►
From YouTube: Colchester Planning Commission - January 3, 2023
Description
https://clerkshq.com/Colchester-vt
00:00:00 Call to Order
00:00:07 Agenda Considerations
00:01:12 Comments and Questions from the Public
00:01:19 Draft Amendments to the Colchester Development Regulations, Supplement 45
02:05:47 Planning Commission Meeting Schedule 2023
02:08:05 Informational Items
02:12:34 Minutes of December 6, 2022
This video belongs to http://www.cctv.org and published with permission under Creative Commons License CCTV Center for Media & Democracy Programming is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
B
C
A
A
G
B
B
B
B
B
Congratulations
to
you!
If
you
did
follow
along
through
the
entirety
of
the
text
and
find
where
everything
was,
we
did
try
to
at
least
put
the
section
numbers
in
here,
so
you
could
find
them
that
way.
So,
they're
with
me,
I'm
actually
going
to
open
a
word
version
of
this.
Just
in
case
there's
changes.
We
can
just
make
them
while
you
see
them
as
I
put
in
the
memo.
B
The
goal
is
that,
hopefully,
by
the
next
meeting,
you
will
have
a
complete
package
that
you
can
consider
warning
for
a
public
hearing,
probably
at
the
end
of
February
or
early
March,
so
no
pressure
to
take
any
votes
on
these
tonight
Amy.
We
don't
typically
run
through
Updates
this
quick,
but
the
Wastewater
regulations.
B
Are
under
sort
of
more
of
a
time
crunch
than
usual
Colchester
has
been
a
delegation
Community
for
more
than
a
decade,
I
suppose
in
December.
The
select
board
voted
to
cease.
That
delegation
and
has
notified
the
state
of
that.
The
ordinance
to
do
so
would
take
effect,
April
1st,
so
we're
trying
to
get
our
regulations
in
line
as
close
to
possible
as
that
April
1st
date,
so
that
we
don't
have
anything
in
our
regulations
that
references
a
chapter
out
of
our
code
of
ordinances
that
is
not
aligned.
B
On
the
books,
just
as
a
quick
reminder
when
we
do
do
regulatory
updates,
the
process
is
that
we
will
consider
them
until
you're
comfortable.
You
will
then
make
a
vote
if
you
are
to
warn
them
from
public
hearing.
The
public
hearing
has
to
be
at
least
15
days
later
than
your
vote
tends
to
be
closer
to
30,
because
of
the
way
that
we
have
to
warn
them
in
the
paper
and
notify
other
communities.
Then
you'll
have
a
vote.
B
B
B
B
C
B
Are
here
this
one's
very
boring?
It
just
changes:
chapter
eight
to
the
state
of
Vermont
Environmental
Protection
rules,
chapter
one,
that's
State,
Wastewater
rules!
So
you'll
see
this
a
lot,
we're
just
replacing
our
reference,
our
regulations
with
the
state
ones
holler
at
me.
If
I'm
going
at
any
point
too
fast,
do
you
want
me
to
slow
down
or
have
a
question?
B
B
Scrolling
down
this
one
I
think
we're
actually
going
to
come
back
to
this
here
or
we
could
do
it
now,
since
we're
going
in
order
if
you'd
prefer.
This
is
item
C.
This
is
a
request.
While
we're
talking
about
public
infrastructure
that
came
from
the
Department
of
Public
Works,
it
looks.
Let
me
just
do
it
since
we're
here.
Okay,
so
again,
this
is
under
item
c.
B
This
says
that
it
says
exactly:
you
know
what
it,
what
it
reads
that
temporary
struct
uses
or
structures
can't
be
within
10,
horizontal
feet
of
existing
underground
public
infrastructure,
portable
trailers
for
construction,
porta
potties.
This
isn't
regulating
new
construction
of
buildings
or
existing
construction
of
buildings.
But
if
you
have
a
temporary
structure,
you
got
to
keep
it
10
feet
away
from
underground
public
infrastructure
so
that
we're
not
having
to
go
through
expensive
or
messy
movement
of
of
anything
I.
Think
it's
pretty.
B
A
pretty
low
bar
okay,
oh
sorry,
Rich,
to
get
back
to
what
you
said
red
any
strikethroughs
or
removal
of
text.
It
does
show
up
in
here
in
two
colors,
because
we
had
two
staff
members
work
on
it.
I
apologize
red
was
me
and
then,
as
some
other
staff
members
joined
in
it,
started
to
show
up
in
blue,
but
they
both
mean
the
same
so
anywhere
you
see.
A
strikethrough
is
a
removal
of
text.
A
replacement
of
text
tends
to
show
up
in
Green
in
here
I.
B
B
Okay,
potable
water
supply,
it's
been
entirely
removed,
I
keep
saying
waste
water,
but
the
State
Environmental
rules
also
covers
potable
water,
so
it's
removed,
I
did
add
reserved
in
there
I'm,
not
entirely
sure
why
it
says
b,
it'll
probably
just
be
for
the
whole
section.
This
just
saves
us
from
having
to
renumber
everything
after
so
at
some
point.
B
B
B
B
Anybody
who
has
ever
seen
a
pipe
in
the
ground
nose,
you
don't
just
put
it
straight
down
to
get
to
it.
If
you
don't
want
the
soil
to
collapse,
you
need
to
sort
of
dig
in
from
the
sides
having
10
feet
gives
room
to
get
to
a
pipe
safely
and
hopefully
not
destroy
anybody's
property
that
they've
built
afterwards.
B
B
B
B
B
We
noted
at
the
time
that
the
Lakeshore
one
and
two
districts
were
listed
as
having
10
years
of
rebuilding,
but
we
didn't
want
to
touch
anything
there
at
the
time
so
because
so
much
of
this
section
is
already
being
changed.
I
just
wanted
to
flag
it
to
check
in
with
you
guys
and
give
you
some
options.
You
can
leave
10
years.
This
is
again
if
you
tear
it
out
and
rebuild
after
you've
torn
it
down.
B
This
would
give
you
10
years
to
rebuild
that
options
include
leaving
it
at
10
years,
choosing
five
years
to
be
consistent
with
what
was
done
on
East
Lakeshore
Drive
for
Lakeshore,
three
and
four
again.
Lakeshore
one
is
the
lake
side
of
West
Lakeshore
Drive,
okay
Waterside
a
third
option
you
might
have
if
I
understand
correctly
about
what
some
of
the
reasoning
behind
10
years
was.
Is
you
could
say
that
10
years
is
allocated
for
any
properties
that
were
demolished
before
the
date
of
adoption
of
supplement
45
but
going
forward?
B
B
See
you
you'd
have
to
follow
the
current
regulations,
which
is
almost
impossible
in
those
districts,
because
almost
everything
is
within
the
Shoreland
overlay
of
250
feet
or
in
the
flood
plain
so
most
properties
on
the
Lakeside
of
West,
Lakeshore
and
East
Lakeshore
really
benefit
by
having
this
ability
to
rebuild
in
their
footprint.
Even
if
the
footprint
is
not
something
that
would
be
permissible
to
be
built
today.
So,
basically
just
it
grandfathers
them
for
what
they
already
have.
B
If
you
wait
too
long,
you
would
lose
that
the
advantage
to
the
town
is
that
at
some
point,
if
you've
got
us,
the
idea
is
that,
if
you've
got
a
certain
amount
of
time
without
rebuilding
it
and
regulations
have
changed.
Thoughts
have
changed
Lakeshore
three
and
four,
for
example,
has
changed
considerably
in
terms
of.
What's
allowed?
B
A
B
C
E
C
A
B
G
B
I
understand
that
there's
different
trigger
points.
Obviously
the
town
does
its
own
reassessments
on
some
sort
of
cycle
anytime,
there's
a
permit.
Our
tax
office
does
get
notified.
So
if
there
is
a
demolition
they
would
know
about
it
so
monthly.
We
export
to
them
and
say
here's
our
permits.
They
look
through
them
and
say:
oh
boy,
this
person
put
in
a
one
million
dollar
innovation,
they're,
probably
going
to
take
note
of
that
or
if
there's
a
demolition,
so
they
would
get
notice
of
that,
provided
the
person
did
do
a
permit.
B
A
C
C
A
F
F
A
F
C
F
They
what
Kathy
was
saying,
though,
if
we
had
it
this
West
Lakeshore
has
a
mixed
bat
of
commercial
and
residential
I
would
think
residential
would
want
to
be
rebuilt
quickly,
maybe
not
so
much
for
the
commercial,
because
it
takes
them
longer
to
get
the
financing.
So
I,
don't
know
whether
we
can
address
two
different
uses.
B
An
interest
I
say
I
shouldn't
say
that
automatically
the
result
is
that
they
cannot
rebuild
I,
know
of
at
least
two
properties
who
have
entered
into
settlement
agreements
with
the
town.
So
basically
they
came
to
the
town
and
said:
hey
we're
not
going
to
make
it
because
of
x
y
and
z.
Can
we
work
with
you
to
secure
an
agreement
to
give
us
an
extension,
yeah
I?
Think
in
here
you,
you
would
think
that
property,
residential
or
otherwise,
but
especially
residential
given
the
market,
would
be
re-rebuilt
very
quickly.
B
We
I
know
of
at
least
two
that
have
exceeded
their
10
years,
and
it's
surprise
it
just
it
surprises
me.
It
doesn't
take
much.
You
can
look
around
and
see
even
the
properties
that
are
in
very
poor
shape,
and
you
wonder
how
do
you?
How
do
you
hold
on
to
that
tax
burden
when
should
be
very
easy
to
resell
and
Market?
But
it
happens,
it
happens
more
than
more
than
makes
sense
to
me,
but
yeah
I
can
I.
A
A
F
D
B
Yeah,
so
technically
again,
if
they
get
a
permit
from
us,
we
give
them
a
sheet
that
talks
about,
like
an
erosion
control
plan
that
they're
supposed
to
meet
again.
That's
if
they
get
a
get
a
permit
and
we
know
about
it,
and
that
goes
for
any
regardless
of
where
you
are.
But
you
obviously
have
to
demonstrate
more
if
you're
on
the
Lakeside
so
yeah,
they
do
have
to
show
at
least
an
erosion
prevention
control
plan.
D
And
then
the
other
one
is
I
wonder
if
it's
five
years
that
might
incentivize
them
to
not
demolish
it
because
they
don't
know
what's
going
to
happen
and
then
you're
stuck
with
this
dilapidated
building
or
you
know
a
safety
hazard
or
problem
or
yeah
some
you
know
collapsing
and
or
you
know,
who
knows
what
else
if
they're
they
don't
want
to
do
anything
because
they're
not
sure
what
they're
going
to
do
so
they're
just
going
to
wait
to
demolish
it.
That
would
be
one
thought.
D
D
Yeah
I'm,
leaning
towards
the
10
years
also
five
years
seems
too
short
to
go
through
design
planning
approvals
and,
if,
like
funding's
an
issue,
you
know
that
could
take
a
few
years
too,
depending
on
what
they're
trying
to
build
so
I
think
10
years
seems
more
appropriate
based
on
what
I
know
of
the
area
and
what
the
zoning
is.
You
know
what
we've
discussed
here
should
I
have.
F
I'm
I'm
leading
towards
keeping
LS1
that's
10
years,
and
now
that
we
have
LS
three
and
four
on
The
Five-Year
Plan,
you
know
see
how
it
tests
out
over
the
period
of
time
see
if
we
have
any
future
issues
we
want.
We
won't
know
until
yeah,
five
or
six
years
down
the
road
but
I
think,
let's
just
keep
it
the
way.
It
is.
B
I
think
that
the
other
reason
we
talked
about
fire
for
the
other
ones,
just
in
case
you're,
like
what
are
we
doing
I
think
was
to
get
it
in
line
with
the
Wastewater
rules,
which
say
four.
So,
even
though
you
tore
down
your
building,
you
could
only
be
grandfathered
with
your
system
for
four
years,
plus
an
extension
of
one,
which
is
how
we
get
to
five.
B
C
B
F
C
D
F
D
B
B
C
B
G
B
B
B
B
C
D
E
C
B
B
B
C
B
B
B
D
B
B
This
is
some
of
our
newest
texts.
We
added
it
in
the
last
supplement
now
it's
coming
out,
so
this
just
says
that
we
had
the
authority
to
review
certain
things
prior
to
giving
a
CO
for
said
structure.
So
if
you
were
to
get
a
permit
for
a
new
house,
we
do
certificate
of
occupancies
for
anything
that
needs
a
permit
ankle
Chester,
and
this
would
say
that
we
have
the
right
to
make
sure
you
built
your
system
the
right
way
before
we're
going
to
give
you
a
CO.
G
So
I
mean
I
I,
just
noted
that,
and
it
wasn't
like
a
shell
just
that
some
they
would
have
the
right
I
mean.
Will
the
state
have
the
right?
I
mean
it
seems,
someone
should
have
the
right.
You
know
before
you
know
the
the
place
is
occupied,
that
someone
has
a
right
to
especially
inspect
the
system
before
it's
covered.
B
It
probably
would
not
read
anything
like
this,
if
only
for
the
fact
that
most
communities
don't
require
a
CO
or
a
certificate
of
occupancy
for
single-family
homes.
It's
pretty
unusual
here
in
Colchester
that
we
do
so
I'd
be
surprised
if
the
state
had
any
language
that
was
similar
just
because
it
wouldn't
be
applicable
in
most
parts
of
the
state,
but
I
also
would
be
very
surprised
if
they
didn't
have
language
that
says
that
they
could
inspect
as
needed.
Probably
just
a
different
trigger
point.
B
G
B
B
So
if
you
said
you're
going
to
build
a
three-bedroom
house
that
is
90
by
25
and
has
a
two-car
garage,
we're
gonna
go
out
there
and
measure
that
you
have
a
three
bedroom
house
and
it's
90
by
25,
and
it
has
your
two-car
garage
we're
not
going
to
inspect
a
Wastewater
system.
We
won't
have
the
authority
to
do
that.
B
G
You
remember
the
family
just
before
you
came
at
the
end
that
bought
a
house
I
think
it
was
a
blue
house
on
East,
Lake,
Shore
Drive,
and
this
the
septic
failed
like
right
after
they
bought
the
house
and
I
think
they
were
required
to
replace
it
with
like
a
forty
thousand
dollar
and
then
and
I
think
with
now
the
septic
going,
and
that
will
be
a
new
point.
But
it
was
just
I
felt
bad
as
consumers
they
weren't
protected
yeah.
B
B
B
B
B
It's
just
a
little
bit
easier
to
figure
out,
especially
if
you're
doing
a
combined
application.
What
you
need
to
show.
So
that's
the
first
part
of
this
one
again,
a
really
nothing
substantive.
It's
an
organizational
piece.
It
had
lived
in
the
body.
This
is
now
an
appendix
G,
okay,
also
an
appendix
G
you're.
Probably
like
Kathy,
you
said
we
were
just
going
to
do
Wastewater.
Why
is
there
something
else?
B
B
And
add
the
paper
which
we'll
still
continue
to
do,
regardless,
we
have
to
find
the
butters
list,
everyone
who
lives
next
to
a
property.
We
have
to
then
draft
the
letter
to
them
fold
and
stuff
envelopes
to
send
to
every
a
butter,
sometimes
with
certain
properties.
You'd,
be
surprised
and
amazed
at
how
many
Butters
you
can
have
you
go
over
to
the
Fort.
We've
had
upwards
of
55
plus
we've
lost
entire
afternoons
of
Staff
productivity,
folding
letters,
stuffing
them
into
envelopes
and
mailing
them.
B
B
When
I
worked
in
South
Burlington,
we
adopted
this
put
it
into
practice
for
several
years,
never
had
an
issue.
A
natural
question
you
probably
have
is
Kathy.
How
do
we
know
they
did
it?
So
we
have
a
handy
dandy
certificate
of
service
form
that
requires
them
to
attest
that
they
did
it
any
good
program
that
requires.
This
will
also
spot
check.
G
Who
works
a
couple
who
work
they've
worked
40
hours
a
week,
so
they
can't
come
to
the
the
town
offices.
I
mean
how
do
they
in
terms
of
their
time
and
translating
That
Into
You
Know
money
I
mean
how
did
they
find
out?
Who
I
mean
the
stuffing
of
envelopes?
I
think
they
should
be
able
to
do
but
finding
out
who
abuts
their
property.
B
B
B
Some
people
will
never
probably
have
to
do
it
more
than
once.
You
know
I'm
thinking
of
the
person
who's.
You
know,
probably
once
on
every
agenda
or
once
every
couple
of
agendas
there's
somebody
who
comes
into
simply
maybe
Building
a
garage
that
is
a
conditional
use
for
some
reason,
so
we
would
definitely
help
them
through
those.
B
B
F
B
C
D
I
am
just
wondering
that
if
you're
saying
the
interactive
mapper
is
based
on
the
tax
data
and
what
happens
if
it's
not
updated
in
time
when
someone's
putting
together
the
butters
list,
maybe
the
address
is
right,
so
maybe
it
gets
there.
You
know,
but
it's
dressed
to
the
wrong
person
or
potentially
it
could
be
the
wrong
address.
How
do
how
does
that
get
addressed?.
B
Okay,
no,
we
would
use
the
exact
same
exactly
yeah,
I
I,
don't
know
about
automatically
I,
don't
know
what
the
I
don't
know.
How
often
things
are
updated,
I
think
pretty
frequently
I
bought
property
in
Colchester
last
year
and
I
know
that
I'm
listed
as
the
owner
on
it.
I
don't
know
how
soon
after
it
took
it.
F
B
E
B
You
know
at
some
point
we're
probably
gonna
come
back
and
readdress
this.
If
you
guys
read
this,
you
probably
laughed
or
scratched
your
head
a
little
bit
this.
This
information
I
didn't
want
to
over.
Do
it
in
this
supplement,
but
would
you
talk
about
like
how
big
your
file
can
be
and
ignore
all
that
I'm
not
trying
to
fix
everything
at
once,
but
just
know
that
I
know
it's
it's
outdated.
B
B
E
B
Well,
I
guess
he's
got
a
part
of
it
here
so
in
the
Shoreland
District.
Okay,
that's
anything!
That's
within
250
feet
of
the
high
water
mark
of
the
lake,
so
most
everything
East
Lakeshore,
West
Lakeshore.
Both
sides
of
some
of
those
goes
pretty
far:
okay,
but
especially
to
those
properties
within
100
feet.
So
we
have
language
in
here
that
says
you
can
increase
or
enlarge
your
residential
structure
so
long
as
it
doesn't
increase
the
degree
of
encroachment
within
the
first
hundred
feet.
Okay,
so
there's
two
numbers:
Shoreland
is
250.
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Staff
interpretation
has
been,
but
you're
putting
a
whole
lot
more
in
that
hundred
feet
than
you
have
ever
had
there
purpose
of
the
hundred
feet,
just
as
a
reminder
is
to
protect
against
adverse
impacts
to
the
water
body,
especially
Shoreland,
the
soil,
erosion
and
anything
else.
Okay,
pollution,
especially
erosion.
B
So
again,
our
interpretation
has
been.
You
have
a
certain
amount
of
square
feet
in
that
area,
where
you're
not
supposed
to
have
anything.
Okay,
but
we're
grandfathering
you
we're
gonna,
we
get
it.
You
had
that
home
there
you've
probably
had
it
there.
You
bought
it
like
that.
You
probably
had
it
in
your
family
or
someone's
family
for
Generations
you're
entitled
to
that
square
footage.
B
We
do
not
believe
that
the
regulation
States
or
should
state
that
you
are
entitled
to
more
of
that
and
so
hold
the
line
approach
here
again.
Old
Camp,
that's
my
dotted
line
here.
Let
me
make
that
just
a
little
bigger,
okay,
Old
Camp,
here's
what
you
had
again!
Some
people's
argument
is
I'm
not
going
any
closer,
I'm
building
a
whole
lot
more,
but
I'm
not
going
any
closer.
Okay,
that's
how
the
little
property
owner
would
want
us
to
interpret
that
because
it
definitely
benefits
them
more.
B
In
theory,
not
in
language,
what
we
are
proposing
is
that
you
had
x
square
feet
in
this
case
20
by
15.,
and
so
you
can
continue
to
have
that
amount
of
square
footage
that
amount
of
non-conforming
structure
in
that
setback,
but
no
more,
you
could
relocate
it
if
you
want,
you
could
put
it
in
such
a
place,
so
this
Old
Camp
would
not
be
able
to
build
under
that
interpretation
here,
because
that
increases
the
amount.
If
this
is
your
100
foot
line-
and
this
threw
me
off
at
first
because
I'm
like.
B
What
you
see
further
up
in
your
memo
just
to
Circle
back
away
from
the
pictures,
because
we're
not
going
to
put
these
pictures
in
the
regulations
along
with
my
video
chat
of
explaining
it
is
to
Define
in
the
definition
section
what
degree
of
encroachment
is,
and
so
here
you
are
enlargement
of.
Let
me
zoom
out
just
a
little
bit,
so
you
can
see
the
whole
thing:
enlargement
of
residential
structures.
Oh
that's!
The
existing.
C
F
A
B
This
case,
what
we
see
a
lot
of
are
people
trying
to
square
off
what
they
already
had
that
doesn't
really
show
in
the
picture,
but
we
see
a
lot
of
is
somebody
has
a
little
5x5
deck
that
extends
this
is
this
is
very
frequent.
Actually
that
extends
into
that
hundred
feet
right.
Then
they
tear
down
that
camp
and
rebuild,
and
they
say
well.
I
have
this
five
by
five
deck
that
got
me
that
line
that
got
me
to
44
feet
instead
of
48
feet,
I
already
got
that
line.
B
A
B
C
B
So
again,
if
you're
old
camp,
what
we
see
so
much
more
is
that
the
entire
structure
is
within
that
hundred
feet
right,
but
they're
they've
got
some
little
portion.
Sometimes
it's
only
five
feet
out
of
the
80
feet
wide
that
their
Camp
is
so,
rather
than
so
now
they've
had
this
they've
had
this
Camp.
That's
in
that
hundred
feet,
that's
already
impacting
Everything
100
feet
is
meant
to
do,
but
it's
but
they,
but
it's
what
they
have.
They
can't
move
it
right,
especially
on
some
of
the
Lakeshore
drives.
B
So
we
get
that
and
that's
why
this
is
in
here.
You
get
to
rebuild
that,
even
though
it
could
have
its
very
presence
has
adverse
impacts.
But
what
we're
seeing
is
I'm
already
this
close
my
Lake
right
I'm.
Already
this
close
to
the
lake
and
I've
got
itty
bitty
deck
right
poking
off
here
they
want
to
now
say
my
new
home
I
had
I
already
established
my
line
is
here:
that's
my
line.
I
could
build
anything.
I
want
up
to
that
line.
D
B
D
B
B
You
take
down
that
camp,
you
rebuild
it
even
if
you
rebuild
it
exactly
in
the
same
square
footprint.
Questions
that
have
come
to
us.
I
said
all
right.
We
know
that
we're
in
that
hundred
feet,
can
we
put
more
in
100
feet
in
the
form
of
a
second
story?
Third
story:
well,
whatever
the
height
limit
is
or
not,
we
have
interpreted
that
to
date
as
saying
it's
really
been
a
footprint
issue,
and
so
we
have
allowed
that,
but
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
you
guys
are
weighing
in
on
that.
This.
B
B
F
A
B
B
F
Well,
my
take
before
I
saw
any
of
this
was
I
always
thought
here
in
Colchester
along
the
lake
you
could
rebuild
on
the
same
footprint.
Same
footprint
to
me
means
Foundation
law
deck
that
doesn't
go
all
the
way
down
and
have
have
a
frost
wall
is
a
deck
it's
attached
to
it,
but
your
footprint
is
the
foundational
to
me.
Dex
can
come
in
and
out
all
over
the
place
and
that
doesn't
affect
the
structure.
F
Hey,
listen
unless
you're
building
a
tree
house
where
you
have
post
and
then
you
can
build
out
I
guess,
but
I've
always
interpreted
what
Colchester
had
was
building
on
the
same
Foundation
footprint
and
it
if
the
decks
are
overhangs
are
concerned.
Maybe
that
could
be
limited
to
not
increasing
it
beyond
the
percentage
that's
currently
in
on
the
existing
property.
F
The
structure
itself
can't
increase
over
the
existing
footprint
of
the
structure
that
was
there
before
increase
over.
So,
if
you
had,
you
know,
you
have
a
15
by
20.
Ranch,
you
know
a
little
Camp.
You
could
build
up
from
that
or
make
it
smaller,
but
now
you're,
bigger
but
I
would
say
you
could
probably
make
a
little
staircase
going
down
because
it's
not
really
a
structure.
F
I
would
tend
to
be
okay
with
that,
because
it's
not
part
of
a
living
area,
it
doesn't
increase
the
living
area,
but
I
wouldn't
want
to
see
I'd
like
to
put
a
limit
on
that,
because
I
wouldn't
want
to
see
the
structure
and
then
someone
putting
you
know
you've
got
15
by
20.
house.
I
would
want
to
see
a
15
by
20
deck
off
of
it.
I
think
so.
I
would
limit
it
to
a
certain
percentage
or
something
tied
to
something.
A
F
B
Even
if
it's
not
a
deck,
so
let's
ask
this
question
first
and
then
we'll
come
back
to
either
the
deck
should
count
because
I
think
that's
an
excellent
question.
So
somebody's
got
this
house.
Let's
pretend
it's
one
story:
I,
don't
know
I'm
not
trying
to
pick
on
anyone
if
anyone's
watching
this
I'm.
Like
that's
my
house,
I'm.
Sorry,
let's
pretend
that
this
is
some
sort
of
small
addition
here
right.
B
So
we'll
Pretend
This
is
a
one-story
house.
They
want
to
take
down
rebuild,
but
we
are
hearing
from
a
lot
of
people.
Is
they
want
to
rebuild
the
whole
new
house
up
to
this
line
all
the
way
across
right
right,
whether
it
was
a
deck,
whether
it
was
living
space
regardless?
They
are
saying
this
is
my
line
Lady.
This
is
my
degree
of
encroachment
all
the
way
the
length
of
the
home
does
that
make
a
little
more
sense.
Now,
Rebecca's
asking
a
very
good
question
and
says:
is
there
a
difference?
B
If
does
this
square
footage
get
to
count,
even
if
it
was
simply
a
deck
versus
whether
it's
a
living
space
right
so
question
one
is
edit,
no
matter
what
is
there
anything
that
should
get
them
an
allowance
to
build
here,
assuming
this
is
all
in
100
feet
and
I'm?
Pretty
sure
it
is
this
line.
Here
is
my
first
question
for
you,
some
would
argue:
I'm,
not
increasing
my
degree
of
encroachment
I'm,
not
any
closer
than
I
was
before.
F
A
F
To
me,
if
it's
something,
if
you
had
raw
land
today,
had
nothing
on
that
piece
of
property,
you
would
not
be
able
to
build
within
that
100
Mark
and
that's
to
protect
the
water
source,
which
is
here's
Lake,
Champlain
mountains,
Bay
I,
would
say.
If
you
already
have
an
encroachment
and
that
100
foot
square
foot
you
cannot
increase
it
I,
don't
think
it
should
be
a
linear
line.
It's
just.
You
cannot
increase.
F
B
That's
actually
a
huge
part
of
the
problem,
because
people
have
historically
built
these
decks,
especially
on
the
backboard.
Nobody
can
see
them,
and
so
they
are
establishing
lines
that
may
only
be
three
four
five
ten
years
old
that
have
never
been
allowed
and
it
keeps
sleep
frogging
and
that's
part
of
the
problem.
I
mean
here's,
probably
another
good
example.
Where
you
have
this
whole
building,
they
might
say
this
is
my
line
now,
look
how
close
we
are
to
the
lake.
This
is
my
line
if
I
were
to
rebuild
this
I'm
building
this.
C
B
This
is
a
good
one
too.
If
you
have
a
property,
that's
not
straight!
You
see
this
point.
This
is
their
closest
point
right.
Their
line
under
some
interpretation.
Is
this?
That's
more
encroachment,
that's
my
point.
They'll.
Take
that
closest
point
and
say
that
is
my
line.
Okay,
I
agree.
You
gotta
change
and
again
I'm,
not
just
picking
on
this
we've
seen.
Applications
come
in
from
all
around
town
clay,
Point,
there's
a
lot
of
rebuilds
up
there
in
that
area.
B
D
D
F
B
B
B
E
F
Existing
food
that
I'm
just
talking
about
the
existing
footprint
I'm
talking
about
this
first
one
where
they're
saying
the
encroachment
this
the
second
drawing
where
they're
taking
the
existing
proposed
square
footage
they're
still
taking
the
example,
is
a
15
by
20,
which
is
that's
not
very
big
at
all.
Is
it
no?
It's
got
a
300
square
feet
I
mean
that's.
B
F
Us
our
examples:
yeah
he's
a
tiny
little,
it's
a
tiny
house.
What
that
second
diagram
is
showing
is
that
you're
taking
that
same
300
square
feet
and
it
doesn't
have
to
be
15
by
20.
It's
300
square
feet
can
be
within
that
100
foot,
setback,
okay,
so
you're
not
increasing
the
square
footage
you
might
be
changing
the
shape
of
it,
but
the
rest
of
the
build
out
is
beyond
the
100
foot
setback.
Okay,
yeah.
C
F
D
F
D
A
B
There's
this
that's
why
we
discuss
that
right.
So
the
goal
is:
let's,
let's
clarify
this
with
the
commission
to
see
what
the
intent
is.
So
that's
that's
the
goal
and
then
how's
the
best
way.
So,
let's
just
say
you
guys
are
all
on
the
same
page
and
say
yeah
square
footage.
That's
what
we
want
how's
the
best
way
to
pop
that
into
the
regs,
and
what
we've
brought
to
you
is,
we
say,
shall
not
increase
the
degree
of
non-conformity.
What
the
heck
is
the
degree
of
non-conformity.
B
Sorry
degree
of
encroachment,
okay,
which
is
very
important
because
we
use
degree
of
non-conformity
Elsewhere
and
to
cover
our
behinds
on
that
one.
We
do
say
it
only
applies
in
the
Shoreland
overlay,
so
anywhere
else.
Where
degree
of
anything
is
mentioned.
This
is
not
the
definition
for
that.
All
right.
G
B
C
B
Is
this
is
I'll
just
call
the
area
of
protection
right?
That's
the
idea.
This
would
say:
no,
you
cannot
build
nice
more
in
that
hundred
feet.
This
is
a
an
important
area.
Unless
you
already
had
something
there,
you
would
be
entitled
to
I
think
we
have
recognized
it
as
very
entire
is
very
important
for
people
to
keep
that
they
have
had.
F
C
G
B
B
B
G
B
F
B
C
B
B
F
D
And
then
you
have
hard
impervious
surface,
you
know
maybe
there's
gaps
between
the
the
boards
and
stuff
but
and
protecting
the
water
quality
of
the
lake.
You
want
you,
don't
you
want
less
impervious
surface
within
that
protected
area,
so,
if
you're,
adding,
if
you're,
considering
that
that,
if
you're
not
counting
the
deck,
that's
what
I
was
questioning.
Why
I
was
questioning
a
pertinent
features,
because
it's
kind
of
a
little
bit
of
a
gray
area
and
are
we
back
to
the
definition
here.
B
D
F
B
C
D
B
D
B
D
B
C
B
B
A
B
E
E
A
The
trick
so
the
so
that
deck
was
excellent
right
now,
that's
existing!
So
we
let
you
rebuild
on
your
little
Foundation
you're
perfect.
You
can
rebuild
your
little
deck
right
there,
so
you're
perfect,
but
now
you
want
to
move
this
back.
Are
you?
Are
we
going
to
allow
that
little
square
part
of
the
square
footage
when
you
move
back?
B
A
A
Decks
separate
from
that
issue,
it's
not
sinner
I
think
the
way
wheel
gets
out
considered
part
of
the
structure,
but
the
question
is
that
you're
saying
is
that
this
is
this
would
be?
Do
we
allow
that
to
happen?
You
build
a
deck,
just
a
regular
deck.
Well,
they'll,
come
to
you
and
say:
can
we
build
that
into
a
new
bedroom?
I'll
say
no,
because
it's
not
permanent
right.
B
B
There's
precedence
for
saying
this
is
part
of
your
footprint
as
long
as
it
was
permitted
in
has
some
or
existed
more
than
15
years
has
some
sort
of
staying
power
that
that
has
historically
been
included
as
part
of
your
rebuild
footprint.
So
your
new
build
is
the
solid
line
Plus
this
line,
whether
you
believe
that
should
be
true
or
not,
is
entirely
up
to
you.
B
F
B
B
A
B
A
F
A
They'll
have
to
get
closer
to
the
lake,
so
we
want
to
eliminate
everything
that
goes
out
towards
the
lake
as
far
as
new
construction
is
concerned.
Okay,
so
if
they
they
want
that
dick
they
could
push
their
hole
according
to
this
and
push
that
whole
Camp
back
go
at
it
yeah.
You
know
as
long
as
they
push
it
back
beyond
that
100
feet.
E
B
D
D
B
It's
not
uncommon
and
we
we
do
struggle
with
it.
A
lot
daily
when
someone's
like
I've
had
this
here
for
50
years
and
we're
like
kind
of
looks
this
color
I,
don't
know
yeah,
but
then
again
something
that
could
be
five
years
old
could
look
like
it's
40
years
old,
stuff,
weathers
pretty
quickly.
So
yeah,
it's
going
to
be
hard.
B
B
B
F
B
C
C
B
C
B
And
something
since
we're
already
talking
about
the
Shoreland,
something
that
you
will
hear
not
for
this
supplement,
but
you
will
hear
it
in
two
weeks
when
we
meet
with
the
drb
they
struggle
with
the
Shoreland
stuff,
there's
something
in
there
about
about
cutting
trees
in
the
Shoreland
and
new
trees
and
something
about
like
they
have
to
be
randomly
placed
and
they're
like
what
the
heck.
Does
that
mean?
How
do
you
randomly
Place
trees,
like
it.
B
B
So
one
thing:
okay,
let
me
see
if
I
can
summarize
us
and
get
us
ordinarily
be
like.
Why
don't
you
think
about
it?
We'll
talk
about
it
again
in
two
weeks,
I
think
what
I
what
I'm
hearing
consistently
is
you
don't
get
to
build
out
to
that
pink
line?
In
any
case,
your
your
degree
of
encroachment
is
not
you've
already
gone
to
40
feet
instead
of
80.,
and
you
can
keep
going
to
40..
B
B
B
So
one
option
is
to
Simply,
say
you,
you
don't
get
that
at
all.
You
have
a
thousand
square
feet
that
you
can
rebuild.
One
option
is
to
say,
put
those
in
the
two
buckets
like
I
brought
up.
This
will
be
tricky,
but
I
think
we
can
do
it.
If
you
want
to
you,
get
the
bucket
of
living
space
foundation
wall,
maybe
being
the
definition
we'll
have
to
work
our
way
through
that
and
you
get
the
bucket
of
pertinences.
B
And
you
can
keep
that,
provided
it
has
existed
for
longer
than
our
statute
of
limitations
of
15
years
and
or
you
actually
got
a
legal
permit
for
it,
but
it
can
only
be
kept
as
that
same
bucket
as
an
impertinence.
Same
square
footage
same
square
footage,
not
any
closer
okay,
and
you
can't
take
that
number
whatever.
It
is
and
convert
it
to
new
living
space
with
this
foundation.
Wall
no.
C
D
C
B
F
F
A
B
B
F
A
F
D
E
A
D
A
B
B
Everything
else
seemed
pretty
straightforward,
so
I
don't
think
we
need
to
review
the
Wastewater
stuff
again,
except
for
the
small
edits
that
I
noted
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that
this
represents
what
you
want
it
to
do.
The
hope
is
to
warn
it
for
a
public
hearing,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
do
that.
If
you
don't
like
the
text,
it's
more
critical
to
get
that
right.
Yeah,
I,.
F
B
B
C
B
Any
importances
pertinances
such
as
decks,
porches,
overhangs
and
stairs
in
existence
on
a
lot
then
100
foot
setback
of
mean
watermark.
So
it's
meant
to
be
like
a
a
plug-in
right.
If,
as
long
as
you
don't
increase
the
amount
of
gross
floor
area
but
I,
don't
think
it
reflects
what
you
talked
about
tonight,
so
I
got
to
fix
it
anyway.
C
F
F
F
F
B
Yeah,
my
gas,
just
knowing
what
I
know
about
sort
of
the
history
of
the
Shoreland
delegation
and
why
Colchester
took
it
on
so
just
a
very
quick
history.
It's
a
little
bit
different
than
Wastewater
regulation
delegation,
where
we
take
the
Statewide
starter
rules
and
keep
them
and
enforce
them.
With
the
Shoreland
delegation,
we
took
oversight,
we
created
our
own
rules
and
we
had
to
have
them
reviewed
by
the
state,
so
we
could
make
them
different
and
we
did
well
predated
me
as
long
as
they
were
approved
and
they
were
by
the
state.
B
So
they
do
look
different
from
what
I
know
about
the
history
of
it.
A
lot
of
it
was
to
protect
existing
homes
in
that
100
foot
because
it
was
deemed
very
important,
and
that
was
the
basis
of
a
lot
of
that
conversation.
Pam.
Were
you
around
you?
Can
you
can
kick
me
if
you're
like
that's,
not
it
at
all,
but
that
was
so
much
it
I,
don't
know
how
much
thought,
or
even
consideration
was
given
to
those
types
of
structures,
because
that
wasn't
the
priority.
B
C
F
B
B
B
B
May
take
one
off:
I
would
hold
them
both
but
know
that
you'll
probably
have
one
and
not
the
other
okay,
because
if,
if
two
weeks
from
now
on
the
17th,
you
say
we're
not
ready,
we
want
to
see
this
again
come
back
to
us.
February
7th!
You
won't
have
a
public
hearing
on
the
21st.
Okay,
you'll
have
it
in
March,
because
we
need
enough
time
to
warn
it
so
hold
both
dates
but
plan
on
only
attending
one.
Okay,.
A
B
A
B
This
letter
is
from
somebody
who's
frustrated
that
somebody
has
overstayed
spoken
with
Mr
Cohen
many
times
he's
very
nice,
but
is
very
frustrated
by
this
and
wants
the
town
to
do
more
than
we
have
been,
and
his
more
per
this
letter
is
to
utilize
the
water
department.
From
what
I
understand
the
select
board
said,
we
don't
control
the
water
department
or
the
water
district
fire
district
2..
We
don't
set
their
rules,
you
need
to
take
it
to
them.
I'm,
not
asking
for
any
action
from
you.
Well.
A
A
B
A
G
It
just
sounds
like
some
homeowners
somehow
have
a
relationship
with
the
water
department
or
a
district
where
they
leave
it
on
or
they
don't.
You
know
it
just
seems
very
unfair
to
me
and
I.
Just
I,
just
am
for
one.
I
am
just
really
an
enforcer.
You
know,
because
it's
just
unfair,
you
know
you
shouldn't
be
people
that
have
a
relationship.
C
B
C
B
B
I
think
that
they
they'd
like
to
retain
their
ability
to
make
those
decisions.
Beyond
that
I
mean
I,
don't
know
how
I
don't
know
how
organized
it
is.
It
could
be
extremely
organized.
It
could
be
extremely,
not
there's
also,
you
know
an
argument
about
whether
or
not
you
know
using
the
Water
District,
as
your
Enforcer
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
I've
had
this
conversation
with
some
folks,
so
you
own
a
seasonal
unit.
We
say
that
you
cannot
live
in
it.
B
B
B
A
B
Oh
and
I
did
have
to
change
the
printed
copy
you
have
in
front
of
you.
Yep
yep
was
slightly
changed
because
the
agenda
item
said
the
wrong
month
in
the
title,
but
not
in
the
text,
so
I
think
it
said
September
or
October
in
the
pre
in
the
one
that
I
emailed
you
item
I,
don't
have
a
copy
here
in
front
of
me.
Okay,.