Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Shoreland Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board approves replacement of nonconforming house at 35 Laurel Shore Drive with septic condition
Summary
After a sitewalk and design review, the board approved relocation and replacement of a nonconforming dwelling at Map 52 Lot 128, finding the proposal met setback standards to the greatest practical extent and requiring an acceptable septic design as a condition of approval.
The Harpswell Planning Board voted April 1 to approve the replacement of a nonconforming dwelling at 35 Laurel Shore Drive (Map 52, Lot 128), subject to conditions including submission of an acceptable septic system design before the start of construction.
Scope and standard
The board’s review was limited to whether the proposed relocation of the dwelling met the shoreland‑zoning requirement that a reconstructed nonconforming structure be placed ‘‘to the greatest practical extent’’ within setback rules. Planner Margaret McIntyre and the applicant’s architect described constraints at the site: a CMP transmission corridor that bisects the buildable area, an existing driveway and tree canopy the applicants sought to preserve, and a narrow building envelope established after a prior sitewalk.
Applicant presentation
Architect Alex Hansen showed a two‑bedroom design with an overall footprint of roughly 1,517 square feet (under the town’s 1,535‑square‑foot threshold), an allowable impervious area under the local standard, and a height nearly identical to the existing A‑frame. David Matero, representing the owners, said the team measured canopy and easement limits and had intentionally constrained the plan to minimize tree removal.
Board discussion and conditions
Board members pressed the applicants on whether the house could be moved farther inland and whether construction activities would intrude on the tree buffer. The applicants said additional setbacks would require removal of protected canopy and could conflict with the CMP corridor and that a full septic design remains to be completed; they committed to submit a site‑specific septic plan before permit approval.
The board found, citing the lot size, the CMP corridor location, and an effort to preserve existing tree cover, that the relocation meets the ‘‘greatest practical extent’’ standard. The approval includes a condition that the applicant obtain all necessary local, state and federal permits, and specifically that an acceptable septic system design be submitted and approved prior to construction.
Ending
The motion passed on a roll call with the stated conditions. The board emphasized the limited scope of its jurisdictional review and reminded applicants that any material changes to the plans will require further review.
