I think one problem inherent in many town's regulations for shoreline building is that they tend to over react based when seeing the worst case scenario, but tailor the regulations so that 80% of structures become problematic. Whereas a 175' dock may not pose a problem to anyone if it is used for access over shallow waters, it may indeed pose a problem in a navigable channel in deeper waters.
From Shore Things:
Quote:
|
There are certain boating needs and the owner can't reasonably be expected to remove and re-install pilings annually if a piling pier is what the owner needs during the boating season. If a seasonal pier would suffice to hold their boat during the boating season, then it would seem unreasonable to impact the public use of the area by maintaining a structure in the public trust after ice-in.
|
Many, many times a newer floating dock would be a much better solution for the owner. We have several of the new ones at our marina in deeper water that is always in the target of waves. However, one must look at the phrase "unreasonable to impact the public use".
I think Shore Things should describe some scenarios where this "impact" would be real before trying to make a comment.