My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-09-2004 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
Historical
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
02-09-2004 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/31/2012 1:53:10 PM
Creation date
5/31/2012 1:53:10 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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 CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2004 <br />The variances allow for one oversized accessory building (any structure over 1,000 s.f.) <br />• beyond what the ordinance allows and for the total square footages of all accessory <br />structures to exceed what the ordinance allows. This was allowed because the ordinance <br />doesn't specifically address totals for accessory structures on properties of over 9- acres. <br />Mr. Dayton's main parcel is over 21- acres. If the table were extended out, accessory total <br />limits would allow the barn. The resolution grants approval of two variances stipulating <br />that the properties be combined and the barn moved to the location shown on the plans, <br />and that this work is completed by July 31, 2004. Should the applicant choose to not <br />relocate the barn, or combine the lots the barn would need to be removed in its entirety by <br />July 31, 2004. <br />Mr. Dayton stated that the process has been more complicated than they had thought it <br />would be. They are comfortable with the request to combine the lots, and intend to move <br />and renovate the barn. <br />Steve Hoyt of 2865 Little Orchard Way stated that the original variance was granted to the <br />developer of 7 lots. He sold the lot to someone else, who then sold it to the Daytons. The <br />barn has sat there for 100 years without anything being done to it. The variance has <br />expired. The only hardship is the neighbors who have to look at it. None of the neighbors <br />support the maintenance of this nonconforming barn. The covenants that govern the <br />properties do not support it either. <br />The development covenants stated that no lot shall be used except for residential purposes, <br />• and no storage is allowed which is untidy or obnoxious to the eye. Also the covenants <br />stated that no barn shall be used as a residence. Mr. Hoyt stated that if the covenants and <br />ordinance are to be respected, the barn should be removed. <br />Sansevere stated that the City did address Mr. Hoyt's concerns in the resolution <br />particularly regarding the exterior appearance of the barn. He stated that the barn was <br />present when the neighbors built their homes. <br />Mr. Hoyt stated that the properties were marketed with the understanding that the barn <br />would be converted into part of a large home. <br />Murphy stated that if the lots are combined, then the barn will conform with the <br />ordinance. <br />Sansevere asked what Dayton's plans are for the barn. Mr. Dayton replied that he intends <br />to move it away from the lot line and repair it. It could be used for storage of vehicles, or <br />as an office space. In the subdivision of the neighborhood, the Ancorp people placed a lot <br />line so close to the barn that they had to tear off parts of the barn, creating some of the <br />disrepair Mr. Hoyt complained about. <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.