My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-16-1984 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1984
>
04-16-1984 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/26/2023 4:07:26 PM
Creation date
6/22/2023 4:27:20 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
120
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
ator <br />ive South <br />a concept <br />collector <br />! lots not <br />performed <br />lese items <br />Lth the use <br />Ltable for <br />site will <br />The sites <br />^e not been <br />t fit into <br />mts. The <br />al concept <br />roadways <br />plan would <br />ever, this <br />ay between <br />urved west <br />Lving us a <br />tposal. <br />sss points <br />s. Plan B <br />Ld Crystal <br />mm <br />i • 'i <br />mm <br />TJ <br />{•H <br />iiS <br />mmili <br />1.'^ <br />- .= ■; <br />^#:Iv <br />Plan B (Exhibit A-3) <br />AS with Plan A. all lots can be <br />6,200 feet existing curb cuts? ’ While this con <br />Watertown Road where ® there are a variety of plans, givenplan does serve all l°ts internally, there are a a y <br />a little leeway. «hich mght reduce the^ <br />developer is concerned with. Some ro g propose designs for <br />ifbSi"vi^sLn^!but^\^^e^se sh^cli^s wtrVdone to^’sh^w that a number of <br />feasible layouts are possible. <br />1 i„ 4-0 the currently proposed subdivision except Plan B relates closely to the cu . niock 2. Would this be <br />for the curved west boundary of L ' . plan; or does it <br />resubdivided at a later date to ^{J. ^„t affect the <br />make more sense to re-align it now/ <br />drainfield sites. <br />PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW <br />Hote that current P-^^tT^L^de^^lopeVc^^^^^^^^ <br />?adirs'irioTo%rThe plans do not appear to reflect this. <br />• n Ko voiced to review the existing drainage plan and road <br />The engineer wil with City requirements,cross sections for compliance with city requ <br />All lots appear to meet the tr\%"planl'ingralSng <br />r:aSia;s‘=.°''l>: yorwtsh"io"make ?his a condition of approval^ <br />a A A A __ _ __ _ <br />A recommendation aPProval of the <br />second Addition should find th®t all lots <br />Or;iron-Si'tt'le;ifc“c^"de%or rural development, subject to the <br />following conditions; <br />1. All newly created lots shall access from the plat roads. <br />2. A flowage and conservation easement will be required over, under <br />and above the pond area. <br />' • inc “d'e"d Tn rStd “r^'4" o? wt^thaf inTcYve'^^he'^e^po^ry cul"d^ <br />sacs. <br />4.riur^paif of iruYe fufltf foad fy YbuYtiniYlnefitf <br />5. <br />approval . <br />6. <br />7. <br />8. <br />9. <br />10. <br />11. <br />12.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.