Wells Planning Board reconsiders "substantial improvement" rule after FEMA remap; options include five- or ten-year reset

The Town of Wells Planning Board spent the first hour of its Nov. 17 meeting in a workshop on proposed changes to the town's Chapter 116 Floodplain Management Ordinance following adoption tied to recently updated FEMA maps.

Mike, who presented the staff memo, said the town adopted a state/FEMA model ordinance in June 2024 to align with newly adopted FEMA maps and that the two central edits under review add a market-value definition and revise the definition of "substantial improvement," the 50% threshold that triggers required floodproofing. "The ordinance change itself that happened in June 2024 ... coincided with the update to the FEMA maps," Mike said, noting the maps were the first major update since 2003.

Why it matters: Wells has an unusually large share of flood-exposed property, so choices about when the 50% calculation resets could shift who must elevate or otherwise floodproof structures and when. Mike told the board the town now has about 1,900 properties mapped in flood hazard zones and 487 properties that carry flood insurance; he stressed that Wells' coastal tax base and insurance exposure make the policy choices locally consequential.

Insurance and fairness concerns: Bob Foley, an insurance-industry representative, said Wells has had comparatively few claims despite many policies and argued the simultaneous adoption of the ordinance with the new maps put "900 more people into the flood zone" without clear, prior notice. "That's really touching people in a situation where they either they're voting for or don't know about an ordinance change that's gonna impact them," Foley said, urging the town to consider incentives and assistance programs as alternatives to a strict lifetime trigger.

Code-office perspective: Jim, the town code officer, emphasized FEMA guidance: all damage and repair costs (flood, wind, fire) count toward the 50% substantial-improvement threshold and FEMA constrains how much the town can relax the model ordinance. He described local permitting practices (routine re-shingling and like-for-like deck-board work historically not counted toward the threshold because they do not require permits) and warned that basing a reset on ownership change would be easy to circumvent.

Options discussed: Board members and public commenters debated three practical choices: retain the adopted life-of-structure standard (which does not reset), revert to a 10-year reset, or adopt a 5-year reset. Supporters of a shorter reset said it gives homeowners time to save for elevation or repairs and prevents sudden market disruption; opponents said a shorter clock could force owners into costly compliance or push them to sell. Several participants proposed a hybrid: keep a time-based reset for ordinary maintenance but require elevation after an event that causes substantial flood damage.

Next steps and outreach: Multiple participants recommended drafting concrete ordinance language for a 5- and a 10-year reset (using July 17, 2024 as the baseline reset date suggested in the discussion) and holding targeted public hearings with the select board and affected property owners. Bob Foley and others offered to help with outreach; board members agreed that a public hearing should follow once specific options are drafted.

What wasn't decided: The Planning Board did not vote on a specific change. The discussion closed with an agreement to prepare draft ordinance language and seek broader engagement before any formal change.

Provenance: topicintro SEG 011; topfinish SEG 151.

Sources: Comments and quotes drawn from the Nov. 17 Planning Board workshop presentation and discussion (Mike; Jim, code officer; Bob Foley).