My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-27-1999 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1999
>
09-27-1999 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/13/2023 4:11:50 PM
Creation date
4/13/2023 4:09:09 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
250
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
Lot Eitisriny Lot Size FrOPOStd Lot Sfeg <br />60 Orono Orchard Road 55,862.6 s.f. 55,807.3 s.f. <br />45 Smith Avenue 52,350.2 s.f. 52,405.5 s.f. <br />Both lots would remain approximately the same size and each lot would have increased frontage <br />along the front lot line. <br />Pertinent Ordinance <br />Section 10.28 RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District <br />Lot Lot Front Side Rear <br />Area Width Yard Yard lad <br />2 acres 200 feet 50 feet 30 feet 50 feet <br />Lot Area and Yards <br />60 Orono Orchard Road <br />Exbtipg <br />Lot Size 55,862.6 s.f <br />Lot Width (front) 210 feet <br />Lot Width (rear) 182 feet <br />Structure Setback (side) 28.5 feet <br />Proposed <br />Lot Size 55,807.3 s.f <br />Lot Width (front) 227 feet <br />Lot Width (rear) 164 feet <br />Structure Setback (side) 43 feet <br />4S Smith Avenue <br />Eicwting <br />Lot Size 52,350.2 s.f <br />Lot Width (front) 161.0 feet <br />Lot Width (rear) 191.5 feet <br />Structure Setback (side) 58.7 feet <br />Proposed <br />Lot Size 52405.5 s.f <br />Lot Width (front) 178.0 feet <br />Lot Width (rear) 174.5 feet <br />Structure Setback (side) 75.5 feet <br />Lots in the RR-IB district are required to be 200' wide at the front yard setback. Each lot would <br />increase 17' in width should the subdivision be approved. The impact on the rear property width <br />would be minimal with each lot only losing 17' in width at the rear.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.