LYMAN — Linda Houy sits on the property she owns with husband, John, Tuesday afternoon and looks out on Wadleigh Pond.
“This is a piece of heaven,” she says.
The Houys have had to move a camper onto the property to enjoy that “piece of heaven,” however, as construction of the retirement home they’ve dreamt about has been put on hold by the town.
The couple, who live in Saco, bought the property on 292 Wadleigh Pond Road in April of 2010 with the intent to refurbish the existing home and move in permanently.
Under shoreland zoning laws, expansion to structures on the Houy’s property has been limited since 1989, but the Houys said they, as well as their realtor, met with James Gardner, who was the town’s code enforcement officer at the time, told the Houy’s the property could be expanded, as town records showed it had not been expanded previously.
“We did everything right,” said Linda.
The Houys took their plans for rehabilitation of the home on Aug. 2, 2010 to Thomas Markley, the town’s new code enforcement officer, and were issued a building permit on that day, according to Gordon Ayer, the Houy’s attorney.
Ayer said then-Selectman Board Chairman Norman Hutchins came to the Houy’s property on Aug. 23 and told their contractor he was going to “shut the job down” because there wasn’t a permit. The contractor showed Hutchins a permit that was posted on a tree on the property, according to Ayer.
Hutchins did not return calls for comment on the matter by press time.
Later that day, the contractor discovered the house was heavily damaged by mold, mildew, and dry-rot and recommended the removal of most of the home. According to Ayer, the contractor discussed options with Markley and concluded it would advisable to remove most of the structure except the foundation.
Two days later, on Aug. 25, 2010, a stop work order was issued by the town.
The Houys later learned they had been incorrectly advised by town officials about shoreland zoning laws. At a planning board meeting in late 2010, they learned the town had interpreted the zoning laws as stating that expansion to property should be limited to 30 percent of area or volume after 1989. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection interprets these laws as limiting expansion to 30 percent of area and volume.
The Houys also learned at a planning board meeting that structures on the property had previously been expanded 30 percent. These records were not found when the permit was granted, said the Huoys.
Linda said they bought the house because they thought they could expand it.
“None of this would have happened if the records had been there,” said Houy.
The Houys have proposed a plan to reduce the size of redevelopment to a 30 percent expansion of volume of the original structure. The proposal would eliminate the dormer and lower the pitch of the roof on the home, and decrease the volume on a shed on the property. The footprint of the home has not been expanded, as it is placed on the original foundation. John Houy said it has actually decreased, since a deck has been removed.
Mike Morse, assistant shoreland zoning coordinator with the state’s bureau of land and water quality, said in a letter written in March of 2011 the DEP would agree to the Houy’s plan, “considering the convoluted facts of this matter.”
“Due to the apparent record-keeping issue by the Town, improper regulatory advice given by a planning board member, and the fact the Town issued a permit to the Houys to expand the structure further, the Department would not take opposition with the town if it allowed the Houys to retain a reasonable volume expansion of the structure provided it was not 30 percent or more of the structure that existed at the time the Houys received their permit from the town,” wrote Morse.
The Houys said the town has asked them to pay a $75,000 penalty fee. They said they have asked to get on the selectman’s agenda, but have been denied.
Ayer said the Houys have been given a “round robin” by town officials.
“There’s a solution here, and it’s blessed by the DEP,” said John.
The Houys filed a lawsuit against the town and Markley in July, asking them to remove all orders and actions that prohibit them from construction.
William Dale, attorney for the Town of Lyman, stated in the town’s counter claim that the information regarding the previous expansion of the buildings on the property was “at all times available” to the Huoys at the town office.
Dale is asking the Houys to pay penalties for violating the town’s Shoreland Zoning Ordinance and remove the home. Rather than remodeling, the Huoys were replacing the structure, he states, and needed approval from the planning board.
Dale said the Houys continued proceeding with construction on the house in “direct violation” of the stop work order. In December of 2010, the chairman of the planning board wrote a letter to the board of selectmen stating the application did not comply with the shoreland zoning ordinance because the existing structure had already been expanded 30 percent.
The Houys said in November, they noticed water damage in the home, and told the town’s attorney they were going to proceed with more work to close it up and he gave them the okay.
In a response to the counterclaim, the Houys are asking that the Town of Lyman pay their legal fees in addition to allowing them to continue with their construction plans.
— Staff Writer Liz Gotthelf can be contacted at 282-1535, Ext. 325 or egotthelf@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
