Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Definitions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bolton planners debate clarifying 'building' vs. 'impervious' coverage in zoning rules
Summary
Commissioners and staff discussed ambiguous references to 'building coverage,' 'lot coverage,' and 'impervious coverage' in the zoning regulations and asked staff to draft clearer calculation language (examples and exemptions) to avoid confusion on small lots.
Bolton Planning & Zoning commissioners and staff spent part of the Dec. 11 meeting discussing inconsistent terminology in the town's zoning regulations around building, lot and impervious coverage.
Zoning enforcement officer Michael D'Amato said dimensional requirements reference "lot coverage" while the definitions mention "building coverage," creating situations where lot and impervious percentages appear inconsistent. He recommended codifying calculation instructions and examples—citing a lake‑district approach used in a neighboring town that exempts open decks and structures under 200 square feet from coverage calculations. "The deck would not be included as coverage, and structures measuring 200 square feet or less would be exempt," D'Amato said.
Patrice Carson and the commission discussed whether to treat total allowable coverage as a single percentage (for example, 25 percent) combining buildings and impervious surfaces, or to retain separate percentages with clearer definitions. Commissioners noted the issue is most acute on smaller lots where adding a shed or deck can create uncertainty. Carson asked whether it would be easier to state a single combined cap or keep separate categories; staff will review options and provide suggested calculation language and examples.
Next steps: staff will research example calculation language and bring recommendations back to the PZC for review.
