Proposed Zoning Amendments for
Town of
Town Meeting March 2008
Amendment Number 1: Are you in favor of:
Amending the Zoning Ordinance by inserting the Table of Contents before Section 1, and inserting the adoption date into the title block and page footers, and moving the definitions section from Section 2 to the end of the document, and inserting the Tuftonboro Floodplain Development Ordinance after Section 13 Telecommunications Facilities.
The Planning
Board recommends this amendment to make the Ordinance easier to use and
understand.
Amendment Number 2: Are you in favor of amending Section 2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance so the definitions read as follows:
Building Height: The vertical distance measured from the
average level of the grade at the Building line a point on the ground at the mean finish grade adjoining the foundation
to the highest point of the roof, excluding chimneys, ventilators, silos, and
other accessory features required above the roof.
Expansion: Any increase in the intensity of the use of a
Home Occupation: Any
individual business or profession conducted within a Dwelling Unit or Accessory
Structure which (a) is incidental to the Dwelling Unit, (b) does not change the
character of the Dwelling Unit or the surrounding neighborhood, (c) is
conducted by the resident owner/lessee, (d) employs no more than three
additional employees besides the owner/lessee, (e) there is no exterior storage
of materials or equipment nor permanent display of products visible from the
Street, and (f) uses not more than the
equivalent of fifty (50%) percent (50%)
of the Gross Floor Area of the Dwelling Unit.
Pervious Surface: Consists of
porous material. Does not cause an increased runoff. Will allow water to pass through at a rate equal to or greater than
the natural infiltration rate of the underlying soil.
The Planning
Board recommends this amendment to clarify the intent of these terms in the
Zoning Ordinance. Note that currently there is no definition in the Ordinance
for Pervious Surface.
Amendment Number 3: Are you in favor of amending Section 3.5.1 of the Zoning Ordinance so that the last sentence reads as follows:
Any use not
specifically listed in the Table shall be deemed to be prohibited
is prohibited unless it is consistent with
the permitted uses and the district purpose.
The Planning
Board recommends this amendment to accommodate compatible uses that did not
exist when the table of uses was created.
Amendment Number 4: Are you in favor of amending Section 3.6 of the Zoning Ordinance so that Home Occupations and Special Home Occupations are removed from the Residential Uses section of the Table and inserted in the Commercial Uses section of the Table.
The Planning Board recommends this amendment in order to place these uses in the correct section of the Use Table and be consistent with the text in the Zoning Ordinance.
Amendment Number 5: Are you in favor of amending Section 4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance by inserting the word “Impervious” into the eighth column heading as follows:
Max. %
Impervious
Coverage
Per
The Planning
Board recommends this amendment to clarify the type of lot coverage this
standard includes.
Amendment Number 6: Are you in favor of amending Section 5 of the Zoning Ordinance by deleting Section 5.2.1.
Changes: No Building, Structure, or use which has been
changed from a Non-Conforming Use to a conforming use shall be permitted to
revert to a Non-Conforming Use.
The Planning
Board recommends this amendment to remove any redundancy in the Zoning
Ordinance which creates confusion.
Amendment Number 7: Are you in favor of amending Section 5.1.3 of the Zoning Ordinance by inserting the word “Height” as follows:
Rebuilding: The restoration of a non-conforming Structure damaged by fire or other causes shall be substantially completed in one year and there shall be no increase in volume, height, or floor space of such Structure.
The Planning
Board recommends this amendment to provide clarification.
Amendment Number 8: Are you in favor of amending Section 5.2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance so that the section reads as follows:
Fire Ruins: No owner or occupant of land in any District
shall permit fire or other ruins to be left on a site, but within one year
shall remove such ruins and fill any excavation with solid fill to ground
level, or shall Repair, replace, or rebuild the Structure. All
potential hazards such as foundation holes are required to be mitigated within
90 days after the fire event and until the structure is
reconstructed.
The Planning
Board recommends this amendment to ensure the safety of the community after a
fire event.
Amendment Number 9: Are you in favor of amending Section 6.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance by inserting the words “Pervious Material” as follows:
Surface: All parking areas and Access drives and aisles shall be surfaced with bituminous binder, concrete, asphalt, pervious material, compacted, or crushed stone placed in order to prevent erosion and raising of dust. If paved, the Lots shall be striped to delineate parking spaces.
The Planning
Board recommends this amendment to include a full range of surface materials.
Amendment Number 10: Are you in favor of amending Section 7.3 of the Zoning Ordinance so that the Explanatory Note reads as follows:
Explanatory Note:
A. The maximum aggregate area is the sum of all attached, projecting, and/or free standing Signs. In no case can all of the Sign areas on a property exceed the maximum aggregate area identified above.
The Planning
Board recommends this amendment to provide clarification.
Ammendment Number 11: Are you in favor of amending the
certification language in Articles 12.3.1 and 12.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance by
deleting the word “contiguous” and changing the word “defined” to the word
“specified”. The amended certifications
would read as follows:
“Based on my
field investigation conducted on (date), Lots (lot numbers)
contain at least ** Acres of non-wetland soil as specified by Article 12.5.3 of
the Town of
(** is the minimum number of acres required
for a lot in the particular zone in which the parent tract is located.)
The Planning Board recommends this amendment
to clarify the existing certification so that it conforms to Article 12.5.3 of
the Zoning Ordinance.
Amendment
Number 12: Are you in favor of amending
the certification language in Article 12.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance by
replacing the existing certification with this new one:
“Based
on my field investigation conducted on (date), newly configured Tax lots
(lot numbers) contain adequate non-wetland soil area to support a State
approved sewage disposal system.”
The Planning Board recommends this revision
because the current certification is worded improperly.
Amendment
Number 13: Are you in favor of amending
Section 13.2.9 of the Zoning Ordinance so that the definition of height
reads as follows:
Height. The distance measured from ground level to
the highest point on the tower or other structure, including antennas including its attachments.
The Planning
Board recommends this amendment to provide clarification.