Laserfiche WebLink
it4*2994 t7S Waynu Boiikvard <br />Mmli lt.20«4 <br />Fatt7 <br />Site-Specific Factors for Consideration <br />1. The property is to some extent an “oiphjn", with relatively little relationship to the development that <br />sunounds it. <br />2. The day-care use at the site apparently has not had much saccess in recent years, due to factors <br />not fully knowrn to staff but potentially related to vehicular access difficulties. <br />3. The range of potential uses within the existing RR-1B Rural Residential zoning for this si te include <br />(he development of single-fiynily housing (up to 3 homes at a 2-acre density) as well as a variety <br />of institutional, public or private uses. <br />4. ThepropertyisatahighlyvisiblelocationtotrafficenteiingOorofiomtheeastDeveloproentat <br />this site mi^t be considered as a ‘main entrance' to Orono, and as such will inherently set a tone <br />as to the character of the City. <br />5. The property abuts the Luce Line Trail, which as it traverses Orono has a completely different feel <br />than it does in Plymouth to the east; a rural feel rather than a suburban feel. Due to topographic <br />constrainu. development of a multiple family residential use on the site will likelybe in close <br />proximity to the trail, and have a potentially negative impact on the rural character of the trail. <br />6. Attached muid-ftmily housing, and such housing at the densities proposed, would oe inconsistent <br />with existing and expected residential development surrounding the property. While the property <br />in Long Lake to the north is zoned to allow up to 4 units per acre, it has developed in the past with <br />a wide range of lot sizes and at a lower density than it is zoned for. A recent subdivision at the <br />south end of Lindawood Road created a total of S single family lots from 4.2 acres of land, a <br />density of just over I unit per acre. <br />D. Are There CompeUiag Reasons to Amend the CMP? <br />In considering this application, staff would offer the following questions to be answered to assist in <br />detennining whether the proposed amendment should be approved: <br />1. Is the property currently guided in a manner that allows the owner son.e reasonable use of the <br />property? <br />2. Does Ae unique location of the property suggest certain types of uses may be more appropriate <br />than others? <br />3. Would re-guiding Ae property tend to promote some specific goal of Ae City m terms of land use?