Post GRDA July Board Meeting Report
A
hearty welcome aboard to our latest new members as follows: Dick Seybold,
Warren Thomas, Larry Harrelson, Mark Roberts, Tom Workman, Betty Kern, Grant
Sherwood, Ted Terwort, Tom Riley, John & Audrey
Novotny, David White, Frank Stewart, Rick & Karen Reynolds, Tom &
Jeanie Tinker,
GLUE
is off to a great start, but we will be more effective with the highest number
of members possible. I would encourage all of you to educate your fellow Grand
Lakers with respect to what we’re trying to do. It won’t be long until the
shoreline management plan takes center stage with the authority and we need to
bring a unified voice to the table. A direct mail piece will go out next week
to over four thousand Grand Lake dock owners inviting them to join our cause,
but nothing can replace the endorsement of an existing member. Now….We know how you guys like to talk…so get on with it.
Yesterday’s
asset committee meeting and full board meeting went about as expected. The
habitable docks issue had been removed and the authority is encouraging
additional public comment. There were two lease proposals on the agenda. One
was for the grazing of cattle near Lake Hudson while the other was modifying
and renewing a lease for property used by Pelican Landing Resort. Both were
approved.
The
issue most discussed was an application for a waiver of the 1/3rd of
the cove rule by a Monkey Island Developer. It all boiled down to how the
distance across a cove was measured. The lake patrol was recommending against
the application citing concerns over navigation by other craft, but their real
point was that since the inception of the 125’/1/3rd of the cove
rule in 1972, it had never been waved.
But
back to how a cove is measured. The authority is obviously very sensitive to
charges by activist groups, primarily against commercial operators, that the
1/3rd of the cove rule has been bent time and again for the benefit
of commercial operators. This obviously wasn’t the case with this application,
but you could sense both the board and the assets committee were more driven by
potential criticism than by the circumstances of the case.
I’m
going to attempt to describe the situation to you, but please bear with me
because this won’t be easy. If you entered a cove by boat, and after lets say 500’, it split, with a smaller cove going right and
another going left. The application location in question is located at the very
point where the cove splits. If you stood on the proposed dock location, and
looked straight ahead, you would see nothing between that location and the main
body of the lake. But the GRDA measurement used was a perpendicular one across
the smaller coves to the right and left.
It
would seem there should be some clear definition of how such measurements are
to be taken and how this particular rule should be applied. I’ll look into that
issue with the ecosystems people for some clarification.
In
the meantime, the developer has to resubmit his application with a different
configuration if he ever hopes to obtain a dock for the three new homes he has
under construction. I have requested a photograph from the authority so that
you might better understand this issue. As of this time, I haven’t received it.
When I do I’ll send it out in a later e-mail.
Since
my last full report, the authority has held a public meeting with the realtors,
including the developer in this case.
Many questions were answered, and although not all were happy campers,
they went away with a better understanding of where we are headed. Below you’ll
find the primary points shared with the realtors much of which will apply to
all of us.
1) Buyer purchasing from seller without a dock
in place.
Seller applies for permit prior to selling or buyer can
submit a dock application. If there is
not a dock on site, seller must submit a new private dock packet in
anticipation of a new dock permit. If
approved, the applicant is allowed to construct the dock pursuant to the plans
in the application.
2) Buyer purchasing from seller with existing
dock in place.
If dock is properly permitted, the dock has to be
inspected and certified by a licensed electrical contractor. If flotation is no longer serviceable, as
determined by GRDA, then flotation must be completely replaced with approved
materials. If, i)
dock is properly permitted; ii) flotation is satisfactory; and iii) proof of
ownership is supplied, footprint is grandfathered. Contact Nikki at Lake Patrol for permit
documentation.
3) Buyer purchases dock from seller anchored on
3rd party’s property.
The dock must meet electrical and flotation standards as
well as obtaining a new permission to anchor form signed by the landowner to
which the dock is attached.
4) Buyer purchases from seller and wants to
replace original footprint with new dock.
Buyer or seller may replace the dock as long as the
original permit.
5) Buyer purchases from seller a permitted dock
but wants to enlarge footprint.
Buyer and/or seller must go through a completely new
permitting process to obtain a new valid permit.
6) Buyer purchases dock from another location to
move onto a property to replace or to add on to an existing dock from seller.
Prior to moving dock, buyer must go through a completely
new permitting process to obtain a new valid permit. If flotation is no longer serviceable as
determined by GRDA, then flotation must be completely replaced with approved
materials.
If a landowner applies for and
obtains approval for pre-construction plans, the approval may be assigned to
the future buyer or permission to anchor may be granted.
Please
send me your thoughts and concerns about these or any other issue you feel our
group should be pursuing. The next shoreline management plan committee meetings
are scheduled for August and I’ll keep you posted. In the meantime, remember
what all those ultra successful football coaches say when questioned about
their success, “It’s all about recruiting.” Let’s all get out there and
recruit.
Cheers
from
Grand Lake ‘o the Cherokees