10/20/03 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20, 2003 6:00 o'clock p.m. (#12) #03-2958 JUDSON DAYTON, 2885 LITTLE ORCHARD WAY, Continued Option 3: Allow renewal of the original variance allowing the accessory structure to remain on a lot which has no principal structure and still require it to be moved to the location indicated on the site plan, but not address whether a principal structure would ever be constructed. Option 4: Grant a new variance allowing the barn to remain absent a principal structure still stipulating that it be moved to a conforming location. The new resolution could include language specifying a time limit by which a dwelling needs to be constructed or the accessory structure must be removed and the variance would become null and void. Waataja encouraged the Commission to consider the neighbor's comments and indicated that it would be staffs recommendation to require removal of the barn if the applicant doesn't wish to combine the parcels, or, if the applicant agrees to combine the parcels require the building to be moved to the conforming location noted on the site plan. Dayton indicated that he would not be opposed to combining the lots in an effort to preserve the barn which has been on the property for over 100 years. While he wished to comply with the neighbor's requests to move the barn to a compliant location away from the property line, when they purchased the property, they were not aware that the original variance had expired. Although they have no long term plans, Dayton stated that it is their intent to preserve and relocate the barn. Chair Smith commented that it is a charming barn, although damaged a bit by the developer, adding that combining the lots and moving the barn would be the best option. Steve Hoyt, 2865 Little Orchard Way, stated that, as someone in the restoration business, he had difficulty seeing much charm to this building. He maintained that, to the neighborhood, this is an eyesore and was only to remain temporarily until the property was developed. Hoyt stated that this is the only parcel not developed and he believed that Dayton should move the barn to their adjoining 30 acres. He agreed with the staff recommendation for denial. Chair Smith asked Gaffron to clarify whether the applicants were within their rights to keep barn after moving it, if the applicants combined the parcels. Hoyt stated that was not part of the original request. Hawn asked what the applicant's timelines were. Dayton stated that they wished to move the barn and begin preservation efforts this fall, until they learned the variances had lapsed. Page 26 of 29