Shoreland Protection Rules

Gatto Nero · 01-14-2008, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AQUAMAN

I have a permit application at the wetlands board now that Darlene Forst is reviewing. She has made it so difficult that I have turned it over to a lawyer. It should not be this difficult and when we hit April 1, 2008 it all becomes that much more difficult.

I would agree that the permitting process is a painful one and it's about to get even more painful come April 1, but don't think for a minute that the person or persons responsible for reviewing the applications are the ones making it difficult. They are just doing their jobs as best they can under the circumstances. I have had more than my fair share of the permitting process over the past few years. It has not been easy, but I have found everyone involved in the process to be nothing but professional. There are lots of rules to deal with but they didn't create those rules. They are just there to enforce them. Considering what they have to deal with and the resources they have available to them I think they do a pretty good job.

That said, I think NH Shorefront Association is a great idea, and I would bet the DES does too. If you've been reading this forum for a while you probably know that ShoreThings reached out to everyone on this forum for input. She also reached out personally to people that she thought would have some constructive input and invited them to the meetings regarding these changes. Unfortunately, I couldn't make it to the meetings myself but it would have been nice to have had representation through and organization like nhshorefront.org.

tis · 01-14-2008, 08:43 PM

I am with you Aquaman. Gatto, unfortunately they have different interpretations, depending on who your reviewer is. It is a damn big hassle and I only see it getting bigger. I think they have already started changing to the new rules, even though they aren't final yet. I think it is a huge mess down there and will only get worse in April. I wonder if Shore Things really cares or that was just a show. Once the going got rough she disappeared. Sorry but this whole thing gets my dander up!

Gatto Nero · 01-14-2008, 10:07 PM

Tis, I agree, in part.

It has been my experience that they do have different interpretations of the rules and that that can be painful. But I believe that the new rules are, in part, intended to be more finely defined so that there is less left up to individual interpretation. I'm not saying I like the rules, I just don't blame the people who enforce them for the problems those rules create.

I reread the changes again tonight and my head was spinning when when I finally got through it. I honestly can't say if they are all that much more strict or not, at least the parts that concern my situation. They may even work in my favor, but there is no doubt that the permit process will be about 10X more complicated. So far I have been able to handle everything I have gone through on my own, and I've been through a lot. I have serious doubts if I will be able to do that if/when I ever need to deal with it again.

I can't argue about other people's intentions, only my interpretation of them, and I believe the intentions of the people I have dealt with are sincere. Think about it. What motive would they have to screw you over? Why would she bother posting if she didn't want the opinions the post would produce? Do you go out of your way just to mess with people in your job? Ok, maybe once in a while, but it's usually in good fun.

Onshore · 01-14-2008, 10:52 PM

Gatto Nero, I appreciate the sentiment but it is unnecessary. You are correct that DES is happy to see the development of an organization that will help keep the people who are directly affected by our programs informed. Our only concern is the adversarial tone that seems to be developing. The NH Lakes Association is a similar organization to this new NH Shorefront organization with which we have had a cooperative working relationship for many years. We are somewhat dismayed by statements on this new organizations website that insinuate that the public was not involved in the development of that new standards since some of the membership of this new organization has been directly involved with the development of these new standards since September of 2005. Given the fact that of the five founding members of this new organization; one was a voting member of the Commission that proposed the changes to the Shoreland Act, a second was employed by a voting member, two others were personally involved in hammering out compromises during the senate hearings on the legislation, and three of the five were also directly involved in the same meetings to develop the new rule package you had been invited to attend we would hope they would wish to continue the development of the program in a positive and cooperative manner. Regardless of the approach they take from here on out the fact that they are increasing public awareness of the issues is the most important thing.

Tis, I understand your frustration and whether you choose to believe it or not I can assure you the shoreline and shoreland staff is greatly concerned with developing a program that issues its decisions in a fair, timely, and above all, consistent manner. Please understand that as an employee of the state my job is to apply the standards and requirements put in place by the legislature or through the administrative rule process. While I can answer any factual questions that people may have but I cannot answer questions relate to personal philosophy or opinions on the issues because I am required to maintain my objectivity. Simply put any opinions I may have are irrelevant and cannot be allowed to enter into these discussions.

Lakegeezer · 01-15-2008, 01:21 AM

Having the NH-DES particapate in this discussion is welcome and refreshing. Thanks "Shore Things" for keeping the public informed and maintaining integrity in the process.

ApS · 01-15-2008, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tis

"...It is a damn big hassle and I only see it getting bigger...I think it is a huge mess down there and will only get worse in April..."

Speaking of mess, one of the area's biggest spec-builders got to a "tear down" near me, bulldozed the lot, and walked away. The resulting spring flood washed tons of silt, sand, and soil downslope and into the lake—then they put up a silt fence! (And then a second—then a third silt fence, then a fourth—and a few generations of hay bales.)

The two newest neighboring homes will have to dredge the lake bottom for their boats as a result of the spec-builder's failure to mitigate their own series of cascading failures.

The problem continues uphill, which this spring will likely see a big fertilized lawn on an impossibe-to-mow slope to keep still more of the scarified lot from ending up in the lake. It's possible that wood chips will be used instead, which also get washed into the lake—then gets replenished again. This gross inattention to Mother Nature only serves to feed the algae and milfoil already in the lake.

This photo shows how the localized flooding even carried rocks downhill across the dock's surface.

Something has to be done to keep the lake healthy, and it wasn't happening in 2007.

Onshore · 02-06-2008, 12:50 PM

The newest draft of the proposed Shoreland Program Administrative Rules, Chapter Env-Wq 1400 has been posted on-line at:

http://www.des.state.nh.us/RuleMaking/

mcdude · 02-25-2008, 10:04 AM

see Citizen Article here......

SHOREFRONT PROPERTY OWNERS FORM ASSOCIATION

Quote:

Robinson said the shorefront owners group has already hired a lobbyist to represent it in Concord and will be keeping active in assuring its interests are heard.

fatlazyless · 02-25-2008, 10:59 AM

Oooohhhhh....nnnoooooo....thanks for the heads-up, McDude....this means I gotta get started like right away saw'n down those three ugly, old, large, Pin Oaks that arch out over my tiny little 55' waterfront.....since all I got is a 12" electric chain saw.....from U-know-where....and them trees need to be gone by April 1......or else....they is here .....basically forever!

Skip · 03-19-2008, 06:30 AM

Move afoot to delay implementation until July 1st.

STORY today in the Citizen on-line!

tis · 03-19-2008, 07:38 AM

Thanks for that post Skip. It seems they should have the rules in place before they enact it.

Lakegeezer · 03-19-2008, 08:15 AM

The local construction crews will be happy. This winter has been tough on business. It will be a noisy spring.

Bear Islander · 03-19-2008, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

The local construction crews will be happy. This winter has been tough on business. It will be a noisy spring.

Except of course on the islands of Meredith, where construction is at a standstill.

fatlazyless · 03-19-2008, 11:03 AM

Yes, good question. So, what's next for the intrepid developers on Sheep Island, Lake Wicwas? Did the 490-525, no vote on their zoning friendly article change their persona from a couple of wolves, to a couple of sheep? Ouchy ouchy...gotta be expensive....legal costs & all.... & plus the tightening of mortgage credit locally does not help..

Onshore · 03-19-2008, 11:39 AM

Well, here's where the Shoreland Program stands right now. We will be ready to bring the program on line on April 1 if the law still requires it. The next hearing on the shoreland rules package is this Friday, March 21. The major point of contention has been the establishment of criteria to qualify a project as "vested". Briefly, "vested" simply means that your project is sufficiently underway and thus should not have to obtain the new shoreland permit. This is a dangerously oversimplified explanation but the problem is that the State's attorneys, the attorneys serving as lobbyists for a couple of groups, and the JLCAR's attorneys are still hammering out the criteria for qualifying as "vested". When this is settled DES will have to provide guidance documents explaining what it takes to be "vested" as well as just what being "vested' means. Another significant change that may come out of the last meeting involves the requirement for a stamped surveyed plan. Originally DES only wanted a surveyed plan when there would be more than 20% impervious area. JLCAR heard testimony at the last meeting stating that a surveyed plan should be required for all projects. We frankly do not want those plans for all projects because of the cost associated with obtaining them. However we may need to take the compromise position of requiring them for projects having as little as 15 % impervious. I can not emphasize enough that people take time to go to the rulemaking website listed earlier in the thread and check for the latest version and amendments to see what's coming.

If the Legislature does manage to get the effective date moved then we will of course adjust accordingly. What the Citizen article does not explain is that there may be other changes coming that we will need to address. The amendment to HB 1151 is in large part to allow time for the legislature to debate some other possible changes (including the issue of "vesting") included in another bill. These issues had been being argued/discussed under Senate Bill 417. This bill is being terminated but the same issues will now be heard as part of Senate Bill 352.

BTW while writing this I received word that it is highly unlikely that the House will get to HB 1151 this week and therefore, it will not be heard before their next session which is April 7. That would be after the law takes effect on the 1st...

hemlockpoint · 03-20-2008, 01:24 PM

I guess this is not surprising considering 483Bs Legislative sponsors were all Democrats and our legislature and executive branch is now Democrat controlled.

The more complex you make these laws the more difficult(and expensive) it is to administer. DES people appear to have their ducks in a row but our legislature is screwed up.

What do I do with my project now? I am 80 percent complete. Dont ask how that is measured or the Democrats will have to come up with a new bill and a fee to calculate it for me.

Onshore · 03-20-2008, 01:49 PM

What does 80% complete mean?

tis · 03-20-2008, 01:58 PM

shore things- is it still highly unlikely (after the vote this morning by the Senate committee) to get to the house now?

Onshore · 03-20-2008, 02:01 PM

still highly unlikely.

hemlockpoint · 03-20-2008, 04:37 PM

My house is framed and roofed but not sided or finished inside. The septic is installed and seeded over with grass seed and mulch. The area between the house and 50 feet from the lake was seeded and mulched last fall. I still need to grade loam and seed
around the house which is 225 feet from the water. I also need to gravel the driveway which starts 200 feet from the water and goes by the house around 240 feet from the water. Miscellaneous things like water lines and well hookups need to be done.

Onshore · 03-21-2008, 08:34 AM

Hemlockpoint - Your project is if far enough along that you would be ok under every version of proposed rule, law, and policy that I've seen thus far. If your primary structure (house) foundation is in and your driveway is roughed in before April 1 then completing those structures is not going to require anything new from DES. From what we've seen so far, if a problem were to arise it would be in relation to outbuildings or not building according to the plan approved by the original building permit. If your primary structure and driveway (gravel by law is considered impervious unless specially designed and laid down) put your property at or above the new impervious surface limits, then after the date the new law takes effect, initiating construction of any new structures, such as a garage, even though they were covered by the local building permit, may still be illegal. The other thing is that you will likely only be covered for those things specifically permitted on the local building permit you are operating under. If you don't build according to the plans sent to the municipality or the permit is vague and no plans were required, then you may not be covered by any vesting provision.

phoenix · 04-21-2008, 12:34 PM

recent e mail from NHSA doubted that the house would extend the deadline or at best July 1

tis · 04-21-2008, 01:32 PM

Why no vote shore things? Also I heard the state has started relating the size of the house to the size of the septic which hasn't been done before. True? I also heard there is consideration of extending the amount of coverage allowed. ????

Onshore · 04-21-2008, 01:46 PM

I can't answer the "why"...

There are changes proposed to the impervious criteria. The upper limit would still be 30 % but the requirements associated with it are different. These changes are laid out in SB 352. Nothing on any of these issues is final though until someone puts paper in front of the Governor and it get's signed.

New Septic rules were adopted in February. The State still bases the size of the septic on the number of bedrooms. The biggest difference we are seeing is with developed, undersized lots. If you have an existing camp or house on a lot that is too small to meet the loading standards then you will not be allowed to expand the house or camp in any way. Maintaining existing conditions is allowed, expansion is not, even if it is not technically adding bedrooms. If you have a lot large enough to meet loading standards or are on municipal sewer then this is not an issue.

tis · 04-21-2008, 06:13 PM

I appreciate you answers, shore things.

dpg · 05-05-2008, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shore things

What does 80% complete mean?

20% still to go.

Onshore · 05-05-2008, 12:01 PM

Unless of course your name is Yogi Berra in which case you should stick to fractions because you're horrible with percentages...

CentreHarborEric · 05-09-2008, 03:01 PM

Wouldn't the new 50'x50'-point system rule as it relates to tree cutting also be delayed now until July 1, 2008?
Are we still under the 50% basal area in a 20 year period rule through July 1, 2008?
Of course the stifling gas prices will help curtail chainsaw operations, but I just want to be sure...

DickR · 05-19-2008, 10:38 AM

Shore Things:

The post-July 1 rules define the 50x50 foot grid as "starting from the northerly or easterly boundary of the property." If the shorefront runs from NW to SE, is there a choice? Or is this a case where the folks in charge will decide the opposite of whichever I pick?

I have a related question. I've begun a tree survey, in anticipation of some later tree removal. Using a long steel tape and some triangulation, I can come up with a fairly decent map of where the trees are. However, given the typical irregularity of the shoreline, terrain, and slopes, location of any tree could be a couple of feet off. This could put some trees in one grid or another if close. How picky are the Concord office types going to be? I certainly hope I won't have to have an expensive survey crew come and do a "certified tree map." Your comments?

01-14-2008, 10:07 PM	#3
Gatto Nero Senior Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Isola Gatto Nero Posts: 697 Thanks: 162 Thanked 263 Times in 81 Posts	Tis, I agree, in part. It has been my experience that they do have different interpretations of the rules and that that can be painful. But I believe that the new rules are, in part, intended to be more finely defined so that there is less left up to individual interpretation. I'm not saying I like the rules, I just don't blame the people who enforce them for the problems those rules create. I reread the changes again tonight and my head was spinning when when I finally got through it. I honestly can't say if they are all that much more strict or not, at least the parts that concern my situation. They may even work in my favor, but there is no doubt that the permit process will be about 10X more complicated. So far I have been able to handle everything I have gone through on my own, and I've been through a lot. I have serious doubts if I will be able to do that if/when I ever need to deal with it again. I can't argue about other people's intentions, only my interpretation of them, and I believe the intentions of the people I have dealt with are sincere. Think about it. What motive would they have to screw you over? Why would she bother posting if she didn't want the opinions the post would produce? Do you go out of your way just to mess with people in your job? Ok, maybe once in a while, but it's usually in good fun. __________________ La vita è buona su Isola Gatto Nero

01-15-2008, 01:21 AM	#5
Lakegeezer Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Moultonboro, NH Posts: 1,680 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 355 Thanked 640 Times in 291 Posts	Thanks Shore Things Having the NH-DES particapate in this discussion is welcome and refreshing. Thanks "Shore Things" for keeping the public informed and maintaining integrity in the process. __________________ -lg

02-25-2008, 10:59 AM	#9
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,835 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 302 Thanked 1,033 Times in 752 Posts	Oooohhhhh....nnnoooooo....thanks for the heads-up, McDude....this means I gotta get started like right away saw'n down those three ugly, old, large, Pin Oaks that arch out over my tiny little 55' waterfront.....since all I got is a 12" electric chain saw.....from U-know-where....and them trees need to be gone by April 1......or else....they is here .....basically forever! __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake!

03-19-2008, 06:30 AM	#10
Skip Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Dover, NH Posts: 1,615 Thanks: 256 Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts	Shoreland protection rules may be delayed Move afoot to delay implementation until July 1st. STORY today in the Citizen on-line!

03-19-2008, 08:15 AM	#12
Lakegeezer Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Moultonboro, NH Posts: 1,680 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 355 Thanked 640 Times in 291 Posts	Economic boom The local construction crews will be happy. This winter has been tough on business. It will be a noisy spring. __________________ -lg

01-14-2008, 08:43 PM	#2
tis Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 6,809 Thanks: 759 Thanked 1,468 Times in 1,024 Posts	I am with you Aquaman. Gatto, unfortunately they have different interpretations, depending on who your reviewer is. It is a damn big hassle and I only see it getting bigger. I think they have already started changing to the new rules, even though they aren't final yet. I think it is a huge mess down there and will only get worse in April. I wonder if Shore Things really cares or that was just a show. Once the going got rough she disappeared. Sorry but this whole thing gets my dander up!

01-14-2008, 10:52 PM	#4
Onshore Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 503 Thanks: 12 Thanked 425 Times in 146 Posts	Gatto Nero, I appreciate the sentiment but it is unnecessary. You are correct that DES is happy to see the development of an organization that will help keep the people who are directly affected by our programs informed. Our only concern is the adversarial tone that seems to be developing. The NH Lakes Association is a similar organization to this new NH Shorefront organization with which we have had a cooperative working relationship for many years. We are somewhat dismayed by statements on this new organizations website that insinuate that the public was not involved in the development of that new standards since some of the membership of this new organization has been directly involved with the development of these new standards since September of 2005. Given the fact that of the five founding members of this new organization; one was a voting member of the Commission that proposed the changes to the Shoreland Act, a second was employed by a voting member, two others were personally involved in hammering out compromises during the senate hearings on the legislation, and three of the five were also directly involved in the same meetings to develop the new rule package you had been invited to attend we would hope they would wish to continue the development of the program in a positive and cooperative manner. Regardless of the approach they take from here on out the fact that they are increasing public awareness of the issues is the most important thing. Tis, I understand your frustration and whether you choose to believe it or not I can assure you the shoreline and shoreland staff is greatly concerned with developing a program that issues its decisions in a fair, timely, and above all, consistent manner. Please understand that as an employee of the state my job is to apply the standards and requirements put in place by the legislature or through the administrative rule process. While I can answer any factual questions that people may have but I cannot answer questions relate to personal philosophy or opinions on the issues because I am required to maintain my objectivity. Simply put any opinions I may have are irrelevant and cannot be allowed to enter into these discussions.

02-06-2008, 12:50 PM	#7
Onshore Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 503 Thanks: 12 Thanked 425 Times in 146 Posts	The newest draft of the proposed Shoreland Program Administrative Rules, Chapter Env-Wq 1400 has been posted on-line at: http://www.des.state.nh.us/RuleMaking/

03-19-2008, 07:38 AM	#11
tis Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 6,809 Thanks: 759 Thanked 1,468 Times in 1,024 Posts	Thanks for that post Skip. It seems they should have the rules in place before they enact it.

03-19-2008, 11:03 AM	#14
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,835 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 302 Thanked 1,033 Times in 752 Posts	Yes, good question. So, what's next for the intrepid developers on Sheep Island, Lake Wicwas? Did the 490-525, no vote on their zoning friendly article change their persona from a couple of wolves, to a couple of sheep? Ouchy ouchy...gotta be expensive....legal costs & all.... & plus the tightening of mortgage credit locally does not help.. __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake!

03-19-2008, 11:39 AM	#15
Onshore Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 503 Thanks: 12 Thanked 425 Times in 146 Posts	Well, here's where the Shoreland Program stands right now. We will be ready to bring the program on line on April 1 if the law still requires it. The next hearing on the shoreland rules package is this Friday, March 21. The major point of contention has been the establishment of criteria to qualify a project as "vested". Briefly, "vested" simply means that your project is sufficiently underway and thus should not have to obtain the new shoreland permit. This is a dangerously oversimplified explanation but the problem is that the State's attorneys, the attorneys serving as lobbyists for a couple of groups, and the JLCAR's attorneys are still hammering out the criteria for qualifying as "vested". When this is settled DES will have to provide guidance documents explaining what it takes to be "vested" as well as just what being "vested' means. Another significant change that may come out of the last meeting involves the requirement for a stamped surveyed plan. Originally DES only wanted a surveyed plan when there would be more than 20% impervious area. JLCAR heard testimony at the last meeting stating that a surveyed plan should be required for all projects. We frankly do not want those plans for all projects because of the cost associated with obtaining them. However we may need to take the compromise position of requiring them for projects having as little as 15 % impervious. I can not emphasize enough that people take time to go to the rulemaking website listed earlier in the thread and check for the latest version and amendments to see what's coming. If the Legislature does manage to get the effective date moved then we will of course adjust accordingly. What the Citizen article does not explain is that there may be other changes coming that we will need to address. The amendment to HB 1151 is in large part to allow time for the legislature to debate some other possible changes (including the issue of "vesting") included in another bill. These issues had been being argued/discussed under Senate Bill 417. This bill is being terminated but the same issues will now be heard as part of Senate Bill 352. BTW while writing this I received word that it is highly unlikely that the House will get to HB 1151 this week and therefore, it will not be heard before their next session which is April 7. That would be after the law takes effect on the 1st...

03-20-2008, 01:24 PM	#16
hemlockpoint Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 13 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Disappointing I guess this is not surprising considering 483Bs Legislative sponsors were all Democrats and our legislature and executive branch is now Democrat controlled. The more complex you make these laws the more difficult(and expensive) it is to administer. DES people appear to have their ducks in a row but our legislature is screwed up. What do I do with my project now? I am 80 percent complete. Dont ask how that is measured or the Democrats will have to come up with a new bill and a fee to calculate it for me.

03-20-2008, 01:49 PM	#17
Onshore Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 503 Thanks: 12 Thanked 425 Times in 146 Posts	What does 80% complete mean?

03-20-2008, 01:58 PM	#18
tis Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 6,809 Thanks: 759 Thanked 1,468 Times in 1,024 Posts	shore things- is it still highly unlikely (after the vote this morning by the Senate committee) to get to the house now?

03-20-2008, 02:01 PM	#19
Onshore Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 503 Thanks: 12 Thanked 425 Times in 146 Posts	still highly unlikely.

03-20-2008, 04:37 PM	#20
hemlockpoint Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 13 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	To Shorethings My house is framed and roofed but not sided or finished inside. The septic is installed and seeded over with grass seed and mulch. The area between the house and 50 feet from the lake was seeded and mulched last fall. I still need to grade loam and seed around the house which is 225 feet from the water. I also need to gravel the driveway which starts 200 feet from the water and goes by the house around 240 feet from the water. Miscellaneous things like water lines and well hookups need to be done.

03-21-2008, 08:34 AM	#21
Onshore Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 503 Thanks: 12 Thanked 425 Times in 146 Posts	Hemlockpoint - Your project is if far enough along that you would be ok under every version of proposed rule, law, and policy that I've seen thus far. If your primary structure (house) foundation is in and your driveway is roughed in before April 1 then completing those structures is not going to require anything new from DES. From what we've seen so far, if a problem were to arise it would be in relation to outbuildings or not building according to the plan approved by the original building permit. If your primary structure and driveway (gravel by law is considered impervious unless specially designed and laid down) put your property at or above the new impervious surface limits, then after the date the new law takes effect, initiating construction of any new structures, such as a garage, even though they were covered by the local building permit, may still be illegal. The other thing is that you will likely only be covered for those things specifically permitted on the local building permit you are operating under. If you don't build according to the plans sent to the municipality or the permit is vague and no plans were required, then you may not be covered by any vesting provision.

04-21-2008, 12:34 PM	#22
phoenix Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: phoenix and moultonboro Posts: 1,561 Thanks: 63 Thanked 276 Times in 194 Posts	recent e mail from NHSA doubted that the house would extend the deadline or at best July 1 __________________ it's tough to make predictions specially about the future

04-21-2008, 01:32 PM	#23
tis Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 6,809 Thanks: 759 Thanked 1,468 Times in 1,024 Posts	Why no vote shore things? Also I heard the state has started relating the size of the house to the size of the septic which hasn't been done before. True? I also heard there is consideration of extending the amount of coverage allowed. ????

04-21-2008, 01:46 PM	#24
Onshore Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 503 Thanks: 12 Thanked 425 Times in 146 Posts	I can't answer the "why"... There are changes proposed to the impervious criteria. The upper limit would still be 30 % but the requirements associated with it are different. These changes are laid out in SB 352. Nothing on any of these issues is final though until someone puts paper in front of the Governor and it get's signed. New Septic rules were adopted in February. The State still bases the size of the septic on the number of bedrooms. The biggest difference we are seeing is with developed, undersized lots. If you have an existing camp or house on a lot that is too small to meet the loading standards then you will not be allowed to expand the house or camp in any way. Maintaining existing conditions is allowed, expansion is not, even if it is not technically adding bedrooms. If you have a lot large enough to meet loading standards or are on municipal sewer then this is not an issue.

04-21-2008, 06:13 PM	#25
tis Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 6,809 Thanks: 759 Thanked 1,468 Times in 1,024 Posts	I appreciate you answers, shore things.

05-05-2008, 12:01 PM	#27
Onshore Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 503 Thanks: 12 Thanked 425 Times in 146 Posts	Unless of course your name is Yogi Berra in which case you should stick to fractions because you're horrible with percentages...

05-09-2008, 03:01 PM	#28
CentreHarborEric Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 48 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	New 50'x50' rule versus old 50% basal area rule Wouldn't the new 50'x50'-point system rule as it relates to tree cutting also be delayed now until July 1, 2008? Are we still under the 50% basal area in a 20 year period rule through July 1, 2008? Of course the stifling gas prices will help curtail chainsaw operations, but I just want to be sure...

05-19-2008, 10:38 AM	#29
DickR Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Moultonborough Posts: 757 Thanks: 4 Thanked 259 Times in 171 Posts	50x50 shorefront buffer definition Shore Things: The post-July 1 rules define the 50x50 foot grid as "starting from the northerly or easterly boundary of the property." If the shorefront runs from NW to SE, is there a choice? Or is this a case where the folks in charge will decide the opposite of whichever I pick? I have a related question. I've begun a tree survey, in anticipation of some later tree removal. Using a long steel tape and some triangulation, I can come up with a fairly decent map of where the trees are. However, given the typical irregularity of the shoreline, terrain, and slopes, location of any tree could be a couple of feet off. This could put some trees in one grid or another if close. How picky are the Concord office types going to be? I certainly hope I won't have to have an expensive survey crew come and do a "certified tree map." Your comments?