Lakeshore Protection Committee

CITY OF WHITEFISH LAKESHORE PROTECTION COMMITTEE Date: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 Place: Via Webex (online) Recorded By: Dabney Langellier Members Present: Peggy Brammer Ben Cavin Donna Emerson Roger Rowles Nancy Schuber Toby Scott Members Absent: One vacant position Staff Present: Dave Taylor 1. CALL TO ORDER Summary: The Committee Chair, Toby Scott called the meeting to order at 6:01 pm. 2. AGENDA CHANGES Summary: None. 3. DISCUSSION & MOTION CONCERNING CONTINUING TO MEET REMOTELY Summary: Starting June 1st all meetings will be in person at City Hall. Everyone will have to wear a mask and remain 6 feet apart. No vote necessary at this time regarding this matter. There may be an option for the public to join remotely, but the details have not been worked out yet. 4. APPROVAL OF APRIL 12, 2021 MINUTES Summary: Members reviewed the minutes of April 12, 2021. ACTION: Donna Emerson made a motion to approve the minutes of April 12, 2021. Roger Rowles seconded and the motion passed unanimously. 5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT Summary: None. 6. OLD BUSINESS A. WLV 21-W07 – LINDA MCCARTHY Summary: A variance request to add 100’ floating walkway to the end of an existing dock and add breakwater wings (not part of the variance request) located at 432 A Dakota Ave. Dave Taylor summarized the staff report for members, noting a couple of key points: • The property is basically a muddy wetland, making it difficult to access the dock as the Lake water level drops. • The owner would like to add an additional walkway/gangway like the neighboring property. Page 1 of 7 Lakeshore Protection Committee May 12, 2021 • The existing T-shape area of the dock was not permitted originally, so this portion is part of the application as well. • The overall length of the walkway/gangway will be 100 feet, but not all of it will be on the water. A portion of the walkway/gangway will be on the land. Only going roughly 10 feet further in the lake than it currently does. • One alternative would be to install a permanent walkway, but is unlikely the owners will get the approval needed from the Corps of Engineers, as it disturbs the lakebed. The walkway/gangway addition is the best option. Recommendation: Staff is recommending approval of WLV 21-W07 with the 11 conditions of approval as noted in the report. Committee members were able to participate in a site meeting last week. Members discussed the application with staff, clarifying the following item: • With Bay Point and the neighboring property, there is significant traffic in this area. The Bay Point docks normally stay stationary. Based on the site plan, there should be sufficient room for boat traffic in this area. Linda McCarthy spoke on behalf of her application and noted the following: • Currently, the water is halfway up the path. Members discussed the application further with the applicant and staff, clarifying the following items: • The applicant is asking for 210 feet in dock length with the full walkway/gangway section. While regulations state up to 60 feet dock length is standard with docks not to exceed 100 feet in length. • If variance applications are not to set precedence, then the neighboring dock does not have any barring on the Board’s decision. • The applicant is asking for retroactive approval for the T-shaped section. • The variance application process is in place, so people can apply if the criteria are met. The Board’s decision should be based on the necessary criteria. • The Board can require that the dock go no further out than 100 feet. • There is less impervious surface area if the walkway is only 2 feet wide, instead of 4 feet. • There is nothing in the Lakeshore regulations against moving a permitted dock out. Although it does create a disturbance on the lake bottom. ACTION: Ben Cavin made a motion to deny WLV 21-W07. Peggy Brammer seconded the motion. The motion passed 3-2 (Donna Emerson and Roger Rowles opposed). 7. NEW BUSINESS B. WLP 21-W17 – CHAD ALLEN Summary: The applicant is proposing to replace existing rip rap rocks with slightly larger rocks (approximately 18 inches in diameter) along 65 feet of the shoreline, covering an area with a width of about 18 inches. The purpose of this project is to minimize shoreline erosion caused by man- made waves during high water and repair existing rip rap, which has become ineffective due to shifting causing erosion. This project will take place at 2086 Houston Drive. Dave Taylor summarized the staff report for members, noting a couple of key points: • There is erosion with the existing rocks. • The applicant is eligible for 603.92 square feet of constructed area. However, rip rap does not count toward the constructed area. Page 2 of 7 Lakeshore Protection Committee May 12, 2021 • As much as possible, the work will be completed by hand, but a small excavator may need to be utilized. If so, this would not be done until after August 16th. • The rocks will be limited to an 18 inch diameter. Recommendation: Staff recommends the approval of WLP 21-W17 with the 11 conditions listed in the report. Members discussed the application with staff and clarified the following items: • The Lakeshore Regulations require the active shoreline erosion to be clearly present for rip rap to be approved. • The erosion is difficult to see with black and white photos. • Members can request additional information and more detail prior to voting on this application. No one was present to represent the application. ACTION: Donna Emerson made a motion to table WLP 21-W17 and request more evidence of erosion. Peggy Brammer seconded the motion and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously. C. WLP 21-W22 – AMY JOHANNES & DOUG NEWTON Summary: The applicant is proposing to remove existing wood steps in the lakeshore protection zone and replace them with twenty (20) four foot (4’) wide dry set chief cliff stone steps set on existing grade (approximately 80 sf total). There will be a simple metal earth-tone handrail (less than 4’ tall) attached for safety purposes. Additionally, they are proposing t apply 23.04 cubic yards of gravel to an existing gravel beach. The project will take place at 2126 Houston Drive. Dave Taylor summarized the staff report, noting a couple of key points: • The subject property is eligible for 1,548 square feet of constructed area. • The applicant also submitted an administrative application for a new dock and trampoline, which would bring the total constructed area to 1,335 square feet. Recommendation: Staff recommends the approval of WLP 21-W22 with the 18 conditions listed in the report. Members discussed the application with staff and clarified the following item: • The stairs that are being replaced are within regulations. However, treated wood is not allowed in current regulations. Johnny and Alex with White Cloud Design were in attendance to represent the application and confirmed the following: • The existing stairs are made of treated wood that are 30-40 years old. ACTION: Peggy Brammer made a motion to approve WLP 21-W22. Donna Emerson seconded the motion and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously. D. JACOBSEN APPLICATIONS – 8 TOTAL Summary: Contiguous properties requesting a number of activities such as new rip rap, stair replacement, gravel applications, and the addition of native plants. Currently, there is a vacant lot that will give the owners the access needed to do the proposed work. However, once the home is constructed on this vacant lot, they will not be able to do this. Committee members had a site visit last week for these applications. Page 3 of 7 Lakeshore Protection Committee May 12, 2021 1. WLP 21-W29 AND WLV 21-W30 – FEENY (LOT 11) Summary: The applicant is requesting a standard lakeshore construction permit (WLP 21- W29) for a one-time gravel application, the addition of rip rap in the Lakeshore Protection Zone (LPZ), the repair of existing wooden stair footings, and replacement of wood steps with natural dry stack stone steps. In addition, the applicant is requesting a minor variance (WLV 21-W30) to extend the rip rap and stairs just below the mean high water level. Dave Taylor summarized the staff report, noting a couple of key points: • For the minor variance work being done, there is no standard in our regulations for stairs below high water as that is outside the LPZ. This does require a permit from DNRC and the Army Corps of Engineers. • Although there is no standard for stairs below high water, members can approve this work and require a floodplain permit (issued by DNRC), by amending condition 24 and adding “without a floodplain permit” at the end. • Otherwise, members can require the stairs stop at high water. • The proposed stairs and existing deck and dock are within the allowable amount for constructed area on this property. • The bank on this property is steep and actively eroding. The existing beach cobble is not adequate. • In order to comply with current regulations, the applicant would have to do a major re-sloping of the property, or the applicants could install a retaining wall. Both would cause more impact on the lake, than the proposed rip rap installation. • The placement of rip rap below the high water mark will not diminish water quality or habitat. In addition, the specific design will minimize any visual impacts. Recommendation: Staff recommends the approval of WLP 21-W29 and WLV 21-W30 with the 30 conditions listed in the report and the suggested amendment to condition 24. Members discussed the application with staff and clarified the following items: • The size of the boulders will be a maximum of 18 inches in diameter, but should be around 12 inches. • The size and slope of the boulders will act like a beach. Otherwise, adjacent properties will be impacted by the wave action caused by it. • The rip rap and stair placement below high water will be subject to approval by DNRC and Army Corps of Engineers. The City permit should come prior to these. Johnny and Alex with White Cloud Design were in attendance to represent the application and confirmed the following: • This is a complex project that White Cloud has been working on for a year. It is a one time opportunity for these property owners before a home is built on lots 5 and 6. These lots are all owned by the same family, just different family members who have lived on the lake for 50 years. • The City of Whitefish approval is needed, but because the Army Corps of Engineers timeline is so drawn out, White Cloud has been working on both applications simultaneously. Members discussed the application further with Johnny and Alex: • Larger rocks will be placed as anchor and masked with smaller rocks to minimize the visual impact. • It is not necessary to mention the required approval from the Army Corps of Engineers in the conditions, as the rip rap cannot be placed without their approval. Page 4 of 7 Lakeshore Protection Committee May 12, 2021 The Army Corps of Engineers has not provided a timeline, but White Coud is confident approval will be granted. They just want to have all other permits in place, so they can begin work once they get the Army Corps of Engineers approval. • There will be roughly 4-5 steps that are in the low water mark. ACTION: Donna Emerson made a motion to approve WLP 21-W29 and WLV 21-W30 with the 30 conditions listed in the report and the following amended wording: • Condition 24 – add “without a floodplain permit” at the end of the statement. • Conditions 12-15 – add “with the exception with what is approved through the variance” at the end of each statement. Toby Scott seconded the motion and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously. 2. WLP 21-W31 AND WLV 21-W32 – JACOBSEN (LOT 12) Summary: The applicant is requesting a standard lakeshore construction permit (WLP 21- W31) for a one-time gravel application, the addition of rip rap in the Lakeshore Protection Zone (LPZ), the repair of existing wooden stair footings, and replacement of wood steps with natural dry stack stone steps. In addition, the applicant is requesting a minor variance (WLV 21-W32) to extend the rip rap and stairs just below the mean high water level. Dave Taylor summarized the staff report, noting a couple of key points: • This application is a repeat of the one just discussed for lot 11. • Members will want to consider the same wording amendments to conditions 12-15 and 24 as noted for lot 11. Recommendation: Staff recommends the approval of WLP 21-W31 and WLV 21-W32 with the 30 conditions listed in the report and the suggested amendments to conditions 12- 15 and 24. Members discussed the application with staff and clarified the following item: • Planting materials around rip rap could address visual impacts and erosion. However, this solution is not currently in the City’s Lakeshore regulations. • Current regulations state you cannot add silt or dirt to the Lake and with portions of the rip rap being below the low water mark, it would be difficult to undertake. Members discussed the application further with Johnny and Alex: • Adding vegetation within the rip rap was not part of the clients request. Due to the budget and plan changes this would create, it is not something White Cloud can consider at this time. ACTION: Peggy Brammer made a motion to approve WLP 21-W31 and WLV 21-W32 with the 30 conditions listed in the report and the following amended wording: • Condition 24 – add “without a floodplain permit” at the end of the statement. • Conditions 12-15 – add “with the exception with what is approved through the variance” at the end of each statement. Donna Emerson seconded the motion and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously. 3. WLP 21-W23 AND WLV 21-W24 – JACOBSEN (LOTS 5&6) Summary: The applicant is requesting a standard lakeshore construction permit (WLP 21- W23) for a one-time gravel application to the existing gravel beach area, the addition of rip rap in the Lakeshore Protection Zone (LPZ), and replacement of wood steps with natural Page 5 of 7 Lakeshore Protection Committee May 12, 2021 dry stack stone steps. In addition, the applicant is requesting a minor variance (WLV 21- W24) to extend the rip rap and stairs just below the mean high water level. Dave Taylor summarized the staff report, noting a couple of key points: • Once again, this application is quite similar to the previous ones. Recommendation: Staff recommends the approval of WLP 21-W23 and WLV 21-W24 with the 30 conditions listed in the report and the suggested amendments to conditions 12- 15 and 24. ACTION: Donna Emerson made a motion to approve WLP 21-W23 and WLV 21-W24 with the 30 conditions listed in the report and the following amended wording: • Condition 24 – add “without a floodplain permit” at the end of the statement. • Conditions 12-15 – add “with the exception with what is approved through the variance” at the end of each statement. Roger Rowles seconded the motion and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously. 4. WLP 21-W25 – FEENY (LOT 7) Summary: The applicant is proposing to place 6.6 cubic yards of gravel with the Lakeshore Protection Zone (LPZ). Dave Taylor summarized the staff report, noting a couple of key points: • The applicant has 59 feet of lakeshore frontage, which allows up to 7.38 cubic yards. • This meets the necessary criteria. No variance required, just a standard lakeshore permit. • The site photos show some existing gravel. Recommendation: Staff recommends the approval of WLP 21-W25 with the 16 conditions listed in the report. Members discussed the application with staff and clarified the following item: • The existing gravel is natural gravel on the beach. There is no record of a previous gravel placement. ACTION: Toby Scott made a motion to approve WLP 21-W25 with the 16 conditions listed in the report. Peggy Brammer seconded the motion and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously. 5. WLP 21-W26 – JACOBSEN (LOT 8) Summary: The applicant is proposing to place 6.25 cubic yards of gravel within the Lake and Lakeshore Protection Zone (LPZ). In addition, the applicant is proposing to plant 85 native plants in the LPZ, with 406 square feet of compost. Dave Taylor summarized the staff report, noting a key point: • Based on City records, this property had a gravel application in the past. Therefore, they are ineligible for gravel placement. Recommendation: Staff is recommending denial of the gravel placement for WLP 21- W26. However, staff is recommending approval of the native plant placement for WLP 21-W26 with the 14 conditions listed in the report. Members discussed the application with staff and clarified the following item: Page 6 of 7 Lakeshore Protection Committee May 12, 2021 • The previous gravel placement is specific to lot 8. Members discussed the application further with Johnny and Alex: • The compost will mimic the native bark mulch that is existing. • With the existing trees, there will not be enough direct rain fall to cause the compost to erode away. ACTION: Toby Scott made a motion to deny the gravel application in WLP 21-W26, but to approve the native plant placement in WLP 21-W26 with the 14 conditions listed in the report. Peggy Brammer seconded the motion and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously. 6. WLP 21-W27 AND WLV 21-W28 – BOYD (LOTS 9&10) Summary: The applicant is requesting a standard lakeshore construction permit (WLP 21- W27) for a one-time gravel application to the existing gravel beach area, the addition of rip rap in the Lakeshore Protection Zone (LPZ), the repair of a small section of existing decking, and replacement of wood steps with natural dry stack stone steps. In addition, the applicant is requesting a minor variance (WLV 21-W28) to extend the rip rap and stairs just below the mean high water level. Dave Taylor summarized the staff report, noting a key point: • This application is similar to the initial ones discussed for this family. Recommendation: Staff recommends the approval of WLP 21-W27 and WLV 21-W28 with the 33 conditions listed in the report and the suggested amendments to conditions 12- 15 and 24. ACTION: Toby Scott made a motion to approve WLP 21-W27 and WLV 21-W28 with the 33 conditions listed in the report and the following amended wording: • Condition 24 – add “without a floodplain permit” at the end of the statement. • Conditions 12-15 – add “with the exception with what is approved through the variance” at the end of each statement. Donna Emerson seconded the motion and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously. 8. STAFF COMMENTS Summary: None. 9. BOARD COMMENTS Summary: The next meeting will be held on June 9th. Donna Emerson and Ben Cavin may not be able to attend. 10. ADJOURNMENT ACTION: The meeting is adjourned at 7:50 pm. Page 7 of 7