Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, November 17, 2003 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#4) #03-2951 JUDITH AND JAMES PEIRPONT, 1849 AND 1801 WEST FARM <br /> ROAD, LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT, Continued <br /> Gaffron indicated that staff recommends approval of the lot line rearrangement, subject to <br /> the following: <br /> 1. Applicants to grant a 20' drainage &utility easement (10' either side of new lot <br /> line) to replace the easements being vacated. <br /> 2. Applicants to provide title opinion to confirm ownership of each property. <br /> 3. Planning Commission should address whether the Guest House use should continue <br /> to be allowed based on 3 acres dry/1 acre wet. If not, then applicants should be <br /> directed to proceed with removal of its plumbing, or make an application to convert <br /> it to an "accessory building with plumbing" and remove any existing kitchen <br /> facilities. <br /> 4. Planning Commission should determine what the intended use is for the driveway <br /> in Lot 14 connecting to Lot 15/16; then determine whether any special conditions <br /> should be considered for continued use of that secondary access if Lot 14 is sold <br /> separately from Lot 15/16. <br /> Ms. Pierpont explained that the original guest house was a converted stable from the <br /> 1800's and that they would prefer to leave the guest house as is. She maintained that they <br /> were not proposing to increase the size of the footprint with the proposed changes in the <br /> driveway and would plan to remove the surrounding circular driveway someday. <br /> Benjamin Whitten, 1889 West Farm Road, voiced his opposition to the proposed lot line <br /> rearrangement. He questioned the process that allowed the applicants to fail to combine <br /> the two parcels as directed by their CUP in 1990. He objected to their request to vacate the <br /> original agreement,redraw the lot line, and allow to site wetlands for their purposes of <br /> septic etc. Although Whitten had no interest in seeing the guest house removed or changed, <br /> as a neighbor, he felt the process had failed to protect him and he questioned the Pierponts <br /> motivation as their property was on the market until recently. <br /> Ms. Pierpont stated that the home had been taken off the market. <br /> Zugschwert asked if the Commission had ever allowed the use of wetlands to be a factor <br /> when determining the propensity of the guest house. <br /> Gaffron stated that the lot area for rural zones does not include wetland regions in the <br /> calculable area of the buildable lot area. He pointed out that, in 1989, that is why the two <br /> PAGE 5 of 41 <br />