02/23 -

MINUTES
FREEPORT BOARD OF APPEALS
Monday, February 6, 2006
7 p.m.—Council Chambers


Attending: Chair Sarah Dalton, Chester Goggin, Doug Reighley, Steven Bradbury, Amanda Meader, Shannon Ryan and Rick Warren



Chair Dalton called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. and explained the Board’s process to members of the public.

ITEM I: Minutes of the December 29, 2005 Board of Appeals Meeting

MOVED AND SECONDED: To accept the Minutes of the December 29, 2005
Board of Appeals Meeting as printed. (Reighley & Ryan) VOTE: (6 Ayes) (1 Abstention—Warren)



ITEM II: Tabled Public Hearings and Unfinished Business:

David Soley and Jo Anne Labbe, 53 Spar Cove Road, Tax Map 28, Lot 3 ETC., Book 10380, Page 202, 205 – Shoreline Variance for the expansion of an existing dwelling,
zoned RP-1.

Ms. Meader recused herself since she is employed at the same firm as Mr. Soley.

Ms. Labbe pointed out to the Board that five children will be living in this home. Mr. Soley explained that they are negotiating to purchase a 4-bedroom home. A rock ledge is actually inside the house and this is what is causing all the problems in the adjacent bedroom. He introduced Alan Mooney, Engineer, Mark Mueller, Architect, John Lincoln, the seller of the house, Bob Knecht assisting Mr. Lincoln and Lex Holly, assisting him. He explained that the Planning Board voted to take a certain area where the building lot is away from the Resource Protection zone but that decision was made subject to DEP approval. The DEP approved it except it did not approve removing from Resource Protection the portion of the property between the top of the bank and the bottom of the bank. This area remains in Resource Protection. He pointed out this area on a plan for Board members.

Mr. Soley noted that they are not proposing to change the footprint of the house at all. They are proposing to take the basement bedroom and put it on the top of the living room along with a bathroom where it is healthy and safe.

Mr. Mooney explained that he looked at the lower level of the house and checked for acceptable indoor air quality. He noted that in all probability the home would not have been built the way it has been by today’s standards. The rock ledge exists immediately behind the room in question. All of the conditions exist in the house that could favorably lead to mold, mildew and unfavorable air quality issues. With the construction that exists right now, one cannot create a situation where there would be acceptable air quality on that lower level because of the moisture. The only possible alternatives from a practical perspective are to move the room entirely, which makes the most sense, or isolate the room in a way so that aggressive ventilation can occur around a type of envelope. This would be a room within a room. This would warrant giving up a foot of headroom to get the airflow underneath the floor. The ceiling height now is 71/2’ so it would be reduced to 6 ˝’. He would not consider this room to be favorable as a bedroom, given the moisture conditions.

Mr. Reighley asked Mr. Mooney if he would live in this house today? Mr. Mooney replied that he would live in the house as a whole, but would not use the bedroom that exists in the basement. Mr. Reighley mentioned that the applicant could build an addition within the building envelope and away from the shoreland setback. The Board’s intent is to try to find solutions that can be done away from the shoreline. Mr. Mooney noted he had not studied the site to determine whether there is a building envelope somewhere else. From Mr. Mooney’s point of view, it would be practical to go up rather than aggravate the moisture problem in the house.

Ms. Ryan had questions for Mr. Mueller. Mr. Mueller advised that he recommended that the basement bedroom be used occasionally but not as a bedroom. The carport would not affect the drainage since the driveway is there now. Enclosing the porch will not affect the drainage since there is a patio now.

Mr. Goggin asked about the moldy smell throughout the house that Mr. Soley mentioned at another meeting. Mr. Mooney explained that what is smelled is higher humidity conditions.
He does not know whether there is mold in other areas of the house but during renovations, there would be an opportunity to discover it and decide what actions could be taken to take care of it.
In order for mold to travel throughout a building, it requires warmth, moisture and food.
More discussion followed.

Mr. Warren asked if there is any evidence of drainage on the property. Mr. Mooney advised there is evidence of some sort of drainage. Water is landing on the rock ledge and follows the ledge even with perimeter drainage. He could not estimate the mitigation cost involved but noted that it would be an expensive exercise and would far exceed the cost of relocating the bedroom. He answered more questions for Board members.

As for new information, Mr. Mueller explained that they have added a couple of dormers for cosmetic reasons. There is no livable space involved.

Ms. Ryan asked about the porch. Mr. Lincoln noted that it was a deck when they purchased it and they enclosed the porch before 1987. He mentioned there is a perimeter drain on the back of their house. They have always had water and the conditions are essentially the same now as when they purchased the house. Nothing has changed in this regard. They used the lower level bedroom as a guest room. Ms. Labbe noted that she visited this house this past weekend and this room was obviously wet and she would not want a child sleeping in it.

Mr. Soley pointed out that this house is being listed as a 4-bedroom house and has been taxed as a 4-bedroom house.

Mr. Goggin advised that he has difficulty seeing this as a hardship. Mr. Reighley pointed out that in the tabling of this application, the Board is still looking at the same proposal while there are opportunities to do some things away from the shoreline. He has not heard any real movement from the applicant and he believes there is an opportunity to build within the building envelope. He is not moved to see this as a condition of hardship.

Ms. Ryan noted that she could vote for hardship in this instance because this room is not a livable space. This room could possibly damage someone’s lungs that inhabited it. She is not convinced that the rest of the house is not moldy. She cautioned the applicant that if he comes back with any other changes, she would not be likely to vote for them.

Mr. Bradbury pointed out that he appreciates the excellent presentation along with the engineering studies. He would be willing to vote in favor of the hardship.

Mr. Warren asked how many useable rooms are on the first floor that have dry livable space.
Mr. Lincoln replied that there are 2 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, kitchen, living room/dining room and a porch. A half level up there is one bedroom with two beds. Mr. Soley pointed out that the attic would be made livable.

Mr. Warren noted that this house is being sold in excess of a million dollars. In the true spirit of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance, the criteria for hardship are that it cannot yield a reasonable return without the approval. He cannot get there. He was David Soley trained on this Board.
Even if the wet area was abandoned, there still remains a large house. If this house does not meet the applicants’ needs, he would suggest another house. There is a lot of livable space that could meet a lot of people’s needs.

Chair Dalton doesn’t find that the Hardship Criteria has been met. Someone is living in the house and it is livable. She would not be willing to vote for hardship.

Mr. Reighley suggested that the applicant consider tabling and returning with a proposal on the possibility of building away from the shoreline.

Mr. Bradbury does not see an issue in this instance. He feels there is no impact involved environmentally. He noted that he feels it is a good design.

The applicant requested a tabling.

MOVED AND SECONDED: To table to the next meeting. (Goggin & Reighley) VOTE: (6 Ayes) (1 Abstention—Meader).

Rachel A Rousseau, 4 Lunt Road, Tax Map 17, Lot 61B, Book 1463, Page 335—To consider a minor modification to a previously approved variance to relocate an existing garage, zoned RR-1.

Mr. Reeder pointed out that Ms. Rousseau withdrew.





Leslie and Michael Reis, 17 Sandy Beach Road, Tax Map 4, Lot 14, Book 20867, Page 255—Front Setback Variance for a minor addition to their house, zoned V-II.

Mr. Reeder had not heard from the applicants but mentioned they were tabled for two months.

MOVED AND SECONDED: To dismiss. (Reighley & Bradbury)
VOTE: (7 Ayes).

ITEM III: Public Hearings

Ms. Ryan noted that the person that put up the modular house on the Pownal Road just before the Pownal line has put it up for sale. He never lived in it.


ITEM IV: Adjournment


MOVED AND SECONDED: To adjourn at 8:05 p.m. (Reighley & Goggin) VOTE: (7 Ayes)


Respectfully Submitted,


Sharon Coffin
Recorder