Opinion ID: 2362019
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Building Expansion

Text: [¶ 25] Lewis challenges the accuracy of the CEO's measurements of the violations of the newly reconstructed building. Lewis acknowledges that portions of the MCA building that encroach upon the minimum six-foot setback existed in the pre-construction building and are exempt under the grandfather clause. [11] She contends, however, that portions of the newly reconstructed building extend into the setback area beyond existing exempted encroachments, and beyond encroachments authorized by the first permit. [¶ 26] The underlying policy of zoning is to gradually eliminate nonconforming structures and uses. Shackford & Gooch, Inc. v. Town of Kennebunk, 486 A.2d 102, 105 (Me.1984). Any significant alteration of a nonconforming structure is an extension or expansion. Id. [T]he accepted legal standard has been to strictly construe zoning provisions relating to the extension, expansion or enlargement of nonconforming buildings .... Keith v. Saco River Corridor Comm'n, 464 A.2d 150, 155 (Me.1983). When an ordinance prohibits enlargement of a nonconforming building, a landowner cannot as a matter of right alter the structure, even if the alteration does not increase the nonconformity. Shackford & Gooch, 486 A.2d at 105. [¶ 27] In Lewis I, we concluded that the modification of or addition to MCA's existing building that resulted in an increase in square footage of a nonconforming space is in violation of Rockport's ordinance that provides that a building may not be expanded to become more nonconforming. Lewis I, 1998 ME 144, ¶¶ 12, 13, 712 A.2d at 1049-50. The Land Use Ordinance in effect when the first permit was granted does not differ greatly from the current Land Use Ordinance that was at issue in Lewis I. [12] The first permit, however, did authorize some nonconformities, and was not appealed. Measurements must be carefully taken to determine the extent to which MCA's building exceeds what was permitted pursuant to the first permit. [13] Such careful measurements must be applied to determine whether MCA's building conforms to authorized height limits as well. The entry is: Judgment vacated. Remanded to the Superior Court for remand to the Rockport Zoning Board of Appeals for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.