Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Farmington planning commission fails to approve larger Pine Drive home
Summary
After an hour-plus of questioning about lot-line changes, setbacks, drainage and neighborhood character, the commission voted against approving a special permit and site plan for a larger single-family home at 8638 Pine Drive. The applicant may revise plans or pursue a standard building permit for a smaller footprint on the existing lot.
The Town Plan and Zoning Commission on June 8 did not approve a special-permit and site-plan application to build a new single-family home exceeding local living-area thresholds at 8638 Pine Drive.
Elizabeth Coo, the applicant, told the commission she and her husband own the adjacent lot and proposed a five-foot lot-line revision to make lot 8638 "less non-conforming" and to permit a wider, single-story house with a two-car garage and screened propane tanks. She said the design aimed to match neighborhood character while providing a marketable single-floor home.
Commissioners pressed the applicant and staff on several technical points: how the lot-line revision affects side-yard setbacks under the town's 10%-of-frontage rule; whether propane tanks would meet setback and fire-safety clearances; stormwater design and downstream effects; and whether the proposed footprint and contemporary roof form would be visually dominant on a roughly 50-foot-wide lot. Staff explained the proposed drainage scheme includes underground infiltration chambers sized for the first ~1.3 inches of roof-runoff and a planned overflow path; the applicant said a roughly 4-foot retaining wall and additional infiltration features were proposed to limit erosion.
Neighbors and commissioners highlighted potential neighborhood impacts. An online commenter, Charles Y of 14 Colony Road, asked the commission to ensure runoff would not affect downhill properties. Commissioners also questioned the comparables the applicant provided and noted the practical difference between a finished basement (which the assessor's living-area metric treats differently) and above-grade footprint.
After commissioners closed public comment, a motion was made to approve the special-permit and site-plan application as submitted. The motion failed to secure the votes necessary for approval. Commissioners summarized that, absent approval of the lot-line change, the applicant could still submit a building permit for a narrower house that falls under the older lot configuration; alternatively the applicant may revise the design and return to the commission.
Elizabeth Coo said she prefers to move forward this season and would continue to work with planning staff, but the commission's vote means she must either revise the plan or pursue the narrower permitted build under the existing lot configuration.
The commission did not record a formal roll-call tally for the failed motion in the posted hearing minutes beyond announcing that the motion did not pass.
