Laserfiche WebLink
Re jet=ski attachments, Bob said vire have to decide how to regulate them. They are <br /> regulatable if they are pile supported or attached to a pile supported dock. If they are <br /> not attached to a dock or float, they are bottom anchored, and they become a 10- ► <br /> situation to be approved by the Harbor Master. so Bob has been telling people who <br /> have been inquiring that they can chose to make it a <br /> 1 O-A where they have to step to it, a bottom 3 attachment, which isn't the most stable <br /> thing in the world. Some people prefer to attach it to the float to give it stability. <br /> However, since we also have a 150 sq. ft. limit on floats, Bob has also made it clear to <br /> these people that they can't exceed that, so if they want to attach a 15 sq. ft. jet ski <br /> attachment, they have to reduce the float by that amount so as not to exceed 150 sq. <br /> ft. Bob recommended that this be formalized at the regulatory subcommittee tweeting. <br /> Elliot said when 1 O-A issues have come up in the past, there's been enough confusion <br /> about therm to warrant setting up a meeting with the Harbor Master to get a clear <br /> understanding where the limits are. In Bob's and the Chairman's absence, there were <br /> a couple of discussions with people about that, where hints were given that they had <br /> been told the attachment to the land was part of the <br /> 1 O-A float. Other statements were made, most of which he's not sure were actually <br /> made, and therefore we should have a clear understanding between the two groups. <br /> Bob said he has discussed this issue with Perry, and Perry has a clear understanding <br /> of our position that the attachment of the 1 O-A float to the land, whatever alteration that <br /> causes, is subject to our jurisdiction. <br /> Elliot repeated that if we had some common understanding, whether it carne in the way <br /> of a memo or the like, when people come in: vire would be able to say this is what it is. <br /> Bob said he and Perry will develop a memo. <br /> Fie: Enforcements. Bob asked the commissioners to sign about six enforcements in <br /> case he needs therm for people who have not done the work required. <br /> Re: Enforcement - Mr. Coleman, Bob stated this is the third time he has put the dock <br /> back in, and it's never been legal. He has been stalling the Commission --- his latest <br /> was to approach his State senator to help him, which is bogus because we had an <br /> issue of authority. Bob recommended we issue an enforcement order saying he has 30 <br /> days to remove the new construction, including a clock and some other accessories, <br /> cement abutments, etc. or file a notice of intent and an engineer's plan within the 30 <br /> days and provide us with a legible copy of Chapter 9 license (which we've asked for <br /> repeatedly), so that we can compare what's there now to what was previously <br /> approved. <br /> Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to issue an Enforcement Order to <br /> Mr. Coleman for the above. <br />