Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER % IW5 <br />(#12 - #2072 Graydon Newman, Jr. - Contimjed) <br />Gaflfron reported that the request was for hardcov er and lakcshore variance for land <br />alteration in the 0-75’ zone Reconfiguring of the access is invols ed as well as a walkway <br />and shoreline improvements The existing platform, which exteiKls into the lake and on <br />the shore, encroaches the neighbors property The proposal is to remove the deck, use <br />the existing concrete stairs, and mov e the dock to new dock access Additionally, the rip <br />rap height would be increased to a height 6-12" above the terraced area above the high <br />water level mark, w hich is made of patio blocks Sand is to be placed between the higher <br />rip rap and the existing retaining walls witn beach and native plantings Boulders are <br />proposed to provide additional stability for the existing retaining walls. <br />Gaf&on reported that the Planning Commission approved the application with the <br />condition that the 5* width of walkway be reduced to 4', the deck be removed, but <br />approved the sand above the blocks to add stability 1 he cement blocks were allowed to <br />stay in place to potentially reduce the amount of erosion caused by wave action. <br />Jabbour said a permit could have been issued to rip rap straight up Gaffron noted the <br />City Engineer looked at the area and recommended the paving block be renu^ved <br />Cook said he saw the blocks as just more hardcov er and serving no function. <br />Goetten asked Cook if the patio blocks were not needed to accomplish what the <br />applicant wished to do to eliminate the wave action erosion. Cook said no. adding that <br />the rip rap is designed to take care ot erosion problems <br />Jabbour commented if the patio block is removed, there would be a need to carry the rip <br />rap further up to serve as a buffer zone Cook said this would have no effect. If the rip <br />rap fails, then the patio blocks would also go <br />The applicant’s representative. Dale Gustafson, said there were two issues His client did <br />not know the dock was encroaching the neighbor's property The dock in the lake was <br />non-conforming, and the applicant rearranged the dock to gain conformity and connect it <br />to the wiilkway He felt it was sensible to go to the existing walkway that going straight <br />up Secondly, the rip rap was already in place and would function well even if higher <br />When the waves come in. until the vegetation has grown, something needs to be done to <br />hold it in place <br />Kelley moved. Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution sf3618 per the Planning <br />Commission recommendations w ith the extraction of the patio blocks. <br />Jabbour noted that the proposal was for a 5' dock but received contirmation from <br />Gustafson that 4' was satisfactory