Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Council asks CRMC for hearing after public concern over Block Island Club dock and floats
Loading...
Summary
The council voted to send a letter to the Coastal Resources Management Council requesting a hearing on an application by the Block Island Club that includes previously installed floats and a proposed expansion into Type 1 waters; the conservation commission had raised concerns about permits and water‑quality impacts.
The New Shoreham Town Council voted to send a letter to the Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC) requesting a hearing on an application by the Block Island Club that seeks to authorize existing float structures and an expansion of floating docks and swim platforms in classified tidal waters.
Council members, Conservation Commission members and residents debated the application’s history; conservation members and some residents said portions of the float system and swim platforms were installed without prior CRMC approval and that the new application seeks additional expanded floating dock area and a swim float. Conservation Commission members said they reviewed the materials and recommended a hearing to review both the installation history and the expansion now proposed.
Carlos Salinas (conservation commission) described recent coordination between staff and volunteer commissioners and urged that advisory bodies be engaged early on in the review process. Resident commenters and members of Conservation Commission and Great Salt Pond committee expressed concerns about permitting procedures and potential impacts to Class‑1 waters.
Councilmember Keith (first reference) and others said they were comfortable asking CRMC to schedule a hearing and to review the application’s history; Councilmember Nancy (first reference) emphasized this was about process rather than endorsing or opposing the club’s use of the facilities. The council approved a motion to send a letter requesting a CRMC hearing and to relay concerns that previous work appeared to have been undertaken without permits. The motion passed on voice vote. The council’s letter does not take a position on the substance of CRMC’s eventual finding but asks that the agency hold a public hearing to vet the application and consider any unresolved permitting or water‑quality questions.
Ending: The council’s letter requests CRMC to hold a hearing; if CRMC sets a hearing date the town indicated it and its advisory bodies would participate in the proceeding. The council instructed staff to finalize and transmit the letter before CRMC’s comment deadline.
