My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-25-2000 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2000
>
09-25-2000 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/15/2023 9:32:04 AM
Creation date
3/15/2023 9:28:11 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
181
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
The Council has the option of a cash contribution in lieu of land dedication. In those instances where <br />a cash contribution is to be made by the subdivider, in lieu of a conveyance or dedication of land, <br />the cash contribution to be contributed shall be equivalent to the fair market value of the equivalent <br />undeveloped land that would otherwise have been conveyed or dedicated. The City shall account <br />for such funds in a special fund named Park Dedication Funds. These funds are to be used only for <br />the acquisition, development and improvement of public parks, playgrounds, trails, wetlands, or open <br />spaces, and debt retirement in connection with land previously acquired for such public purposes. <br />The cash contribution is 8% of the fair market value of the properties. A minimum contribution of <br />$2,900 per lot or a maximum $4,900 per lot would be required if the City requires a cash <br />contribution rather than a land dedication. <br />This item will be forwarded to the Park Commission for review at their next meeting. Given the <br />location of the park area, it is possible the Park Commission will request a land dedication rather <br />than collecting a park dedication fee. Land around the northerly ravine is most likely a candidate for <br />dedication. <br />Issues for Discussion <br />1. <br />2. <br />3. <br />4. <br />5. <br />6. <br />Should lot width variances be approved for lots not meeting the minimum width requirement <br />on the cul-de-sac? <br />The pond on Lot 1 requires credit for the drainage area to be buildable. Should credit be <br />granted for the lot. Typically, credit has only been given for stormwater ponding areas as <br />part of a Planned P.esidential Development. <br />Should the Outiot be a public road? The Comprehensive Plan suggests urban residential and <br />urban service areas should be served with public roads. <br />Is the proposed road layout acceptable? Should two roads be provided (Garden Lane/Outlot <br />A)or would it be acceptable to combine into one road? Should Garden Lane be extended <br />fiirtlier to the north to provide future access to other properties? <br />Would a Park Dedication be appropriate for any portion of the development due to the <br />proximity of the Saga Hill Park? If so what areas may be appropriate for dedication? <br />The road and most of the lots will drain towards the NURP pond shown on Lot 1. Tne pond <br />outlets to the drainage ravine along the south lot line of Lot 2 There is concern about the <br />drainage being diverted into one location before it drains to the east side of Wildhurst Trail. <br />#2596 Brenshetl Homes <br />1181 WildhuntTmil <br />Class III Ptelimitiafy Subdivision <br />Junt 19. 2000 <br />patt-S
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.