Town of Buxton
Appeals Board Meeting
March 3, 2009
Members in attendance: Stephen Heroux, and Jack Hanna, Peter Leavitt
Members absent: Charlene Libby, Dennis Sweatt
Open at 7:02 pm request for a reconsideration of decision at the last meeting
Can be requested from anyone at the meeting or the selectmen, or board member. Requested by the applicant. If the board does decide to reconsider will go into a public hearing and be considered as a new application.
Motion by Peter to open the discussion part of the meeting, seconded by Jack, all voted in favor.
Stephen feels it is important to hear all considerations and hear new information.
Relevant new information submitted:
" A letter from the fire chief was submitted dated February 10th stating he did not have an issue with the dog house style entrance since there was still 47' to abutters dwelling.
" A letter from Letter from Code Enforcement Officer Fred Farnham stating his research with the file and notice two-mortgage surveys in the Code Enforcement files. The abutters survey compliments the information shown on the applicants' survey.
" Letter submitted by the Parlin's indicating the contractor could not did closer to the pool without jeopardizing the integrity of the in ground pool that was already in place. And that the original house had a doghouse style entrance on the back of the house to the finished basement. Well and electrical lines are in the back yard. There was too much emphasis on who was a fault and not on what was non-conforming.
Mr. Parlin stated that the contractor could not dig any closer to the pool. All the lines to the well and pool are located in the back yard and the septic is in the front left hand corner of the house. Mr. Parlin stated that there was too much emphasis on who was a fault and not looking at what was non-conforming.
Stephen does not see that any of this is new information. The reason the Board denied the application on February 3rd is due to hardship #4 - These conditions are not the result of action taken by the applicant for a variance or a prior owner. Jack did not realize there was plumbing and wires under the deck at the first meeting. Peter was not present at the first meeting.
" Stephen made a motion to reconsider this application for reconsideration by the show of hands, 1 voted in favor, 2 voted against, the motion did not pass and the original ruling will stand.
Mr. Parlin said a septic tank on the right front corner of the house with the tank on the left side of the house making the location of the foundation placed where it was placed.
Stephen said the house located in the present condition was a matter of fact determined that was where it would go. The plans submitted for the building permit show 36-feet and the deviation from the plan is what caused the problem.
Stephen said that as a Board this is what they have to consider:
Undo hardship - what constitutes undue hardship for traditional zoning variance is by four hardship tests. The undue hardship test is a strict one; the applicant needs to meet each of the four pre-requisites. Because of 6.B.2 they could skip the first one, but sometimes is difficult for the BOA to apply criteria strictly or deny what seems to be a reasonable or harmless request wear a variance is warranted.
Mrs. Parlin said she could go through 4.2.D.2 Non-conforming and not need to prove a hardship to be granted a variance. She can submit a new application tomorrow. Mr. Parlin said there was no other place to put the house due to the septic, the pool and the drive way and stated the left hand corner of the house is in the same location due to the septic pipe.
Stephen said they are right and they have fifteen days to file in superior court.
Mr. Parlin said he was completely disappointed with the decision and the town.
Stephen tried to explain the difference as to why a bulkhead style was acceptable - we as a town decided that adding stairs to a property does not cut into the setback requirements, but when you add a roof over the stair it is considered part of the structure and has to meet all required setbacks.
Approval of Minutes:
February 3, 2009 - cannot approve, need the three members who where in attendance at that meeting.
CEO Report: note in attendance
Approval of bills:
Motioned by Stephen to pay Portland Press Herald for $24.36, seconded by Jack. All voted in favor.
MMA is hosting a workshop for local Boards on March 12th, 2009.
Maine Townsman from January 2009
In reading the information from MMA there is another standard to adopt by the Board rather than the standards and proceeding that we use. They are called 6 practical difficulties. MMA.com under board of appeals. Adopt the 6-practible difficulties rather than the 4 cases of hardship that we currently use.
" Peter motioned to close the meeting at 7:30pm, seconded by Jack, all in favor.
Krystal L. Dyer
Stephen Heroux, Chairman Signature Date