re lakeshore improvement - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I detinitel}- do not agree that a conditioiial use pertiiit froiii the City of Orono �vas a condition of this arrangement as you state as number three in your Dec. 28, 1998 letter. You and I did discuss the existing fence south of the road�vay and whether you and the city would require us to reposition lumber removed to provide access for the equipment used in the work on Nov. 30, 1998. I was clearly told by you that that would not be necessary as you were familiar with the fence and its original existance and condition frotn your earlier ��isit to the site in June of 1998.We also discussed my desire to do maintenance and improvemetit work on the fence and �i�hether any additional permit ��ould be required. You informed me that maintenance work does not require a permit but that some changes or a new fence may require a conditional use permit from the Orono City Council because of the fence's location close to the lake. The written inspectiotl notice that you provided to me on Nov. 30. 1998 lists the conditions in writing under the comments section and does not include any mention of any conditional use pennit. The third condition was the use of silt fencing south of the road, not any conditional use permit. It was also understood by me that even�one present on Nov. 30, 1998 agreed that a problem ob��iously was occurring to our shoreline and that it �vas reasonable to seek a remedy involving some type of future additional ��-ork to be determined with additional examination of the situation and investigation of what other permits may be required. I did not understand an�•one to purport that damage had not occurred to the shoreline or that our desire to take action ��as inappropriate. What was in disagreement was how to go aboiit it and what was permissable Linder our cunent permit. I was clearly told that we �vould be allowed to utilize the soil already waiting in the trucks currentiv at the site but only in filling in the holes specifically agreed on by both you and Mr. Hafner. I specifically asked if we could also continue v��ork on the shoreline of our pond, north of the roadway, which Mr. Hafner did not object to, apparently as he considered it a private pond �i�hich was not a concern of the MCWD. You objected to any further work any�where beyond the soil already on site and the specific holes already agreed on. You stated that only soil already on site could be used for any further �vork along the pond shore. I did not feel this limit �vas appropriate but agreed to do so in the spirit of cooperation. We filled the specific holes, we were told �vere acceptable, and some holes along the pond utilizin� only the soil alreadv at the site. That very same day we contacted the MDNR and arranged to have Ms. Ceil Strauss from the MDNR visit the site and discuss the situation with us the following day. My fatlier and I met with Ms. Strauss Dec. l, 1998 on site P. 3