Opinion ID: 2311684
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Density Requirements

Text: Section 6.21 of the Kennebunk Zoning Ordinance specifies that [n]o dwelling, seasonal or year-round, shall hereafter be erected in any Farm and Forest District, except on a lot containing not less than three (3) acres and not less than Two Hundred (200) feet lot width. . . . Because plaintiff intends to construct 203 sites in an area of approximately 30 acres, the Board contends that the lot space for each camping unit, either tent or camping vehicle, is less than the three-acre minimum for a dwelling under the above provision. The Superior Court ruled that trailers and tents designed for transient use are not dwellings within the meaning of the Ordinance and hence the density requirements do not apply to the plaintiff's facility. We agree. In determining whether each camping unit is a dwelling as the term is denominated and applied in section 6.21 of the Ordinance, we are aware that the terms of a zoning ordinance must be construed reasonably with regard both to the objects sought to be attained and to the general structure of the ordinance as a whole. Moyer v. Board of Zoning Appeals, Me., 233 A.2d 311, 317 (1967). Thus, when the term used is ambiguous or uncertain, the Court's construction of that term should be informed by the context within which the term appears. Robbins v. Bangor Ry. & Elec. Co., 100 Me. 496, 62 A. 136 (1905). An examination of the Ordinance convinces us that dwelling is intended to refer to structures of facilities used for permanent habitation. The Ordinance does not define the term dwelling, but sections 2.41 and 2.411 specify that the word building shall include mobile homes if they are designed for long-term occupancy. It would follow that units bearing many of the characteristics of mobile homes, but not designed for long-term occupancy, such as campers, are not considered buildings as that term is defined in the Ordinance. The Ordinance also defines Home Occupation as an activity customarily carried on by the permanent residents of a dwelling unit, further evidencing the logical connection between dwelling and permanent occupancy. The uses permitted in the Farm and Forest Districts strongly support the construction that the term dwelling is intended to exclude facilities not designed for permanent habitation. These permitted uses include Seasonal and year-round one-family dwellings, but only one such structure per lot . . . (section 6.11). Although the Ordinance lists several other permitted uses, only here does it reiterate the density requirements of section 6.21. Summer camps are apparently not considered dwellings because they are dealt with in a separate section and because this density requirement is not mentioned in the section permitting their use within this zone. The context  summer camps, schools, libraries, museums (section 6.13)  suggests that the Ordinance is referring to group camps and not to the seasonal one-family dwelling of the previous section. It would indeed be anomalous to require that each building in a summer camp facility be located on its own three-acre lot, even though these structures are relatively more permanent than the tents and trailers located on a camping ground. It would be even more absurd to permit campgrounds and then require that each tent occupy its own three-acre lot. The apparent purpose of the density requirements for dwellings is to restrict residential development thereby preserving the rural character of the zone for the enjoyment of those who would pursue the outdoor recreation activities (including camping) specifically permitted by the Ordinance. Finally, common parlance suggests that the word dwelling does not refer to facilities for transient habitation. E. g., F. H. A. v. The Darlington, 358 U.S. 84, 79 S.Ct. 141, 3 L.Ed.2d 132 (1958). Undefined terms should be given their common and generally accepted meaning unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. Moyer v. Bd. of Zoning Appeals, supra; 1 Yokley, Zoning Law and Practice 446 (2d ed.). Although not conclusive in this case, it is worth noting that this Court has, in a non-zoning context, determined that a mobile home was a dwelling by giving particular weight to the structure's permanent character. Naiman v. Bilodeau, Me., 225 A.2d 758 (1967). We conclude that the Court below correctly held that tents and trailers intended for transient use by vacationers and campers are not dwellings as that term is used in section 6.21 of the Kennebunk Zoning Ordinance. The plaintiff's campground is not therefore subject to the density requirements of that section.