08-24-1992 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r MINUTES OF THE LAKE USE COMMITTEE - August 12, 1992 with North Shore Drive Marina. Gaffron referred to this issue regarding the number of slips in the water. The most immediate past license was for 88 slips. The LMCD has been licensing 93 slips in the water for the last 6 or 7 years. The LMCD was counting slips along the lagoon shoreline and the south side differently than the City. Jabbour asked if the LMCD was licensing slips or water useage. Debbie Breneman stated this has been changed 3 times. Gaffron noted the LMCD listed 113 units including 20 transient. Post-1987 they were at 93 plus 72 rack slips. The number 93 goes back to inconsistencies in counting the number of slips based on one or two boats in a slip. According to Gaffron, 93 would seem to be a reasonable and correct numJ’-er. It was down to 88 in some of the transition years. Jabbour commented that in the 20 years since he has been here he has never seem the marinas on Maxwell Bay get along with the City, It will be virtually an impossible task to enforce the number of slips. He thinks the site should be viewed and then determine the density the site can handle. The marina owner can then determine how to run his business. Most of these places have already identified the maximum by site through court settlement. The LMCD changes constantly so the City should forget about their numbers. Callahan disagreed. When the letter was written on May 28, 1992, the Committee agreed that a license for 93 slips could not be granted under the existing ordinances. He feels it is an improper act on the part of the City to give a license for things which are not correct. Jabbour asked for direction to be given to marina owners as to what is most important to be done right away. Callahan replied that it is staff’s opinion that nothing can be done except have nice conversations given the current ordinances. Callahan thinks the Committee should proceed to the next part, don’t issue licenses and work on the ordinances. The difficulty is that if we proceed further and attempt to tag then for operating without a license, the City would need to seek legal advice to see what activities are actually in violation of the licensing ordinance. If you read the licensing section. Section 5, there is no mention of boats. However, the license should be denied as they are in violation of current ordinances. The ordinances were passed and a "working arrangment" has been made which focused on the number of boats and landscaping. This never had any authority. There still are a number of violations which can be pointed to but they are hard to make concrete, e.i. landscaping. Gaffron asked if there would be an intent that the Council adopt a resolution denying a license to formalize some of these reasons. Some years there have been denial reolutions while other years there weren't. Callahan stated resolutions could be passed by City Council if it were stated in writing that license requirements have or have not been met.