02-17-1998 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #2342 February 12, 1998 Page 2 common by the applicant and the Ilarren's of 175 Landmark Drive. These are the only two properties that have access rights over Outlot A. Applicant’s intent is to create a 20’ wide beach area that extends shoreward from the rip rapping which will flank it on either side (see Exhibits D & E). While the City has generally encouraged property owners to rip rap their shorelines to protect them from erosion, excavation to create beach areas has not been encouraged. This generally is based on the Comprehensive Plan principles that suggest the existing nature of shorelines should be preser\’ed rather than modified. The City receives very few applications similar to this one, since most property owners with a natural beach have merely left gaps in the rip rap for pedestrian access or have merely accessed their beach via a doc^Vstairway system. The idea of creating a sand beach area above the OHWL is technically an alteration to the natural shoreline, although in this case a fairly minor one that will likely not have a significant visual impact nor other significant shoreline impacts. DNR regulations allow rip rap to occur via MCWT) permit, and DNR regulations also allow placement of sand blanket lakeward of the OHWL. Applicant has obtained the necessary permits from the Watershed District for rip rapping and for sand blanket placement. Section 10.55, Orono’s flood plain ordinance, makes certain land alterations w ithin the floodway or flood fringe a conditional use, including "all dredging or excavation of material from any lake bed, pond, or wetland or from land adjacent thereto". Other code sections specifically prohibit land alteration within 75’ of the lake, so that the current application also needs a variance. This inherently requires that a hardship be shown. Issues for Discussion 1. 2. 3. Will approval of this request result in any significant visual impact to the shoreline? Will approval of this request result in any other enviromnental impacts that can be identified? Can the applicant identify any specific hardships which support granting of the request (note that because this was properly presented as a conditional use permit request, applicant has not provided a specific hardship statement). Staff Recommendation Given the fairly minor scope of this reqr.est (2.2 cubic yards takes up approximately the same volume as 3 full size file cabinets), and given the minimal impacts associated with the prooosal, staff recommends approval, subject to applicant obtaining an land alteration permit; subject to t.ie Harrens also providing a letter indicating their approval of this proposal; and subject to no weed control