Laserfiche WebLink
mm'- ^Vi';,/Ar---::i:Si;' v -'^^ /: ^ ■;■■■ 1*1•V - * V; ■ '.’ '•■ .* ’i *- Planning Commlnsion iltions of fence height, 1 of enclosure must all be > accessory structures. Qted that in Orono, where t>lematic due to influent <br />jld allow greater primary <br />led on factors such as lot <br />lation to lot lines, view <br />>pography and screening. <br />3 Planning Commission, and <br />icture ordinances from the <br />>odbury, all of which have <br />sties to Orono. Copies of <br />nces are attached for your <br />buation, I have completely <br />closely coincide with the <br />r using bits and pieces of <br />s ordinances. These will <br />summarized in the table <br />t there should be a maximum <br />t currently subject to the <br />darda. Other cities have <br />IS with their staff people, <br />e a problem". Also, other <br />effect! a) basing their <br />buiIdinqs, not including <br />nd b) based on the total <br />:vious surfaces, similar to <br />fWiiii' <br />£ *'>Si^Si5#S{£a <br />Because the areas not covered by our existing hardcover standards are further away froai the lakeshore, X am suggesting that an extension of our existing standards be adopted for all residential zones not designated LB, and that these areas should be subject to a maximum hardcover or impervious surface limitation of 40% of gross lot area. This would apply to therural residential portions of Orono as well as certain districts <br />zoned as It-IA and R-IB. <br />Further, I am recommending thit the City also adopt a <br />standard for these non-lakeshore properties for the maximum .lot <br />coverage by buildings only as a percent of gross lot area. 1 am <br />proposing that the percent of lot coverage be inversely <br />proportional to the lot size, as shown on the following tablei <br />Lot, Area <br />0-0.50 acres <br />0.51 to 1.0 acres <br />1.50 acres <br />2.00 acres <br />2.50 acres <br />3.00 acres <br />3.01 acres a greater <br />percentage of Lot Coverage <br />bv Buildings <br />251 <br />22.5% <br />2w% <br />17.5% <br />15% <br />12.5% <br />10% <br />For Instance a 3/4 acre lot (32,670 s.f.) would be allowed <br />22.5% hardcover or 7,350 s.f. The typical 2 1/4 acre lot in the <br />RR-18 zone would be allowed 15% or 14,700 s.f. A 5 acre lot <br />would be allowed 21,780 s.f. A 40 acre property would be allowed <br />up to 4 acres of buildings, however, since che square footage and <br />number of such buildings would be strictly limited under new <br />ordinances to be discussed below, it is unlikely that such a <br />large area of structures would actually ever be allowed, even <br />under a conditional use permit. <br />The table above was designed to allow smaller properties to <br />develop the nece3sary improvements without being excessive in <br />visual density and for larger properties to contain the necessary <br />buildings for a typical quasi-agricultural type operation (horse <br />stables, greenhouses, etc.) without causing a visual density <br />problem. <br />M'i ' <br />■r a;. <br />'. V.. <br />■? <br />A-- . 'm <br />• >;■ <br />: - <br />4HW- <br />..^5