Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board continues hearing on 1774 Inn plan to use adjacent land for seasonal event parking
Summary
The planning board heard from owner Sarah Dunigan about leasing adjacent land at 42 Parkerhead Road for temporary event parking to ease an eight-space shortage at the 1774 Inn. Neighbors raised setback and environmental concerns; the board continued the hearing to May 12 to allow more measurements and revised plans.
The Phippsburg Planning Board continued a public hearing on a proposal by the owner of the 1774 Inn to lease neighboring land at 42 Parkerhead Road for temporary, seasonal event parking.
Chair Marie Varian opened the hearing and asked the applicant to describe the plan. Sarah Dunigan said the inn has eight on‑site parking spaces and routinely relies on the church and library lots. “The inn has 8 spaces, which is tight,” Dunigan said, and she described plans for vegetative screening, signage and two on‑site parking monitors to direct traffic during weddings and other events.
Board members and neighbors questioned how the town’s buffer and setback rules apply when parking is on a leased parcel. One board member read the ordinance language aloud and noted that a 100‑foot setback applies to many commercial activities but a 150‑foot buffer is specified for uses that include music or entertainment; Dunigan said her events require music to stop by 9 p.m. and guests to depart by 10 p.m. Abutters also flagged environmental concerns, saying Lot 3 is very wet and drains toward an aquifer and the Catapult River, and warned that compacted soil, brake dust and runoff could increase pollution.
Dunigan told the board the family holds the neighboring parcel in trust and intended to formalize the arrangement with a lease (she said the lease would likely be a $1 nominal lease with insurance to name the landowner as an additional insured). She also asked whether a small variance would be possible if precise measurements showed a 10‑ to 20‑foot shortfall against a 150‑foot buffer.
Planning board members recommended the applicant revise site drawings to maximize parking in Lots 1 and 2 and to reconfigure raised beds and trees to gain capacity. After discussion the board moved, seconded and voted to continue the hearing to the next planning board meeting on May 12 at 4:30 p.m. so parties can measure setback distances, review the easement/lease paperwork and submit updated plans.
