On the Home Front

Developers, homeowners brace for pier review

By Rick Romano

This pier is exempt from oversight under the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resource's pier statute. Photo courtesy of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

There are hundreds of lakes, ponds and rivers dotting the Wisconsin landscape.

There are hundreds of thousands of piers stretching out into all those waterways. And the fate of many of those piers — and many that might one day be built — rests in the hands of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

The DNR last year created a statute exempting the most basic piers and pier construction from oversight. Now, the agency is proposing to the state Legislature a set of revised regulations that would add to the original statute a permitting element for non-exempt piers.

The DNR maintains the new regulations are meant to clarify acceptable pier configuration and construction.

“The rules are very clear, and our Web site explains all the details as well as how to determine if piers are in compliance,” said Liesa Lehmann, the DNR’s waterway policy coordinator.

The original statute defines exempted single piers as being no wider than 6 feet; extending into the water the length needed to moor a boat or use a boat lift or to a 3-foot water depth, whichever is greater; and having up to two boat slips for the first 50 feet of property shoreline and one more for each additional 50 feet.

Lehmann said the DNR estimates that 84 percent of existing piers are in compliance. With a state-estimated 500,000 existing structures, about 80,000 piers would need to come under permit review. Permits would either be general permit issues that cost $50 or individual permits that would range from $300 to $500 for larger, commercial marinas.

Under the DNR's proposed statute revisions, this pier complex must get a site-specific individual permit and comprehensive review to assure it is designed and located properly. Photo courtesy of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

Those who represent pier owners and real-estate interests forecast that the permit-based rules will be a hard sell. They argue that owners of existing piers won’t easily accept the regulations, and some of the rules might make it difficult, at best, to develop multifamily projects.

Tom Larson, director of regulatory and legislative affairs for the Wisconsin Realtors Association, said the regulations negatively impact property rights as well as pocketbooks.

“We would like to see all existing piers be grandfathered in and not be reviewed,” he said. “We don’t think it would be fair to subject property owners to tearing out what they already have.”

Paul Kent, an attorney with the firm of Anderson and Kent in Madison, represents the Riparian Owners and Marine Contractors Association. While noting that some form of regulation makes sense from a water-use-right-of-way viewpoint, he agreed that existing structures should not be affected by the new regulations.

“There needs to be an easier way to deal with existing piers,” he said. “What really hurts is the limit on the number of boat slips allowed.”

It’s not an easy proposition, he said, for the many homeowners who already own more than two water crafts. In addition, Kent and Larson pointed out that the restriction of boat slips could affect the development of condos, though Lehmann insisted the waterfront footage regulation won’t hinder new construction.

How effectively the regulations can be applied is also debatable. Kent noted that, new construction aside, the difficulty in regulating the approximately 80,000 existing piers will likely pit neighbor against neighbor.

“What typically happens is that a pier owner would be turned in by a neighbor,” he said. “And it will be the result of a dispute that has nothing to do with the pier.

Personally, from a public policy perspective, relying on a neighbors’ dispute is not good.”

Lehmann, again pointing to the details of the new regulations, disagreed.

“The rules will be so clear that everyone will know who is and who is not in compliance,” she said. “If neighbors are in disagreement over something, it won’t be about this.”