Laserfiche WebLink
22 January 1998 <br /> Page 4. <br /> 100 feet of the riverfront area and also talks about requiring vegetation be <br /> installed in areas where inadequate. If someone owns a piece of land on a <br /> Pond or a River and he has a beach with sand, whatever the innermost 190 <br /> feet is, can you say you wart grass, or poison ivy, or honeysuckle on that <br /> beach? Mr. Sherman stated that is not the intent. He advised he is referring <br /> to situations where someone wants to plunk their house 99 feet from the <br /> water and previously mowed clown lame areas of vegetation, he would like to <br /> have it replaced, but not on a beach. <br /> Mr. Baker stated he believed the answer to his question to be yes, you could <br /> require it if taking a strict interpretation of this, but it is obviously something <br /> you would never do in a case where someone has had a beach for years. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated if a beach not put in illegally and has been mound for <br /> years, we would not require that. <br /> Mr. Baker asked 1 lr. Sherman to define innermost. Mr. Sherman stated it <br /> means closest to the river. Mr. Baker asked if he was happy with that <br /> wording? Mr. Sherman stated,.he could add in parenthesis, "closest to the <br /> river ■ <br /> Mr. Estated as the reqs stand he does not see a lot but asked, for dredge <br /> disposal of material for future dredging, he floes not foresee any application <br /> within a riverbank for putting material, but if in the future something sloes <br /> happen and they have to dredge and build a di tilliurig basin, would these <br /> regulations ... ..........Mr. Green interjected it would require a Notice of Intent. <br /> 1&. Elm asked if these would stop him from building a distffling basin? <br /> 1 Ir. Sherman stated the State law would stop you, if it is Ri erfront area. The <br /> State later for non-houses, it has an exemption so they dont get into taking. <br /> The exemption is if you can't get the 290 feet you have to stay in the second <br /> 100 and are limited to 5999 s.f. in that second 109, under most circumstances, <br /> and the first 199 'is supposed to be left alone. <br /> Mr. Ellis stated he is not taking about leaving the material there, only <br /> temporarily. Mr. Sherman stated the State would allow it if he disturbed the <br /> vegetated area and replaced it afterwards, he would imagine they would allow <br /> it, but this is new law. <br /> Mr. Baker asked if all of this was in CMR? Mr. Sherman advised it is in CM <br /> 10.58, the Rivers equivalent. He will provide a copy for Mr. Baker. <br />