Precast shoreline walls
 

I'm curious to know how others feel about the attached photos. All are of projects, approved by DES, that have been installed this spring.

There was a period when DES discouraged these types of walls due to the visual impact on the natural shoreline, the reflection of boat wakes/waves, etc. But apparently they are now being allowed as "in-kind" replacement of natural stone waterfront walls.

Personally, I think they are eyesores and would prefer a wall like the one in the last picture. Both accomplish the same but the latter is much more in keeping with the natural lake shoreline and helps dissipate wave action.

As things are going, soon the lakes will all have a shoreline that looks like all the seawalls in FL. But perhaps it's just that I don't like the look.

Eyesore plus requires drainage as precast walls are not porous.

Half the cost of a natural stonewall and does the job. Glad to hear DES is helping out with shoreline ownership.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

If there is in fact a pre-existing wall then NHDES cannot reject a permit based on poor taste in aesthetics. That's just not within our scope. The new wall face cannot be lakeward of the old wall face. If there was toe protection rip-rap we will permit retaining it as it helps dissipate wave energy. Precast block walls are not water-tight and all walls should incorporate proper back drainage otherwise they risk failure due to the freeze thaw cycle or hydrostatic pressure build up.

It looks better than just dropping in a bunch of jersey barriers. I think I'd prefer permitting some sele3ctive mining of navigation hazards if you need to build retaining walls. I understand there are some downsides to wave action on flat walls.

Absolutely. To this day I don’t understand why water rock hazards can’t be removed


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Agree those walls are butt ugly but probably better than letting the shoreline erode.

There is the key right there, they may not be the most attractive thing, but they help lakefront owners, protect their property... Unfortunately the cost of doing manual labor to build a true walk wall is out of site....

If the shoreline continues to be allowed to deteriate, the end result is not good for the lake...

The top two patterned walls are sad-looking and, although not great, the rectangular block wall at least looks a tad better IMO since it doesn't appear like someone is trying to mimic a natural rock wall. Regardless, after a few years of exposure I suppose any of the walls might start to blend in a bit. Maybe? Hopefully?

Over time, the opportunity is for the manufacturers to make their products look more natural...or maybe they already do. That may not mean lower cost but in many cases people will still pay a premium for low maintenance AND good design. We've seen that with all manner of building products. Why not lakefront walls?

BTW - This string is tempting FLL to carry on yet again about his concrete-in-a-bag (or whatever it is) underwater wall solution.

They can mimic it.
Just the choices made are not for stone that is native to the area... more of a cut stone format. It is less expensive.

Natural Stone
 

I much prefer the natural stone. It's not just the look. It's everything. We had a family of mink in our wall one spring. It was amazing to see.

I prefer the natural stone. If you've had your property for a while, you have an existing wall. If you're doing new construction on the lake today, chances are you've got plenty of cash, no need to economize

Scavenger
 

Many years ago building s breakwater was moistly scavenging boulders from the shore and stacking them up. Over time, the shore where the boulders used to be, eroded. If the property sold, nobody noticed. It is only evident to those who have occupied the same property for, say, 50 years, and shorefront trees have died where their roots used to hold things together. Erosion is a slow process.