9C-i - Kevin and Noelle Sheehan - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

COMMUNITYGROWTH Ciq Of - Pe not _T_ q 1 N S T 1 T U T E _-- tes 9(c-i) Kevin and Noelle Sheehan The City contacted Kevin and Noelle Sheehan after being informed that they had performed a shoreline alteration and installed stairs within the shoreline setback without a permit. They have contacted the City and acknowledged that they did the work without a permit. They are requesting clarification as to what needs to be done to resolve the issue. They indicated that they constructed the new stairs where there was none previously. This would have required a permit, although it is not clear that one would have been approved based on the fact that there are existing steps already cut through the slope. We likely would have tried to find a way to renovate the existing steps so as to avoid creating an additional trough to the lake. If we had approved these steps as constructed, it would have been after consultation with the Planning Commission, and we would have recommended additional vegetation and screening within the steep slope area and would have sought some stormwater improvements at the top of the slope to avoid channeling (if needed). The Sheehans indicate that they placed four cubic yards of sand within the shore impact zone. Based on the photos of the property, we estimate that the amount of sand brought in was closer to 12 cubic yards. They also indicate that four cubic yards of rock was added to the shoreline. We do not have an estimate for what was added as the shoreline _ was extensively rip-rapped prior to this alteration. The ordinance allows up to io cubic yards of grading with an over-the-counter permit. We would not have written a permit for this grading without some substantial changes from what was done. First, we would not have approved the rip-rap installation without a clear need for shoreline stabilization. That does not seem to exist. If the rip-rap had been permitted, we would have required plantings within it consistent with the _ requirements of the Ordinance. It is unclear whether or not the required installation materials are present. We also would not have written a permit for the creation of an artificial beach area. While the property is allowed up to io cubic yards of grading, it is evident that this amount of grading had previously been done based on the prior rip-rap installation. Any grading that would have been authorized on this site would have included requirements for shoreline restoration,including plantings of native vegetation and reestablishment of stormwater retention and filtering mechanisms. _ Consistent with the guidance we have received as staff,the goal of any permitted activity on the site would have been to create a stable permanent situation that functioned for the property owner and was sensitive to the surrounding environment. As it stands, we anticipate this property will see substantial erosion, including washout of the beach area. —' Without stabilization and stormwater control, this area will degrade over time until the property owner finds it necessary to "sweeten" the artificial beach area with more sand reapply/rearrange the rip rap to restore the aesthetics (the current installation does little to prevent shoreline erosion but appears to be primarily for aesthetic reasons), possibly adding additional material as was done this time. Pequot Lakes Staff Report 9(c-i)-1 May 15,2oo8