My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-21-2001 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2001
>
02-21-2001 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/22/2023 2:24:02 PM
Creation date
2/22/2023 2:23:23 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
131
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
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Wednesday, January 17,2001 <br />(IV26SJ Craig Ahhouse, Continued) <br />(heir options on how to best maintain the rural character of tins area, maintain the accessory <br />buildings, and be compatible with the surrounding residential areas Staff had discussed the <br />possibility of using the property as a community hone fitrm, which »he Applicant has determined <br />would not be successful <br />Alshottsc stated he is interested in developii^ a development Uut will work well with the <br />site and the surrounding area Alshouse stated the previous owner of the property purchased <br />it in 1971, and erected the 10,000 square foot arena at tliat time on seven acres of land for the <br />purpose of boarding horses Presemly there is a commercial license under a conditional use <br />permit for the purpose of boarding horses for the public Alshouse commented there ha\e been <br />a number of problems experienced with this operation such ns parking along Watertown Road <br />Alshouse stated the lot to the north was subsequently combined with the seven acre lot. with the <br />existing residence being rented out at this time <br />Alshouse stated the goal of this project is to create five or six lots oser the 36 acres in order to <br />help maintain the rural chracter of the area An interior private road would be created on the <br />lower area to access this development, with some consideration being given to shortening (he <br />length of the cul-de-sac. Alshouse stated they will be eliminating a number of the other <br />outbuildings on the property, and are contemplating clustering the residences towards tlie top of <br />tlie ndge Alsliousc stated m his opinion the development they arc proposing is in keeping with <br />the chaia,;tcr of the zoning ordinances and the neighborhood <br />Berg inquired whether the developer prefers Option I or Option 2 <br />Alshouse stated he prefers Option 1 due to marketing Alshouse stated if he goes with Option 2, <br />he would be forced to increase the pnee of the houses due to the smaller number of lots that would be <br />for sale <br />Gaffron stated he likes the concept plan, but m his opinion the future use of the accessory <br />building should be limited <br />Mabusth suggested the future owner of that lot be (old the bam is non-conforming <br />Bellows stated she prefers Option 2 over Option I because it prefers a little bit more of tlie <br />larger lot and prov ides more land for Uk* indoor riding arciu Bellows stated the City needs to be <br />careful about preserving this area, but the City needs to be careful about placing too many <br />restrictions on the fiiture use of the stnictiire <br />Alshouse stated he will be re-appearing before the Planning Commission in March with a preliminary <br />plat and that he is looking for some direction from the Planning Commission on whether the <br />accessory buildings can remain and the basic lay out of the dev elopment <br />Kluth suited pei>o*ullv he does not see any mqjor problems with the proposal. <br />Bellows stated the City may be limited in the type of restrictions it can place on this property and <br />the accessory building since it was originally constructed on a seven acre piece of land. <br />PAGE 29 <br />i
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.