Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board denies rebuild application for Map 20 Lot 16 E
Summary
The planning board voted to deny an applicant’s proposal to demolish and rebuild a 16-by-16 structure on Map 20 Lot 16 E as submitted, after interpreting the ordinance — with MMA legal review — to limit rebuilding options when an original structure is removed.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The planning board voted to deny an application proposing the demolition of an existing 16-by-16 structure and construction of a new structure at Map 20 Lot 16 E, after the board said its reading of the town ordinance and MMA legal guidance constrains what can be rebuilt when the original structure is removed. Chair said the existing building sits about "29.6 feet back from the road" and the applicant sought to create a new, less nonconforming structure by moving it farther from the road.
"Under the ordinance, if you are removing a structure ... you can only rebuild on the property the same exact structure to conforming standards," the Chair said, describing the MMA legal interpretation and case-law review the board considered. Board members discussed alternatives, including attaching a new addition to an existing grandfathered building or submitting a modified plan to fit within the existing nonconforming footprint.
After discussion, a motion to deny the application "as submitted" was placed on the table and approved. The Chair told the applicant the denial applied to the version before the board and that he could revise and reapply — for example, to add onto the existing grandfathered building or pursue a different modification that complies with the ordinance. No individual vote tallies or named aye/nay votes were recorded in the transcript.
Board members urged the applicant that there are paths to achieve greater conformity, but "we're confined to what we are allowed to do under the ordinance," the Chair said. The ruling leaves the applicant the option to submit a revised application that either attaches to the existing nonconforming structure or seeks another permitted adjustment.

