Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Shoreline Permit Approval topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning board grants 30% shoreline expansion at 5 Russell Cove within setback under Rainsley code

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Rainsley Planning Board found no practical alternative and granted a shoreland zoning permit for 5 Russell Cove allowing a 30% expansion while remaining within the required shoreline setback, citing Rainsley Town Code section 38-3-3-5.

The Rainsley Planning Board granted a shoreland zoning permit for 5 Russell Cove, concluding the project is eligible for a 30% expansion while remaining within the required shoreline setback. The board said it had authority under Rainsley Town Code section 38-3-3-5 and recorded that the code enforcement officer made a determination on July 2, 2025. "The planning board has the authority to consider this request for expansion, relocation, and replacement of a structure as required by section 38-3-3-5 of the Rainsley Town Code," Planning board member (Speaker 1) said. In reading the statutory factors the board said it considered the size and shape of the lot, location of other structures, septic-system constraints, potential for soil erosion and vegetation removal. "Based on 3 8 f above, the planning board finds that there is not a practical alternative to retain the original floor plan volume and structure within the required setback area," Planning board member (Speaker 1) said. The board moved through required findings individually and ultimately concluded the application met the criteria for a 30% expansion. A motion to grant the shoreland zoning permit was made and seconded and carried on a voice vote. The board recorded no additional conditions and stated a determination granting the application. One procedural remark on the record—read aloud during findings—asked that a written notice not be mailed to other property owners as part of the consideration; that statement was read into the record during the deliberation. The board closed consideration with a formal determination that the application is granted.