TOWN OF GORHAM
BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES
APRIL 17, 2003
The Gorham Board of Appeals regular meeting was held in the Gorham High School auditorium on April 17, 2003.
Present: Board Members; Audrey Gerry, James Pellerin, Joe Gwozdz, Mark Stelmack, David McCullough, Clinton Pearson, and Stephen Scontras. Code Enforcement Officer, Clint Cushman, Deputy Town Clerk, Jennifer Elliott, and Town Attorney, Natile Burns.
The meeting was opened by the Deputy Town Clerk and after introducing the new Board members, Joe Gwozdz, Mark Stelmack and Clinton Pearson, the floor was opened for nominations for Chairman.
Moved, and VOTED Mark Stelmack for Chairman of the Board of Appeals. 6 Yeas.
Moved, Seconded and VOTED to accept the minutes of the February 20, 2003 meeting. 7 Yeas.
Appeal# 150 The appeal of Christopher and Valerie Bowie requesting a 3 foot sideline variance to construct a 23 foot by 24 foot garage with a second story to be used for storage and a home day care business on property they own at 30 Hidden Pines Dr. (Map 30, Lot 9.007) which is in the Urban Residential Zone.
Valerie and Christopher appeared on their behalf and explained that the frost wall in the back of the garage will be protected and due to the slope of the driveway, the addition will be 2 stories over the garage. They had been granted this variance in November 2002, but had failed to file it with the Registry of Deeds as required by the Code.
There was no public comment and the hearing was closed.
The Board discussed cluster sub-divisions and their square footage issues.
Moved, Seconded and VOTED to approve the appeal as it meets the 20% setback criteria. 7 Yeas.
The findings of fact as read aloud by the Code Enforcement Officer were Moved, Seconded and VOTED. 7 Yeas.
Appeal# 151 The appeal of Jason Foster requesting a permit to enlarge and replace a non-conforming structure, namely to replace and enlarge the deck area with a 25 foot by 10 foot brick patio on property he owns at 43 Johnson Road (Map 100, Lot 35) which is in the Urban Residential District and which will not encroach any further into the required setback than the 6 feet encroachment which now exists.
Jason Foster appeared on his own behalf and explained that he wants to take down the existing deck and replace it with a brick patio that will be less obtrusive than the current deck. The patio will be at ground level.
There were no public comments and the hearing was closed.
The Town Attorney explained that this is not a landscaping issue it falls within the definition of a structure.
The Code Enforcement Officer explained that the applicant has a legal non-conforming deck and wants to replace it with a patio.
The Board went over the criteria for special exceptions.
1. It will not create traffic or other hazards.
2. It will not cause water pollution.
3. There will be no unhealfull conditions created.
4. No nuciences will be created for the neighbors.
5. The waste disposal is adequate.
6. No damage to spawing grounds.
Moved, Seconded and VOTED to approve the appeal. 7 Yeas.
The findings of fact as read aloud by the Code Enforcement Officer were Moved, Seconded and VOTED. 7 Yeas.
David McCullough left the meeting at 7:25 p.m.
Appeal# 152 The appeal of QAD Investments, Inc., Russell Glidden, President requesting a 12 foot front yard variance and a 2.5 foot side yard variance to use an existing 20 foot by 60 foot residential garage for commercial uses, i.e., three offices and a rental apartment, on property owned by them at 462 Main Street (Map 30, Lot 5) which is in the Commercial/Office District.
Earnest Manderson spoke on behalf of Mr. Glidden and explained that there was no planned use for this building at this time. The exterior was completed but the interior is not complete. Mr. Glidden had previously been granted a variance for residential use but now wants this for commercial use; Mr. Manderson explained that the property across the street was recently zoned for commercial use by the Town. He passed out a photo of the building. In response from a question of the Board he explained that an apartment would be out of place with the surrounding commercial zoning.
The Code Enforcement Officer explained that the sketch in the packet did not have accurate measurements. The commercial setbacks are more stringent than the Residential setbacks.
At this time the building is used for storage and workshop use by Mr. Glidden.
There was no public comment and the hearing was closed.
The Board discussed the 4 criteria. The hardship issue and the reasonable return issue were discussed.
Moved, Seconded and VOTED to deny the appeal, as it does not meet the criteria.6 Yeas.
The findings of fact as read aloud by the Town Attorney and the Code Enforcement Officer were Moved, Seconded and VOTED. 6 Yeas.
Moved, Seconded and VOTED to Adjourn. 6 Yeas.
Time of adjournment 8:05 p.m.
A TRUE RECORD OF MEETING
ATTEST:
Jennifer Elliott, Dep. Clerk
| 
