Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
1 <br />Planning Director Stan Boling reviewed the amendments and discussed the changes <br />which had been directed by the Board at the meeting of April 19, 1999. The most discussion <br />at that meeting was regarding "home occupations" and "building height". The directions to <br />staff at that time have been incorporated into the revised Ordinance. <br />Commissioner Stanbridge asked for some comment on No 4, Distinguishing Piers <br />from Docks, as she believed this will open a Pandora's Box. <br />Director Boling commented that only a definition is being added as the current code <br />does not have a definition for a private pier which is not to be used as dock, but just for <br />observation and swimming. These piers would not require all the regulations of a dock but <br />would allow for waterfront owners to have a private pier. <br />Commissioner Stanbridge asked whether this had been a site specific request, and <br />Director Boling responded that the discussion had been prompted by the development at <br />Grand Harbor where residents had requested private piers, not for the purpose of mooring <br />water craft. This will be a county -wide regulation and will allow only private piers, but no <br />boat traffic. <br />Chairman Macht felt it was naive to believe private piers would not be used for docks <br />sooner or later. <br />Chief of Environmental Planning Roland DeBlois commented that Grand Harbor is <br />just one example. These fishing piers could also be allowed in subdivisions with interior <br />lakes where boat traffic is prohibited. Environmental Planning is satisfied with the <br />regulations and the Department of Environmental Protection has specific criteria for the <br />construction of these piers. <br />Commissioner Adams suggested that the language be changed to indicate that piers <br />could only be designed and permitted over "privately owned submerged lands". <br />Chairman Macht wanted the record to reflect that he had a telephone call yesterday <br />regarding home occupations and had advised the caller that the item was not on the agenda <br />today. He apologized and noted that he had not realized the caller was referring to this <br />particular item. <br />The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in <br />regard to Item #1, Murphy Deed Reservations. There being none, the Chairman closed the <br />public hearing. <br />CONSENSUS WAS REACHED TO APPROVE THE ITEM. <br />MAY 4, 1999 <br />-29- <br />Boor UC 171 <br />