My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/21/1986
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1986
>
5/21/1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:53:01 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 12:27:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/21/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Fr - <br />MAY 21 1986 BOOK 64 F,�,cc 533 <br />Vice Chairman Lyons asked what the base level would be under <br />the provisions of the new ordinance, and Attorney Stewart stated <br />it would be about 141, and this makes a difference in what rooms <br />can see the ocean. - <br />Director Keating presented some graphics. He noted that the <br />way building height was measured before, some people were <br />cheating by filling the land higher; also, they sometimes put a <br />building in and bermed up in front of it and could get four <br />stories. Basically, the elevation in most districts is 351, and <br />Director Keating felt the decision if whether we want to go over <br />351. He continued that there are two ways to measure - by taking <br />the average natural grade of the site, and you can interpret that <br />to the natural grade of the building pad itself if that is to the <br />builder's advantage, or you can use the minimum flood elevation <br />of the property as your reference point. Director Keating felt <br />the definition we have now is a good one. He believed one of the <br />major items Attorney Stewart brought up was vesting. He pointed <br />out that Mr. Nutt does have a valid site plan, and he can go out <br />and construct that. What he is talking about, however, is coming <br />in with a revised site plan, and then you have to play by the new <br />rules. Director'Keatih'g did not concur he would be vested then. <br />Commissioner Wodtke asked if it is not worthwhile if we can <br />get the structure further back off the dune line. <br />Attorney Stewart stated they have no intention of raising <br />the elevation artificially, and he did believe they are vested <br />with respect to the hotel and the investment in it. He also did <br />feel it is worthwhile to encourage people to move back from the <br />dune line. <br />Vice Chairman Lyons did not know about the vesting issue, <br />but agreed that he would hate to see anyone penalized because <br />they move back from the dune line. <br />Environmental Planner Challacombe noted that most people <br />build to the edge of the setback line and then they trim the sea <br />grape, etc., for the view. <br />76 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.