Laserfiche WebLink
DNR#!'’-~rE'jIGi'i 6 TEi_-61iPost-It * brand fax trarsmiMal mono 7671# <br />i <br />* ttf . 2^^ r 9 ^• • A <br />l/t\ V {(jf <br />Ov?''o>^0 <br />PMon.. <br />- O'? \ ^ <br />.I;\n .14. 1003 <br />TO: <br />FROM: <br />l.d biCKDNn Regional Shore’and Hydrolcgisl <br />Stove Prestir* ^ <br />Consultant to the TMCD <br />RE: ORONO LAND USE CONTROL REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE WITH <br />DNR SHORELAND STANDARDS <br />Orono'8 shorclnnd management controls are predominantly compliant <br />with DNR gtp.ndarda, and. in several respects more restict.ve. <br />However my detailed review of then has identified a few <br />S”:ArTiAnd some Items thst, ' <br />hrve dwided the following list into Major and Minor <br />catr^tories tc provide some relative perspective regarding their <br />importa.-.oe. but I do not regard the ".Major items as crucial <br />shortcomlnss. .Vnothcr reasonable »PP;;°»«h IS ““o <br />terms “Minor" and •SuSdested Revisions ... <br />catr»gorlos. 1 strongly urge you and Ceil Strauss to review this <br />list in detail and dr-aw your own cone lus ion.s. <br />MAJOR <br />1) The City’s provision for allowing guest houses is not <br />eompliant wUh DNR standards. It allows them norma si.c lots <br />(should be duplex size), and does not contain size limits for <br />structures. <br />2) Vegetation alteration provisl' .■ are deficient in two <br />respects. First, the prohibition o«* • <br />(OK), but it must also apply to bluff impact <br />section does not contain a provision requiring <br />pesticides to be used in ways that minimize <br />shore impact zones and public waters by use of earth berms and/or <br />vegetation filter strips. <br />3) The City’s controls are lacking a provision f <br />conditional use permit for converting forested iand to another <br />use. <br />4) The sizing provision for controlled access <br />contain a minimum area requirement (width setup is more <br />restrictive than the DNR standard) <br />MINOR <br />SiSiT S;S5'‘3^‘^^bl°c^■aJ?^ )r. subd..s.j.s.i.