My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-27-2006 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2006
>
02-27-2006 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/13/2015 1:59:51 PM
Creation date
7/13/2015 1:59:21 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
285
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
ORONO CTTY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> > MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 2003 <br /> � 8. #03-2951 Jrcditls a�td Jafnes Pierpont, 1849 a�zd 1801 West Farm Road—Lot <br /> Li�te Rearratigement—Contirirred <br /> Resolution No. 2854. The applicants' intent is to yield two lots that are conforming for <br /> the intended uses with the easterly lot totatly 4-acres. This can only be accomplished if <br /> the wetland area is attributable for the 4-acre guest house requirement. Planning <br /> Commission concluded that the wetland area is not attributable and that the guesthouse <br /> use should be discontinued, the kitchen removed, and a "Plumbing in Accessory Building <br /> CUP" be applied for. <br /> Gaffron stated that at the time the CUP was granted for the guesthouse, the lots should <br /> have been coinbined, yielding a lot with over 5 dry contiguous acres. For unknown <br /> reasons, the applicants never completed the legal combination. They requested the lot line <br /> rearrangement in order to maximize the area of the homestead parcel while retaining the <br /> minimum 2.0 dry buildable acres in Lot 14 for future development or sale. <br /> The result would be a lot with 3 acres of dry buildable and 1 acre of wetland. The <br /> Planning Commission felt that was not adequate to allow the guesthouse to remain. <br /> Gaffron stated that the applicants would have to make necessary easement vacations in <br /> exchange for dedication of new easements along the new lot line. <br /> There is a driveway on the property that has existed for many decades. The Planning <br /> Commission su�gests it be removed by 2004. The applicants suggested that the drive <br /> ought to be left alone as it poses no complications to any one. <br /> Gaffron stated that the City Attorney advised that the application for conversion of the <br /> guesthouse to Plumbing in an Accessory Structure be a separate application and should <br /> not be added to the current application. Planning Commission discussed the fact that the <br /> guest facilities did not meet location standards for the Plumbing CUP but concluded that <br /> because the building has been in the present location for many decades, is far from any <br /> neighboring residence, has no negative visual impacts, and is a historic structure dating in <br /> part to the 1870's, any negative impacts of such a CUP would be limited. <br /> Gaffron passed out copies of a letter from Mr. Pierpont. <br /> Sansevere asked if the applicants intended to appiy for the plumbing CUP. Mrs. Pierpont <br /> stated that the guesthouse had partial plumbing when they bou�ht the property and applied <br /> for the conversion permit in 1990. <br /> Mrs. Pierpont stated that the letter from her husband covered all the Plannin� Commission <br /> points. She summarized. They have no problem with the requirement to change the <br /> utility easements. <br /> The driveway recommended for removal has been in existence since the 1870's. Previous <br /> 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.