My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-19-1982 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1982
>
04-19-1982 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2023 11:01:09 AM
Creation date
2/15/2023 10:59:24 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
159
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
#671 Schlee Builders Inc. <br />April 15, 1982 <br />page 6 <br />the result would more closely conform to <br />existing neighborhood conditions and to the <br />underlying single fcunily zoning. <br />10. Housing Type Conclusion <br />a. ) Approving the proposal requires a variance <br />for single family units at 3/acre density. <br />b. ) Denying the variance would likely not result <br />in 1/2 acre singles but rather in duplex or <br />quad construction (perhaps more than 48 units <br />total if road ROW is reduced) or in delayed <br />development. <br />III. SUBDIVISION LAYOUT <br />1. General Pattern <br />The design chosen is a result of several criteria: <br />a. ) Street access required to Blaine at Livingston <br />b. ) Street access required to Northern Ave. at a <br />grade level street intersection/RR crossing <br />c. ) Future access required to west property line <br />d. ) All the above required so that multiple access <br />is available to serve the number of units proposed <br />e. ) No access permitted to Co. Rd. 15 for safety <br />reasons (differs from previous approval) <br />f. ) Clustering of unit7 to reduce needed streets and <br />utilities, thus reducing develo{Maent costs and <br />increasing the number of units allowed. <br />2. Outlet A <br />A result ofthe above design was outlet A, a piece <br />of unplatted "leftover" land. <br />a.) If this Outlet were centrally located it might <br />make an excellent park. This use is not too de- <br />sireable in the present location. <br />b„) The outlet area has already been used in the formula <br />for overall density (its density credits have been <br />transferred to the platted lots) therefore it is <br />not further developable. <br />c. ) The development type does not seem to lend itself <br />to a homeowner's association to maintain O.L. A <br />d. ) If left in developer's ownership there will likely <br />be future pressure to develop it - or it will go <br />tax forfeit. Neither respects the actual develop <br />ment credit transfer.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.