SOUTH BERWICK ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PUBLIC HEARING
NOVEMBER 20, 2003
7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
John Kareckas called the meeting to order at 7:05 pm
ROLL CALL
John Kareckas (Chairman), Kevin DeSchuytner, Bonnie Gould, Alan Schalk and Joseph Rousselle (Code Enforcement Officer)
QUORUM
There was a quorum with 4 voting members. None of the members had a conflict of interest.
NEW BUSINESS
Case #08-03
Map 9 Lot 13; Richard and Catherine Stevens
Variance Appeal
JURISDICTION
The Zoning Board of Appeals has jurisdiction to hear variance appeals based on Section 140-76. B(2) Variance appeals, Tables B & C of the South Berwick Zoning Ordinance.
The property is located in Resource Protection. Based on the Town’s Ordinance the
criteria for a Site Plan review, Sec. 140-77(E) 1-19 was not applicable, however the
Board did show consideration. Bonnie Gould motioned that the Board would
address it for sake of argument, but in the end it was not necessary. John Kareckas
seconded. All in favor. Motion passed.
DETERMINATION OF STANDING
Richard and Catherine Stevens own the property located at 285 Emery’s Bridge Road, which gives them standing. Mr. and Mrs. Stevens were represented by Tom Harmon of Civil Consultants.
TESTIMONY, QUESTIONING AND DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE
Mr. and Mrs. Stevens are proposing to add an addition approximately 800 square feet to the existing home. This would bring the home closer to the Great Works River and will not meet setback requirements. Mr. Harmon presented a plot plan, labeled A#1, indicating existing conditions and proposed improvements. He went over twelve pictures of the property, labeled A#2. He ran through the topographic plan, showing the location of the river. The home was built in 1795, has historic character and has been in the family since it was built. It is very small and not viable today. Zoning was enacted in 1978 which put both the existing home and the garages in the Resource Protection area. Mr. Harmon explained they would not be able to put an addition on in any manner and make it
conforming. The proposed addition would be placed approximately 12 feet above the top of the river banking, 115 feet to the river. There would be a new driveway which would be in back of the property. Access would be enhanced because autos would be able to turn around in the new driveway instead of backing out as they do now. There would be a new drilled well. There would also be a new septic system which would be outside Resource Protection. Mrs. Stevens then spoke. She said currently there is no reasonable access to the second floor but with an addition they could access the second floor differently. She said it would be a valuable asset to the neighborhood. She also mentioned they would like to restore the home to a historical nature and put it on the register. They would like to keep the home as close to what it is now without it being an eyesore.
Joseph Rousselle, the Code Enforcement Officer, offered testimony. He said in the Resource Protection area a single family home cannot be built but this home already exists. The proposed addition at the end of the building comes in line with the existing building. He mentioned that area of town is the R3 Zone and the Great Works River is in the Resource Protection area. It doesn’t fall under Site Plan Review before the Planning Board, only if it falls in Shoreland District.
Close public hearing at 7:55 pm.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1) The property is located in Resource Protection. Based on the Town’s Ordinance the
criteria for a Site Plan review, Sec. 140-77(E) 1-19 was not applicable, however the
Board did show consideration. Bonnie Gould motioned that the Board would
address it for sake of argument, but in the end it was not necessary. John Kareckas
seconded. All in favor. Motion passed.
2) Appellants are Richard and Catherine Stevens.
3) Property address is 285 Emery’s Bridge Road, South Berwick, Maine.
4) Property is known as Map 9 Lot 13.
5) Deed reference is Book 13396 Page 333.
6) A plot plan indicating existing conditions and proposed improvements prepared by
Civil Consultants on 11/3/03 was entered as Exhibit A#1.
7) Exhibit A#2 – 12 pictures of property
8) Exhibit A#3 – Copy of the tax map where property is located.
9) Exhibit A#4 – Memo from Tom Harmon detailing responses.
10) Exhibit A#5 – The appellant’s application.
11) Exhibit A#6 – Sec.140-77(E) 1 – 19.
John Kareckas motioned to accept Findings of Fact. Alan Schalk seconded. All were in favor. Motion passed.
DELIBERATION
1) Alan Schalk motioned the land in question cannot yield a reasonable return unless the variance is granted. Kevin DeSchuytner seconded. All were opposed. Motion failed 0-4.
2) Kevin DeSchuytner motioned the need for a variance is due to the unique circumstances of the property and not to the general conditions in the neighborhood. Bonnie Gould seconded. All were in favor. Motion passed 4-0.
3) Alan Schalk motioned the granting of a variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. Bonnie Gould seconded. All were in favor. Motion passed 4-0.
4) Bonnie Gould motioned the hardship is not the result of action taken by the appellant or a prior owner. Kevin DeSchuytner seconded. All were in favor. Motion passed 4-0.
CONCLUSION
The Board finds all hardship criteria are not satisfied, namely number 1, reasonable return. John Kareckas motioned to accept the Conclusion. Alan Schalk seconded. All were in favor. Motion passed.
DECISION
All the hardship criteria were not satisfied and the variance is not granted. Bonnie Gould motioned to accept the decision. John Kareckas seconded. All were in favor. Motion passed.
OTHER
John Kareckas mentioned the Board needs someone to preside if he is not there for a meeting. Alan Schalk does not want the Vice Chair position. Alan Schalk nominated Kevin DeSchuytner. Bonnie Gould seconded. All were in favor. Motion passed.
ADJOURNMENT
Bonnie Gould motioned to adjourn. Alan Schalk seconded. All were in favor. Meeting ended at 8:50 pm.
| 
