2/14/1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

F E B 14 `a989 Page 2 January 4, 1989 BOOK 76 PCE 87 The applicant contends that while state regulations encourage public access to multi -slip docking facilities in aquatic preserves, county ordinances restrict multi -slip residential dock access to residents of the project associated with the dock. It is the applicant's contention that the county's requirements limiting public use of docks to facilities located in commercially zoned areas severely limits public access to docking facilities. The proposed changes would make the county's code more similar with FDNR allowances. On January 12, 1989, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-1 to recommend approval of this request. ANALYSIS AND ALTERNATIVES In the review of this request, staff examined its reasonableness as well as any negative impacts that the request might have on existing or future development. Before analyzing the subject request, however, it is necessary to analyze current multi -slip residential dock regulations. As structured, the county zoning code limits uses to specific zoning districts. The purpose of the regulation is to group similar uses together and to prohibit incompatible uses within those districts. Besides the uses allowed in specific districts, accessory uses (those uses which are customarily associated with allowed principal uses) are also allowed in each district. These principles of zoning are the basis of the county's current dock regulations. The county's code allows multi -slip docks as accessory uses to residential developments because, like garages or swimming pools, docks are typical improvements• associated with housing developments. To protect the integrity of the development by limiting outside traffic and intrusion by the general public, dock usage is limited to residents of the project. Consistent with these principles, public docks are designated as commercial uses and are limited to commercial zoning districts. Limiting public use of dock facilities, however, is somewhat inconsistent with the county's policy of promoting public access to waterbodies. For that reason the applicant's request warrants consideration. In analyzing the applicant's proposal, however, several issues must be considered. These are the potential impacts on residential developments from public use of boat slips, the issue of restriction of dockage facilities, and the public access issue. The first issue involves the potential impact on a development of public use of docking facilities constructed as part of the development project. Such a facility would likely contain characteristics of both private and commercial facilities. Since this type of facility would be open to the public, the surrounding residential development and adjacent areas are would likely experience an increase in traffic commensurate with the size of the facility. In conjunction with increased traffic would be the need to provide adequate parking facilities for those slips which are not rented to residents. Even with the proposed ordinance change, the facility would not operate as a commercial dock other than the renting of slips. Any other commercial facilities including fueling, storage of marine equipment, sewage pump -out, or other commercial facilities would not be permitted. The second issue involves the size restriction of such a facility. Currently, the county controls the size of multi -slip docking facilities through accessory use criteria. Since accessory uses must be incidental to and subordinate to the principal use, the size of the dock is limited by the size of the development with which it is associated. If residential multi -slip docks are no longer considered accessory uses, however, there would be no county size restrictions. 16