses are highly competitive;

5 - 6

TABLE 5-2

GAPC NOMINATIONS

APEA NO11INATOR DESCRIPTION

1. 80 acre tract north of U.S. 61 Lake States Office; Federally-owned tract, natural area, currently managed for
near Pigeon Falls on the Pigeon (federal) Bureau of wildlife habitat. Nominator wishes to preserve the area.
River-Cook County within Grand Land Management
Portage Indian Reservation

2. Unsurveyed islands in Lake Lake States Office; Federally-owned unsurveyed islands, presently managed
Superior in Cook County Bureau of Land as wildlife habitat. Nominator wishes to preserve the
Management area.

3. Areas in Cook County for Lake States Office; Only area in CZ14 study area with known prospecting
which prospecting permit Bureau of Land permit application pending. The U.S. Forest Service
applications are pending Management has surface management responsibilities but BL14 has the
approval. T64N, RI and mineral leasing authority. No recommendation from
ZE, 4th PM nominator.

4. Unsurveyed islands in Lake Lake States Office; Federally-owned islands under BLM administration, valuable as
Superior in Lake County Bureau of Land gull nesting habitats. flomihator recommends preservation.
Management

Ln 5. 3 islands in Pigeon River, Lake States Office; Federally-owned islands under BLM administration. Not unique
Cook County Bureau of Land but valuable as wildlife habitat. Nominator recommends
Management preservation.

6. Cook County Historical Board of Direc tors, The Historical Society would like to buy the 2 lots adjoining
Museum, Lot 3 & 4, Block 30, Cook County the present museum in order to complete reassembling of the
Grand Marais Historical Society former Mayhew estate, home of the first white settlers in
Grand Marais. These two lots are presently privately owned.

7. Campsite on Burlington Bay and City Council, City Camp and power plant owned by Two Harbors are suffering erosion
Water & Light Plant, City of of Two Harbors damage, from lake level changes and from 'storm waters.
Two Harbors, Lake County

8. The Mississippi River at and Robert Anderson, Area is "messed up." Nominator feels that it needs help.
below the Twin Cities NEMEEC Would require considerable extension of CZM boundaries to be
included.

Table 5-2 continued.

AREA NOMINATOR DESCRIPTION

9. 2 parts of proposed North Trails Section- Trail has potential high recreational use. Land necessary
Shore Trail: Barrs Lake State Department is currently in both public and private ownership.
Township Historic Site, St. of Natural Recommendation is that the immediate area surrounding the
Louis County. Silver Bay Resources trail should be wisely managed to protect the significant
Township proposed Tailings features for recreation and educational uses.
Site, Lake County

10. Entire Coastal Zone Study Area North Star Chapter, "The entire area is of statewide concern as a resource for
with exception of incorporated Sierra Club recreational and scientific activities." Nominator wishes
towns, cities and villages. to see area managed according to state standards implemented
by the local units of government.

11. Selected sites for future U.S. Fish and These are areas which the Fish and Wildlife Service would like
additions to Wildlife Wildlife Service the state Department of Natural Resources to acquire for their
Management Areas (see attached Wildlife Management Program.
map for locations).

00 12. Minnesota Point (undeveloped Minnesota Only significant undeveloped areas remaining on Minnesota
portion from Oatka area to Ornithologist's Point. Receives extensive use by classes from UMD. Recently
Superior entry) and Hearding Union proposed as National natural Landmark in National Park Services
Island, Duluth City Natural Area Program. Recommends that State, U.S. Corps
of Engineers and City of Duluth develop a management plan
for the protection of the area's natural resources.
13. Offshore islands with large Minnesota These ecologically sensitive areas need to be protected as
gull breeding colonies Ornithologist's the breeding grounds of the herring gull. Recommends that
(Blueberry Island, Pancake Union the DNR purchase development rights.
Island, Five Mile Rock, Marr
Island, Gull Island & Bear
Island, Beaver Island, Encamp-
ment Island & Knife Island)

14. Marshes in the St. Louis River Minnesota These ecologically sensitive areas are the only marshes left
from the Arrowhead Bridge Ornithologist's in the Duluth Harbor and are vital for waterfowl nesting and
(Duluth) to the Fond du Lac Union feeding areas. There are no other marshes in the Minnesota
(Duluth) especially Grassy Coastal Zone. The marshes should be identified by vegetational
Point, Indian Point, Spirit surveys and designated as sanctuaries.
Lake, flud Lake and Fond du Lac areas.

Table 5-2 continued.

AREA NOMINATOR DESCRIPTION

15. Abandoned and modern beaches, John Green, UMD The area is of scientific-educational value with abandoned
Red Rock Creek area, N.E. Cook Geology Department "washboard" beach ridges in an undisturbed natural area.
County in Grand Portage Indian There is very little such habitat in Minnesota. Recommends
Reservation preservation from development.

16. Sugarloaf Point and Beach, John Green, UMD This privately-owned area is of scientific, educational,
SW Cook County Geology Department historic and natural value, especially important for volcanic
features of billion year old lava flows. Often used for field
work by UMD students. Recommend getting non-development
easements from present owner (Consolidated Paper Co.) or
possibly public acquisition.

17. Par 'adise Beach Area, Cook John Green, UMD This is an area of fine, natural gravel and back-beach bogs.
County Geology Department These wild undeveloped natural areas offer excellent examples
of wave-deposition processes and geomorphology and provide
essential natural habitat for resident wildlife and birds
migrating along the coast. In combination public/private
ownership. Nominator reco"nds non-development easements
and regulations by the DNR and the Minnesota Highway Department
prohibiting the removal of sand and gravel from these beaches.
Ln
18. Grand Portage Island, in John Green, UMD This area has natural value as wildlife habitat and contains
Grand Portage Indian Geology Department significant geologic features where exposed Puckewunge Sandstone
Reservation, Cook County formation contacts the base of the overlying Keweenawan lavas.
Nominator recommends developing a management plan to prevent
logging or residential developments.

19. Devil Track River-Durfee Creek John Green, UMD This area, in both public and private ownership, is of great
Area in Cook County. Includes Geology Department scientific and educational interest. It contains excellent
1/8-4 mi. wide strip along examples of abandoned beach and shore features (especially
Highway 61 from Devil Track River wave-cut cliffs) of 5,000 yr. old Lake Nippissing stage of
east past Durfee Creek until Lake Superior. Area also contains good natural shingle
Highway bends away from lake beaches for recreational use. Nominator recommends more
in Section 9. state ownership on the land side of Highway 61 to include as
much as possible of the abandoned wave-cut slope, coupled
with a non-disturbance policy for the remainder of the area.

Table 5-2 contin'ued.

AREA NOMI NATOR DESCRIPTION

20. Knife River Beach, southwestern John Green, U11D This area is primarily in public ownership. It is an
Lake county (from rocks at north Geology Department excellent natural sand and gravel beach, unique in St. Louis
end near house to southeast end and Lake Counties. It is used by UMD faculty and students.
at harbor entrance; all along It is also of recreational value with abundan't agate pebbles.
lake side of Knife River Also provides beach habitat for water birds during breeding
?a season and migration. flominator recommends continuation of
Mtral @ecommends all of Knife River present management, but no further ri ragpiny or other on-
shore erosion prevention devices shol e a lowed.

21. Thomsonite Beach, Good Harbor John Green, UMD This area, presently owned by the state has good recreational
Bay, Cook County Geology Department value both as a beach and source of thomsonite; scientific
educational value due to exposed geologic forms in the road
cut; and aesthetic value from the Highway 61 overlook.
Nominator recommends continuation of present management.

22. Susie Islands Henry Roberts(board This area has natural value (wild islands with dense boreal
Archipelago, Cook County member of the forest and rocky shore); as an historic area (old mine site on
Nature Conservancy, Susie island) and as an ecologically sensitive area (several
but making rare flowers in the arctic-alpine community occur south of
nomination on own their normal range in the severe microclimate on the Lake
Ln behalf) Superior ledge). The current ownership is mixed: some
private, some public (Indian lands) and some Nature
Conservancy (southern half of Susie Island). Nominator
recommends transferring the Conservancy parcel to a public
agency who would preserve it and urges the Grand Portage
Reservation to take the natural areas into account in their
future planning.

23. North Shore Streams Izaac Walton North Shore streams are felt to be particularly sensitive
League to development pressures and concerted efforts should be
applied to protect them from detioration caused by develop-
ment activities. The nominator stressed the biological
importance of streams to the Lake Superior fishery and also
indicated the scenic and recreational importance of the
streams.

Table 5-2 continued.

AREA NOMINATOR DESCRIPTION
24. Duluth-Superior Harbor Izaac Walton Lying at the western tip of the Great Lakes St. Lawrence
League Seaway the Twin Ports provide for the transshipment of
Minnesota iron ore, Midwest grain, Montana coal, and various
general and bulk cargos. Each,year national and international
shipping operations handle forty million tons of cargo.

Because of its geographic setting, size, and diversity of
activities, the harbor Is a complex area. The harbor poses
critical decisions on industrial development, marine traffic,
dredge activities, recreation, water pollution and possesses
extremely valuable wildlife resources.

25. Silver Bay Area Great Lakes The Silver Bay area should be considered as a GAPC because
Basin Commission of the intense pollution problems associated with the
disposal of taconite tailings. In addition, the proposed on-
land tailing disposal site(s) should also be considered for
GAPC status because of the potential direct and significant
impact of this use on the LaVe Superior waters.

F-A-

7. Areas of significant hazard, if developed, due to
storms, slides, floods, erosion, settlement, etc.;

8. Areas needed to protect, maintain or replenish coastal
lands or resources, including coastal flood plains,
aquifer recharge areas, sand dunes, coral and other
reefs, beaches, offshore sand deposits and mangrove
stands." (From federal "threshold papers")

Step 2: Staff evaluated the viable nominations against the following
designation criteria. For the site to be recommended for
designation, each question should be answered "yes

1. Is the e::isting resource management for the proposed
GAPC in some way inadequate?

2. Can the Coastal Zone Management Program (as opposed
to some other type of state or local action) effectively
assist in the management of the proposed GAPC?

3. Within the Coastal Zone Management Program itself,
would the GAPC designation be more appropriate than
dealing with the area through general policies de-
veloped in the permissible use portion of the plan?

4. Is the magnitude or complexity of the area's problems
or opportunities sufficient to warrant special GAPC
designation?

5. Is the value or significance of the area'-s resources
sufficient to justify special GAPC designation?

Step 3: This step was the final screen used to determine which
areas would be recommended. Those areas which made it
through the first two steps were checked for two things.
First, if the area in question was in federal ownership,
it was excluded from further consideration because federal
lands are excluded from the program. Second, if the area
in question was substantially outside the CZM boundary adopted
by the Policy Advisory Cornmittee at their May 11 meeting,
it was eliminated.

Table 5-3 summarizes the results of the screening process. Numbers
on the left margin of the Table correspond to the numbers in Table
5-2 which lists the GAPC nomination. Numbers along the top under
the listina of the various steps refer to the criteria listed under
each step @bove.

5 12

me"Mew mmmm"Nam man M MOSM10

TABLE 5-3

GAPC SCREENING PROCESS

Step I Step 2 Step 3 .0
Nominated Areas OCZM Categories Designation Ownership/
Criteria Boundary

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5

1. Pigeon River + Federal Ownership No

2. Lake Superior Islands + Federal Ownership No
Ln 3. Prospecting Area + Out of Boundary No
4. Lake Superior Islands + Federal Ownership No
Uj 5. Pigeon River Islands + Federal Ownership No

6. Cook Co. Hist. Museum + No

7. Campsite/Power Plant + + + + + No

8. Mississippi River Out of Boundary No

9. North Shore Trail + . . . Out of Boundary No

10. Coastal Zone Study Area + + + + No

11. Wildlife Mgmt. Areas . . . Currently being
evaluated by DNR
12. Minnesota Point + + + + + + + + + Yes

13. Gull Rookeries + Federal Ownership No

Table 5-3 continued.

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3
Nominated Areas OCZM Categories Designation Ownership/ 0
Criteria Boundary
ea

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 a)

14. St. Louis River Marshes + + + Yes

15. Beaches + No

16. Sugarloaf Point + No

17. Paradise Beach + + No

18. Grand Portage Island + N o

Ln 19. Devil's Track River + + No
1 20. Knife River Beach . . . + . . . . . Yes

Thomsonite Beach + + . . . . . Yes

22. Susie Islands + + No

23. North Shore Streams + + + + + + + + + No

24. Duluth-Superior Harbor . . . . . . . + . . . . . Yes

25. Silver Bay Area + + + + . . . . . Yes

Theareas which survived the screening process are Minnesota
Point, Duluth Superior Harbor, St. Louis River marshes, Knife River,
the Silver Bay-Milepost 7 area and Thomsonite Beach. These areas
are briefly described in Table 5-3 and their general locations are
shown on Figures 5-1 and 5-2. Figures 5-3 to 5-6 indicate the extent
of each nominated area. The boundaries shown are approximate and
subject to change.

It should be noted that the areas recommended for GAPC designation
extend, in most instances, beyond the boundary approved 'by the Policy
Advisory Committee on May 11. This was done in order to indicate
what was felt to be the area suited for GAPC designation. Re-
stricting GAPCs to the approved boundary would have resulted in the
elimination of a portion of the area which was nominated.

At its meeting on June 9, 1977, the PAC reviewed and discussed
the six areas which met the screening criteria and took the fol-
lowing actions.

1. The Silver Bay Milepost 7 area was dropped from.consideration
because it was felt that a considerable amount "of planning
had gone into the selection of the Milepost 7 site andthat
the various state and federal permits required would insure
that environmental impacts would be minimized. It was
further noted that most of the construction workers on the
Milepost 7 disposal site would be commuters and there
would be little increased demand for housing or public
services.

2. The Minnesota Point, Duluth-Superior Harbor and St. Louis
River marshes areas were combined into one single nomination
and tentatively approved by the PAC, subject to approval
of the designation by the City of Duluth. This was done
by resolution of the Duluth City Council on August 15,
1977.

3. Action on Knife River and Thomsonite Beach was deferred
pending discussions with local residents and governmental
units.

Following action by the parties involved with Knife River and
Thomsonite Beach, the PAC will officially designate GAPCs. if
additional GAPCs are proposed after the CZM Plan has been reviewed
by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Washington,
the process will.be repeated at a later time.

C. GAPC Nomination and Designation Process During Program Implementation

The process for nominating and designating GAPCs during coastal
zone program.implementation will be as follows:

5 - 15

T:@
Balsam ake
lin Pinevil
19
inley La e Greenwood co
--v,
'4 a Lake rph
'o even Beaver
58 Whitew er
Lake Skib ake tWe 1616..
44
paida a .U z River Pine Lake ->0
041*
0 Long Lake Why e 1p

rys Lake
Palo ei inland
Little Marais
cp Lo ak 17
cj) I
ARD ARAL EL asse L T-
0 irba Norsh unctiln La Lak
@4Z n OIL 111gen City
c h.-I P.,nt
13r <
6\ McN r 140 Palisade Head
9 9 e
arK a iteface Y
F
8entral Lakes Res 4oL r Bay
el Br so 0 0
ollin
eaver Bay
e r
e took Lake ales
0
aNt'
in Gustafso Hill
a .. plit Rock Point
tt oface t=ewaTt
54 r
'feel, Rush Lak A e F
Uri ef 0 is
u k
v astle Danger
4E
S art
son Lieuna ek
0) E-an-iptrniant Isl.nd
ake
Boulder Lake
53 es
f,>B a

0 o Harbors
[@&.d L
Ta ir 0
e ewvoir
pend e r de b arsmont FK3U1RE- 5- 1
0
35 Fish 61 ife River
0 Lake I
d
Stony Point
GAPC NOMINATIC
9 510 1377 i Ric"a- 9rench River
7 Volk on
Gra Lake f7j Ar ld lift
Pike Lake

50 NUMBERS ON MAP CORRESPOND WITH NUMBERS
Mu er
@!ph ULUtH
2 (F FEDERAL OWNERSHIP)
r tor innesqt4
'90 r nt

ar ey
fit
ca n
M (NOTE: NOMINATION *10 WAS FOR THE ENTIRE COASTAL ZONE PLA

arl n

r sha

YUV
Ke Rose -R
unflint Lake 'Min
oxise North Fowl Lake
T)q can
sh@e e
ish@emuncie a e.
L4ke Loon A &tith Fowl Lake
L
__D_ - o la 151 Riv
__@@K!Wabic La Tus k The
1% . Cascades
> % R
Q L Lo s 0 nR Greel aKB pigeon
@iag ga, Lake %I,- ke q. 4
51 3
-Mtn 10 avis 9 438 0 ra
@om ao ke Misquah Hill G
R herok cz,_ @7 in
S Brule Cen
I;- @@m Lake
3
@9 _j
ake < 9 rthern
K I t P
er 0 Eagle <@@ %., ak.
Lak '? go ight Lake R,%@., uhar
po"'! aw :3 ?30 13F
,4 L SIP n
4 race asGad Ca
8 Elbow
Phoebe e liegy ke Lake ovia
9_@ on L*e
e Kawishi wi. Lake ak Devil Tr ck Lake
t
arr 14.d
Lake
13 LuLn Mtn ait Lake
(a Lake
Of rent 'ake R' iara 61 ed Cliff 13F
rak@@ -
Mtn.
or sland Timbe -hite in Pike e Grand Marais
Lake a e Deer
Lake lbow Lake Lake errace Point
6 5
h Ca , ou
La e
itel'i FIGUM .5-2
L e i Blml, Point

ilsad L e F
88 tsen 'GAPC NOMINATIONS
G, z 005 16 In
Ln
e ux Mtn F

Cmitcpn
15
ofte
ERS ON MAP CORRESPOND WITH
NUMBERS ON GAPC LISTING SHEET

(F FEDERAL OWNERSHIP)

(NOTE: NOMINATION #10 WAS FOR

THE ENTIRE COASTAL ZONING PLANNING

HARBOR ARM H&HA(MENIEWT [PL&H
METROPOLITAN INTERSTATE COMMITTEE

............

M.
.............

. ...... ....

.. ................

Mo
.. ................... -::t,
....................
..........
................ ....
.. .. ..........

..........

.... ... ........
........ ........
...... ....
..............
............ I.............

. . . . . . . . . . . .
. ...............................
....... .......

.............
... ............
. . ... ............

. ........ ................
!.Ag ..........

........ .....
. ....... .....
FIGURE 5-3

/DULUTH-SUPE
St. L 'UIS RIVER MARSHE

lee

cr/

ao
ae cb.,@v
0
0
ON.
1.0 0
@o

. . . . . . . . . .

KNIFE RIVER

FIGURE 5-4

5 19

... .. ... ...

23 -2.

im.

FIGURE 5-5
c r: C)- --'K

2
SILVER BAY MILEPOST 7 AREA

5 - 20

..................

...... ................. ...........

T H O*M P S ON I T,E. B E A,C H.

FIGURE 5-6

5 21

Step 1: Individual citizens, citizen groups, and federal,
9tate and local units of government will be eligible
to nominate geoqraphic areas of particular concern.
All.nominations shall be sent to the State Planning
Agency and shall include a legal description of the
area, reasons why the area should be considered for
designation, and management recommendations. Nomination
forns will be made available at the State Planning Agency
and the Arrowhead Regional Development Commission.
(See attachment A for nonination form)

Step 2: 1.1ithin seven days of receipt of nomination form, the
State Planning Agency staff shall notify the appropriate
unit(s) of government which applies to the nominated
area and affected property owner(s), if private
property is involved, that the area has been nominated
as a GAPC. Comments from the local unit(s) of goVern-
nent, property owner(s), and interested citizens @4ill
be requested. Time for submission of comments will be
30 days from receipt of notification of a GAPC no@iination.

Step 3: Upon receipt of comments, the State Planning Agency
will screen the nominated GAPCs using the following
criteria:

riteria A: 1. Is the area in question in federal
ownership?
2.. Is the@'area outside the boundary?

Criteria B: Does the area fall within one or more of
these categories:

1. "Areas of unique, scarce, fragile, or
vulnerable natural habitat, physical
feature, historical significance,
cultural value and scenic importance;
2. Areas of high natural productivity or
essential habitat for living resourcest
includinq fish, wildlife and the various
trophic levels in the food web
critical to their well-being;
3. Areas of substantial recreational
value and/or opportunity;
4. Areas where developments and facilities
are dependent upon the utilization of,
or access to, coastal waters;
5. Areas of unique geologic or topographic
significance to industrial or com-
mercial development;
6. Areas of urban concentration where
shoreline utilization and water uses
are highly competitive;

5 - 22

7. Areas of significant hazard, if de-
veloped, due to storms, slides, floods,
erosion, settlement, etc.;
8. Areas needed to protect, maintain
or replenish coastal lands or re-
sources, including coastal flood
plains, aquifer recharge areas, sand
dunes, coral and other reefs, beaches,
offshore sand deposits and mangrove
stands." (R@,
P&P`eTr"_)_

Criteria C: Each question must be answered "yes.11

1. Is the existing resource management
for the proposed GAPC in some way
inadequate?
2.',Can the Coastal Zone Management
Program (as opposed to some other
type of state or local action) ef-
fectively assist in the management
of the proposed GAPC?
3. Within the Coastal Zone Management
Program itself, would the GAPC des-
ignation be more appropriate than
dealing with the area though general
policies outlined in Chapter 2 of the
plan?
4. Is the magnitude or complexity of
the area's problems or opportunities
sufficient to warrant snecial GAPC
designation?
5. Is the value or significance of the
areals resources sufficient to justify
special GAPC designation?

Criteria D: Comments received on GAPC nominations and
the degree of support from property owners
involved shall be considered in staff
recommendations to the Policy Advisory
Committee.

Step 4: The screening process shall be conducted semi-
annually and shall be completed 30 days prior
to the PAC meeting at which the GAPC nominations
shall be discussed. Thirty days prior to the
PAC meeting the results of the screening process
shall be made available to the nominator, the
appropriate unit(s) of government, and property
owner(s) so that additional comnents bv these
parties can be prepared for presentation at the
PAC meeting.

Step 5: PAC shall make recommendations to the Governo r as
to whether a GAPC designation should be made.

Step 6: GAPC designations shall be evaluated by PAC to
determine priority of funding.

5 - 23

D. Effect of GAPC Designation

The designation of an area as a GAPC carries with it the as-
sumption that the area contains natural, cultural or economic
resources which are of significant value and that present manage-
ment is either very complex or highly difficult. Once an
area has been designated, additional funds can be made available
for federal, state and local interests to cooperate in the
development of a management plan for the area which addresses
the special concerns identified through the designation process.
Further, the CZM Act provides for funds on a.continuing basis
to assist state and local government in implementing plans which
are developed. These funds can be used for technical
studies, to,hire staff to administer programs and to do de-
tailed design work.

It must be emphasized that GAPC designation, in and of itself,
does not preclude any activity or provide preference for
one activity over another. Designation simply means that the
area is considered sufficiently important to warrant a detailed
study of the area and development of a management plan which
addresses the issues and concerns which make the area important.

E. Funding

Federal funding for GAPC programs will be provided at the same
matching proportion as funding for the overall CZM program.
Eighty percent of the total costs for GAPC planning will be
paid with federal funds. The remaining twenty percent of the
costs must be borne,by the state, by the locality, or by com-
bining of funds from these two sources. It is not necessary
for the local share of the cost for GAPC programs to be in
actual dollars, however. The local match can also be provided
through in-kind services. In-kind services can be provided
through various methods such as dedication of employee services
to the planning program* by providing office space or clerical
assistance for the planning neetings,a'nd by providing office bquip-
ment to develop GAPC program documents, etc.

Coastal Zone Program funding may be applied for costs incurred
by the local unit of government after the site has been des-
ignated as a GAPC by the PAC. Funding is available primarily
for planning efforts and to cover the cost of developing studies.
Section 315(2) of the CZM Act provides matching funds for
acquisition of public access to public beaches and other public
coastal areas of environmental, recreational, historical,
aesthetic, ecological, or cultural value, and for preservation
of islands. Coastal Zone funding may also be applied to
salaries of personnel who are involved in the implementation
of the plan (e.g. the local zoning adminstrator). Personnel
for maintenance of a GAPC site may also be hired with Coastal
Zone monies.

Coastal Zone Program funds may not be used for construction
purposes at this time.

5 24

Overall federal funding for the Minnesota Coastal Zone Manage-
ment Proqram under the present legislation can continue for a
five year implementation period after the Minnesota C 4 plan is
approved.
F. Steps in Developing Plans for GAPCs 10000e
1. When designation of a GAPC occurs, the geverning body of
the political unit(s) inwhich the GAPC is located will
be notified. In addition, all public agencies which have
management authority or responsiblity for the site will
be identified and contacted. The governing body will be
asked to formally sponsor the GAPC planning program for
each GAPC within its jurisdiction. To sponsor a GAPC,
the governing,board must have management authority over
the nominated area, endorse the nomination of the area for
GAPC designation., agree to be.involved in the planning for
the GAPC when/if designation occurs, and make 'a commitment
to carry out the plan that is developed for the GAPC. In-
volvement by the governing body in the actual planning for
the GAPC can take-place in the form of the body designating
an individual who is a member of the governing body or an
administrative department as the governmental unit's rep-
resentative on the planning group established for the
GAPC. In addition, the governing body involved will re-
view all planning products that are developed for each GAPC,
suggest revisions and submit the documents to the lead
agency/Policy Advisory Committee for final approval.

2i Formation of a Planning Group by Local Unit of Government

a. The sponsoring unit of government.will form a Planning
Committee for each GAPC. If several GAPCs of a similar
nature are within the local governmental jurisdiction,
one Planning Committee could be formed to address all
GAPCs of the same class. Representation on the GAPC
Planning Committee will be determined by the elected
governing body of the sponsoring unit of government.
The governing body may find it desirable to utilize
existing experience by seeking representation from the
local planning commission to be on the GAPC Planning
Committee. Staff from the sponsoring unit of.government
can also be represented on the Committee. The size
of the GAPC Planning Committee may vary up to ten
members. The governing body should determine a
chairperson for the Committee who will have re-
sponsibility for chairing the meetings and communicat-
ing developments to the governing body. The chair-
person will also be responsible for maintaining com-
munication with consultants that have been contracted

5 - 25

with for studies on the GAPC and for ensuring that
plan elements are completed as scheduled. All govern-
mental units and agencies which have been notified
previously will be invited to select a representative
who will act in an advisory capacity to the planning
committee for that individual publicagency. These
representatives can benefit the GAPC planning effort
by providing technical advice to the-GAPC Planning
Committee. A staff planner from the Arrowhead Regional
Development Commission will also be available'to work
with the planning committee. The State Planning Agency
will review products as they emerge from the planning
.process for consistency with adopted Minnesota CZM
policies, and will suggest necessary revisions that will
bring each GAPC program into conformance with these
policies. Ultimate responsibility for development
of the GAPC plan will lie within the local unit of
government in which'the site is located with two
exceptions:

(1) The first exception occurs if the local unit of
government is offered the opportunity for, but
declines,primary responsiblity. In this case a
negotiation process will be entered into with
residents.from the proposed area and the local unit
of government.

(2) The second exception occurs if the site is owned
publicly or is proposed for public ownership.
In this case, the public agency or unit of govern-
ment now owning or proposing to acquire the land
would be responsible for development of the plan.
In any case, however, a Planning Cornittee should
still. be used to develop actual reconmendations.
The local unit of government involved (municipal,
township, or county) will review all functional
elements of the GAPC planning program, suggest
revisions, and submit the final work program
and plan to the Policy Advisory Committee for
final approval.

3. Establishing Management.Polici es for the GAPC

a. Once established, the first duty of the GAPC Planning
Committee will be to develop a set of management policies
for the GAPC. The planning group should assess the
policies which have been adopted,for the overall MCZM
Program by the PAC as management policies for the GAPC
are being formulated. Along with preparation of the
management policies, the planning group will also de-
velop a set of tasks or a work program which need
to be accomplished to achieve the management policies.

5 - 26

If additional work such as consultant or engineering
studies or architectural design work are envisioned as
part of the necessary tasks for accomplishing the
management policies for the GAPC, this should be ad-
dressed in the work program and an estimate of the
costs involved should be addressed in the work program
and an estimate of the costs involved should be included.

b. The management policies arid work program will be sub-
mitted to the appropriate local unit of government for
its review. The local unit will suggest any revisions
it deems desirable. The management policies and work
program for the GAPC will then be submitted to the lead
agency for PAC review and approval.

4. Policy Advisory Committee Approved Management Policies and
Work Program, Planning for the GAPC Begins

With PAC approval of the management policies and work
program for the C2APC, the GAPC Planning Committee will
address their efforts towards accomplishing the work task
contained in the work program. Following are two hypothetical
examples of GAPC planning programs:

a. Type: Developed site in an unincorporated area that
is experiencing problems with sewage contaminationof
both ground water supplies and of streams tributary to
Lake Superior. There are development proposals that
would result in more residences being constructed
in the community.

Description: This site consists of approximately 400
residences, a few commercial developments and a
marina situated on Lake Superior, all within a town-
site that has been lived in for more than sixty years.
The townsite includes a portion of a river which has
substantial sport fishing activity during upstream
spawning migrations of rainbow trout from Lake Superior.
All residences in the townsite have individual on-site
sewage treatment systems. Some systems are failing due
both to age and to the geologic limitations for suc-
cessful operation of the systems which predominate in
this vicinity. Some residents are interested in study-
ing the feasibility of getting a sewage collection and
treatment system to service the entire community.
Because of the marina and sport fishing resource within
the community, there have been development proposals
to construct condominium-type seasonal residences in
the townsite. Some residents do not look favorably
on such proposals because of a stated desire to maintain
the present character of the community.

5 - 27

Planning Group: The county zoning administrator, the
county healtH-officer, a county board member, and in-
terested residents could make up the Planning Committee
for this GAPC. The State Department of Natural Re-
sources and the Pollution Control Agency would be
contacted and asked to provide assistance to the local
planning effort. In addition a planner from ARDC would
be available to assist in the planning efforts.

Plan Financing: Apply for an initial planning grant to
the lead agency under Section 305 or Section 305-1/2
of the Federal CZM Act.

Hypothetical Recommendations of the Planning Group:

1) The county should apply to the state for CZM funds
to contract with a consultant to do a detailed
study for devel@pment of a comprehensive plan and
amended zoning regulations for the townsite.

2) The county should apply for CZM funds to contract
with an engineering consultant to do a feasibility
study for a sewage collection and treatment system
to serve the local population.

3) The county should apply for CZM funds to contract
with an architectural firm to do detailed design
studies for development of a river-oriented park
within the community that would compliment existing
commercial developments.

b. Type: Land to be acquired for waterfront beach park.

Description: This is a 300 acre site with lake access.
The land is in both county and private ownership.
The county would like to acquire the land on which to
develop a park with a nature center and a marina. There
are no improvements currently on the site. A special
turn lane from the nearby state highway might be re-
quired to handle the increased traffic into the area.
The land is presently zoned Residential-1.

Planning Committee: The county zoning administrator,
member of the county board, member of the county park
board, and local citizens. The State Department of,
Transportation, the State DNR could be asked to
provide technical advice to the GAPC planning program.

Plan Financing: Apply for an initial planning grant under
Section 305-1/2 of the Federal CZM Act.

5 - 28

Hypothetical Recommendations of the Planning Group-

1) No rezoning is necessary since a county-owned park
is a permitted use in the Residential-1 zone.
However, special efforts should be made to screen
the boundaries of the park, by leaving or planting
a buffer of vegetation, so that park activities
and neighboring residential developments do not
interfere with each other.

2) The county should apply to the state for CZDI funds
to hire a consultant to do detailed site planning
and architectural design of the park facilities.

3) The.county should apply for 50% federal matching
funds under Section 315(2) of the Federal Coastal
Zone Act which provides funds to acquire public
beach access. In addition, another 20% of the cost
might be financed by the Upper'Great Lakes Re-
gional Commission. Additional funding could also
be sought from the Minnesota Iron Range Resource
and Rehabiliation Board (.IRRRB).

4) The possibility should be explored that CZM funding
might also be used to hire a park administrator.

The above examples are intended to provide some insight into
how the GAPC part of the Coastal Zone Management Program
might operate. Again,-depending on the individual situation
and the members of the planning group, the recommendations
that they make might be quite different. There are often
a range of feasible alternatives that might apply to each
site. Again, it is up to the local governmental unit or
state agency, after evaluating the technical recommendations
of the planning group, to decide on the content of the
GAPC plan.

5. Periodic Review of Planning Progress

The planning program for each GAPC will undergo a review
by the lead agency/PAC at six month intervals to ascertain
whether significant progress is being made. Six months
after PAC approval of the management policies and work
program for the GAPC and at six month intervals thereafter,
all documents which have been produced will be submitted
to the lead agency/PAC. If the lead agency/PAC determines
from their review that significant progress has not been
made, it shall make recommendations towards this end within
thirty (30) days after receiving the documents. If significant
progress is not made after ninety (90) days have elapsed
from the time lead agency/PAC recommendations have been made,
the lead agency shall terminate funding for the GAPC.

5 29

6. After GAPC Management Plan Completion

One of the requirements for the GAPC 'Planning process
described herein is that a public agency or unit of govern-
ment must sponsor and participate in the process. In ad-
dition, the agency or unit of government is required to have
authority to carry out the policies which are developed for
the GAPC, and is further required to indicate a willingness
and intention to carry out the management policies prior
to initiation of the GAPC planning process. The implications
of management planning for a GAPC vary according to the
management policies or objectives which apply in each case.
Federal funding is available for GAPC planning and im-
plementation of the GAPC plan when it is completed. In a
situation where the GAPC is a historic site, the implementa-
tion may take the form of hiring an employee who will be re-
sponsible for administration and general maintenance of
the site. If the GAPC is a developed area that is con-
fronted with pressure for development that would result in
conflicting land uses, implementation can be in the form
of hiring additional personnel to enforce the local zoning
ordinance or setting up an on-going planning council to
address local development issues and to revise the zoning
ordinance. The implementation measures can be as diverse
as the rationales for establishing the GAPCs.

A site will remain a GAPC as long as CZM program funds are being
expended for that particular site.

5 - 30

RETURN TO: Attachment A NO.

Coastal Zone Management Program
Minnesota State Planning Agency
550 Cedar Street
St. Paul , MN 55101

Nominator Other Participants in Nomination:
Organization (if any)-
Address

Phone

Guideshee t for Nominating Geographic Areas of Particular Concern

1) Print the name and general location of the proposed GAPC, including County and
Township or Municipality.

2) What are the boundaries of the area?
a) Please use attached map and be as accurate as possible.
b) Please describe the boundaries using roads, distinquishing
landmarks, structures, etc.
c) Township range and section numbers, if possible.

3) What type of area is it?

5 31

4) Why is the area of particular concern to you and/or your organization?

5) Is the area publicly owned or privately owned?

6) How is the area currently managed? Is more than one political unit or agency
presently involved in managing the area? (Please list)

7) What are the problems, if any, associated with the current use of the area?
What special opportunities or problems do you forsee for the future?

8) In your opinion, how do you think the area should be managed or developed?
(public acquisition, preservation, zoning change, commercial or industrial
development, etc.)

Plese feel free to use the back of this guidesheet for additional information on nomination.
Please use a separate guidesheet for each nomination.

5 32

cim

F
w 9kii
Plan- ung
Process...T. ZONE MANAGEMENT

CHAPTER 6:

ENERGY FACILITY PLANNING PROCESS

Introduction

A. Energy Requirements of the Coastal Zone Act

The Coastal Zone Management Act requires that each state
must include in its coastal zone plan Ila planning process for
energy facilities likely to be located in, or which may sig-
nificantly affect the coastal zone, including, but not limited
to, a process for anticipating and managing the impacts from
such facilities." 305(b)(8) This process must include the
following five elements:.

1. An identification of energy facilities which are likely to
locate in, or which may significantly affect, the coastal
zone;

2. A procedure for assessing the suitability of sites for su
facilities;

3. Articulation of state policies and other techniques for the
management of energy facilities and/or their impacts;

4. A mechanism for coordination and/or cooperative working
arrangements, as appropriate, between the state coastal
planning or management agency and other relevant state,
federal, and local agencies involved in energy facility
planning and/or siting, including conformity of siting
programs, where they exist, with the coastal zone management
program; and

5. An identification of legal and other techniques that can
be used to meet management needs.

In addition, the Act is also explicit as to which energy-related
facilities must be addressed. Table 6-4 on page 6-55 shows how
Minnesota will meet federal coastal zone requirements for these
energy-related facilities.

B. Benefits of the Process

After developing 4 planning process which addresses energy-
related facilities in or near the coastal zone, Minneosta will
qualify for financial assistance from the Coastal Energy Impact
Program to help its coastal communities affected by new or
expanded coastal energy activity. Assistance can take four
forms: planning grants to prepare for on-coming energy activity
and for its socio-economic and environmental consequences;
financial assistance for new or improved public facilities and

new or increased public services required because of new or
expanded coastal energy development; repayment assistance to
the borrowing government when it cannot meet its credit obliga-
tions because actual revenues from the coastal energy activity
are insufficient; and grants to help prevent, reduce, or re-
pair damage to valuable environmental or recreational resources
when the person responsible for the damage cannot be identified
or cannot be charged for the damage.

C. Work Program for Energy Facility Planning

In order to develop the planning process required by the CZM
Act a work program was developed in June 1977. The list
below outlines the steps oil- the work program and indicates
which section of the Energy Chapter addresses each element of the
work program. Elements 1-5 have been completed, while 6-8 remain
to be done during the implementation phase of the coastal zone
plan.

Work Program Elements Secti on

1. Determine what needs to be Energy Requirements of,the
done to meet the requirements Coastal Zone Act
for the 305 portion of the program.

2. Determine whether there is a need Power Plants - Numbers and
to locate any additional energy Location; Other Energy-
facilities in, or significantly Related Facilities - Numbers
near, the coastal zone. and Location

3. Determine what Minnesota already Existing Management
has to offer in planning and Controls
managing for energy-related
facilities.

4. List locational requirements of Site Requirements/Impacts
needed or expected energy
facilities.

5. List anticipated impacts that Site Requirements/Impacts
can be expected by locating
various energy facilities in, or
significantly near, the coastal
zone.

6. Identify those areas within the To be done during coastal
coastal zone that fit the loca- zone implementation
ional requirements listed in No. 4

7. Based upon expected impacts, To be done during coastal
state and national interests, zone implementation
suggest:
a. which facilities could be
located within the coastal
zone;
b. which facilities should be
located outside the coastal

zone.
6 - 2

8. Develop policies, guidelines To be done during coastal
and perforriance standards for zone implementation
the location and operation of
energy facilities.

D. Energy Chapter Format

The Energy Chapter is organized so that certain sections meet
certain federal requirenents. Refer to the chart below for
easy reference. Requirements
1 2 3 4 5

Section

Power Plants
Uumbers and Location x

other Facilities -
Numbers and Location x

Existing Management
Controls x x x x

Coordinational Network x

6 3

I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I SECTION 1:
POWER PLANTS - NUMBERS
AND LOCATIONS
I
I
I
I

Section 1: Power Plants - Numbers and Locations

The issue of how many additional power plants will be needed in
Minnesota depends on future statewide and regional demand for
electrical energy and on energy policy set by Minneosta, other states
and Canada. The issue of where power plants will be located and
what type will be built* is contingent on availability of large
quantities of water and air quality considerations.

A. Statewide Supply and Demand

Statewide as well as regional demand for electrical energy
will determine the need for future power plants in north-
eastern Minnesota and the coastal zone.

In 1976, Minnesota's total electrical capacity was approximately
7,100 MW. The location of existing power plants over 50 MW
in size is shown in Figure 6-1. Currently, power plants in
the state meet approximately 88% of Minnesota's electrical
energy requirements. Three power plants exist within Minnesota's
coastal zone, serving both local needs and mining needs. If
demand for electrical energy increases, it is doubtful these
plants would be expanddd, but rather electrical energy would be
purchased from Minnesota Power and Light Company and United
Power Association.

Predicting the demand for electrical energy in Minnesota
requires examination of the "total energy" picture. In 1976,
electrical energy contributed 9.5% and oil and natural gas,
approximately 86% of the total amount of net energy used in
Minnesota. Coal and wood contributed the-remainder. The,
Minnesota Energy Agency projects that by the year 2000 only
2/3 as much oil and 1/2 to 2/3 as much natural gas will be
available in Minnesota as was available in 1975. The shortfall
of oil and natural gas will be mitigated by conservation and
will be replaced in part by electricalenergy or synthetic
fuels (such as those produced by coal gasification plants).
For purposes of this discussion, we are assuming electrical
energy will be substituted for oil and natural gas.

*Discussion of power plants is limited to coal-fired and nuclear
plants since these will be the most prevalent types of plants built
between now and the 1990s due to economic and technological
considerations.

6 - 7

VIQURE 6- 1

0
MoMoho Huhmwk ftmMUM
REM@ OHM ma angby

REL TRAI I

LRII

;Tn-

ERt MINING C40L

AURORA

SILVER BAY
CLAY BOSWELL

THOM N
PAL. HIBBARD

..A

HOOT LAKE
LE L
50 599 MW: UNIT TYPE
OTTER TAIL 0 STEAM

NUCLEAR
1-0 ILI, HYDRO
0 JET TURBINE
a GRANITE CITY
0 GAS TURE$INE
SHERBURNE
U
ry
NT >- 600 MW

STEARIS
Et.K RIVER
(SOUTH M4EKER STEAM
MONTIC'ELLO
Rl@ERVP
JR. L -
KING
* NUCLEAR
LAC QVI FARLE "R ... HIGH BRIDGE SUMMER RATING (MW)
BLUE LAKE I I
INVER HILLS
m ?"
\--BLACK DOG
sc. I I n PRAIRIE. ISLAN13 o 6 111 go 4o WFs
*Q
(WISCONSIN)
20-
0 W

-D cl
ROCHESTER 05 10 20 40 KLOARTERS

IWISCONSIN)
RTIN Q I
0 FOX LAKE

SOURCE. MINN. STATE PLANNING AGENCY

From 1960 through 1973, total energy use in Minnesota has
grown at a rate of slightly greater than 4% per year. If this
growth rate continues over the next 25 years, the demand for
total energy in Minnesota will be two and one half times as
large-as it was in 1975. This could result in demand for 70,000
M of additional electrical energy by the year 2000, if we
assume a continued annual growth rate of 4% for total energy
-demand, and substitution of electrical energy for shortfalls
,of oil and-natural gas. However, the Minnesota/Wisconsin Power
Suppliers Group in its recent 15-year forecast predicted a net
growth in electrical demand of only 9,200 MW for a total de-
of 16,300 MW by 1990. This prediction assumed growth in
energy demand can be curtailed and electric load management
programs implemented.*

In an attempt to understand the differences in these two
estimates, three scenarios are presented. These scenarios do
not include all possible alternatives nor do they predict the
probability of occurrence for each alternative.

The growth of total energy use depends on public attitudes.
Assume for sake of argument that the total energy growth rate
in Minnesota can be checked and that demand will be the same
in the year 2000 as it is today. This is reasonable since:
1) energy substitution for labor will slow or cease, 2) economic
trade-offs of substituting energy for labor is quickly approach-
,ing equality, 3) air conditioners and televisions are reaching
the saturation point, and 4) amount of energy consumed per capita
will decrease because of conservation programs. If the growth
in demand for total energy is checked, the growth in demand
for electrical energy will be caused by substitution for oil
and natural gas. The three scenarios discussed below reflect
the same demand for electrical energy as today, but assume
different rates of substitution of electrical energy for oil
and natural gas.

Scenario 1 -- Assuming a reduction in total energy proportion
of 30% for oil and natural gas to be replaced by electrical
energy, the proportion of total energy-use supplied by electrical
energy would be about 40% while oil and natural gas would drop
to just less than 60%. This would mean that we would have a
demand for about four times existing demand (7100 MW) or 28,400
MW of electrical energy.

Growth Factor Growth in MW to 2000
4X - 28,400 + 4,200a = 32,600 7,100b = 25,500

Power plants are built to meet peak demand. Load management is
a way of "leveling" out the demand peaks.
a 4,200 MW will probabl y be replaced by the year 2000 for those plants
built prior to 1975.

b existing generating capability in 1976.

6 - 9

Scenario,2 -- This scenario closely parallels the prediction Made
by the Minnesota/Wisconsin power Suppliers Group. In this case,
electrical energy would still substitute for oil and natural gas;
however, total demand for oil and natural gas would be lower
than in Scenario 1, therefore less additional energy would be
required for substitution.

Growth Factor Growth in MW to 2000
3X 21,300 + 4,200a = 25,500 - 7,100b = 18,400

Scenario 3 This scenario can be interpreted several ways.
Either electrical energy would absorb more >30%) of the curtail-
ment in natural gas or oil or absolute demand for electrical
energy would grow considerably during the next 25 years or a
combination of both would occur.

Growth Factor Growth in MW to 2000
6X = 42,600 + 4,200a = 46, 80 0 - 7,100b = 39,700

Translating demand into the numbers of power plants needed by
the year 2000 yields the following estimates:

Growth Factor Growth in MW of 1,600 MW Facilities
All Coal Fired or 2/3 Coal/l/3 Nuclear

3X 18,400 12 8C/4N
4X 25,500 16 11C/5N
6X 39,700 25 17C/BN

The assumptions in developing these scenarios are:

1. Coal will most likely be the major fuel for electrical
power generation.

2. Nuclear fuel technology will play a subordinate role as an
electrical generation fuel.

3. Alternative sources of fuel such as the sun or wind will
not yet be feasible for power plants.

4. Power plants will be built in size increments of 800 or
1,600 MW.

5. All electrical power generation to meet predicted demand
will take place within Minnesota. Energy sharing between
utilities by transmission of energy across state and inter-
national boundaries will be necessary primarily during
peak periods of demand.

a 4,200 MW will probably be replaced by the year 2000 for those
plants prior to 1965.
b existing generating capability in 1976.

6 - 10

B. Northeastern Minnesota Supply and Demand

In Northeastern Minnesota,,demand for electrical energy
energy is expected to grow at 8-10% annually for the next
10-15 years, dropping to 5-6% by,the year 2000. Minnesota
Power and Light Company, which supplies over 90% of the
electricity sold to the mining companies in the region,
bases its forecasts on two major assumptions:

1. Mining will continue to be an economically viable industry
with continued expansion in taconite and eventual develop-
ment of copper-nickel mining.

2. The standard of living will continue to grow, use of energy
will grow because of this and electrical energy will
maintain its present share of the market.

These assumptions allow for expansion of industrial growth
based on specific information obtained from industrial customers,
national studies of the mining industry, and use of historically
based trends to project cornercial and residentialloads. Pro-
jections of industrial demand are based on direct cormiunication
with large industrial customers and national studies of the
mining industry. Projections of residential and commercial
demand are based on analysis of historical trends. The
major portion of load growth will be contributed by mining ex-
pansion and development. Only moderate growth is expected in
the commercial and residential sectors which will expand to
support the industrial growth.

Peak demand in northeastern Minnesota during the summer of
1976 was approximately 1,000 MW. The Minnesota Energy Agency
projects by 1985 that this demand will be close to 1,700 MW
and by 1990, 2,000 MW. This increase in demand reflects the
growth in taconite mining and accompanying secondary and tertiary
developmen@. The estimates given here may be conservative be-
cause the projections do not include the substitution of electrical
energy for oil and natural gas, or the possibility that copper-
nickel mining may occur. (See Figure 6-2).

Estimates of regional demand must be translated into estimates
of additional power plant requirements. Four to six additional
800 MW power plants may be required in northeastern Minnesota
by the year 2000. The larger estimate assumes the development
of copper-nickel mining and taconite mining.

Existing generating capacity in northeastern Minnesota is 850
101. No existing power plants in northeastern Minnesota are
scheduled for retirement by the year 1990. However, two new
power plants are proposed to be operational before 1990: one
500 M. plant near Grand Rapids (Clay-Boswell Unit #4) to be
in service by 1980 and one 800 MW plant at Floodwood to be in

6 - 11

FIGURE 6-2

SYSTEM LOAD FORECAST 1975-1985
60 MINUTE COINCIDENT DEMAND IN MEGAWATTS
ADJUSTED FOR LOSSES

1800

1700
OXXX

xx.-
1600

1500
..........
... .. . .. ..

X..
.... ..... ... ..... . ..

x
. . .. ........I
@X:
1400
...........

1300
-x
v.

X.,

X
X
-w,m: X
1200 ..... .....

..... .... ..
. ..... .......... . ......... N.
.... .... .. ... . . ....
IRON RANGE TACONITE. L DAD
x
X
1100 X:
. ....... ..
x .... ...... ...... X

Xx .. .... .....
::x- K",
1000
. . ...... ..... .... X:
. . .......... ... ..
-X:
X
... . ..........

..... ..... ......... ..
R
... . .. .. ...
d.
. .... ....
..........
. .........
900
x
....... ....... ...
X:
... ........
...........

'x X
-:X. X: ..... .......
xx]:: @.o
..... .. .. ... X i
800
..........
..... ....
-:w -XI...-, . .... ..
.. ... ...... 'X.

x:
700 xx...
.4..;N

.... ......
F

XX
600 :P
.......... ...................

----- -- ------
.............. . .... ... ..... . . . . .
-- - ----------- I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.............
X:
500 -x: x@-
......... ...

............ ........

.... ....... ... :.d.
X..

400

300 &.P%Am.%jlH AREA LOAD

200

100
X.

OTHER LOADS
0 1 1 - I -- - ' I
Years 1975 1976 1977 1978 19796 121980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985

service by 1984. Both Clay-Boswell and Floodwood are outside
the coastal zone. The Energy Agency projects that another
800 M11 plant will be necessary by 1990 to serve the increased
load growth in northeastern Minnesota, and to replace planned
reductions of electrical energy imported to the area. Long-
range requirements may mean construction of two to four additional
power plants in addition to the Clay-Boswell and Floodwood
facilities.

After the four to six additional plants are operational,
growth in demand is expected to drop as taconite mining begins
to peak and copper-nickel mining reaches maturity. However,
the power plant scenario, as with the regional demand pre-
dictions, does not consider the substitution of electrical
energy for oil and natural gas. Consequently, the number of
power plants needed for development in northeastern Minnesota
could be greater than the estimates presented here.

C. Policy Options

In addition to statewide and regional supply and demand and energy
policy set by the state, other states and Canada could have
significant effects on energy facility development in Minnesota.
The Canadian government must approve the sale of power from its
hydroelectric facilities to utilities in Minnesota. Decisions
made by other states on energy facilities outside Minnesota
affect the state's ability to import power, as well as the neces-
sity to export power to other states. For example, if the.proposed
Tyrone Energy Park is not built, additional generating capacity
may be built in Minnesota to satisfy demand in Wisconsin.

Increased coal'development in the Northern Great Plains States
of North Dakota, Wyoming and Montana will affect energy develop-
mQnt in Minnesota. Until recently, western coal was not
competitive with eastern coal because of its lower BTU content
and greater distance from most consuming centers. However,
the higher sulfur content of mosteastern coal has caused coal
consumers to look west for cleaner low sulfur coal. The high
capital costs of underground coal mining has increased the
demand for western coal which can be strip-mined. More
,stringent mine-safety regulations continue to raise the cost of
production and have given western coal a competitive advantage
depending on the location of the consuming center. Western
coal will be mined in the Northern Great Plains for export to
other states, including Minnesota.

Western coal may be exported as solid fuel, or converted to
gas or electricity. The environmental impacts of coal use on
the Northern Great Plains and Minnesota depend on the form. in
which coal is exported. For example, the impacts of rail
traffic and coal slurry pipelines on land use and water use are
Very different. Several generating plants are proposed in
North Dakota to produce electricity from lignite for export to

6 - 13

Minnesota. The people of North Dakota will suffer the impacts
of both mining and electrical generation, while the people of
Minnesota will face the impacts of additional transmission
lines. The,form of coal energy delivered to Minnesota will
affect the state's requirements for additional generating plants.

There are too many uncertainties in supply and demand scenarios,
and developing energy policy to make accurate predictions of
additional generating plant requirements. However, we can examine
the environment of northeastern Minnesota to understand how
it will be affected by additional generating plants.

D. Locational Factors*

Current electrical power generation technology requires large
amounts of water and emission of most of the products of com-
bustion into the atmosphere. The two major constraints in
locating power plants are: 1) the availability of large quantities
of water, and 2) the avoidance of air quality-problbm areas.

Figure 6-3 shows the 7-Day, 10 Year Low Flow of streams in
Minnesota. The St. Louis River has a 7-day, 10 year low flow
of less than 500 cubic feet per second. If demands for the.
use of the St. Louis River continue to grow, consumption of
water from this source may have to be limited eventually.
When these limits are reached, there may be pressure to use
Lake Superior as a'source of water for additional generating
plant deve lopment in northeast Minnesota.

Minnesota faces a number of air quality problems, including
increasing concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide
(S02), particulates, nitrogen oxides (110x), and photochemical
oxidants. of these, S02,partidulates and NOx are the most
important pollutants directly associated with electrical power
generation., Although Duluth is currently not violating
S02 or NOx standards, severe air quality problems could occur
if industrial growth continues at historical rates. Although
maximum mean concentration did not exceed 75% of the ambient
air standards in 1974, future violations are a real possibility.
In addition to ambient air quality standards for S02 and NOx,
Duluth has been designated by the EPA as an Air Quality Maintenance
.Area (AQMA), reflecting possible particulate violations in the next
ten years. An emission source which would affect an AQMA must

We are assuming no major technological breakthroughs in alternative
sources of energy. According to the Great Lakes Basin Commission,
Energy Facility Siting in the Great Lakes Coastal Zone.- Analysis
and Policy Options, "Over the neiH _15-20 years no major changes
in -the technology of large scale power production are expected
to be implemented on a commercial basis." Consequently, discussion
on locational factors is limited to coal-fired and nuclear power
plants.

6 - 14

W
U.
M g)
w a 8
0

Lo 0 0

........... M

p T-

Iff

CV)
c6

c1c Ll

V.- J

1.t

be consistent with the AWMA Plan. Finally, EPA standards
designed to prevent significant deterioration of existing air
quality could limit power plant development in large portions
of northeastern Minnesota. The Boundary Waters Canoe Area
and Voyageurs National Park have been designated Class I areas
while the rest of the state has been designated Class II.
Figure 6-4 estimates the area in which a 1600 MW power plant
could probably be located without causing an air quality
violation in the Class I designated areas (Boundary Waters
Canoe Area and Voyageurs National Park). (This map does
not include Clay-Boswell Unit 4 nor the 800 MW plant planned
for Floodwood.)

Air quality control costs and technology may limit.siting
of power plants in northeastern Minnesota. The location of
power.plants is dictated by: 1) availability of water,
2) avoidance of air and water quality problems-and
3) transportation networks, and in the case of nuclear
plants, land for exclusion purposes.

Duluth, Silver Bay, Cloquet and the Iron Range have been
designated as air quality non-attainment areas for control
of particulates, as required by the Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1977.'Until July, 1979 new particulate emission sources
in these areas may not be constructed unless more than
compensated for by a corresponding trade-off or reduction from
an existing source. A new state air quality implementation
plan now in preparation must require compliance of all sources
in non-attainment areas by no later than July, 1982. New and
more stringent standards for application to coal-fired and
nuclear plants are being considered by the U.S. E.P.A.

6 16

FIGURE 6-4

F@[T 000 Hm C@d

-7

CLASS I AREA

AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE
AREA JAQMA)
MONITOR IN VIOLATION OF
S02 STANDARD
E
LOCATIONS WHERE ADDITIONS TO
S02 LEVEL AT* EXPECTED
l
LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 40 pg/jn3
. .. . . . ElIMPACT TO AOMA
LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 20 pg/m3
M CT 0
AOMA
LOCATIONS WHERE ADDITIONS OF
SO, WOULD EXCEED CLASS I ALLOW-
ABLE

0 a lo 20 4D mEs

05 10 20 4o fmchlFrm

SOURC NCONTROL AGFNCY
17

I
I i I .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I SECTION 2:
OTHER ENERGY-RELATED
.FACILITIES - NUMBERS
I AND LOCATION
I
I I
I -

Section 2: Other Energy-Related Facilities - Numbers and Location

Minnesota is.an importer of energy. Presently, a large portion of
the imported energy comes from the Northern Great Plain States
in the form of coal (15%) and from Canada in the form of oil (25%).

A. Coal Handling Facilities

Due to national air quality standards, western coal has become
attractive as a less expensive source of fuel for power plants
compared to eastern coal. There has been increased use of
western coal for electrical generation in Minnesota. However,
Minnesota has also become a transfer point for western coal
going to destinations farther east through the Duluth-Superior
Harbor located at the western tip of Lake Superior. For in-
stance, the coal-handlin4 facility in Superior, Wisconsin,
was developed primarily to meet the demand of the Detroit
Edison Company for low sulfur coal. This facility has the
capacity to transship 20.million tons annually. As demand
increases in the east for western coal, additional transshipnent,
capacity may be needed in the coastal zone by the 1980s. For
example, an expansion in demand for western coal via Superior
may occur near Buffalo. Niagra-Mohawk Power Corporation is
planning two 850 MW coal-fired plants near Dunkirk, New
York, on Lake Erie, and it is anticipated that both will
require low sulfur coal transshiped through the Duluth/Superior
Harbor as their fuel source.

Currently, western coal is transported to the Duluth-Superior
Harbor via unit trains (90-110 cars, 100 tons per car). How-
ever, once capacity is met on the two rail lines feeding into
Superior, new modes of transportation may become necessary
either in the form of additional rail lines or coal slurry
pipelines.

B. Oil Storage Facilities

In the short-term, curtailment of natural gas will be replaced
by increased use of oil. Pipelines terminating near the coastal
zone may deliver additional petroleum to serve load centers
at Duluth and the Iron Range. Since pipelines deliver petroleum
at a constant rate, and since petroleun, demand is seasonal,
additional oil storage facilities may be necessary in northeast
Minnesota.

C. Transmission Lines

If Reserve Mining expands its processing facilities at Silver
Bay, it is expected to purchase additional electrical energy
from MP&L rather than expand its power plant at the same location.
Minnesota Power and Light Company projects a need for a 230 kV

6 - 21

line from Duluth to Silver Bay by 1981. If this line is approved
by the Minnesota Energy Agency, the route selection process is
expected to commence in 1978 or 1979. Erie Mining Company
also may purchase additional elec@rical energy from MP&L, rather
than expand its generating plant at Taconite Harbor. However,
since Erie's processing plant is located inland from the north
shore, existing transmission lines extending west and south
would probably be used rather than constructing a new line
south. (See below)

TRANSMISSION LINES

probable route for Erie Mining

Evelet

rry
j& F

115 kV line to Two Harbors

FIGURE 6-5

In 1978 a 115 kV line will be built from Duluth to Two Harbors
to serve the needs of North Shore residents.

Facilities which are not likely to locate within or significantly
near the coastal zone include:

1. Coal Gasification Plants

Currently only low BTU gasification is competitive with
oil; however, low BTU gas cannot be economically piped
beyond 1,500 feet. High BTU gas can be piped greater dis-
tances, but currently is not competitive with natural gas
or oil. Therefore, before high BTU coal gasification plants
are built on a large scale, coal gasification technology
will have become competitive with oil and natural gas.

2. Power Plants Involving Direct Solar Energy

Technology will not be available for large scale production
for the next 10 to 15 years.

6 - 22

3. Power Plants Involving ocean Thermal Energy Conservation,
TI-d-alor Wave Power, Wind Power, or Geothermal

Not applicable to Minnesota.

4. Uranium Enrichment Facilities

Not applicable to Minnesota.

5. Facilities to Separate oil, Water and Gas

Not applicable to Minnesota. Such facilities will occur at
point of production. oil is not produced in Minnesota.

6. Drilling Rigs, Platforms, Subsea Completions, and Subsea
Production Systems

Refers to offshore drilling. Not applicable to Minnesota.

7. Construction Yards for Platforms and Exploration Rigs,
Pipe Coating Yards, Bases Supporting Platforms and Pipeline
Installation and Crew and Supply Bases

Refers to offshore drilling. Not applicable to Minnesota.

8. Oil and Gas Storage in Salt Domes

Not applicable to Minnesota.

9. Marine Pipeline Systems, Including Pressure Source, Gathering
Lines, Pipelines, Intermediate Pressure Boosting Facilities,
and Landfall Sites

Not applicable to Minnesota.

10. Transportation Systems for Tankers

Not applicable to Minnesota. Refers to offshore drilling.

11. Facilities, Including Deepwater Ports, for the Transfer of
Petroleum

Not applicable to Minnesota. Duluth-Superior Harbor is not
a deepwater port.

12. Facilities for Geopressurized Gas

Not applicable to Minnesota. Sedimentary geological formations
for geopressurized gas storage do not exist in northern
.Minnesota.

6 - 23

I
I
I
I
I
I -
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I SECTION 3:

EXISTING MANAGEMENT .
I CONTROLS
I
I
I
11

Section 3: Existing Management Controls

The State of Minnesota has several regulatory programs to plan and
manage the impacts of energy facilities. The scope of these pro-
grams is summarized in Table 6-1.

A. Forecasting

The Minnesota Legislature has directed the Environmental Quality
Board (EQB) and the Minnesota Energy Agency (MEA) to collect
data on energy supply and demand within the state to identify
emerging energy trends and to determine the level of statewide
and service area energy needs. The EQB requires biennial sub-
mission of fifteen-year forecasts of additional generating and
transmission facility requirements. The Energy Agency requires
annual submission of fifteen-year forecasts from prime petroleum
suppliers, petroleum pipeline companies, natural gas utilities,
and interstaL"iPelig&.g"n anies_, as well as electric utilities.
Data coll-ected by the Energy-Iggency is stored in the Regional
Energy Information Systems data base (RR18).

The Energy Agency is developing models to use the data stored
in the REIS data base for policy analysis. The Agency has
developed an input-output model that relates energy use to
economic output and employment. The model predicts electric
use in kilowatt hours and total non-electric energy use in BTU
for commercial and industrial energy use for thirty-five
sectors of the economy. A fuel substitution model distributes
total non-electric energy projections to different fuel types
considering relative fuel prices and obstacles to fuel shifts
defined by the current pattern's of consumption. A model is
under development to predict residential fuel use considering
different mixes of building types and different assumptions on
the prices and availability of fuels.

The Legislature has funded an interagency study of the impacts
of increased coal use in Minnesota. The Energy Agency has
identified the current users of coal in the state. Within the
next year, the Agency will prepare five-and ten-year forecasts
of coal use by user type and location. The study will examine
increased coal demand by the mining and paper industries as
well as small users in northern Minnesota.

Statewide projections of energy use are too general for some
planning purposes. The different types of loads for each electric
utility require the application of different forecasting
techniques for each service area. The Agency has developed the
capability to prepare forecasts of electrical energy demand
within the state. Projections of peak demand are important
to evaluate the need for additional generating facilities, as
well as projections of total electrical energy demand. The
Agency is in the process of developing a model to project
electrical demand for each service area.

6 - 27

TABLE 6-1

MINNESOTA REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR ENERGY FACILITIES

Forecasting Certificate of Need Siting Environmental Review

Electric Biennial submission of 15-year Required for any generating plant Sited by the EQE1 if Preparation of an EAW required for
Generating facility forecasts by electric 50 *1 or greater, and any capable of operation construction of electric generating
Plants utilities to the EQB. (Minn. generating plant 5MW or greater at 50 megawatts or plants at a single site designed for
Stat. 116C.54) burning oil, natural gas and more. (Minn. Stat. or capable of operation at a capacity
natural gas liquids. (Minn. Stat. 116C.51-.69) of 200 or more megawatts. (6 MCAR
Annual submission of 15-year M611.02, Subd. 5(a)) 3.024(b) (I ) (c,
facility forecasts by electric
utilities to the Energy Agency. Environmental reports required at
(6 MCAR 2.20208 and 6 MCAR 2.20209 certificate of need and siting steps.
(6 MCAR 3.025(G)(2))

High Voltage Same as above. Required for any HVTL with a The EQB routes HVTL Preparation of an EAW required for
Transmission capacity of 200 kV or greater capable of operation construction of electric transmission
Lines with more than 50 miles of its at 200 kilovolts or lines and associated facilities
length within Minnesota, or with more. (Minn. Stat. capable of operation at 200 kilovolts
a capacity of 300 kV or greater 116C.51-.69) or more, and 50 miles or more in
0) %qith more than 2S miles of length length. (6 MCAR 3.025(B)(1)(d
M
ithin Minnesota. (Minn. Stat.
61-1.02, Subd. 5(b).

OD
Coal The Legislature has directed the Required for any coal gasification No state authority. Preparation of an EAW required for
Gasification Energy Agency to project the facility with the capacity to construction of a new mineral or
Plants demand for coal in Minnesota by process more than 25 tons of fuel processing or refining facility.
5 and 10-year forecasts, by user coal per hour. (Minn. Stat. (6 MCAR 3.024(B)(2)(i)
type and location. The Legislatur( 116H.02, Subd. 5(k))
also directed the Energy Agency to
study the potential for coal
gasification in the state
(Minn. Laws 1977, Ch. 381;10)

MMUM am mom M'@

we ma

Table 6-1 continued.

Forecasting Certificate of Need Siting Environmental Review

Oil and Gas Annual submission of 15-year Required for any facility on a No state authority. Preparation of an EAW required for
Storage facility forecasts for oil and single site capable of storing construction of facilities on a single
Facilities gas storage facilities by more than one million gallons of site capable of storing one million
petroleum and gas Suppliers to crude petroleum or petroleum fuels gallons of liquid natural gas, liquid
the Energy Agency. (Minn. Reg. or oil or their derivatives unless petroleum gas or other liquid fuels.
EA 407B and EA 310B) the facility would be at an (6 MCAR 3.0250)(2)(h)
existing site and would constitute
an increase of more than 20% in thE
storage capacity at that site.
(Minn. Stat. 116H.02, Subd. 5(c)).

The Legislature directed the Required for any facility capable Preparation of an EAW required for
Energy Agency to study the of storing on a single site more construction of an underground storage
state's storage capacity for than 100,000 gallons of liquified facili ty for gases and liquids.
heating fuels. (Minn. Laws natural aas or synthetic gas. (6 MCAR 3.'024 (B)(2)(i)).
1977, Ch. 381, Section 21). (Minn. Siat. 11611.02, Subd. 5(f)).

Required for any underground gas
storage facility. (Minn. Stat.
116H.02, Subd. 5(g)).

@o Pipelines Annual submission of 15-year Required for any pipeline.greater Commissioner of the Preparation of an EAW required for
faci.lity forecasts for pipe- than 6 inches in diameter and Department of Natural construction of a pipeline greater than
lines by petroleum and gas having more than.50 miles of its Resources must approve six inches in diameter and 50 miles
suppliers to the Energy Agency. length in Minnesota used for the project plans for pipe- in length. (6 MCAR 3.025 (B)(2)(g)).
(Minn. Reg. EA 407B and transportation of coal, crude lines before the right
EA 307B). petroleum or petroleum fuels or r)f eminent domain is
oil or their derivatives. granted to the pipeline
(Minn. Stat. 116H.02, Subd. company. (Minn. Stat.
5(d)). 117,49)

Required for any pipeline for
transporting natural or snythetic
gas at pressures in excess of 200
pounds per square inch with more
than 50 miles of its length in
Minnesota. (Minn. Stat. 116H.02
Subd. 5(e)).

Table 6-1 continued

Forecasting Certificate of Need., Siting Environmental Review

Facilities Annual submission of 15-year Required for any facility capable No state authority Preparation of an EAW required for
for the facility forecasts for of storing on a single site more construction of facilities on a
Transfer transmission lines and storage than 160,000 gallons of liquified single site capable of storing one
or Storage facilities for LNG by gas natural cas or synthetic gas. million or more gallons of liquid
ofLNG suppliers to the Energy Agency. (Minn. Siat. 11611.02. Subd. 5(fl)) natural gas or other liquid fuels.
(Minn. Reg. EA 31013) (6 MCAR 3.025 (13)(2)(h)).

Coal The Legislature has directed the Required for any facility to store No state authority The Legislature has directed several state
Storage Energy Agency to prepare five 7,500 tons coal or with an annual agencies to study the environmental impacts
and and ten-year forecasts of state throughput greater than 125,000 of increased coal use, transportation and
Handling coal demand by user type and tons to serve coal-burning handling. (Minn. Laws, 1977, Ch. 381,
Facilities location, and to examine facilities within the state. Section 10)
transportation and handling
system needs. (Minn. Laws 1977, Required for any facility No EAW is required for coal storage and
Ch. 381, Section 10) to transfer more than 300 tons handling facilities. However, preparation
coal per hour or with an annual of an EAW is required for industrial.
throughput of greater than development of 40 or more acres within a
500,000 tons of coal from one floodplain. (6 MCAR 3.024 (B)(2)(c);
mode of transportation to a similar and for harbor and marina projects of more
or diffegnt mode of transportatior than 20,000 square feet of water surface
WMCAR 2 .091-2.0981) area. (6 MCAR 3.024 (b)(2)(s).

C> Petroleum Annual submission of 15-year Required for any petroleum tlo state authority. Preparation of an EAW required for
Refineries facility forecasts for refineries refinery. (Minn. Stat. 116H.02, construction of a new oil refinery
by petroleum suppliers to the Subd. 50)). or an expansion of an existing refinery
Energy Agency. (Minn. Peg. that will increase capacity by 10,000
EA 40713) barrels per day or more. (6 MCAR 3.024
(13)(2)(f)).

Facilities Annual submission of 15-year Required for any pipeline gre3ter ommissioner of the Preparation of an EAW required for
including facility.forecasts for pipelines than 6 inches in diameter and )epartment of Natural construction of facilities on a single
Deepwater and storage facilitics by heving more than 50 miles of its lesources must approve site capable of storing one -Ollion gallons
Ports for the petroieum suppliers to the Energy leng6 in Minnesota used for the )roject plans for pipe- of liquid natural gas, liquid petroleum gas
Transfer of Agency. (Minn. Reg. EA 40713) transportation of coal, crude lines before the right or other liquid fuels. (6 MCAR 3.024(B)(2)(h)

ow I= go, M

Vs am M. low NO so tw,

Table 6-1 continued

Forecasting Certificate of Need Siting Environmental Review

Petroleum pet roleum or petroleum fuels or of eminent domain is Preparation of an EAW required for
oil nr their derivatives. granted to,a pipeline construction of a pipeline greater
(Minn. Stat. 116H.02, Subd. 5(d)). company. (Minn. Stat. than six inches in diameter and 50
117.49) miles in length. (6 MCAR 3.024
Required for any facility on a (B)(2)(g).
single site capable of storing
more than one million gallons
of crude petroleum or petroleum
fuels or oil unless the facility
would be at an existing site and
would constitute an increase of
more than 20% in the storage
capacity of the site. (Minn. Stat
116H.02, Subd. 5(c)).

Nuclear No state authority. Required for any nuclear fuel No state authority. Preparation of an EAW required for
R
I
eprocessing processing facility. (Minn. Stat. construction of nuclear material
ON Facilities 116H.02, Subd. 5(j)) processing plants and facilities.
(6 MCAR 3.024 (B)(2)(el))

W
Nuc ear No state authority. Required for any nuclear Minnesota is under study qo environmental review required.
Waste waste stora e or disposal by ERDA for potential
Disposal facility. ?Minn. Stat. 116H.02, nuclear waste disposal
Facilities Subd. 5 j)). sites. The Legislature
has prohibited the
construction or operation
of a radioactive waste
management facility with-
out express approval by
the Legislature. The
Legislature has prohibite
the transportation of
-adioactive wastes into
;he state for burial or
)ermanent storage without
!xpress approval by the
-egislature. (Minn. Stat
116C.71-.74).

B. Certificate of Need

The Legislature recognized that large energy facilities require
a substantial commitment of the state's resources with sig-
nificant effects on energy supply, the environment and the
economy. The certificate of need program enables an evaluation
of these effects in a public forum. Large energy facilities
that require a certificate of need from the Director of the
Energy Agency include electric power generating plants, high
voltage transmission lines, petroleum and gas pipelines and
storage facilities, petroleum refineries, coal transshipment
facilities, coal gasification plants, and nuclear fuel re-
processing and waste disposal facilities.

In evaluating the need for a propos ed facility, the Director
must consider:

1. The accuracy of the long-range energy demand forecasts
on which the necessity for the facility is based;

2. The effect of existing or possible energy conservation
programs under sections 115H.01 to 115H.15 or other federal
or state legislation on long-term energy demand;

3. The relationship ofthe proposed overall state energy
needs;

4. Promotional activities which may have given rise to the
demand for this facility;

5. Socially beneficial uses of the output of this facility,
including its uses to protect or enhance environmental
quality;

6. The effects of the facility in inducing future development;

7. Possible alternatives for satisfying the energy demand including
but not limited to potential for increased efficiency of
existing energy generation facilities;

8. The policies, rules and regulations of other state and
federal agencies and local governments.

Public hearings provide an opportunity for the public to
participate in the decision-making process. Other agencies
with responsibility for approving the proposed facility are
required to present their position regarding the need for the
proposed facility at the public hearings.

6 32

Within six months after receiving an application, the Director
of the Agency must issue or deny a certificate of need. The
certificate specifies the size, type and timing of the allowed
facility.

The proposed location is known for some facilities at the time
of application for a certificate of need. For example, the ap-
plicant can often specify the location of a proposed oil
storage facility. The application often specifies the end-
points of proposed transmission facilities and oil pipelines.
'However, the location of other facilities is not known at the
need stage, for example, large electric power generating
facilities.

C. Location of Power Plants and Transmission Lines

The Power Plant Siting Act requires the EQB to locate large
electric generating plants and high voltage transmission lines.
The process is guided by the policies and criteria given in the
Power Plant Siting Act and the EQB's regulations. The Board must
designate a site or route within one year after receipt of an
application. This time period may be extended for up to six
months for good cause. The location process includes extensive
public notice, information meetings, a citizens' committee
and public hearings.

Criteria for evaluation of power plant sites and transmission
line routes are found in proposed rules and regulations MEQB
71-100. "The following criteria and standards shall be used
to guide the site suitability evaluation and selection process.
Not all site selection criteria are applicable to all plants
to the same degree.

Power Plants

1. Exclusion Criteria.

a. No large electric power generating plant shall be sited
in violation of any federal or state statute or law, rule
or requlation. No area shall be selected in which
a large electric power generating plant is not licensable
by all appropriate state and federal government agencies.

b. The following land areas shall not be certified as a
site for a large electric power generating plant.ex-
cept for use for water intake structures or water
pipelines: national parks; national historic sites
and landmarks; national historic districts; national
wildlife refuges; national monuments; national wild,
scenic and recreational riverways; state wild, scenic
and recreational rivers and their land use districts;
state parks; nature conservancy preserves; state
scientific and natural areas; and state and nation@tl
wilderness areas.

6 33

c., No area shall be selected which does not have
reasonable access to a proven water supply sufficien't
for plant operation. No use of ground water shall be
permitted where mining of ground water resources will
result. "Mining" as used herein shall mean the
removal of ground water that results in material
adverse effects on ground water in and adjacent
to the area, as determined in each case.

d. No water shall be transferred between the four major
drainage basins within the state: that is, the Missouri
River drainage basin, the Mississippi River drainage
basin, the Lake Superior drainage basin, and the Red-
Rainy River drainage basin.

2. Large Electric Power Generating Plant Avoidance Areas (LEPGP)

a. In addition to exclusion areas, the following land
use areas shall not be. approved for large electric
power generating plant sites when feasible and
prudent alternatives with lesser adverse human
and environmental effects exist. Economic considera-
tions alone shall not justify approval of avoidance
areas. Any approval of such areas shall include all
possible planning to minimize harm to these areas.
These avoidance areas are: state registered historic
sites; state historic districts; state wildlife
management areas (except in cases where the plant
cooling water is to be used for wildlife management
purposes); county parks; metropolitan parks;
designated state and federal recreational trails;
designated trout streams; and the rivers identified
in Minn. Stat. �85.32, Subd. 1 (1971).

b. Avoidance areas also apply to new transportation
access routes and storage facilities associated
with the plant in addition to the plant itself.
Water intake structures and water pipelines
shall not necessarily be prohibited from LEPGP
avoidance areas.

6 34

c. The use of ground water for high consumption purposes,
such as cooling, shall be avoided if feasible and prudent
surface water alternatives less harmful to the environment
exist. Ground water use to supplement available surface
water shall be.permitted if the cumulative impact minimizes
environmental harm.

3. Site Selection Criteria. The following criteria shall be
applied in the selection of sites.

a. Preferred sites require the minimum population dis-
placement..

b. Preferred sites minimize adverse impacts on local
communities and institutions.

c. Preferred sites minimize adverse health effects on
human population.

d. Preferred sites do not require the destruction or major
alteration of land forms, vegetative types, or ter-
restrial or aquatic habitats which are rare, unique, or
of unusual importance to the surrounding area.

e. Preferred sites minimize visual impingement on water-
ways, parks, or other existing public recreation areas.

f. Preferred sites minimize audible impingement on water-
ways, parks, or other existing public recreation areas

g. Preferred sites minimize the removal of valuable and
productive land from other necessary uses.

h. Preferred sites minimize the removal of valuable and
productive water from other necessary uses and
minimize conflicts among water uses.

i. Preferred sites minimize potential accident hazards
and possible effects with respect to geology.

j. Preferred sites permit significant conservation of
energy or utilization of by-products.

k. Preferred sites are located near large load centers.

1. Preferred sites maximize the use of already existing
operating sites.

M. Preferred sites utilize existing transportation systems
unless feasible alternative systems, including new or
upgraded existing substandard systems, have less
adverse impact.

6 - 35

n. Preferred sites allow for larger rather than smaller
generating capacity.

o. Preferred sites minimize adverse impact of transmission
lines."

Transmission Lines

"In selecting a route and issuing a construction permit, the
Board shall seek to minimize adverse hurian and environmental
impact, maximize the efficient use of resources, and ensure
continuing electric power system reliability. No route shall
be designated by the Board in violation of federal or state
statute or law, rule or regulation. No route shall be designated
by the Board through state or national wilderness areas.

1. Designated Lands. Lands designated as state and national
parks and scientific and natural areas by the Congress of
the United States, the Minnesota Legislature or the Com-
missioner of the Department of Natural Resources pursuaint
to Legislative directive have been set aside for the benefit
of the people-and for future generations. No land within any
of these designated areas shall be selected as a high voltage
transmission line route by the Board unless:

a. a route in a designated area would not materially
damage or impair the purpose for which the land was
designated; and

b. unusual circumstances exist in all alternate routes
which would be more severely detrimental to humans or
the environment if any alternate were selected.

Economic considerations alone shall not justify approval
of these designated lands. In the event that such an area
is approved, effort shall be made to minimize the harm
to it.

2. Considerations for the Designation of a Route and Issuance
of a Construction Permit. The Board shall make an evaluation
of the following considerations prior to issuance of a
construction permit. In its evaluation of.route alternatives,
the Board shall consider the characteristics of a given
geographical area, identify the potential impacts and apply
methods to mitigate adverse impacts so that it may select
a route with the least adverse impact.

a. Identification of Geographical Characteristics and
Potential Impacts. The Board shall identify the geo-
graphical characteristics and potential impacts in the
following categories:

6 36

(1) Existing and projected human settlement including
but not limited to development patterns; .. -
(2) Economic operations, including but not limited
to agricultural, forestry and mining operations;
(3) The natural environment and public land, including
but not limited to natural areas, wildlife
habitat, waters, recreational lands, and lands of
historic or cultural significance;
(4) Reliability, cost and accessibility.

b. Methods of Mitigating Impacts. The Board shall utilize
the following methods in seeking to find a route with
the least adverse impact:

(1) Evaluation of existing land use or management
plans, and established methods of resource manage-
ment;
(2) Evaluation of routes along or sharing existing
rights-of-way;
(3) Evaluation of routes along survey, natural division
and field boundaries;
(4) Evaluation of structures capable of expansion in
transmission capacity through multiple circuiting
or design modifications to accommodate future high
voltage transmission lines;
(5) Evaluation of alternate structure types and
technologies."

Before January 1, 1979, the EQB must prepare an Inventory of
Large Electric Power Generating Plant Study Areas. The In-,
ventory will map areas of the state for further study to find
?ower plant sites. A Power Plant Siting Advisory Committee
is currently developing policy on use of air and water re-
sources and fuel transshipment and how it relates to power
plants. The use of Lake Superior for cooling water is an
issue that ultimately must be faced in revising the Inventory.

D. Siting of Other Energy Facilities

The Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources must
approve pipeline routes before the right of eminent domain is
granted to the pipeline company. The Commissioner's evaluation
is based on information collected by the environmental review
process.
The Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) has
the responsibility to site federal radio-active waste re-
positories in deep geologic formations. Minnesota is among
.thirty-six states under study by ERDA in fiscal year 1977 for
potential sites. The ERDA will conduct surveys of the geologic
literature and possibly field work to evaluate the suitability
of granite and quartzite formations in northern Minnesota.

6 - 37

However, the Legislature has prohibited the construction or
operation of a radio-active waste,management facility in
Minnesota without the approval of the Legislature (M.S. S115C.71-
.74). The Legislature has also prohibited the transportation
of radio-active wastes into the state for burial or permanent
disposal.

Although state locational authority is only extended to large
electric generating plants and high voltage.transmission
lines, the siting of other energy-related facilities within
or near the coastal zone will be controlled through the permit
process. Federal and state permits listed in A Compendium of
State and Federal Programs for Potential Consistency Monitoring,
found in Chapter 3, will be Fe-viewed by the EQB for compliance
with the coastal zone plan. If an energy-related facility is found
not to be in compliance with the coastal zone plan or would
significantly affect the coastal zone resources, issuance of a
permit could be denied.

There is also no state siting authority for coal transshipment
facilities. However, the coal impact study funded by the
Legislature may suggest areas for the siting of transshipment
facilities. The study will examine the need for coal transship-
ment sites in northern Minnesota to serve the mining and paper
industries as well as demand east of the state.

E. Environmental Review

The Environmental Policy Act sets environmental policy for the
state and requires environmental review of major decisions.
The Act also requires preparation of an environmental impact
satement (EIS) where there is potential for significant environ-
mental effects from any major governmental action or from any
major private action of more than local significance. Any
action that requires approval by a public agency is considered
a governmental action. The EQB is authorized to prescribe
by rule those circumstances in which an EIS is required.
These regulations will be amended to require environmental
review in any circumstance where any major action is proposed
that would be in violation of the coastal zone plan.

The Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is a form that
describes the proposed project to help determine whether the
"tests" for an EIS are met. The EQB's regulations require
mandatory preparation of EAV7s for an array of projects, includ-
ing all of the energy facilities considered in this plan. In
addition, an EAW may be ordered in response to a citizen
petition or at the initiative of the proposer, the EQB or
other units of government. The EAW concludes with findings on
the*need for an EIS. These findings are printed i 'n a state
publication, the EQB Monitor, to enable interested parties to
review the worksheet and challenge its findings.

The meat of an EIS is the comparison of alternatives to the
proposed action and evaluation of mitigating measures to re-

6 - 38

duce the impact of the proposal. The alternative of different
sites could be considered in greater depth during the environ-
mental review of projects in the coastal zone for which the
state lacks siting authority, such as coal transshipment facilities.

The environmental review process itself cannot stop the
development of a project. The EIS is an information document
to inform decision-makers, public and private, of the impacts
of their actions. Modification of projects often results from
the exchange of ideas in the review process. However, Minnesota
Statutes S116D.04, Subd. 9 grants the EQB authority to re-
verse or modify state decisions that are inconsistent with
state environmental policy. Minnesota's coastal zone plan will
become state environmental policy when approved by the Governor.

F. Permits

A variety of public agencies must approve the construction and
operation of large energy facilities. Currently, local ap-
provals are preempted by state authority for generating plants
and transmission lines that are sited by the EQB. Other
large energy facilities usually require local approval to assure
consistency with local land use plans and ordinances. Upon
approval of the coastal zone plan, local approval will be based
on policy and guidelines outlined in the plan.

The EQB issues a certificate of site compatibility for large
electric generating plants and construction permits for high
voltage transmission lines. Transmission lines and oil pipe-
lines require approval from the Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) to cross streams and state lands. These facilities also
require approval from the Minnesota Department of Transportation
(MN/DOT) and other agencies for road crossings.

Most other large energy facilities require permits from the
Department of Natural Resources, the Pollution Control Agency,
and the Minnesota Health Department. The DNR requires permits
for the appropriation and consumption of public waters, and
for work in the beds of public waters. The PCA regulates air
emissions, water discharges, noise, and solid waste. The Minnesota
Health Department must approve the plans for wells and sewage
systems associated with large energy facilities. All these
permits, as well as many others outlined in Chapter 3, will
have to be in compliance with the coastal zone plan before they
can be issued.

too

6 39

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 4:
I SITE REQUIREMENTS/
IMPACTS
I
I
I
I

Section 4: Site Requirements/Impacts

The impacts of an energy facility depends on its site and design.
Table 6-2 summarizes the major environmental impacts of energy
facilities. The impacts include consumption of resources (such
as water), and the production of wastes (such as'air enissions,
reject heat and solid waste). The greatest environmental impacts
are attributable to facilities that process fuels (such as re-
fineries), and to facilities that convert energy from one form
to another (such as generating plants and gasification facilities).

Table 6-3 summarizes the site requirements of large energy facilities.
The requirements include land requirements, water requirements,.
access to the transportation network and distance from sensitive
areas. Petroleum pipelines, transmission lines and oil and gas
storage facilities impose few resource requirements,.except for
land requirements. In contrast, facilities to process energy or
convert energy from one form to another such as refineries or gen-
erating plants require a greater investment of,resources.

6 43

TABpE 6-2

IMPACTS OF ENERGY CO101ENTS
FACILITIES

>1 Id
14 0J W

0
ri 0
%
"4
In

Electric generating i
plants Fossil i Y X Y, Y X Y M Y Emissions of@ sulfur oxides, particu-
lates and trace elements to air.
Significant thermal releases. Signi-
ficant co'nsumption of water. Impacts
attributable to the transportation
Of fuel.
nuclear Y M Y Y M H Nuclear plants release chronic low-
Electric Generating" level radiation.: Very low proba-
Plants bility of a major accident releasing
Rreater levels of radioactiviti-
High voltage Trans-
mission lines N N N N N N M N Aesthetic disruption. Interference
witbother land-uses.
Gasification plants Y M Y Y M Y K Y Emissions of sulfur oxides, particu-
lates, and trace elements to air.
Significant thermal releases and con-
sumption'of water. Impacts attri-
butable to transportation of fuel.
Coal Storage and
Handling Facilities N Y N M M 7 May be a significant source of partic-
K M
ul:t: emissions. Water use and solid
wa t production may result from coal
washing. Other impacts are attribut-
able to transportation of coal by rail,.
barge and truck.
Petroleum Refineries Y Y Y N M K M Major source of sulfur oxide and
hvdrocarbon. emissions
Facilities including
deepwater ports for x M N M N N M Y Potential for contamination of surface
the tr
water with oil spills at the transfer
,.t.,.J:::fer of point.

oil and Gas
Storage Facilities N M N N N M N Potential for contamination @f
groundwater or surface water from a
failure of the tank.
Petr laum.
Pipeolines N M N t@ M N X 14 N Potential for contamination of
groundwater or surface water from a
failure of the pipe.
Facilities for the
trailsfer or N N
N N M M Potential for fire or explosion from
stozage of LNG release of LNG.
Nuclear reprocessing
facilities Y M Y Y Y y N M Greater chronic releases of radio-
activity than other steps of the
uranium fuel cycle. Low probability
of greater releases from a major
accident. Potential for radioactive
r
eleases from transportation of
oactive materials to and from
radi
the site.
Nuclear waste
disposal facilites Y i M Y M Y M Chronic low-level releases of radio-
7 ity-significant thermal releases.
I activ
KEY: Y Significant impact 6 44
N Not significant
X May be significant
*effects mainly from assoc. transportation systems.

@4 MR4 0 IV 0 0 0 Cn '0 m
n '0 m n QQ
n M 0
m
.4 rt rv OM 0 -0
0
0 0 k@ 00 Im .1 n
m 0m H M 0
ON CD 1@ A rt
go 0
It
I " , w , m 0
m 0 n' 101, -0 (A @h t@
rt m 0 n I.,
F@ 0
Pj F@ H
0 m n tr 0 0
04m (D go It 0
0 m M- -M 93
OQ0 00
Pn, 03 m
93 m

-4 -4 z z -4 Z -4 .4 Access to Wate
or Process Wat

Access to Wate
Transportation

Z z @4 -4 x 4 Access to Rail

4@ Access to Pipe
Ln i4 z @4 @4 -4 X z z

14 14 z @4 @4 @4 z .4 4 Access to Hig

.4 14 z z z L4 @4 Distance from
Centers

.4 x z 14 Ustance from

z z t4 @4 z z Requires Linea
Way

.4 -4 S4 z z 14 Mquires More
Acres in a Blo

IV 0 0 04 -4 @d 0 a
M I., M rl I-
nn nn I-n ,'n' 8 0
P@ k- r 0 1-1 @O M@& H t- :r n ;S
HM o lu M F' 0 0
F@ H F@ CA ,I rt mH
" R 9 " n 1@ o H 1@
0 01@ 0 m 95 H F, n
M M$0 M 4m
0 an N 0 UQ 0 0 (IQ 0
1 110 m n m 93 M M m
0 0 0 0 v &. M 9 1@ :1 0M
n w 11 m rt 0 1., go
t:o m 0 0 H ts 0
W ;d M r M rt
m M 03 wo 0. rr =1 lb 1@ " @L I--
.0 v @L rt aqm M 00 i; M rt
c 0 0 m M M W
0 09 QQ

n 0m
0M
R,
M
m
m

-4 z Access to Wate
or Process Wat

z z z z Access to Wate
Transportation

z X X 4 .4 4 z Access to Rall

2: .4 @4 .4 z W. Access to Pipe
Ln

.4 -4 2: 4 @4 @4 4 14 4 Access to Hig

@4 .4 z z z L4 @4 Distance from
Centers

z Z @4 X z r4 @4 Ustance from

z -4 @4 14 z t4 &4 @4 L4 z Requires Linea
Way

.4 @4 z %4 z -4 X .4 z Requires More
Acres in a Blo

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I SECTION 5:
COORDINATIONAL NETWORK
I
I
I
I

Section 5: Coordinational Network

Coordination between state coastal planning and relevant state,
federal and local agencies involved in energy facility planning
will be assured due to the position the State Planning Agency has
on the Environmental Quality Board and the Policy Advisory Committee.
(See Chapter 3 - Organization and Authorities for a detailed
discussion of the organizational structure for coastal zone im-
plementation.) The Diagram below outlines the more relevant
points from Chapter 3 relating to energy development in the coastal
zone,'

DIRECTOR OF SPA

Chairman, Environmental Chairman, Policy
Quality Board Advisory Committee

1. SPA will review the 1. Energy-related facilities,
Power Plant Siting other than power plants,
Program and permits usually require local
of other state agencies approval consistent
for compliance with with local plans.
.,the coastal zone plan.

EQB will not issue 2. Coastal zone plan
permits if they are not will become local
in compliance with state plan.
policy.

3. Coastal zone plan will 3. Locals mu st comply with
become state policy upon coastal zone plan.
adoption by Governor

4. State agencies on EQB 4. SPA will monitor
will review federal compliance.
counter-parts issuing
permits for energy-re-
lated facilities;
if not consistent, EOB
will recommend not
issuing permit.

5. EQB will monitor permits
of federal agencies with
no state counterpart.
C
Q

6 49

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I SECTION 6:

CONCLUSIONS
I
I
I -

Section 6: Conclusions

Minnesota's existinq regulatory process can be adapted to energy
planning for the coastal zone. Data collection and forecasting
programs enable the state to anticipate energy needs. The state
holds review and permitting authority for all of the energy
facilities considered in the plan. The review process is coordinated
by the Environmental Quality Board which has authority to suspend
or modify any state decision. (See Chapter 3 - Organization
and Authorities.) The public has an opportunity to participate
in each step of the regulatory process.

Some steps of the planning process can be buttressed for facilities
that may affect the coastal zone. For example, special conditions
can be attached to certificates of need to protect coastal re-
sources not regulated by other state authority where these
conditions would tip the balance between a "needed" and "not needed"
judgment. The environmental review of pipelines and coal trans-
shipment facilities can consider alternate sites and designs in greater
depth for projects affecting the coastal zone. The EQB Monitor
can be used to a greater extent to notify the interested public of
each step in the regulatory process for energy facilities affecting
the coastal zone,

The state should examine the need for additional authority to site
pipelines and coal transshipment facilities. Like large electric
facilities, these are facilities with significant energy and
environmental impacts that evoke a high degree of public concern-.
Like electric utilities, pipeline companies are also delegated
the right of eminent domain upon the approval of the Commissioner
of the Department of Natural Resources.

The planning process recognizes the problems associated with the
long lead time required for the planning of some energy facilities.
The long lead time required for large electric facilities and pipe-
lines makes forecasting demand more difficult and less accurate.
Additional state review of energy facilities affecting the coastal
zone should be incorporated into the existing time framework to
the maximum extent possible without compromising the review process.

The planning process recognizes that the relationship of a proposed
facility to the coastal zone is often not known at the preliminary
stages of state review. For example, the proposed location of a
large electric generating plant is often not known at the certificate
of need stage. In these cases, the evaluation of impacts of pro-
posed facilities on the coastal zone must be focused on the later
stages of the regulatory process.

6 - 53

The energy planning process recongizes that the impacts of an
energy facility often are not confined to its immediate site.
Some energy facilities located outside the coastal zone may have*a
significant impact on coastal resources. For example, an electric
power plant twenty miles inland nay significantly affect the air
quality of the coastal zone. Facilities proposed outside the
coastal zone are more difficult to monitor and incorporate in the
coastal zone planning process. State and local officials must
recognize the significance of impacts on the coastal zone as
projects are'proposed.

Minnesota's planning process must recognize the national interest
in the coastal zone's natural resources, and its relationship to
the energy supply network. The beauty of the north shore is more
than a statewide resource. The energy supply network that supplies
Minnesota extends far beyond the state's boundaries. In addition,
Minnesota cannot be parochial; it must recognize its interdependence
with the rest of the world for energy supplies.

Minnesota's planning process for energy facilitie s is accompanied
by conservation programs that recognize the environmental impacts
of energy facilities and the limits to traditional energy supplies .
The state plays an active role in educating the public on the need
for energy conservation. The state administers grant programs to
encourage research and development of innovative conservation
practices and the development of alternative energy sources. The
state has incorporated energy standards in the state building code,
banned decorative gas lamps, limited the use of outdoor display
lighting, set efficiency standards for room air conditioners,
banned pilot lights on new appliances and prohibited the heating
of enclosed parking areas. Further regulation of the end-uses of
energy may be required.

The matrix shown in Table 6-4 represents a graphic summary of work
activities conducted within this Chapter. As such it shows how
the planning requirements of the CZM Act dovetail with the energy-
related facilities which must be considered. It also shows that
several additional work activities will be conducted during the
implementation phase of the program which will result in additional
management controls and policies. In the first activity, (work
element 6, page 6-2)the coastal zone will be exanined in relation
to energy facility impacts and requirements which were discussed in
a previous section. From this analysis, it will be determined which
facilities could locate in the coastal zone with minimal human and
environmental impacts and which facilities should be located out-
side the coastal zone (see work element 7). From the above analysis,
additional policies and guidelines will be developed for the
management and control of energy-related facilities locating within
or significantly near the coastal zone.

6 54

TMLE 6-4

cf'i@"@' IZone Energy Requirements
T@. mall.gement program must In-
clude ann1ng process that
can anatiplipate and manage the
impacts from energy facilities
in or significantly affecting
the state 's coastal zone.
2 3 4 5
An identification of A procedure**for Articulation of state policies and A mechanism for coordination and/ An identification of
energy facilities assessing the suit- other techniques for the management or cooperative working arrangements. legal and other techniques
which are likely to ability of sites of energy facilities, and/or their as appropriate, between state coastal that can be used to meet
locate in, or which for such facilities. their impacts. planning or management agent and mnagement needs.
significantly affect. other relevant state, feder.@, . nd
the coastal zone. local agencies involved In energy
facility planning and/or siting, in-
electric generating ------- forecasting and state siting authority cluding conformity of siting programs,
plants, including certificate of need EAW where they exist, with the coastal zone
those involving (CN) management program.
fossil or biomass
fuels, nuclear
power,
direct solar ------------- not applicable not applicable
:nergy, ocean thermal
nergy conversion,
tidal or wave power,
Ind power. or geo-
thermal energy
Wpetroleum refineries ------ forecasting/C11 EAW
and associated ------------- (pipelines-forecast- EAW/permit
facilities ing/CN)

gasification -------------- special study/CN EAW
plants
facilities used for ------- forecasting/CN EAW
the transportation.
conversion, treat-
ment, transfer, or
storage of LNG

uranium enrichment not applicable
or nuclear fuel pro-
ceasing facilities -------- CN EAW

nucl ar waste ------------- CN ERBA study
disp: sa 1*_
f11c ilities to separate ---- not applicable not applicable
oil, water and gas
drilling rigs, platforms;-not applicable not applicable
:ubsea completions, and
ubsea production systems
.9
construction yards for ---- not applicable not applicable
platform and exploration
rigs, pipe coating yards,
bases supporting platforms ZE ff;=
and pipeline installation
:nd crew and supply bases
I
I and gas storage ------- forecasting/CN EAW .2
cilities, including . US a
lt domes ---------------- not applicable not applicable
C1
marl ne pipeline systems,--not applicable not applicable N
Including pressure source.
sa

gathering lines. pipeline, -V -C -am -0
intermediate pressure
boosting facilities, and
landfall sites
oil and gas processing --- not applicable not applicable
facilities

transportation systems ---- not applicable not applicable
for tankers

facilities, including forecasting/CN EAW/permit
deepwater parts. for the (deepwater parts-
transfer of petroleum not applicable)
facilities for geo - ------ not applicable not applicable
pressurized gas

terminals which are
associated with the
,egoing
%/hol 'Jh voltage trans- forecasting/CN state siting authority
m
mission lines*** EAW
oal storage and ---------- special study/CN special study/EAW for industrial 4- 4-
V6andllng facilities*** development of greater than 40
acres in size in the floodplain
/
2
ur.
A@ed
a P; s Ing
.N it, of
bil
far Sur
.hf,

*Substantial or potentially substantial changes in coastal zone resources; includes changes in land, air, water, minerals,
flora. fauna, noise and objects of historic, cultural, archaeological, or aesthetic significance; can also include concepts
_outlined In the NEPA of 1969
Procedure must also include a capability to evaluate al.ternative sites and to determine if a potential site Is appropriate
given these assessments.
*@not included In coastal zone rules and regulations. 6 55

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I

SECTION 7:
1 TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS
I
I I - -

section 7: Tentative Recommendations

1. The Minnes ota Energy Agency.should conduct a detailed study
of coal use within the coastal zone.

2. The use of Lake Superior as a cooling water should be studied.

3. Environmental Assessment Worksheets for facilities outside the
coastal zone should include an evaluation of impacts on the
coastal zone.

4. State location authority should be extended to pipelines and
coal transshipment facilities.

6 59

References

1. Coastal Zone Management Act, Rules and Regulations, Sec. 920.18,
Federal Register, Vol. 42, No.' 83, April 29, 1977.

2. Great Lakes Basin Coruqission, Energy Facility Siting in the
Great Lakes Coastal Zone: Analysis anTPolicy Options,
January, 1977.
3. Hynes, John -(Interview),.Acting Director, Power Plant Si@ing,
Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, July, 1977.

4. Minnesota Energy Agency Minnesota's Energy Situation: A
Biennial Report to the Governor and the Legislature, St. Paul,
Hir-n-nesota, January, 1976.

5. Minnesota Power and Light, Certificate of Need Hearings,
Transcripts.

6. Minnesota State Planning Agency, Future Electrical Energy
Resource Demands, St. Paul, Minnesota, December, 1976.

7. Minnesota/Wisconsin Power Suppliers Group, 1976 Advance
Forecasting Report to the Minnesota Environmental Quality
To- -ar d .

8. Murphy, Michael J., Northern Great Plains: Issues and options
for Suppliers and Users, Upper Midwest Council, July, 1975.

9. Wallen, Dick (Interview), Director, Certificate of Need Program,
Minnesota Energy Agency, August, 1977.

6 - 60

Magoon m"m wommowwm M@wm

"N m
00
on
(
m
D
CA
CP
8

N
9
C. A ER 7
CA

CHAPTER 7:

MINNESOTA SHORELINE EROSION/MITIGATION PLANNING PROCESS

Objective: To assess the effects of erosion along stream banks
and the shorelands of Lake Superior in Lake, Cook
and St. Louis Counties, Minnesota, and to develop
management policies and techniques for addressing
shoreline erosion including mitigation, controll
and restoration of areas which are or may be
adversely affected by erosion.

Planning Elements:

The State of Minnesota will.review, collect and analyze information,
as needed, to understand shoreline erosion causes and effects.

Through this planning element, the state will determine:

1. Methods for designating.areas where shoreline erosion controls,
restoration practices and/or mitigation are needed.

2. Short- and long-term program planning elements necessary to
provide continuing surveillance, monitoring, and policy and
technique refinement and implementation.

3. Methods for funding and other techniques which can be used to
meet management needs.

The State of Minnesota will establish a technical group to collect,
review, and analyze data, as needed, and make recommendations and
suggestions to the PAC for implementation.

The group will:

a. review, evaluate and provide comment on the completeness and
applicability of work study planning elements 1 through 7 which
pertain to their areas of concern.

b. develop suggested work schedules;

c. appear before a public forum to discuss their findings and
recommendations and to provide for public input on shoreline
erosion problems, concerns and recommendations;

d. based on the results of items a, b, And c above, develop
a final detailed work schedule;

e. if approved by PAC, the group will imple ment the work schedule,
establish a public informational process to report on periodic
work programs, procedures, problems and accomplishments, and
present for public consideration a recommended shoreline
erosion management program which incorporates each of the
planning process elements.

The State of Minnesota will establish a comprehensive planning
process to provide necessary facts and/or details concerning:

1. Shoreline erosion causes.

2. Shoreline erosion effects.

3. State policies and programs for mitigation or,control of erosion.

4. Designation of areas for erosion control and/or restoration.

5. Procedures for dealing with erosion causes and effects.

6. Mechanisms for continuing refinement and implementation of
policies and techniques.

7. Funding programs and techniques that can be used.

Following is an outline which further discusses and explains
the planning process elements, their relationships to one another
and the final anticipated product.

7 2

OUTLINE OF SHORELINE EROSION PLANNING ELEMENTS

Causes of shoreline erosion.

A. Natural Factors

1. Character of the shoreline

(a) Determination of types and location of:

(1) soils
(2) rock
topography-
(4) vegetation

(b) In-lake physiographic setting:

(1) 'o pen lake -shoreline
(2) bays and inlets
(3) estuaries
(4) other areas e.g. barrier reefs, islands,etc.

(1)' winds
(2) temperatures
(3) precipitation
(4) freezing and thawing
(5) storris
(6) other factors

(d) Measurement of wave actions and currents

(e) Measurement of lake levels and fluctuations

B. Man-Made Factors

1. Private developments

2. Public developments

7 - 3

Explanation of Planning Element 1:

Although considerable data are available concerning the physical
character of the shorelands of Lake Superior in Minnesota, it is
necessary to carefully review and analyze these available data as
they relate to factors which directly or indirectly cause
lor.
or influence erosion of shorelines of Lake Super'

The surficial geology of the Minnesota Shoreline of Lake Superior
has been mapped and these data are available, but no offshore
studies have been initiated to measure wave climatology, long-
shore currents, sediment transport and nearshore bathymetry.
Such studies are necessary in order to make rational decisions for
coastal zone management.

A major responsibility of the technical group will be the
development and implementation of a comprehensive,program of
basic data collection and continuing monitoring of the natural
factors and their causative effect on shoreline erosion.

Previous Coastal Zone Management efforts have furnished data
on the publicand private shoreline development of the area,
but there has been no study of the affects, if any, of these
developments as causes of shoreline erosion. The technical
group will evaluate this parameter to determine its
importance.

In summary, the assessment of causes of shoreline erosion will
involve identification of the natural and man-made factors which
cause or contribute to coastal shoreline erosion. It will also
provide information on the degree of importance of the factors
involved and the areas of influence of the factors. In addition,
the assessment will provide a rational program for continuing
surveillance and monitoring of the factors.

7 4

2. Shorelineerosion effects

A. Susceptibility of areas to erosion

1. Present observable effects:

(a) on private property
(b) on public property

2. Possible future effects:

(a) on private property
(b) on public property

Explanation of Planning Element 2:

Investigations were made of erosion and flooding damages along
the Lake Superior shoreline under contract with the U.S. Corps
of Engineers. These investigations included circulation of
questionnaires, random sampling, aerial photo review and review
of newspaper accounts of changes. The data provided important base-
level knowledge of the effects of shoreline erosion, but did not
provide in-depth detailed facts for the entire shoreline. In
addition, in most cases,.the damage.cost data were not reviewed
and evaluated by professional staff skilled in making such
determinations.

There was also no attempt to determine the possible future effects
of shoreline erosion on public and private property.

The technical group will develop and implement a comprehensive
program to thoroughly investigate the present magnitude, degree
and location of shoreline erosion as well as the possible future
location and extent of erosion if no remedial measures are taken.
Additionally, a monitoring and observation program will be
established to maintain continuing review of shoreline erosion
effects.

The results of the study on effects, in combination with the results
of the study*on causes, will be used to provide the background
methodology, techniques, and measures for dealing with shoreline
erosion problems.

7 5

3. State Policies and Programs for managing shoreline to mitigate,
control and/or restore areas subject to, and/or adversely
affected by, erosion.

A. Assessment of existing state laws, programs, and policies.

1. Statutory.

2. Departments or agencies.

3. Local governments.

B. Assessment of possible proposed state laws, programs, and
policies.

1. Statutory.

2.- Departments or agencies.

3. Local governments.

Explanation of Planning Element'3:
Minnesota has a wide variety of programs and policies relating to
the use and development of water and land resources. These programs
and policies range from case-law determinations to statutory laws
to state department and agency rules, regulations and policies
and to local government regulations, ordinances, and policies.

Non-structural alternatives will be subject to the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes Chapter 105.485 and the Rules and Regulations
which have been promulgated in furtherance of this law. (See page
7-15)

Structural alt ernatives will be subject to the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes,.Chapter 105. Applicable portions of the statute are as
follows: Note especially Minnesota Statutes 105.44 relating to en-
vironmental review.

105.38 DECLARATION OF POLICY. In order to conserve and utilize
the water resources of the state in the best interests of the
people of the state, and for the purpose of promoting the nublic
health, safety, and welfare, it is hereby declared to be the policy
of the state:

(1) Subject to existing rights all waters of the state which serve
a material beneficial public purpose are public waters subject
to the control of the state. In the determination of whether
a beneficial public purpose exists, specific evidence of the
present or future beneficial public purpose shall be evaluated

7 - 6

in accordance with section 105.37, subdivision 6, and with
reference to the existing land use of the area,.the soil types
surrounding and underlying the'water, the ownership of the land
surrounding the water, the relative-agricultural and wildlife
productivity of the area, and relevant provisions of a,
county or municipal shorelands ordinance enacted pursuant to
section 105.485. The public character of water shall not be
determined exclusively by the proprietorship of the underlying,
overlying, or surrounding land or on whether it is a body or
stream of water which was navigable in fact or susceptible of
being used as a highway for commerce at the time this state was
admitted to.the union. This section is not intended to affect
determination of the ownership of the beds of lakes or streams.

(2) The state, to the extent provided by law from time to time,
shall control the appropriation and use of surface and under-
ground waters of the state.

(3) The state shall control and supervise, so far as practicable,
any activity whichchanges or which will change the course,
current, or cross-sect'ion of public waters, including but not
limited to the construction, reconstruction, repair, removal,
abandonment, the making of any other change, or the transfer
of ownership of dams, reservoirs, control structures, and
waterway obstructions in any of the public waters of the
state.

105.39 AUTHORITY AND POWERS OF COMMISSIONER. Subdivision 1.
Water conservation program. The commissioner shall devise and
develop a general water resource conservation program for the
state. The program shall contemplate the conservation, al-
location, and development of all the waters of the state,
surface and underground, for the best interests of the people.
The commissioner shall be guided by such program in the is-
suance of permits for the use and appropriation of the waters
of the state and the construction, reconstruction, repair,
removal, or abandonment of dams, reservoirs and other control
structures, as provided by sections 105.37 to 105.55.

105.41 PENALTIES. Whoever does any of the following is guilty
of a nisdemeanor:

(1) Undertakes or procures another to undertake an alteration
in the course, current, or cross-section of public waters
or appropriate waters of the state without a permit from *
the commissioner previously obtained regardless of whether
the comnissioner would have granted'a permit had an ap-
plication been filed;

7 - 7

(2) Undertakes or procures another to undertake an alteration in
the course, current, or cross-section of public waters or ap-
propriates waters of the state.in violation or in excess of
authority granted pursuant to a permit duly issued by the
commissioner, regardless of whether an application had '
been filed for permission to perform the act involved,,'or
whether the act involved would have been permitted had a pro-
per application been filed;

(3) Undertakes or procures another to undertake an alteration in
the course, current, or cross-section of public waters or ap-
propriates waters of the state after a permit to undertake such
project has been denied by the commissioner.

(4) Violates any other provision of this chapter.

105.55 COMMISSIONER'S ORDERS, ENFORCEMENT. Upon application of
the commissioner, the district court of any county in which the
project is wholly or partially located, may by injunction, enforce
the compliance with, or restrain the violation of, any order of
the commissioner made pursuant to sections 105.37 to 105.55, or
restrain the violation of sections 105.37 to 105.55.

105.42 PERMITS; WORK IN PUBLIC WATERS. Subdivision 1. It shall
be unlawful for the state, any person, partnership, association,
private or public corporation, county, municipality or other
political subdivision of the state, to construct, reconstruct,
remove, abandon, transfer ownership, or make any change in any
reservoir, dam or waterway obstruction on any public water; or in
any manner, to change or diminish the course, current or cross-
section of any public waters, wholly or partly within the state,
by any means, including but not limited to, filling, excavatinq, or
placing of any materials in or on the beds of public waters, with-
out a written permit from the commissioner previously obtained.
Application for such permit shall be in writing to the com-
missioner on forms prescribed by him.

This section does not apply to any public drainage system lawfully
established under the provisions of chapter 106 which does not sub-
stantially affect any natural watercourse or any lake basin which
serves a beneficial public purpose.

The commissioner, subject to the approval of the county board,
shall have power to grant permits under such terms and conditions
as he shall prescribe, to establish, construct, maintain and
control wharfs, docks, piers, levees, breakwaters, basins, canals
and hangars in or adjacent to public waters of the state except
within the corporate limits of cities.

Subd. la. The commissioner shall recornend by January 15,
1975, to the legislature a comprehensive law containing standards
and criteria governing the issuance and denial of permits under
this section. These standards and criteria shall relate to the

7 - 8

diversion of water from other uses and chanqes in the level of
public waters to insure that projects will be completed and
maintained in a satisfactory manner. The commissioner may by
rule identify classes of activities in waterbasins and classes
of watercourses on which the corunissioner may delegate permit
authority to the appropriate county or city under such guide-
lines as the commissioner may provide based on agreement with
the involved county or city and in conplaince with the require-
ments of secton 105.45. After November 15, 1975, a permit
shall be granted under this section only when the project con-
forms to state, reqional, and local water and reldted Idnd
resources management plans, and only when it will involve a
minimum of encroachment, change, or damage to the environment,
particularly the ecology of the waterway. In those instances
-where a major change in the resource is justified, permits
shall include provisions to compensate for the detrimental
aspects of the change."

In unincorporated areas and, after January 1, 1976, in corporated
areas, permits that will involve excavation in the beds of
public waters shall be granted only where the area in which the
excavation will take place is covered by a shoreland conserva
tion ordinance approved by the commissioner and only where the
work to be authorized is consistent with the shoreland conserva-
tion ordinance. Each permit that will involve excavation in
the public waters shall include provisions governing the de-
position of spoil materials.

No permit affecting flood waters shall be granted except where
the area covered by the permit is governed by a flood plain
management ordinance approved by the commissioner and the
conduct authorized by the permit is consistent with the flood
plain management ordinance, provided that the commissioner has
determined that sufficient inforriation is available for the
adoption of a flood plain ordinance. No permit involving the
control of flood waters by structural means, such as dams,
dikes, levees, and channel improvements, shall be granted until
after the commissioner has given due consideration to all other
flood damage reduction alternatives. In developing his policy
with regard to placing emergency levees along the banks of
public waters under flood emergency conditions, the corramis-
sioner shall consult and cooperate with the office of emergency
services.

No permit that will involve a change in the level of public
waters shall be granted unless the shoreland adjacent to the
waters to be changed is governed by a shoreland conservation
ordinance approved by the commissioner and the change in water
level is consistent with that shoreland conservation ordinance.
Standards and procedures for use in deciding the level of a
particular lake must insure that the rights of all persons are
protected when lake levels are changed and shall include pro-

7 - 9

visions for providing technical advice to all persons involved,.
for establishing alternatives to assist local agencies in re-
solving water level conflicts, and mechanics necessary to pro-
vide for local resolution of water problems within the state
guidelines.

Subd. 2. Nothing in this section shall prevent the owner of
any dam, reservoir, control structure, or waterway obstruc@_ion
from instituting repairs which are immediately necessary in case
of emergency. However, the owner shall notify the conmissioner
at once of the emergency and of the emergency repairs being
instituted and, as soon as practicable, shall apply for a permit
for the emergency repairs and any necessary permanent repairs.
Nothing in this section shall apply to routine maintenance, not
affecting the safety of the structures.

In case of an emergency where the commissioner declares that
repairs or remedial action is immediately necessary to safe-
guard life and property, the repairs shall be started immediately
by the owner.

Subd. 3. The owner of any dam, reservoir, control structure,
or waterway obstruction constructed before a permit was re-
quired by law shall maintain and operate all such dams, re-
servoirs, control structures, and waterway obstructions in a
manner approved by the commissioner and in accordance with any
rules and regulations promulgated by the commissioner in the
manner prescribed by chapter 15.

105.44 PROCEDURE UPON APPLICATION. Subdivision 1. PERMIT.
Each applications for a permit required by sections 105.37 to
105.55 shall be accompanied by maps, plans, and specifications
describing the proposed appropriation and use of waters, or the
changes, additions, repairs or abandonment proposed to be made,
or the public water affected, and such other data as the com-
missioner may require. This data may include but not be limited
to a statement of the effect the actions proposed in the permit
application will have on the environment, such as: (a) changes
in water and related land resources which are anticipated; (b)
unavoidable but anticipated detrimental effects; (c) alternatives
to the actions proposed in the permit. If the proposed activity,
for which the permit is requested, is within a city, or is
within or affects a watershed district or a soil and water
conservation district, a copy of the application together with
maps, plans and specifications shall be served on the secretary
of the board of managers of the district and the secretary of
the board of supervisors of the soil and water conservation
district and on the mayor of the city. Proof of such service
shall be included with the application and filed with the com-
missioner.

7 - 10

Subd. 2. AUTHORITY. The commissioner is authorized to receive
applications for permits and to grant the same, with or without
conditions,'or refuse the same as hereinafter set forth. Pro-
vided, that if the proposed activity for which the permit is
requested is within a city or is within or affects a watershed
district or a soil and water conservation district the com-
missioner may secure the written recommendations of the managers
of said district and the board of supervisors of the soil and
water conservation district or the mayor of the city before
granting or refusing the permit. The managers or supervisors
or mayors shall file their recommendation within 30 days after
receipt of a copy of the application for permit.

Subd. 3. WAIVER OF HEARING. The commissioner in his discretion
may waive hearing on any application and make his order granting
or refusing such application. In such case, if any application
is granted, with or without conditions, or is refused, the
applicant, the managers of the watershed district, the board of
supervisors of the soil and water conservation-district, or the
mayor of the city may within 30 days after mailed notice thereof
file with the commissioner a demand for hearing on the applica-
tion together with the bond required by subdivision 6. The
application shall thereupon be fully heard on notice as here-
inafter provided, and determined the same as though no previous
order had been made. Any hearing pursuant to this section
shall be conducted as a contested case in accordance with chapter
15. If the commissioner elects to waive a hearing, and if no
demand for hearing be made, or if a hearing is demanded but no
bond is filed as required by subdivision 6, the order shall
become final at the expiration of 30 days after mailed notice
thereof to the applicant, the managers of the watershed district,
the board of supervisors of the soil and water conservation
district, or the mayor of the city and no appeal of the order
may be taken to the district court.

Subd. 4. TIME. The commissioner shall act upon all applica-
tions, except for appropriations for irrigation, pursuant to
section 105.44, subdivision 8, within 30 days after the ap-
plication and all required data is filed in his office; either
waiving hearing and making an order thereon or directing hearing
thereon.

Subd. 5. NOTICE. The notice of hearing on any application
shall recite the date, place and time fixed by the commissioner
for the public hearing thereon and shall show the waters af-.
fected, the levels sought to be established or any control
structures proposed. The notice shall be published by the
commissioner at the expense of the applicant or, if the pro-
ceeding is initiated by the commissioner in the absence of an
applicant, at the expense of the commissioner, once each week
for two successive weeks prior to the day of hearing in a legal
newspaper published in the county in which a part or all of the
affected waters are located. Notice shall also be mailed by the
commissioner to the county auditor and the mayor of any municipal-
ity or the watershed district and the soil and water conserva-
tion district affected. The commissioner shall also fulfill
any notice requirements prescribed by section 15.0418 and rules
of the chief hearing examiner.

Subd. 6. HEARING COSTS. Except where a public hearing is
demanded by a public authority which is not the applicant, the
applicant shall pay the following, if the commissioner's action,
taken pursuant to subdivision 2, is affirmed without material
modification: (1) Costs of the stenographic record and trans-
cript, (2) Rental expenses, if any, of the place of hearing,
(3) Costs of publication of orders made by the commissioner;
however, in no event shall the applicant pay more than $750.

Where the public hearing is demanded by a public authority
-which is not the applicant, the public authority making the
demand shall pay the costs and expenses listed above if the
commissioner's action is affirmed without material modifica-
tion. An applicant filing a demand for a public hearing shall
execute and file a corporate surety bond or equivalent security
to the state of Minnesota, to be approved by the commissioner,
and in an amount and form fixed by the commissioner. The bond
or security shall be conditioned for the payment of all costs
and expenses of the public hearing if th'e commissioner's action
taken pursuant to subdivision 2 is affirmed without material
modification. No bond or security is required of a public
authority which demands a public hearing. The commissioner, in
his discretion, may waive the requirement for a bond or other
security. In all other instances, costs of the hearing shall
be borne in the manner prescribed by in chapter 15 and the
chief hearing examiner.

Subd. 7. SUBPOENA AUTHORITY. The commissioner may subpoena
and compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of
all books and documents material to the purposes of the hear-
ing. Disobedience of every such subpoena shall be punishable
as a contempt in like manner as a contempt of the district
court on complaint of the commissioner before the district
court of the county where such disobedience or refusal occurred.

105.45 PER11ITS AND ORDERS OF COMMISSIONER; NOTICE. The com-
missioner shall make findings of fact upon all issues necessary
for determination of the applications considered by him. All
orders made by the commissioner shall be based upon findings of
fact made on substantial evidence. He may cause investigations
to be made, and in such event the facts disclosed thereby shall
be put in evidence at the hearing or any adjournment thereof.

If the commissioner concludes that the plans of the applicant
are reasonable, practical, and will adequately protect public
safety and promote the public welfare, he shall grant the
permit, and, if that be in issue, fix the control levels of
public waters accordingly. In all other cases the commisioner
shall reject the application or he may require such modifica-
tions of the plan as he deems proper to protect the public
interest. In all permit applications, the applicant has the
burden of proving that the proposed project is reasonable,
practical, and will adequately protect public safety and promote
the public welfare.

7 - 12

In granting a permit the commissioner may include therein such
terms and reservations with. respect to the amount and manner
of such use or appropriation or method of construction 'o-r. op
eration of controls as appears reasonably necessary for the
safety and welfare of the people of the state.

Notice of all orders made after hearing shall be given by publica-
tion of the order once each week for two'successive weeks in a
legal newspaper in the county where the hearing was held, and
by mailing copies of the order to All parties who entered an
appearance at such hearing.

The commissioner shall make his order pursuant to hearing with-
in 60 days after the completion of the hearing.

105.46 TIME LIMIT. The commissioner shall fix the time within
which all construction authorized in the permit must be com-
pleted, or within which the appropriation or use of water must
be made, which time shall not exceed five years from the date of
the permit. Such time may be thereafter extended by the com-
missioner for good cause shown. Permits granted in connection
with the mining, transporting, concentration or shipment of
taconite as defined in Minnesota Statutes 1945, Section 93.20,
and permits granted in connection with the mining, production
or beneficiation of copper,copper@nickel or nickel, shall be
irrevocable for the term thereof without the consent of the
permittee, except for breach or nonperformance of any condition
of the permit by the permittee and the commissioner may allow
and prescribe therein such time as he deems reasonable, regard-
less of the limitations of time contained in this section, for
the commencement or conpletion of any construction or operations
under such permit, or the exercising of the rights granted
thereunder, or may extend such time, for cause shown, upon
the application of the permittee.

105.461 ORDERS TO RESTORE. As a part of any order granting or
denying a permit, whether or not a hearing has been held, the
commissioner may order the applicant to take any Action neces-
sary to restore the public waters or beds thereof to the con-
dition existing before unlawful activities, if any, were under-
taken by the applicant. This restoration may include, but not
be limited to, filling beds unlawfully dredged, removing fill
unlawfully placed, or restoring water unlawfully appropriated.
If a hearing on the application was not held, the applicant
may, within 30 days of the receipt of an order to restore
public waters or beds, contest the order and shall be afforded
a contested case hearing in the manner prescribed by chapter
15.

7 - 13

105.462 INYESTIGATIONS; ORDERS WITHOUT A PEP14IT APPLICATION.
When the commissioner determines that'the public interest so
requires, he may investigate on his own motion any activities
being conducted in relation to public waters without a permit
as required by sections 105.37-to 105.55. With or without a
public hearing the commissioner may make findings and issue
orders as otherwise may be issued pursuant to sections 105.37
to 105.55. A copy of his findings and order shall be served
upon the person to whom the order is issued. If the commissioner
issues his findings and order without a hearing, the person to whom
the order is issued may file with the commissioner a demand for
a hearing, together with the bond required by section 105.44,
subdivision 6, within 30 days after being served with a copy of
the commissioner's order. Thereafter the matter shall be heard
in the same manner and pursuant to the same laws as an applica-
tion is heard following a demand made under section 105.44,
subdivision 3, insofar as applicable. However, if no demand
for hearing is made by the person to whom the order is issued
under this section, or if that person demands a hearing but
fails to file the required bond, the commissioner's order be-
comes final at the expiration of 30 days after the person is
served with the order and no appeal of the order may be taken
to the district court.

105.463 CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY. It is unlawful for any
agent, servant, or employee of another to undertake work for
which a permit is required pursuant to section 9,8.48, sub-
division 9, this chapter, or section 106.021, unless a copy of
the permit authorizincr such work is posted on or near the
premises upon which_sd@@h work is conducted. The violation of
this section constitutes a separate and independent offense
from any other--provided by sections 105.37 to 105.55.

In order to determine the effectiveness and applicability of the
various laws, policies and programs it is necessary to review
and analyze them to determine their value, coripleteness, and
effectiveness as the basis for a shoreline erosion management
program. It will be necessary to determine if there are con-
flicts in the laws and policies and if they can stand alone as a
series of related laws and policies or if they must be further
revised, added to and/or combined to form a single law and
series of related policies.

7 - 14

105.W REGULATION OF SHORELAND DEVELOPMENT. Subdivision 1.
In furtherance of the policies declared in section 105.39, and chapter 116, it
interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to provide guidance for the
wise development of shorelands of public waters and thus preserve and enhance the Subd. 6. Municipal shoreland management. Before April 1, 1974, each munici-
quality of surface waters, preserve the economic and natural environmental values of pality having shoreland within its corporate limits shall submit to the commissioner,
shorelands, and provide for the wise utilization of water and related land resources of for his review, any ordinances, rules, or regulations affecting the use and development
the state. of its shorelands. The commissioner shall review the ordinances, rules, or regulations
Subd. 2. Definitions. For the purposes of this section the terms defined in this and determine whether they are in substantial compliance with municipal shoreland
section have the meanings given them: (a) "Shoreland" means land located within the management standards and criteria promulgated pursuant to subdivision 3. In making
following distances from the ordinary high water elevation of public waters: (1) Land his review the commissioner also shall consider any feature unique to the municipal
within 1,000 feet from the normal high watermark of a lake, pond, or flowage; and (2) shoreland in question, including but not limited to the characteristics of the waters
land within 300 feet of a river or stream or the landward side of flood plain delineated which may be affected by development, storm sewer facilities, and sanitary and waste
by ordinance on such a river or stream, whichever is greater. (b) "Unincorporated disposal facilitieg'in existence at the time of the commissioner's review. If the commis-
area" means the area outside a city. (c) "Municipality" means a city. sioner determines that the ordinances, rules, or regulations of a municipality do not
Subd. 3. Commissionees duties. liefore April 1, 1974, the commissioner of natu- substantially comply with the state standards and criteria for municipal shoreland
ral resources shall promulgate, in the manner provided in chapter 15, model standards management, he shall so notify the municipality and shall indicate to the municipality
and criteria, other than a model ordinance, for the subdivision, use, and development the changes which are necessary to bring the ordinances, rules, or regulations into
of shoreland in municipalities, which standards and criteria shall include but not be substantial compliance with state standards and criteria. Within one year after receiv-
limited to those listed below in regard to unincorporated areas. Before July 1. 1970, ing this notice from the commissioner, the municipality shall make the changes neces-
the commissioner of natural resources shall promulgate, in the manner provided in sary to bring the ordinances, rules, or regulations into substantial compliance with
chapter 15, model standards and criteria for the subdivision, use, and development of state standards and criteria. If a municipality has no ordinance, rule, or regulatioh af-
shoreland in unincorporated areas, including but not limited to the following: (a) The fecting the use and development of shoreland on, April 1, 1974, it shall adopt such an
area of a lot and length of water frontage suitable for a building site; (b) the place- ordinance, rule, or regulation complying with state standards and criteria for munici-
ment of structures in relation to shorelines and roads; (c) the placement and construc- pal shoreland management,,before July 1, 1975. If (a) a municipality has no ordinance,
Alon of sanitary and waste disposal facilities; (d) designation of types of land uses; (e) rule, or regulation affecting the use and development of shoreland on April 1, 1974,
--changes in bottom contours of adjacent public waters; (f) pr ,eservation of natural and fails to'adopt such an ordinance by July 1, 1975, or if (b) the corporate bounda-
shorelands. through the restriction of land uses; (g) vafiances from the minimum Stan- ries of the municipality are expanded to include shorelands not previously included
dards and criteria; and (h) a model ordina:nc*e-. Thi'following agencies shall provide within the municipal boundaries and the municipality fails to adopt such an ordinance
such information and advice as may be necessary to the preparation of the rules and within one year after including the shorelands within its municipal boundaries, or if
regulations, or amendments thereto: The state departments of agriculture, economic (c) the coramissioner determines that a municipal shoreland management ordinance
development, and health; the state planning agency, the pollution control agency, the does not substantially comply with the state standards and criteria for municipal
Qn state soil and water conservation board; and the Minnesota historical society. In addi- shoreland management and that the municipality has failed to make the necessary
tion to other requirements of chapter 15, the model standards and ordinance promul- changes within one year after receiving notice of noncompliance, the commissioner
gated pursuant to this section, or amendments thereto, shalf not be filed with the sec- may adopt an ordinance, rules, or regulations for the municipality in the following
retary of state unless approved by the executive officer of the state board of health manner. The commissioner shall hold at least one public hearing on the proposed ordi-
and the director of the pollution control agency. nance, rules, or regulations in the manner provided in section 462.357, after giving no-
tice as provided in section 462.357. The ordinance, rules, or regulations are effective
Subd. 4. Failure of county to act; commissioner's duties, enforeemenL If a for the municipality on the date and in accordance with such regulations relating to
county fails to adopt a shoreland conservation ordinance by July 1, 1972, or it the compliance as the commissioner shall prescribe. The ordinance shall be enforced as
counnissioner of natural resources, at any time after July 1, 1972, after notice and provided in section 462.362. The penalties provided in section 462.362 apply to viola-
hearing as provided in section 105.44, finds that a county has adopted a shoreland tions of the ordinances, riules, or regulations adopted for,the municipality by the com-
conservation ordinance which fails to meet the minimum standards established pur- missloner. The costs incurred by the cornmissioner in adopting the ordinances, rules.
suant to this section, the commissioner shall adapt the model ordinance to the county. or regulations for the municipality shall be paid by the municipality and collected
The commissioner shall hold at least one public hearing on the proposed ordinance in from the municipality in the same manner as such costs are paid by a county and col-
the manner provided in section 394.26, after giving notice as provided in section lected from a county pursuant to subdivision 5; and any tax levied to pay the costs
394.26. This ordinance is effective for the county on the date and in accordance with shall be levied in excess of any limitation as to rate or amount, but shall not cause the
such regulations relating to compliance as the commissioner shall prescribe. The ordi- amount of other taxes which are subject to any limitation to be reduced in any
nance shall be enforced as provided in section 394.37. The penalties provided in sec- amount whatsoever.
tion 394.37, apply to violations of the ordinance so adapted by the commissioner.
Subd. 7. Municipal use of land other than shoreland. Municipal planning and
Subd. 5. Costs. The cost incurred by the commissioner in adapting the model land use controls for land other than shoreland in the vicinity of shoreland shall be, to
ordinance to the county pursuant to subdivision 4 shall be paid by the county upon the maximum extent practical, compatible with planning and land use controls for
the submission to the county of an itemized statement of these costs by the commis- shoreland adopted pursuant to subdivision 6.
sioner. If the county fails to pay these costs within 90 days after the commissioner's
statement is received, the commissioner may file a copy of the statement of these Subd. 8. Extent of authority of municipality. Nothing in Laws 1973, Chapter
costs with the county auditor of the county for collection by special tax levy. The 379 shall be construed to prohibit a municipality from adopting and enforcing ordi-
county auditor, upon receiving a statement from the commissioner, shall include the nances, rules, or regulations affecting the use and development of shoreland which are
amount of the state's claim in the tax levy for general revenue purposes of the county. more restrictive than the state standards and criteria.
This additional tax shall be levied in excess of any limitation as to rate or amount, but [ 1969 c 777 s 1; 1969 c 1129 art 3 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1973 c 379 s 1-3.5;
shall not cause the amount of other taxes which are subject to any limitation to be re- 1975 c 271 s 6, 1976 c 149 s 59
duced in any amount whatsoever. Upon completion of the tax settlement. following
this levy, the county treasurer shall remit the amount due to the state to the commis-
sioner for deposit in the state treasury.

4. Methods for designating erosion areas as areas of particular
concern or areas for preservation/restoration.

Explanation of Planning Element 4:

Based on the assessments and implementation of the preceding
elements, it is necessary to establish a program which will
result in adequate protection and controlover those areas
where shoreline erosion problems are significant and require
attention.

The fii@dings and programs developed under the various elements.
would be considered by PAC in proposing methods for protection
and control of specific areas as the urgency of-the situation
requires. The type and method of ultimate control will depend
upon the particular causes and effects, the most applicable
types of solutions, and the most applicable legal and policy
framework which fits the situation.

7 16

5. Assessment of possible procedures for handling erosion causes
and effects, including methodologies and estimated costs.

A. Structural alternatives

B. Non-structural alternatives

C. No control alternatives

Explanation of Planning Element 5:

There are a number of presently available methods, techniques
and programs which have been or could be utilized to provide
varying degrees of solution or mitigation of the causes and
effects of shoreline erosion. These vary from purely structural
methods, such as breakwaters, groins, slope stabilization,
etc., to purely non-structural alternatives, such as zoning
controls, setback regulations, restrictive-permitting, etc.

Not all solutions are applicable to all situations and
similarily,in some instances, the best solution is to do
nothing and let the natural processes occur.

The technical group would review and analyze data on shoreline
erosion causes and effects to determine the general and
specific programs,-methods and techniques which would be
best applicable to solve or mitigate shoreline erosion
problems. This would entail careful consideration.of the
most practical and economically favorable solutions to
deal with the shoreline erosion problem for a particular
reach of shoreline6

At the present time, the State of Minnesota does not have
a sufficient understanding of the coastal processes at work along
the Minnesota shoreline of Lake Superior to develop adequate
criteria for dealing with erosion causes and effects. The
surficial geology of the coastal areas was mapped within the
past year, but no off-shore studies have been initiated to
measure wave climatology, longshore currents, sediment transport
and nearshore bathymetry.

Such studies are an absolute necessity if the State is to make
rational decisions concerning coastal zone management.

A modest pilot study of aerial photographs of a 35 km stretch
of the North Shore was recently completed by the Department of
Geology and Geophysics at the University of Minnesota. A com-
parison of air photos taken in 1948 and 1970 revealed that
along 7% of the shoreline, the beach regressed by as much as

7 - 17

20 meters in the 22 year periodi and along.6% of the shoreline
the beach transgressed by as much'as 12 meters. This indicate's
that the nearshore environment is very dynamic in certain areas:
beach morphology changes considerablyand sediment movement is
significant. The net long-term effect of these nearshore
processes may not be one of significant erosion or deposition
compared to some regions of the Wisconsin shoreline on Lake
Superior, for instance. But sediment transport in the near-
shore zone could be seriously disrupted by man-made structures
that were emplaced without regard to this process, and thereby
give rise to serious problems of erosion or sediment infilling.
A much publicized example of this kind of coastal mismanage-
ment is in southern California. The coastline along Santa
Barbara was in equilibrium, suffering no problems of progradation
or erosion,until the breakwater was built there to create
a small harbor. The breakwater structure soon caused prefer-
ential deposition of sand within the harbor and beach erosion
down-current (to the southeast) of the harbor. If the State
of Minnesota is to prevent such problems along the North Shore,
it must undertake studies of the off-shore environment as soon
as possible.

Studies of nearshore processes on the North Shore should be
continued. This would first entail a detailed examination of
aerial photos, of the entire Minnesota shoreline, that cover
a period of about 40 years. The results of the photo study
would identify regions of most intense shoreline fluctuations
and would serve to focus subsequent studies in these potential
problem areas. The subsequent studies would include measurements
in areas of interest of wave.energy, longshore and off-shore
currents, sediment transport, and changes in off-shore bathymetry.

7 18

6. Assessment of short and long-term program planning elements
to insure continuing surveillance, monitoring and program
and policy refinement and implementation.

Explanation of Planning Element 6:

Since a viable planning process must be dynamic and responsive
to changes and since knowledge of shoreline erosion causes,
effects, and possible treatment is dependent upon continuing
observation, monitoring, evaluation and research, it is neces-
sary to ensure that the shoreline erosion manaqement program
is flexible and comprehensive.

The task forces will provide periodic expert review and con-
mentary on the status, applicability and viability of the various
program elements in order to assure that the program includes
current technological and legal advances.

For example, the results of monitoring a reach of shoreline
over a period of time may disclose that the predicted erosion
effects may be of greater impact than originally determined.
This may require establishment of a different course of action
in order to control or alleviate the problem. Through develop-
ment of a continuing assessment and appraisal program, such prob-
lems can be addressed using the best available technologies
and legal means.

7 19

7. Assessment of funding programs and.,other techniques that can
be used to meet management needs:

A. Determination of:

1. Federal interests

2. State int@erests

3. Local interests

B. Determination of:

1. Level of management responsibility

2. Level of financial responsibility

Explanation of Planning Element 7:

Since the success of the shoreline erosion management program
will depend on the continued concern and involverient of the
various parties impacted by the program, it is necessary to
carefully develop a program which recognizes the needs, con-
cerns and responsibilities of the parties.

The results and programs of the various other planning elements
will be reviewed to determine as reasonably as possible the
extent of interest, concern and financial and management re-
sponsibility of each of the parties involved. This will en-
tail careful considerations of the value of particular reaches
of shoreline to various parties, the benefits which the
various parties receive if shoreline erosion is adequately
controlled and the willingness of the parties to enter into
cooperative programs including financial as well as personnel
and administrative commitments.

The entire program's success will depend on the development of
a program which is guided by the state in cooperation with the
federal government, but which is administered at the lowest
organized practical unit of local government.

The degree of financial input must be based on the value of
the program from national, state and local perspectives and
must include continuing support after initial program establish-
ment.

Since the local government will, in most instances, have the
least ability to bear major financial costs, there must be
adequate provisions for substantial assistance from state and
federal sources, where applicable.-

7 20

It is especially important that the program include con-
tinuing high levels of expert technical input and that there
be an open process for public involvement, interaction and
participation during the program development and after the
program is established and operating.

7 21

3 6668 14103 1916