Town of Gorham, ME - 03/21/2002 Minutes

03/21/2002 Minutes


	TOWN OF GORHAM BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES MARCH 21, 2002 The March 21, 2002 regular meeting of the Gorham Board of Appeals was held in the auditorium at the Gorham High School. Roll Call: Present: Board members Audrey Gerry, Peter Traill, Michael Webb, David McCullough, James Pellerin and Stephen Scontras; the Town Clerk, and the Code Enforcement Officer Absent: Chairman Owens McCullough In the absence of the Chairman Peter Traill conducted the meeting. Moved, seconded and VOTED to approve the Minutes of the February 14, 2002 meeting as printed and distributed. 6 yeas. Appeal #02-04 Ron Kuusela appeared on behalf of this appeal explaining that he would like to build a garage. At the present time his property is not non-conforming but he would need a variance for the garage. His neighbor, Mr. Allocca, whose lot is non-conforming would be willing to sell him a strip of land 15 feet side so he could build the garage and not need a variance. This action would make Mr. Allocca In response to questions from Board member Mr. Kuusela explained that the house was built in 1984; that is 100 feet back from the front line now and the entire lot is only 200 feet; that he would prefer to build a two-car garage than a one-car garage because it would fit with the house better; that if he did build a one-car garage he would not need a variance or the extra land and that he has lost sales on the house because it does not have a garage. There was no public comment and the hearing closed. The Board went over the criteria with Board members expressing concern about making a non-conforming lot even more non-conforming. Moved, seconded and VOTED to deny the appeal as it doesn Moved, seconded and VOTED to approve the Findings of Fact as read aloud by the Code Enforcement Officer. 6 yeas. Appeal #02-05 David Allen explained that he would like to build an attached garage for storage of outdoor items. He presented pictures of the house as it presently is. In response to questions from Board members he explained that the garage would not extend any further than what the driveway is now; that the tree line would stay the same; that the present deck would be removed for construction of the garage; that there is no other way to go with the garage because of the way the property is; that the garage he wants to build is an oversized one-car garage; that he purchased the house. There was no public comment and the hearing closed. Board members went over the criteria expressing concern regarding a hardship as a result of action taken by the owner. Moved, seconded and VOTED to grant a 3 foot sideline setback variance. 6 yeas. Moved, seconded and VOTED to approve the Findings of Fact as read aloud by the Code Enforcement Officer. 6 yeas. Appeal #02-07 Douglas Carter spoke on behalf of this appeal stating that he started his business 5 years ago and in 2000 he purchased the second lot which has a single-family dwelling on it. His business building is 75 feet by 33 feet. He needs to keep his business going while he builds the new building. He would like to remove the single-family house, construct his new business building and then remove the existing business building. In response to questions from Board members he stated that if the appeal was granted he would have to go to the Planning Board for site plan review; that the present building has five stalls and four lifts and the new building would have 8 bays and an office. There was no public comment and the public hearing closed. The Board reviewed the non-conforming standards. Moved, seconded and VOTED to approve the replacement and enlargement of a non-conforming use. 6 yeas. Moved, seconded and VOTED to approve the Findings of Fact as read aloud by the Code Enforcement Officer. 6 yeas. Appeal #02-06 David Cairns presented this appeal stating that this was his second appeal to enlarge a non-conforming structure and adding a second floor. Neil Weinstein, Attorney representing Mr. Cairns, stated that the original appeal was granted but that he felt the Town had used the wrong form, a variance form requiring filing, rather than a non-conforming use form. In response to questions from Board members Mr. Cairns and Mr. Weinstein stated that the design is slightly different for this appeal, that it is a better design and that the expansion is actually better than the original in their opinion; that they have not changed the intended use but have scaled it back somewhat to accommodate the neighbors; that there would be office space, an area for canvas sewing and seaming, as well as a sales area; that they are close to the end of the site plan review; that they are undergoing a minor site plan review; that they would not be on a public sewer but on a leach field which is on the abutting property and that they do have a plan for a replacement septic system. Mr. Cairns presented a copy of a letter from William Bray in response to questions on vehicular or customer traffic. He also explained that the leach field for the property is on Lake Region property but that he has an easement on the property for the leach field. Paul Driscoll, Attorney representing Lake Region Furniture, stated that his client had significant concerns about this appeal. He stated that this plan has not been approved by the municipal level and that the Town Attorney has not approved of it. He also stated that his client believes that the project will intrude more into the existing setback than the present building. He presented a copy of the plan submitted to the minor site review committee and stated that the upper floor on the plan protrudes more into the setback than the present building. This requires a variance and the variance was not filed as per State law. Les Berry, Engineer representing Lake Region Furniture also spoke in opposition to this appeal, as did Steve Crockett of Lake Region Furniture. Pete Sawyer who is responsible for the plan submitted by Mr. Cairns spoke in favor of this appeal. There was no other public comment and the hearing closed. The Code Enforcement Officer, in response to a question from a Board member, explained his method of measuring for a setback. The Board went over the special exception standards and there was some concern expressed by some Board members regarding No.1 and No. 4 of the criteria. Moved, seconded and VOTED to approve the appeal. MOTION FAILED. 3 yeas. 3 nays (Scontras, McCullough, Gerry). Prior to the above vote a motion to deny the appeal FAILED OF PASSAGE. 3 yeas. 3 nays (Traill, Webb and Pellerin). This motion was voted then voted as an affirmative motion as a motion to deny does not grant the appeal. Moved, seconded and VOTED to approve the Findings of Fact as read aloud by the Code Enforcement Officer. 6 yeas. Mr. Weisman asked the Board for explanation and an oral vote on each item of concern. This request was denied by the Chairman. Moved, seconded and VOTED to adjourn. 6 yeas. Time of adjournment D. Brenda Caldwell Town Clerk of Gorham