Harbor Committee Meeting Minutes August 12, 2009

<<< Return to Date-Selection Page

Harbor Committee Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Islesford Neighborhood House

Attendance:
Richard Howland, Harbor Committee Chairman
Ted Spurling, JR, Harbor Committee
Roy Hadlock, Harbor Committee
Jeff Berzinis, Harbor Committee
Janice Smith Murch, Harbor Committee Alternate
Bruce Fernald, Harbormaster
Sally Rowan, Board of Selectmen
Ron Axelrod, Transportation Committee
Erica Merrill, Transportation Committee
Eric Dyer, Facilities Supervisor
Nanette Hadlock, Deputy Clerk
Eliza Greenman, Island Institute
Richard Dudman
Helen Dudman
Clayton Bright
Eleanor Bright
Lela Bright
Sam Reece
Jeff Lauren
Cheryl Sholl
Drew Sholl
Rob Leary – by Teleconference
Elaine Huber Neville – by Teleconference

I. Call to order: 4:00 P.M. by Chairman Richard Howland.
II. Review / Approval June 11, 2009 Harbor Committee Meeting Minutes
Richard Howland moves to accept the June 11, 2009 Harbor Committee Meeting Minutes as written. Roy Hadlock seconds the motion. Motion passes.
VIII. Other Business (Taken out of order)
• Numerous questions were fielded by the Harbor Committee and Rob Leary with his agent in reference to the proposed dock application. At the last Harbor Committee meeting it was reported that up to twenty moorings may have to be moved for construction of a dock by the Leary Family at Islesford. At today’s meeting, it is reported by the Facilities Supervisor that it appears that only one to two mooring may have to be relocated for the dock construction. The moorings are owned by Roy Hadlock and Chris Wriggins. The Facilities Supervisor suggests that some arrangement between Roy Hadlock / Chris Wriggins and the Learys might take place in a personal conversation between the two parties. Interested mooring owners attended today’s meeting in order to learn more about the placement of the proposed dock. At the conclusion to the meeting, it is still not clear exactly where the dock will be placed, or how many, if any moorings will have to be relocated.
Some of the comments / questions were as follows:
o (Rob Leary) Good Afternoon everyone. I have also on the phone with me Elaine Huber Neville who is with Permit Consultants who has been working with Nora and I on getting all the documentation done over the last I guess close to a year or so. I heard Nan mention all the approvals and there are many other approvals that we obtained. We do still have to go to the planning board which I think will be in about mid September. I needed to postpone a meeting that was scheduled about two weeks ago. I want to thank all of you for spending time on this and I appreciate very much your effort. We have tried to follow, I think we have, followed all the relevant rules, regulations, gotten all the permits, etc. We’ve done everything we could. It was certainly never my intention at all to interfere with the mooring fields or anybody’s convenience. When we started this project I certainly was not aware, in fact didn’t know, until the March Harbor Committee meeting when Bruce and I spoke on the telephone afterwards that in fact there might be some moorings impacted. I regret that it now looks like there will be a few moorings that are impacted, although the extent of that is not fully known and that’s maybe something we could talk about. I have been contacted by at least one person who has a mooring who expressed some concern about it and in fact they might be inconvenienced by it. You know clearly I will want to do whatever I can to let people agree and when we know anything more about who would be impacted. I would certainly be happy to let them know personally, talk to them, express my regret for their inconvenience. And also if there are costs, as I’m sure there would be, associated with moving the mooring, it would be a condition clearly as I stated that we would pay the cost of moving those moorings. My understanding is, and I’m not an expert; from what I’ve read, I guess I’ve read enough to be a little dangerous, is that it is the Harbormaster’s discretion to move moorings. I’ve also read a report that I know has not been adopted yet, kind of long term planning report, about things that might be done in the harbor including maybe at some point expanding the reach of the Town Dock for Little Cranberry Island and in order to implement that recreation I know that the mooring field at least the report says the mooring field might have to be moved as well. My regret is that there is no way around it. I wish I could specifically identify to you every mooring which might be impacted or not. I’m not able to do that at this point. But again, I still would like to proceed with this, and I think in the spirit of neighborliness, hopefully we can still do this in a way that we won’t get people too upset.
o (Elaine Huber Neville) I would reiterate that all the permits that we applied for have been procured and met the state and federal standards.
o (Eric Dyer) We have a fairly good map of the harbors and the moorings. But what we don’t necessarily have is a good understanding of where shore side facilities are going to be, how they going to be put out. As Rob has said, he’s not sure how things are going to come together between the mooring fields and this shore side facility, structure that’s going to be built. I took the information that Rob had submitted in one of his permits showing the approximate location of the dock, the approximate angle from shore and overlaid that with a map of our mooring fields. I then consulted a few people regarding what a good distance is, a safe distance is, from a mooring to a float or a dock type facility. That came back for a recreational type mooring, different than a commercial fishing boat where you have you know forty feet of boat. Recreational boats typically more twenty feet or so. This part of the mooring field typically is, predominantly recreational boats. The number that was used for a rough estimate with what an appropriate buffer might be came to be about forty feet, so that you would have some room for some scope, some room for a buffer, if there was say a ten foot wide boat tied up to the float or something along those lines. So technology can be a blessing and a curse sometimes. I put that on paper and now we have something that shows an impact. How reliable that is, is somewhat questionable. We have data points that were taken at certain tides and certain weather conditions, certain wind conditions. We have an imprecise layout of the dock facility and floats, again that are not one hundred percent reliable. I would say that this estimate that was made is probably accurate to within twenty to thirty feet. And again, it’s a good use of technology because it gives an idea of what’s going on but is again not as precise. One of the things that was done initially to that forty foot buffer was one hundred foot buffer. That was put on there primarily as a “let’s see what happens with a hundred feet” as apposed to an actual tangible impact. In looking at it, I think that in the future, it might be a good idea for the Town to adopt a policy whereby if a shore facility, like a dock or float, comes within sixty or eighty feet or some distance of a mooring, that we should have a notification process. That didn’t happen this time. It is a disconnect between our policy for shoreland zoning and our land zoning and what we have in the water, which is essentially nothing, aside the Harbormasters’ responsibilities. So that one hundred foot buffer that was out there is around this structure, I’m not sure how many of you who have seen this document; this is where a lot of this concern is coming from. That all said, it really looks as though the only reliable indication we’ve got, the mooring that will be affected is very likely Roy Hadlock’s mooring. There’s a chance Chris Wriggins’ might be affected, but that’s less likely because he’s about fifty feet on paper, again on paper away from the facility. I really think that the best thing that could be done right now is to pursue some kind of a discussion between those people, between Roy and possibly Chris, but most likely just Roy and Rob to figure out if there is an impact, how that can be addressed. As Rob had said he’s willing to pay for moving the mooring. I don’t know if that is something we can answer here. In my best judgment, using the technology we have available, and an understanding of what Rob has proposed, I really think that the only significant impact will be one of Roy’s moorings. I know that there is a lot of concern here. If we feel, and the Harbor Committee feels that a forty foot buffer is adequate, and we feel that Rob’s plans are accurate, which I think most people do, then that’s more or less where we stand.
o (Rob Leary) I would certainly welcome the opportunity to talk to Roy. I have spoken to Chris a bit; I’m happy to speak to Chris again. I don’t think there is any problem there. I’d certainly be happy to do that.
o (Nan Hadlock, speaking as Deputy Clerk) They were saying that all the permits had been obtained. All the permits have not been obtained, because they still have to go in front of the Planning Board. All those other permits don’t mean a thing if the Planning Board says no, but they (Planning Board) have to have a reason based on our ordinance to say no.
o (Rob Leary) That is correct Nan. I thought I did say that we had hoped to have the Planning Board meeting in mid September, but I had to reschedule that, so just to be clear. That being said, the Planning Board, although it could say no, there are essentially a list of questions that they have to ask. I have certainly spoken to at least one of the Selectmen about that. As far as we know, we have complied with every one of those questions. It’s still possible that the Planning Board could say no, but I’m not sure what the basis of the no would be.
o (Richard Howland) Do you have anything to add on the forty foot buffer; do you think that’s pretty good Ted (Spurling); do you know anything about that?
o (Ted Spurling,JR) I’m just looking at a plan here of the mooring field with your dock superimposed on it Rob. I’m looking at, just judging by Chris Wriggins’ mooring which is in really close. I mean Chris’ mooring is really in too close for a mooring but he gets away with it because it’s a really shallow draft whaler and he pulls the outboard up. Your dock is inside of that. I’m just wondering if your plans aren’t over-optimistic about the depth. I don’t think you’ll be able to get your Shangrila in there at low tide. I’m wondering if you have to have the dock come further out, that really would impact more moorings. According to the sketch, Eric’s right, it would really impact only a very few moorings, like a couple or three. I suspect it’s going to impact more like six or eight directly. I mean that’s if we picked them up and just moved them further down the beach. It wouldn’t really be fair to do that. We really have to move the whole section right along the Sand Beach, move everybody down a little bit, rather than leapfrog those six or eight. If you’re content with a half tide dock, this would probably work. I just think at low tide, I don’t know how you’re going to get in there with your boat, especially with a northwest wind.
o (Rob Leary) Yeah, I definitely share the concern. I appreciate your saying that. You know that was something we definitely mentioned to, you know that Prock did a number of soundings, and a whole bunch of, you know, for data and mapping, etc., at a time when we didn’t necessarily you know, know that there’d be any impact one way or the other. They felt, you know they took all the dimensions and the drafts, etc. for the Shangrila, and as you know we have a whaler, or as you may know we have a whaler. And you know we’ve been assured it’s ok, but you’re making me, I know you’ve got a lot of experience in this regard so it certainly causes me some concern, but I’m certainly willing to go on the basis of what we have. As far as I know, whatever gets approved here will be on basis of these drawings and we won’t be able to move from there.
o (Bruce Fernald) I just wanted to add one other thing. That would also, having the dock there like that, will also keep the size of the boat down, like what Teddy said, you’re not going to go getting probably a forty or fifty foot boat to try to maneuver around in there, so you’d probably be limited to the Shang or something similar size on you know thirty percent of the time anyway. That would keep the buffer down. You’d need less room by having the smaller boats. I think that that’s good thing there.
o (Rob Leary) It would also make my wife Nora very, very happy to hear that.
o (Clayton Bright) Well I just had a general question. I wonder in the process, obviously I’m one of the one of the impacted moorings, and having had the mooring for a number of years, I’m not quite so sure I’m really happy moving. But I think there’s some more important questions that nobody has asked, and I’m not sure the Town has thought about. We have a very full harbor at the present time as far as moorings are concerned, and is it appropriate to take a large amount of mooring space, six moorings which according to the map that I’ve seen is about the impacted number; and take that out of the harbor on a permanent basis for one dock. On a long range planning, I wouldn’t think that that would be forward looking. I’ve seen how much since we did our house more than ten years ago, the mooring field has almost doubled. Is it appropriate, I’m asking people to consider appropriate, to take valuable mooring space for one dock?
o (Sam Reece) Could I ask a question. This is Sam Reece. I was just wondering, the moorings you’re talking about, one or two, or six. How many of those are seasonal moorings? You know, I guess, Roy, I don’t know if you use that boat all winter.
o (Roy Hadlock) No
o (Richard Howland) These are all seasonal moorings, actually.
o (Sam Reece) So it’s a seasonal mooring for you as well.
o (Ted Spurling, JR) I think almost all of them are outboard motors, small boats.
o (Sam Reece) Yeah, alright. I guess that should be something you would consider.
o (Richard Howland) I just want to remind people that we’re not going to be taking the moorings and putting them on the outside of the mooring field. We’d be just shipping them out about ten feet or so.
o (Nan Hadlock) Wouldn’t you have to move everybody’s out then?
o (Sally Rowan) What’s the domino effect of that?
o (Richard Howland) I know, I know, I’m just saying, everything’s sliding down. Alright, I’m just saying what’s happening here. We’ve already talked about this.
o ( Ted Spurling, JR) We’d pretty much just slide everything, everything down the beach a little bit. So Clayton would have a few moorings in his view. But also I mean I think most people agree, including myself, I maintain a lot of these moorings; they’re really packed in pretty close, like sardines. As long as you’ve got a very small boat, that’s fine. But people tend to put bigger ones on; and that means more scope as well as more weight. You get bigger ones against smaller ones, and we’ve got boats bumping sometimes. We probably would want to allow more distance between the boats, so rather than just slide everything down, we’re also going to have to spread everything apart. Which that’s nothing to do with you Rob; it’s independent of this. But I think while we were sliding them down, we’d also have to give more space in between them. It would just be a good idea I think.
o (Rob Leary) You know there are a couple of things if I could. I certainly can’t answer for the Town. But Clayton, just to get to your question a little bit. I don’t know if you’ve seen this Town of Cranberry Isles Transportation Committee Docks and Harbors Safety Study, dated July 30 which Ron Axelrod sent me a copy of. It does, it actually is pretty visionary; one attempt of the Town to look kind of forward into the future looking of the safety of the docks and harbors of Manset, Great Cranberry and Islesford. Definitely talks about a whole number of different things, and I’m certainly not an expert but I have read it. Among the things is the idea that it may be prudent to actually extend the Town Dock by another forty feet. If it did so, that would actually move the mooring field out even further. Again, I don’t have a view on that, per say, and I was not involved with the study. It looks like it’s something that the Town, is at least, or at least some people in the Town are thinking about. The other thing is that that part of the waterfront of Islesford on which we live, Nora and I and Emma, you know is clearly an area if you go from the restaurant dock all the way down to you know Frannie Jo’s boathouse and the like, etc., although there are plenty of residences, there are plenty of docks and boathouses, railings, etc. and from my perspective, and I’m just only one seasonal resident, I really like that aspect of the waterfront, and I hope if anything it becomes a more, I’d like to see more, I personally would like to see more activity rather than less in that sense, and hope that that part of the island will remain that way as opposed to just a purely residential kind of setting.
o (Bruce Fernald) Two things. This might kind of instigate what we really kind of need is a mooring rearrangement especially for small boats. Somehow like in Northeast around the Fleet, whether it would work here, I don’t know. They have like two huge moorings one on each end, and a chain or something in between them, so the boats are moored in a more you know spaced, orderly way. It would probably free up more space. So something like this might just start instigating the possibility of pursuing something like that. And also where Rob’s dock is going, you know this is not a lot of moorings in there for a reason; because it’s shallow. So I mean, is that your mooring Roy with the red bobber in there, the one that’s in closest?
o (Roy Hadlock) yes
o (Bruce Fernald) So, you can’t get anything inside there.
o (Roy Hadlock) No
o (Bruce Fernald) Or anything sensibly. So that area is not great for moorings of any kind. And like I said earlier, this might instigate a plan to reorganize so we actually might even end up with more space.
o (Lela Bright) My name’s Lela Bright. To second a little bit of what Clayton has, but to add to it. I guess my concern is, and I see this happening in Rockland where I live, and I saw it happen in New York where I lived before, is that you really need to have, to overcome all the problems, a complete plan. What we don’t have now, it seems to me, is something that’s completely accurate. As Bruce points out this could be a springboard for some further planning. So I would hate to see us rush into that because once you have given this eighth of our harbor away to a private use, we’ll never be able to get it back. I think that’s a really important thing to be thinking about. We need to make sure that it’s going to be absolutely what we want to end up with.
o (Eric Dyer) To respond to the Brights just a little bit. From a policy perspective, moorings are always kind of a tricky thing; it’s essentially squatting. You claim this space as yours; you have to get permission to do so. But up until very recently, the Town has not had an active role. Only very recently have we started managing moorings in respect to the safety issues. The way that, and I don’t make policy for the Town, but this is just my interpretation of what’s been happening, is that, we’ve been working to try to manage the safety of the harbors, and not go too much further. It seems to be a public safety issue. That said a mooring is essentially private property. So when we have conflicts between private property and private property that’s really a private matter. The Town, again, has only intervened where safety is an issue. So, to date, that might change, we might move everybody and square them up and make a really nice tight harbor. But going on precedent, it seems as though this really is a private issue. I think the Town does need to do something, especially like I said with notification, if a facility does impact, more notice, so we can facilitate that discussion between private parties. But right now, as the Harbor Ordinance stands, the level of standard is safety. It’s not necessarily equity, but safety.
o (Jack Merrill) I’m not going to talk about Rob’s dock at all. The comment that Bruce made. I’ve looked out at that harbor, our harbor on a certain day and things are lined up, and things are just far enough apart so that everybody has swing room. Because if you’re not, and some of it’s tight. But I don’t think, I would be very surprised, if the effort to move everybody and make it better, is going to make it better. I think you’re going through an awful lot of effort, where just by nature, by the nature of people, and where they want to get as close as they can. So, it’s lined up by itself.
o (Ted Spurling, JR) It’s just kind of trial and error. You tweak it until it works. Which we would have to do all over again if we moved them. Unless we gave a lot of space in between, which would mean a lot more distance from the dock for some people than they’ve got now. As long as the boats that are intended for the moorings stay on them, and the winds all blowing in the same direction, it’s been working. It’s when you start mixing and matching boat sizes that it gets a little difficult.
o (Jack Merrill) I don’t believe we’ve ever had any really big problems.
o (Ted Spurling, JR) I did have a couple of boats bumping last year, a couple of my customers’ boats.
o (Jack Merrill) You moved their moorings appropriately. That’s as tight as you can get.
o (Richard Howland) Anybody else have any more comments to make while Rob is on the phone? I see Eleanor just got here.
o (Eleanor Bright) I was wondering and I’m really late, I’m sorry, whether or not there is a plan, a specific plan about which moorings would have to be moved? I know there was a discussion of a plan but then I was told that’s not actually accurate.
o (Richard Howland) We just talked about it. The best Eric, you know, we could come up with, and this isn’t a hundred percent accurate, by taking a GPS grid of the moorings and then superimposing Rob’s plan for his dock over it, was that it affected one or maybe two moorings using a forty foot buffer. That would be Roy Hadlock’s and possibly Chris Wriggins’.
o (Eric Dyer) He’s on a fifty foot, so again, he’s even further out.
o (Ted Spurling, JR) I can jig Chris’ out a little bit anyway; I think he’s in too close now. If there is room I could bring him out. According to that plan, I don’t think there’s a huge problem at all. I’m just skeptical if that plan really represents what the Learys need for a dock. You know for an inboard power boat.
o (Eleanor Bright) I guess I would say two more things. One, the meeting minutes from the last Harbor Committee meeting said up to twenty boats, moorings that would potentially have to move. The other thing is as a mooring owner in the harbor, as I think many of us/most of us are, I really would really like to know the exact impact of which moorings would have to be moved and where they would have to be moved before I think comfortable just saying go ahead and do whatever you have to do. I really think it’s fair to all of us to know exactly who’s going to be impacted and in what way.
o (Ted Spurling, JR) It would probably mean that whole, if you think of slicing up the mooring field into thirds, you know the third along the beach and the mid third and the third that’s kind of outside like facing Southwest Harbor. We would be sliding the middle third along the beach a little bit like down towards Clayton’s, probably one or two mooring births. You know I say two just to make it/give it a good buffer. And then I think probably to add a little more space while we’re at it. So probably everybody along that inner section would probably have another couple of births to row out to from the Town Dock.
o (Eleanor Bright) I guess I have one more question. I don’t know if anyone’s mentioned this. Given the long range plan for the harbor, and the potential that the float may be moved out another forty feet and there’s discussion with that plan that additional moorings would have to be moved, how does that, which is a need for the Town, how does that impact this other possibility of moorings being moved? And again, in your own meeting minutes it said up to twenty possibly.
o (Ted Spurling, Jr) This is Ted Spurling again. It would be roughly the same thing. That would be a Town concern, rather than the Learys, but if we did extend the Town Dock, it would be like the middle section, well most of them are lobster boats. They would all have to move toward Great Cranberry you know a similar distance. Of course it would be at least birth or two, or at least the forty feet of the dock, plus probably little more scope as well just because some of them are pretty tight.
o (Eleanor Bright) But don’t think that potential should be considered when talking about moving additional moorings?
o (Ted Spurling, JR) For the Town Dock I agree.
o (Eleanor Bright) Right, but when you’re talking about two potential scenarios where moorings may have to be moved, isn’t it important consider them both, together, sort of a plan for the harbor and for the moorings?
o (Ted Spurling, JR) I think that they’re kind of independent of one another. Because I think that inner tier of moorings along the beach, those small boats, are probably not as affected by lengthening the Town Dock. A few of the inner ones might be but mostly straight out from the Town Dock and most of them are lobster boats. But yeah, long range planning we should take a good look at it. But I think it would be very few of those in there.
o (Lela Bright) At what point would you start getting into the gut? That’s my question. If we’re giving away this real estate, we’re pushing towards the gut, and it’s alright for somebody to say ok, guest moorings are out there now. But we don’t want to have to chase a guest boat that gets left out in the tide anymore than we want to chase our own.
o (Ted Spurling, JR) I mean conceivably there will be a time when the mooring field, the harbor will be closed like Northeast Harbor and Seal Harbor. I mean I’m on a waiting list for Northeast Harbor right now for a mooring; I’ve been on it now six or eight years.
o (Nan Hadlock) Southwest is the same.
o (Ted Spurling, JR) Yeah Southwest Harbor is closed now. It used to be easy to get a mooring in Southwest until probably the last ten or fifteen years. Now you’re on a waiting list if you want one. We don’t want to see that here. We deliberately left, we didn’t put a quota on the moorings here a couple of years ago when we drafted the harbor plan. We thought there’d be a kind of a gold rush mentality, everybody dropping at once, just to have one in. It’s still open; if anyone wants a mooring they may have one. They just have to be outside of everything.
o (Eric Dyer) And get permission from the Harbormaster first.
o (Jeff Lauren) Did I understand you say that the Leary’s building their dock as proposed wouldn’t affect at all extending the Town Dock?
o (Eric Dyer) Not really.
o (Bruce Fernald) Not much, very little if any.
o (Richard Howland) Coming off the side.
o (Jeff Lauren) Facing out towards Frank’s Dock?
o (Richard Howland) Right, exactly. I think that’s a common misconception.
o (Jeff Lauren) It is yes, a lot of people think it’s right in front of the harbor.
o (Ted Spurling, JR) According to the plan, it’s not very far from the beach really.
o (Nan Hadlock) I’d like to say one more thing. I have studied the ordinance quite a bit, obviously. Before any moorings are moved, there is a protocol for the Harbormaster to take. I know some moorings have been moved, one had to be moved again, at the cost to the Town because it was moved to the wrong place, not enough scope. “Before removing a mooring or buoy, the Harbor Master(s) shall notify the owner, if owner can be determined, by registered mail at his/her last known address…” That’s a registered letter.
o (Bruce Fernald) I forgot to mail them, but I talked to everybody.
o (Nan Hadlock) You’ve got to do that. “…the fact that the mooring will be removed. If the matter is not settled within two weeks,…” (there’s a two week waiting period ,within two weeks) “…the Harbormaster(s) may then take action provided for…” That’s going to come in to play if Mr. Leary has to move these moorings as well I would say. It’s got to be a registered letter to the owners of any moorings moved. My understanding from the State level is, if there is a boat on it, you need the owner to be there to move the boat.
o (Bruce Fernald) What was the bill that you had there?
o (Nan Hadlock) This is a bill for “move co op mooring away from Howland mooring at Islesford” for $116.25 on top of already, the moorings were already moved.
o (Richard Howland) What are you bringing that up for?
o (Nan Hadlock) Because that’s what the bill says.
o (Richard Howland) Yeah I know.
o (Nan Hadlock)I know. “Harbormaster had mooring to wrong location. Eric and Richard Howland okayed payment.” The total bill is $1,178.55.
o (Richard Howland) That wasn’t just for that.
o (Nan Hadlock) No, but that was $116.25 on top of it.
o (Richard Howland) ok
o (Bruce Fernald) That was a good shot, because all Richard had was a buoy there.
o (Nan Hadlock) These things are going to keep coming up, and you do have to notify the owners in registered mail.
o (Bruce Fernald) Well I wasn’t aware of that.
o (Nan Hadlock) The Town pays for mailing and everything out of your harbor funds appropriated by the Town voters.
o (Cheryl Sholl) I have a question. Maybe this is not a fair question, I’m just curious. Given the fact that you live so close to the Town Dock and that you too could get a mooring, I’m just curious to know why you need the dock, or is it even fair of me to ask that question?
o (Rob Leary) I think it’s completely fair of you to ask that question. We do have a mooring first of all. I’ve learned a lot about the mooring in the last couple of weeks. We do live fairly close to the dock. I commute on a very regular basis back and forth and actually through a good part of the year. Hopefully that will be an even longer part of the year as the years go forward. So it’s mainly for convenience. I also think that it would greatly enhance the enjoyment of the property, of our property for us and for future generations. If we ever were to sell the property I think it would greatly enhance the value of the property as well. So for all those reasons I think it’s great. I also think Cheryl it’s very appropriate for that part of the island, this is my own view, as I expressed before, that everything from the restaurant dock down to Frannie Jo’s boathouse and out that way has a long history of boathouses, docks, etc. I think it’s certainly something that historically has been kind of a working waterfront. Even this Saturday with the Islesford Boatworks launching, I’m looking forward to that. So it’s really a matter of convenience. It’s something that I think, I know that the Sawtelles, from Bob Pyle and others that this the thought that it be from the families that have owned the house all the way back to William Otis Sawtelle. It’s something that we would certainly like to realize. We certainly didn’t intend to inconvenience anyone. It sounds like we may inconvenience as little as one mooring and that will depend a lot on Roy and his family. The other thing is that I found out, which actually I have to say I was quite amazed by, is that, I think I heard Eric say well you know a mooring is private property. That’s certainly the way that I had thought of it, we’ve had our mooring for a few years with the Shangrila. My understanding is actually that it’s not private property at all, that I have no rights to the mooring that we have for the Shangrila. The Harbormaster, if I read the ordinance right, and I’ve talked to someone about it as well that knows about these things. It’s completely at his discretion to move it. So that doesn’t mean that that’s a great thing, doesn’t mean that I celebrate or applaud that. But I have to say that I was kind of amazed to learn that, but I think that that’s the case. So the Town for example, when they move the Town Dock out, I may get my mooring moved, etc. and I’m not thrilled about that but in the grand scheme of things, if my mooring gets moved ten or twenty feet or a few four feet, I won’t be happy about it, but I can live with it. That’s just me, I can only speak for me. It’s obviously a very personal decision. But I think it’s a fair question Cheryl.
o (Richard Howland) We can’t make any, the best I can do with the comments is to pass them on to the Planning Board. I think the best thing to do is for Roy and Rob to talk, not here, in a different setting and try working that out amongst themselves. Based on the information I have you know that is the one mooring that is going to be affected. That’s the best I can tell them.
o (Drew Sholl) Excuse me. This is Drew Sholl speaking. It’s going to be more than one mooring affected from what I understand. When you move one mooring you’re going to have to move…
o (Eric Dyer) If Roy wants to move his mooring someplace else then there is no issue. The hope is that the first round the first iteration is those two talking and saying can we resolve this without moving twenty moorings and what’s it worth to you? That’s I think what Richard is trying to get at is that’s the best first step with this.
o (Richard Howland) Right.
o (Eleanor Bright) But Eric, excuse me, aren’t you saying that you aren’t entirely comfortable with the mapping system as it’s been done, particularly the superimposing of this dock on it?
o (Eric Dyer) yeah, I’d say it’s probably my best guess is that it’s probably accurate within twenty feet. I might have had the angle of the dock wrong. But it’s not that far off, I’d say again, maybe twenty feet. So if you do that, it’s still just Roy Hadlock, and maybe Chris Wriggins. But Ted has said, and I think Chris has expressed his willingness to work that out. So really again it comes down to that one issue. I hate to put it all on Roy, but really that’s what it comes down to, so maybe another meeting might be appropriate it that’s not able to be resolved. But I don’t think it does much good right now to spend a lot of time on it, especially not knowing for sure.
o (Eleanor Bright) I guess I have one more question, this is Eleanor Bright again, when will you know for sure?
o (Bruce Fernald) September, isn’t it?
o (Eric Dyer) Yeah.
o (Richard Howland) I have a suggestion, too Rob. Possibly if there’s any way you could put some stakes out, I know you had one, Courtney might have put one in last fall, where the end of the dock is going to be? If there’s any way that could be done, maybe that would give people a little bit better of an idea.
o (Eric Dyer) Maybe drop a mooring?
o (Rob Leary) I would be willing to do that. I think we need permission of the Harbormaster to do that. But assuming we can get that, and Elaine you may have something to say about what we can do or not, but I think we need, that was suggested to me, but I think we need if I read the ordinance right, we need permission to actually do that because it’s an interrupt navigation or safety in the harbor.
o (Bruce Fernald) I spoke to Courtney about doing that again. He said it might be a like the start to a construction project before the permits was given. I don’t know where he got his information on that. That’s why…
o (Richard Howland) Well he could put a concrete block with a buoy on it or something, short line.
o (Bruce Fernald) All property owners that abut the shore are entitled to at least one mooring in front of their house. So he could drop one in there.
o (Rob Leary) Well, I will certainly talk to you Bruce and Courtney and we’ll see what we can set up to try and do that. And obviously, I’ll be up starting tomorrow afternoon, when you can find some time, most obviously, I’ll sit down and talk to you.
o (Richard Howland) t think that I want to say to the public that’s here, it’s in everybody’s best interest that everyone’s happy and we work this out. It’s not up to the Harbor Committee to make the decisions. The discretion does come down, as stated in the ordinance, to the Harbormaster ultimately. We don’t want to have to have Bruce move people’s moorings though and make anybody angry. It sounds like Rob’s really willing to work with people. So I really feel like we can work this out. I know it’s frustrating now because everyone’s basing this on you know a map that’s not a hundred percent accurate. It’s the best we could come up with. But I want to stress again, the Harbormaster, I mean the Harbor Committee, excuse me, doesn’t have the final decision on this. We’re here to hear your concerns and in the future when this happens, we’re going to the drawing board this fall, and we’ll try to figure out, we’ve never dealt with anything like this so if we can come up with a plan, if there’s more docks, we’ll have a plan for the next one and this will be a lot smoother. That’s understood?
o (Elaine Huber Neville) One more thing, this is Elaine. In doing the DEP permit for the state, I am supposed to contact the Harbormaster, so it was in the wintertime that I did talk with Bruce about the dock, and sent him the plan. Because looking at your ordinance; that was my understanding of what needed to be done is to speak with the Harbormaster. So I just wanted to throw that out also.
o (Richard Howland) Yes we got the… I believe I talked with you too I think.
o (Rob Leary) I just want to thank the Harbor Committee and also all the people that have come out from the community. I’m sorry I’m not able to be there right now, believe me I’m sorry I’m not able to be there right now. I just want to thank everyone for participating and for letting their thoughts be known on the topic. I appreciate it.
o (Bruce Fernald) Thank you Rob.
o (Richard Howland) Anymore questions for Rob while we got him on the line?
o (Richard Howland) OK. Thanks for calling Rob. We will inform the Planning Board of the concerns. But, he does have the permits from the Army Corp of Engineers. That has nothing to do with the Harbor Committee.
o (Eric Dyer) I do want to say on the part of the Town, as far as I can speak for the Town, we do need to address the disconnect between shore side and thee harbor. And Richard said the same thing, we’re going to work on it this fall and it will probably take the form as an amendment to the Harbor Ordinance or possibly the Shorelands Ordinance. But in any event, we’re going to work on it to avoid people not being notified that something may impact them. And again, as this is not precise, we’re going try to give a good buffer, sixty, eighty, a hundred feet, whatever from the proposed project, just to make things run more smoothly.
o (Bruce Fernald) I forgot to say one thing. I think one other way to look at it, too, is every private dock you get, it takes pressure off the Town Dock And if you look at the Town Dock these days, there’s a lot of pressure down there. You get two or three boats that go there, two or three boats that go over there; it just makes it a little more efficient down there. At times it’s a mess.
o (Clayton Bright) You may be taking pressure off the Town Dock, but you’re applying pressure by eliminating mooring space. Which I know we haven’t settled that question, but it is a very good question.
o (Bruce Fernald) It’s not to say that everybody will put a dock in the harbor. Like Moe Zukerman has a dock down on the North Shore.
o (Clayton Bright) No, no. I’m not saying, I’m saying yes you’re putting the dock there, you’re saying well I’m relieving pressure; you’re relieving pressure on the Town Dock, but you’re increasing pressure on the mooring field.
o (Bruce Fernald) But by one mooring.
o (Cheryl Sholl) Potentially, we don’t know that.
o (Lela Bright) Well, we don’t know that.
o (Clayton Bright) Well, if it’s one mooring, yeah.
o (Lela Bright) I do think that Cheryl asked an important question. And Mr. Leary is wanting this for his convenience, and I think the idea that you inconvenience several people to convenience yourself is a little hard for a lot of people to swallow. I think that that has to be considered also.
o (Richard Howland) I understand all of this. I want to let you guys know the Harbor Committee doesn’t make this decision on the moorings getting moved. I really am glad that people are commenting on this. I really want to work this out so everybody’s happy, and whether we can do that or not… But I understand a mooring’s a very touchy subject, like when they put a mooring on top of mine this spring.
o (Erica Merrill) When you’re considering doing, adding to ordinances, whether it’s the shoreland or the harbor, I think people also need to be considering the size of docks that we do create, because I know there was controversy up the Sound, whether or not to allow longer docks for bigger vessels. And the impact it also has on homes that are in the area, too, you know whether views are going to be blocked or not. That people should be thinking about that, not only the impact on moorings but also the impact on views.
o (Lela Bright) Possibly one of those things we ought to consider down the road is the precedence we create by allowing, or the Town does, by allowing one dock, do we then open it for twenty or forty in the next how many years or whatever. Do we need some kind of future plan for that?
o (Richard Howland) Absolutley. No, that was brought up at the last meeting. That’s a big concern of a lot of people is the precedence it sets, you know we move a few moorings for somebody and then somebody else has one. It’s something we’re definitely going to talk about at the next Harbor Committee meeting, so we’re more prepared. This kind of just came about. The Harbor Committee is only two years old so we’re still getting everything figured out. We just came up with a new ordinance.
o ( Nan Hadlock) This basically, a lot of this, he’s right. This isn’t a Harbor Committee decision. They’re only an advisory committee to the Selectmen for one thing, on harbor issues. This is a harbor issue. It’s really a planning issue though. Our shoreland ordinance is where it’s going to fall, you know whether he gets the permit or not, like I said earlier. One thing that most people don’t know about the ordinance, and I do know because I’ve been forced to take minutes and learn about this ordinance, because it’s a tough one to read, is that seasonal docks can be okayed by our Code Enforcement Officer without the Planning Board. That’s a seasonal dock is what, seven months out of the year it can be in. Well mind you, a dock never comes down, the float gets hauled up. So we’re talking about the float really, so there’s some wording issues in the ordinance when it comes to that. The only reason he (Leary) has to go in front of the Planning Board is because he’s having concrete pillars put in. This is going to stay there. It’s not something like Zukerman’s Dock, that’s going to blow away in the next wind or whatever. It isn’t, it’s something that’s going to be there forever. That is something to consider when we go to vote on our shoreland zoning ordinance; that’s one area. Anyway, but when it comes to voting on the shoreland ordinance, or any input on the comp, shoreland ordinance that’s based on the comp plan that’s coming up, there’s a meeting on the 26th; it’s really a planning board issue and the planning board meeting is likely to be either the sixteenth or seventeenth of September, it’s not been set yet. It’s a shoreland zoning issue basically.
o (Clayton Bright) Just one comment on that. I only read the ordinance quickly, but I believe that if somebody is dissatisfied, and I know that I’m being told that my mooring won’t move, but if somebody is dissatisfied with the action of the harbormaster, they may appeal to the Selectmen. Is that not correct?
o (Nan Hadlock) That’s true.
o (Richard Howland) That’s correct.
o (Eleanor Bright) I have one other question in reading, this is Eleanor Bright, in reading the ordinances myself. My understanding is that in most cases, it is up to the Harbormaster, but because this is a Planning Board issue, the Planning Board actually authorizes the Harbormaster once the plan is approved. That the Planning Board authorizes the Harbormaster so if there was an appeal process, would that potentially keep the Harbormaster from making any changes until an appeal is resolved, from making any moves of the moorings?
o (Eric Dyer) It’s my impression, and I may be mistaken as well, that the Planning Board handles just the shore side impacts. So if the dock goes out and it pushes moorings out, that’s not really their jurisdiction. Their concerned only with the shore side. That’s my interpretation of it.
o (Eleanor Bright) But if there’s an appeal to a decision of the Planning Board, doesn’t that prevent any action until that appeal is resolved? I guess is my question.
o (Eric Dyer) It prevents the dock from being built I guess, but it wouldn’t necessarily impact the, I hope they wouldn’t move moorings in advance of the final outline.
o (Eleanor Bright) I guess that’s what I’m asking.
o (Eric Dyer)Yeah, I think that’s more of a common sense type of thing. I hope Bruce doesn’t go and say ok well, we’re going to clear out you know a hundred feet on either side. I think it’s going to be more of, I hope that it wouldn’t happen in that direction, that we’d have to look at it from that point of view I guess. It might be a little flip flop, I don’t know. Does that answer your question at all?
o (Richard Howland) Yeah, it’s tough that we don’t have a better plan, it is very confusing.
o (Eric Dyer) We’ve got a nudge. I think we’re moving the right direction.
o (Richard Howland) Right. But yeah, if we could at least get some markers out there, it might be able to help out. Give us a better idea of what we’re working with. And then whoever is going to be impacted directly can work it out with Rob. And then if they’re not happy, then we’ll take it from there I think, is the best we can do now. Does anybody have anything else? Or, just switch gears pretty quick here. There’s not a whole lot more we can do. We’ve heard the concerns of people. And we’ll pass it along to the Planning Board. We can’t make any decisions like I said here, but we do understand that people are very concerned about this. And we’re taking that very seriously. I think Rob understands that. I move to item III. Nobody else has anything to say on that? Ok.
III. Acknowledge Board of Selectmen Appointment of Harbor Committee Alternate
The Harbor Committee acknowledges the appointment of Janice Smith Murch as Harbor Committee Alternate.
The Harbor Committee also acknowledges the appointment by the Board of Selectmen of Norman Sanborn, III as Harbormaster for Baker Island.
IV. LCI Dock
Jack Merrill reports that Islesford Dock is overcrowded. He suggests an L-shaped finger float towards the Head (Leary Property) for additional space.
Richard Howland suggests that the floats need to be lettered with tie up limits.
V. GCI Dock
No communication at this time.
VI. Sutton Dock
The Facilities Supervisor reports that the life ring has been installed at Sutton Dock.
Bruce Fernald tells the Committee that it has been reported to him by a Sutton Island Resident that more moorings are appearing on the North side of Sutton Island, and some of these moorings are not property owners. The question is whether the moorings have been approved by the other Harbormaster, Norman Sanborn, II.
VII. Manset Dock
No communication at this time.
VIII. Other Business (Revisited)
The Transportation Committee has presented the Board of Selectmen with recommendations for ferry service between the Town of Cranberry Isles and Mount Desert Island. Also presented to the Selectmen was the Transportation Committee’s Docks and Harbors Safety Study. The Selectmen and the Facilities Supervisor have asked the Harbor Committee to help with prioritizing the list of improvements suggested in the Safety Study, both long term and short term.
Ted Spurling, JR suggests that a breakwater would help at Islesford. He also recommends swim ladders off the stair landings.
Richard Howland moves to accept short term improvements recommended by the Transportation Committee. Roy Hadlock seconds the motion. Motion passes.
The Harbor Committee would like more time to look over the suggestions for long term improvements to make any recommendations to the Board of Selectmen.
IX. Adjournment: 5:45 P.M.
Richard Howland moves to adjourn the meeting. Roy Hadlock seconds the motion. Motion passes.

<<< Return to Date-Selection Page