Laserfiche WebLink
No. 2 - (Page 12, Line 20) <br />Mr. King stated that this is the same as in our current <br />Comprehensive Plan except that it says on a "one-to-one" <br />basis and it is less specific. <br />Commissioner Scurlock suggested, in order to save some <br />time, that in each of these cases where we address <br />specifics, we insert our language in place of their <br />language. <br />Commissioner Bowman asked if the Board objected to the <br />suggested language, and Commissioner Lyons explained that <br />whether we object or not is not important - what is <br />important is that we addressed this all in our Comprehensive <br />Plan, and we cannot change it here and now. <br />No. 3 - (Page 13, Line 1) <br />No. 4 - (Page 13, Line 5) shoreline alteration activities <br />No. 5 - ( Page 147, Line 1) <br />No. 6 - (Page 14, Line 9) <br />After some discussion, it was agreed to leave No. 3 and <br />No. 4 in. <br />No. 5 F.(bulkheading) - Lengthy discussion ensued, and <br />Mrs. Jeannette Lier pointed out that the words in paragraph <br />(b) "governmental authority or non-profit corporation" came <br />out.of the Ad Hoc Committee; they were not the wording in <br />the original report, which the Town of Orchid preferred. <br />Attorney Brandenburg explained that the way it <br />originally read, it was saying that an individual could not <br />do something because it would create a hazard, but if that <br />individual gave us a public benefit, then we would let him <br />go ahead and create the hazard anyway. To eliminate the <br />"taking" issue, he suggested allowing only governmental <br />organizations that are in the business of providing public <br />benefits to do this. <br />Discussion continued re alternative language, and <br />Commissioner Lyons felt we are doing a lot of talking about <br />something we will not control in any event since it is <br />11 <br />JUL 18 1983 Lop{ -1 54 nu 1 <br />