Joseph Quandt, an attorney for dredging permit applicant Carrie C. Barnes Family Trust, said he thought the moratorium was “unnecessary and unfortunate.”
“I think it’s ill-informed, but we will continue to work productively with the township planning commission and the review process, and in trying to establish any changes to the ordinance that are necessary, appropriate, in the public interest as well as in the interest of my client,” he said.
Lemcool said the moratorium can be extended two more times for a total of 360 days, but only in light of new information that would require an extension. The moratorium doesn’t prevent property owners in the affected district from doing other things on their property, just no dredging, channeling, or other activities.
Trustees also directed the township planning commission to spend that time reviewing zoning rules for what can be done within the 50-foot setback from the lake’s edge, Lemcool said. That provision earned his “no” vote in the 5-2 decision.
“I voted no because I questioned if it’s something that needed to happen, to direct the planning commission to look into this, but the board voted to approve it,” he said.
Challenging the moratorium in court seemed “eminently” doable to Quandt, he said, citing case law stating any moratorium affecting zoning needs to be adopted through the same process as a zoning amendment, public hearings and all. But the Carrie C. Barnes Family Trust is more interested in working constructively with the township than fighting in court, he said.
While environmental regulators stated the dredging permit’s objectives could be satisfied with “prudent and feasible” alternatives, Quandt previously rejected this, noting the stated alternative — a seasonal dock — isn’t much of a substitute for a permanent boathouse.
An appeal of that rejection is still working its way through the process, and Quandt said he expected an administrative review judge to set a scheduling hearing in roughly a month.