08-11-1986 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

lto To: Orono Councii Members kuG 1 119co From: Michael P. Gaffron, 'sY! Assistant Planning 6 Zoning Admini etrator Date: August 5, 1986 Subject: #1042 Thomas Maxwell, 3685-3725 Watertown Road - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Resolution List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Staff Memo and Exhibits f 7/16/86 Exhibit B - Planning Commission Minutes of 7/21/86, 6/16/86 Exhibit C - Notice to Applicant of 7/24/86 Exhibit D - Proposed Resolution This is a request to combine 2 parcels of property totaling just under 10 acres in the 5 acre zone, into one property with the second existing residence to become a guest house. The combination will allow the repair or replacement of an existing horse barn which now straddles the dividing line between the two lots. Please review the memo and exhibits of 7/16/86. The Planning Commission reviewed this request at their June meeting and suggested to ti.e applicant that, rather than requesting a "setback variance" for the barn (which was found to be over the line only after the survey arrived just prior to the June meeting), that the properties be combined. Staff feels that the Conditional Use Permit/Guest House/Lot Combination scenario makes more sense than a barn setback variance because: 1. The barn is already over the line, "zero -setback" situation, hence, a setback variance could not be granted realistically. Replacement of the barn would have to be in a new location which would be limited by the existing septic system east and southeast of the barn. 2. The applicant could not have 6 horses on either of the properties unless they were combined, and his request is for a 6-stall barn. Planning Cow- ission, at their July meeting, voted 3-3 on a motion to appr.. : the Guest House Conditional Use Permit application. The dissenters felt uncomfortable in creating a situation that would potentially create the need for future variances if the land was ever di lded again. ^taff feels that the applicant is fully aware of the potential future consequences, i.e. that a future re -subdivision might be turned down, and applicant has no problem agreeing to the conditions set forth ii the attached resolution, which staff recommends be adopted.