To view or leave comments on this story, click HERE.
(Editor’s Note: Sylvia Rombis, who owns waterfront property on the Old Mission Peninsula, says she just wants the rules and regulations of the Township to be adhered to and enforced. She urges the Township to stick with one boat hoist per 50 feet of shoreline. Read on for her thoughts outlined in a letter to the Peninsula Township Planning Commission. -jb)
Old Mission Gazette is Reader Supported.
Click Here to Donate and Keep the Gazette Going.
Dear Commissioners Shipman and Hall and Trustees,
I am writing today with great concerns about the laws overseeing the management of the number of hoists allowed on lakefront along Old Mission Peninsula. We have been owners of our lakefront property on Peninsula Drive for 19 years. We have 125 feet of lakefront. My understanding of the current regulations concerning the number of boat hoists is one hoist per 50 feet of frontage.
In 2020, there were six hoists in place on our neighbors’ 320 feet of frontage owned by Bayside Woods Association. In 2021, the hoists increased to 11. Currently, there are 13 hoists there, more than double the legal limit. Clearly, this is a violation of the current laws.
I understand that there is a Planning Commission committee set up to study the dock/hoist situation and possibly make a recommendation to the Township Board to INCREASE the allowance to three hoists per 50 feet of frontage. If the new recommendations were to become law, as an example, within the span of approximately 800 feet to the north and south of our property, there would be a maximum of 45 allowable hoists. This would make our stretch look more like a marina than a residential lakefront.
If implemented, during the summer, my lakefront neighbors and l would not only see an assemblage of docks and hoists, but also the sounds of 45 boats motoring out and back at all times during the day and night. In addition to the obvious visual and noise pollution, we would have the disturbance and wake of each of these motor crafts. The Co2 and other pollution of 45 boats is significant, and the effects of such emissions is well documented as very detrimental to the ecology of the lake.
We routinely clean up a variety of debris that washes up on our shores — bottles, cushions, dock pieces, straws, bags, food containers, cigarettes, fireworks debris, syringes, plastic bags, fast food containers, glass bottles and yes, even condoms and other garbage thrown overboard. Swimming and playing on the lakeshore has become an unsafe and potential health hazard for our grandchildren. I can’t even imagine three times that amount of garbage washing up on our lakeshore.
The wake of all these crafts coming and going would create a major disturbance to the ecology of both aquatic animals and vegetation, as well as lakeshore erosion.
As an example, the current Bayside setup — with a dock and 13 hoists on 320 feet — has a minimum of 234 points of contact with the lake bottom. If we extrapolate out, it is thousands of points of contact of dock/hoist posts on just 800 feet of frontage lake bottom to the north and south of our home’s lakefront.
Extrapolating out even further, there are 42 miles of lakeshore on the Old Mission Peninsula. If the majority of the lakefront is privately owned, one can see that the ability to have three hoists per 50 feet would result in many more hoists than the number of people living on the Peninsula.
Who actually needs three hoists/boats per 50 feet? It is apparent that increased allowance would benefit the subdivisions and their non-shore dwelling residents. It is exceedingly inequitable to allow those who live away from the shore to have such an impact on those who live on the shore. These landlocked communities enjoy the benefits of access, but don’t have to deal with the 24/7 ramifications of the impact to the enjoyment of our lakefront property. Nor do they have to deal with the increased taxes and regulations associated with lakefront ownership.
The tremendous detrimental effects of so many docks and hoists in the water from May to November is a huge impact on the aesthetics, environment, light/noise pollution, water and air pollution. These are a hindrance to the quiet enjoyment of our properties and homes during the summer months.
The situation however, does not go away during the winter months. The docks and hoists are dismantled and brought to shore, where they are haphazardly piled-up visual junk on the beach … and there they stay for eight months looking like giant piles of metal skeletons. I have documented in pictures many such dumps of hoists and docks all along Peninsula Drive.
Again, if we extrapolate out the amount of dock/hoist components we’d have if we increase the allowable ratios, the entire length of drivable and walkable (public domain) lakeshore would become a lakeshore junkyard. When the water table rises, the hoist and dock components become partially submerged and even more haphazardly scattered.
All of this disarray is very visible in the winter as there is no foliage to cover the mess. There is simply not enough room to store the current hoists/dock parts, let alone three times more!
I like to walk along the lakeshore, and during the winter months, one cannot walk the shoreline without an obstacle course of dock parts, paddle boats, lawn furniture, beach umbrellas, sheds, toys and portapotties .. all smashing vegetation, restricting nesting and feeding sites for foul, and damaging the natural topography of our lakeshore. The situation is critically unmanaged and damaging to every aspect of our shoreline. It is unimaginable what it would look like with three times that amount of hazardous debris.
With the recent change in the floodplain, it appears that all boats, docks, hoists, sheds, outhouses, etc. left on the shore are in the floodplain. The Township is very restrictive of lakeshore homeowners doing anything in the floodplain zone. Having large amounts of dock/hoist components in the flood zone would go against current regulations and be detrimental and against the high-water shoreline regulations of the Township.
I urge you to not allow any more hoists than the current one per 50 feet. I urge you to implement a system that will monitor and enforce the existing one hoist per 50 feet rule so that the “ask for forgiveness, not permission” mentality and practice be stopped. I urge you to asses a penalty fee to those who have violated the law.
The population on the Old Mission Peninsula is growing, but our lakeshore is a limited and shared natural treasure. It’s essential that we all act as responsible stewards to protect and preserve it.
Respectfully,
Sylvia Rombis
Also Read…
To view or leave comments on this story, click HERE.
I think there are many ways, charitably and otherwise to get involved in the community in a positive matter rather than a clearly cynical ploy to increase the quality of the view from your recently built lakeside McMansion, in the guise of a plea regarding environmental concerns.
An add on – to claim you’re seeing syringes and condoms on the beach is an embarrassing over-exaggeration, this is a community of young families and retirees. As residents and tax payers on the peninsula I don’t believe you hold any special standing just because you “live” on the lakeshore directly, if you have concerns or ideas to improve quality of life on old mission I’d suggest engaging the community and your neighbors directly, as opposed to going on a propaganda filled campaign pretending to be concerned about the environment, and not your view.
As I have yet to a really see you or anyone on that property in the last 5 years I would like to welcome you to the community in any event. Cheers.
The fact that this is still being debated and allowed for editorial opinion is hard to fathom. The Township has NO legal authority for this ordinance and this will end up with another judgement to go with the others. Enough. Just stop, please!
How many times have we seen this? A wealthy, out of state, summer only resident tears down a smaller existing, perfectly fine, house and replaces it with a massive multimillion dollar McMansion and wants to privatize as much of the lake front as possible for her own enjoyment. I walked the beach during the construction of this home for two years in the winter watching constant spew of debris and fiberglass insulation into the bay and she claims to be concerned about the environment? The abundance of trash I witnessed on the beach was coming from the construction of a massive home not from anything from the bay. The rich want the waterfront to themselves and can’t stand seeing the children of year round middle class residents enjoying something that is and has always been for all us. Go back to Ohio.