Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Reconstruction Rules topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Buyer at 104 Memorial Drive told to clarify impervious-cover and 50% rebuild rule
Summary
Scott Collins, under contract to purchase 104 Memorial Drive, presented planned repairs and a roughly 30% deck expansion; the board requested impervious-cover calculations and asked staff to confirm how the state's 50% 'significant improvement' interpretation applies to a tear-down-and-rebuild scenario.
Scott Collins (Scott Collins, S8) told the board he is under contract to purchase 104 Memorial Drive and described planned repairs plus a deck addition that he said would be under the town's 30% expansion threshold. "I'm under contract to purchase 104 Memorial Drive, which is in need of some repairs," Collins said, adding the deck would be roughly a 30% increase in deck area.
Board members raised two substantive concerns: how to measure existing versus proposed impervious cover, and whether a total demolition would require rebuilding to a conforming structure or allow a nonconforming footprint under a hardship claim. A committee member (S5) summarized recent DEP training: "The requirement that they very clearly said is that if you tear the structure down, you must rebuild it to a conforming structure," and added that training presenters used a 50% threshold as an interpretation of 'significant improvement.' The board asked Collins to provide a simple sketch showing existing impervious cover and the proposed changes and agreed to seek a formal opinion from the code officer (Mark) and DEP (Colin) about applying the 50% test and how replacement value should be determined.
Staff indicated that the board cannot approve an application until ownership is confirmed and that the applicant should expect feedback once the code officer and DEP provide clarifying guidance. Collins asked how staff would communicate next steps; staff agreed to call or email him with updates.
