Biddeford’s review of shore ordinance stirs up controversy

By Gillian Graham
Staff Writer

The city planner calls it a “nightmare ordinance” full of inconsistencies.
The planning board is grappling with an inherited issue that will require more than 20 pages of amendments to fix.
And coastal Biddeford residents are split – some support the city’s plan to hammer out zoning changes, while others would like them to simply leave the ordinance alone.
At issue is the city’s shoreland zoning, which city officials have spent much of the past year updating to comply with a state mandate. City Planner Greg Tansley said the city’s goal is to create a consistent ordinance, void of conflict.
Nearly 100 residents crowded into council chambers at Biddeford City Hall last week for a council workshop on the city’s shoreland zoning updates. The workshop was held as the planning office and planning board work to update coastal zoning, as required by state law. The changes would switch about 180 homes on Mile Stretch, Fortunes Rocks and Hills Beach roads and Bridge and Yates streets from resource protection to less restrictive, limited residential district zoning.
Resource protection zones are created for relatively undeveloped areas or large undeveloped tracks of land where development would have a significant impact, Tansley said. Limited residential districts are areas suitable for residential development, he said.
Tansley described the ordinance as a “patchwork of Band-Aid on Band-Aid,” which makes it difficult for planning staff to explain to homeowners why their homes are zoned as they are. It is not uncommon for a house to be in a resource zone, while a building 20 feet away is zoned limited residential district.
Tansley said the goal is to make the zoning consistent and defensible.
“At the end of the day, at least people would understand what it is and why,” he said.
A planning board public hearing on the issue is scheduled for 6 p.m. Sept. 16 at Biddeford Middle School. Planning board members will consider residents’ input before submitting a recommendation to the city council for further review, said Tansley.
Tansley said the state’s Shoreland Zoning Act first required all towns and cities to adopt municipal shoreland zoning ordinances in 1989. In 2006, the state mandated that municipalities update their shoreland zoning by July 1. Though Biddeford is behind schedule, city officials are working closely with the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, he said.
“As long as we’re showing progress there’s no need to worry,” Tansley said.
The board formally began the process in January and has met 12 or 13 times to review zoning ordinances and hundreds of written comments from residents, Tansley said.
Tansley said changes to the zoning could allow some property owners to add storage sheds or garages, though they still must meet setbacks and other buildings standards. Homes in the resource protection zone require a 250-foot setback from the water resource, while limited residential district homes require a 100-foot setback, he said. Under state guidelines, homes zoned resource protection may be expanded by 30 percent one time if they were built before 1989, he said.
Mayor Joanne Twomey said she called the meeting to allow summer residents a chance to voice their concerns before they leave town. She said she understands how frustrating it feels when it seems no one is listening and wants to provide accurate information instead of the “outrageous rumors” circulating.
“My hope is at the end of the day we won’t be so far apart,” she said. “I do not want the coastal community to pit neighbor against neighbor.”
Because the meeting was a council workshop, councilors were asked to suspend the rules to allow public comment. Councilors David Flood, Fred Staples and Susan Deschambault voted against allowing public comment.
“It’s the planning board that really needs to hear this,” Deschambault said.
Following the meeting, Flood said he came to the meeting with a list of questions he never got to ask. While he feels it’s important for residents to have a chance to speak, Flood said the council still needs more information to fully understand the effects of zoning changes in the area. He said another council workshop should be scheduled to allow councilors to ask questions.
“I wanted the council to be better informed on the issue. I wasn’t able to ask questions,” he said. “I think we easily could have had three hours of questions and answers with [Tansley].”

An argument for habitat

Residents opposed to zoning changes say reducing the number of resource protection properties will damage the environment by allowing more development in the area. They argue the area is a unique habitat for shorebirds, and bird watchers and other eco-tourists visit the area.
Ken Putney of Bayberry Road said 77 percent of people at the coast are opposed to changing the zone, a number disputed by residents who support the plan. Putney recommended the council ultimately vote to leave the zoning maps as they are to prevent changes that he said would allow more development in the area.
“I fear that if the zoning changes, people will bring in truckloads of fill” and create buildup and runoff that would affect Biddeford Pool, said Putney.
Pat Moynahan of Hills Beach Road said she bought her home in 1974 and later chose to retire in the area because of its “world-renowned” reputation for bird watching. Shorebirds that nest in the area are a “treasure” to the city that must be protected by maintaining resource protection zoning, she said.
Several people opposed to the plans said they feared zoning changes would allow the addition of garages and storage sheds that could be converted to separate dwellings.
Conservation Commission Chairman Denis Rioux said the city should add more resource protection instead of taking away restrictions. He said residents in the coastal area want increased protection and doing otherwise would “diminish the area.”
On Monday, Ken Buechs and Susan Amons sat at a picnic table overlooking Biddeford Pool while talking about the potential effects of zoning changes. Both are members of Allies of the Coastal Economy, a group formed by area residents to educate people on the issue while protecting Biddeford Pool. Amons said her house at Granite Point is zoned resource protection and she would like to have it stay that way.
Amons said there is no need to change zones that have been in place for years. She said people bought their homes knowing what the zoning was and should not expect that to change.
“It’s your personal responsibility to research the limitations of any property you buy,” she said.
Buechs said Biddeford Pool is a unique area that needs environmental protection and said he is not sure where the “breaking point” is, when one more septic tank or one more home will irrevocably harm the area. Residents are concerned about fill being brought in to build up lots and causing runoff from gas, oil, fertilizers and other harmful chemicals, he said.
“We’re not against the allowed expansion in the current ordinance. It’s the contamination we’re concerned about,” Buechs said. “People say ‘What harm can a shed do?’ It could be a five-bay garage with a gym over it. We’re not talking just a potting shed.”
Amons said the types of accessory structures – including sheds and garages – allowed in the limited residential district could disturb birds and other wildlife. Clam flats were closed in past years because of contamination, as was nearby Goose Rocks Beach in Kennebunkport.
“It’s a citywide resource for all of our people to use and enjoy,” she said.
Buechs and Amons said they expect hundreds of residents to attend the planning board public hearing. Buechs said he is begging the city council to authorize an economic and environmental study before they make a decision.
“Things are getting better here,” he said. “This is not the time to regress.”

‘Laws should be clear’

Residents who support the city’s proposed changes say fixing zoning irregularities is a matter of fairness. They also argue homeowners should be able to make reasonable changes to their properties without harming the environment.
Hills Beach resident Steve Stanvick told the council he does not think changes to the zoning would allow further development in the area because there are few, if any, empty lots.
“The issue isn’t birds, it isn’t clams,” he said. “The issue is, let’s have a consistent set of zoning rules that allow everyone to use their property to the full extent allowed by law.
Cynthia Howard, an architect from Fortunes Rocks, said those opposed to the changes have done a “fabulous job of propaganda” with the issue. Despite “quirky spot zoning” in Biddeford, she said the state and city have “terrific” regulations in place to protect the coastline.
“The laws should be clear, fair and the same for everybody,” she said.
Sarah Williams, who owns Hattie’s restaurant with her family, said she does not want to do anything to damage the “beautiful vistas.”  She is  just as interested in preserving and protecting the environment as her neighbors, but thinks the issue has been blown out of proportion.
“I’m more interested in fairness,” Williams said. “It doesn’t make sense one house on Mile Stretch Road can make changes and others can’t.”
Williams said Hattie’s is currently closed because, after buying the business three years ago, she was required to make code updates that essentially eliminated the kitchen. Though she does not want to increase the seating capacity of the restaurant, she said her kitchen needs a bigger griddle and storage space. She is holding off on making any decisions about the future of the business, which is in the resource protection zone, until the zoning issues have been sorted out.
“We’re all in this together. We’re all here because it’s beautiful. It’s a very unique place,” she said. “We’re all interested in protecting that within reason.”
Chris Stone agrees.
As a local real estate broker, the Fortunes Rocks resident said she is well aware of zoning inconsistencies and how that affects property owners. Standing in the middle of a cluster of homes overlooking the water, she pointed to a small cottage sandwiched between two larger homes. The cottage is zoned resource protection, which she said forced the owner to sell it out of frustration because he could do nothing to improve the property. The neighboring homes are zoned differently.
“These are the inconsistencies we’re talking about,” she said while standing on the line between resource protection and limited residential district zones. “What is the difference? They’re both high and dry.”
While driving along the coast, Stone pointed out vacant lots, which are few and far between. They are tucked next to houses in densely developed neighborhoods. She said most of the vacant lots are probably not suitable for building.
“Everyone acts like we’re going to have huge development out here,” Stone said. “I think they’re afraid there’s going to be all this development. There’s not. There’s no room. Look at the density of development here. Where is it they think something will be built?”
Stone said she is always concerned about protecting Biddeford Pool but doesn’t feel allowing a few residents to build sheds for lawnmowers will be harmful. Upgrading septic systems is a critical way to protect the coastal area, she said, and those types of upgrades usually go hand in hand with home renovations.
“That’s what protects the clam flats, upgrading your septic system, not forcing things to stay as they are,” she said.
The bottom line, Stone said, is that zoning fixes need to be done sooner rather than later.
“I do think it’s the fair thing to do,” she said. “Zoning should be fair and it should be consistent. It should match the law.”

Staff Writer Gillian Graham can be reached at 282-4337, ext. 213.