Shoreland Protection Act

[Gatto Nero]

I know some of you are very knowledgeable when it comes to the subject of the DES and shore related things and I am hoping you can help me get clarification on the COMPREHENSIVE SHORELAND PROTECTION ACT Section 483-B:11. The section deals with nonconforming structures. In particular I am interested in the expansion of an existing nonconforming structure.

I have spoken with the town's building inspector and I understand, and can work within, the town's restrictions, but the building inspector told me I needed to speak with the state for anything closer than 50' to the high water mark. I then read the Shoreland Protection Act on the DES website and found the following with regard to nonconforming structures.

"Except as otherwise prohibited by law, nonconforming structures, erected prior to July 1, 1994, located within the protected shoreland may be repaired, renovated, or replaced in kind using modern technologies, provided the result is a functionally equivalent use. Such repair or replacement may alter the interior design or existing foundation, but no expansion of the existing footprint or outside dimensions shall be permitted....."

So after all that my question is, does the above underlined statement apply only to the expansion of the nonconforming portion of the structure or does it apply to the entire structure, even if part of the structure is conforming (past 50' from the high water mark)?

For example, if the lake side of my house is 30' from the high water mark and extends 50' away from the lake then only the first 20' would be nonconforming, right? According the above statement I know I can't expand upon the front 20' of the house but can I expand upon the back 30' that is conforming as long as I am within the town's codes and the expansion itself is conforming?

I know that in the case of the town they only care about the nonconforming portion of the structure. Beyond that I just need to abide by the normal building codes.

Thanks in advance to anybody who has knowledge of, and experience with, this issue and takes the time to respond.

[Lakegeezer]

Its my understanding that you can expand a building in the conforming area without regard to the existing footprint. The rules about non-conforming area are pretty clear, but there is a waver process which is less clear. It may be possible to find records of previous applications and results to get a clearer picture of what is acceptable.

[Heaven]

GN -- I think you've got the jist of it. Remmember also you musy have room on the lot for new septic.

[lakershaker]

Keep in mind that the 50' rule is only for towns that did not have a specific setback on the books prior to the implementation of the SPA. For instance, we are building in Alton, new construction on a previously vacant lot, and only need to conform to the 30' setback that Alton has. In the case of Meredith I think the town already had a 60' setback, which also takes precedent. So if your town had a setback (sounds like 30' from your post) prior to the SPA, you probably only need to conform to that.

There is an opinion from the NH Attny General's office here (http://www.nh.gov/nhdoj/publications/opinions/040002.pdf) that does a good job of clarifying the issues - pay particular attention to the top of page 5 (Section II).

Hope this helps.

[Gatto Nero]

I am in Meredith where the setback is 65', which is generally what I need to comply with, but they do allow cumulative expansion of non-conforming areas of up to 400 sq ft as long as I don't encroach into the setback area beyond the existing limit of encroachment (yikes, did I really just write that?). Anyway, I can live with all that because the town has no issue with expansion past the setback. I was just curious if the state took the same stance regarding expansion beyond their setback and it appears that they do. They also allow you to build a deck up to 12' towards the water, regardless of how close you are already. The town won't, of course, but that's another story.

What I also found out is rather odd though. I guess the state will allow some expansion inside their own setback as well but only if you can somehow make the property "less non-conforming" than it already is. A couple ways of doing that are install a new septic system or bring the waterfront back to a more natural state for runoff purposes. Unfortunately, my septic is already up to code and other than being closer than 50' to the high water line my property conforms already, so that loophole may not apply to me. If, on the other hand, I currently leached into the lake or some previous owner had paved my waterfront back in the 70s then I could take advantage of that by correcting the issue. Go figure.