Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lincoln County denies two after‑the‑fact lakeshore permits, orders restoration
Summary
Commissioners denied two after‑the‑fact lakeshore permits — one at Crystal Lake (Thompson Contracting/Mini Jackson Holdings) and one on Island Lake — and directed applicants to restore disturbed shoreline and use turbidity controls; planning staff cited water‑quality and habitat concerns including potential loon nesting impacts.
The Lincoln County Board of Commissioners voted on Jan. 28 to deny two after‑the‑fact lakeshore permit requests and to enforce planning board restoration conditions.
Staff presented the Crystal Lake application tied to Mini Jackson Holdings, also listed as Thompson Contracting, and said the applicant substantially exceeded a previously permitted small dock project. Staff described excavation of an unknown volume of native material, a rock retaining wall and creation of an artificial beach. Planning staff concluded the work likely altered shoreline vegetation, could diminish water quality and fish and wildlife habitat, and might affect neighboring properties. The planning board recommended denial and attached corrective conditions requiring restoration of the affected area to its pre‑construction condition, avoidance of unnecessary shoreline disturbance, and use of turbidity curtains for any near‑shore work.
A local property owner who owns land at the opposite end of Crystal Lake presented photos and video and told the board the work occurred below the high‑water mark, asked for an immediate cease‑and‑desist order and fines, and urged faster enforcement processes. The board voted to deny the Thompson/Crystal Lake after‑the‑fact permit and instructed the planning department to issue notifications and pursue the corrective requirements.
The board also reviewed an after‑the‑fact request at Island Lake where an applicant had placed untreated wood pallets across a marshy shoreline to access open water. Staff cited potential harm to marsh habitat, including the presence of a nesting loon pair that Fish, Wildlife & Parks identified as a sensitive species in the region, and noted an existing public boat ramp nearby. The planning board recommended denial with restoration conditions (including a 15‑day requirement to sign and return a completion letter). Commissioners approved the denial and directed planning staff to handle enforcement steps.
In both matters no applicant representative was present at the meeting. Commissioners and staff discussed that reapplication would be allowed if a revised plan complies with county regulations; staff noted no evidence of active erosion that would justify a retaining wall in the Thompson case and emphasized that vegetation and less‑intrusive alternatives should be used before constructing retaining walls.
