My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packet Cc - regular meeting 9/12/1988
Orono
>
City Council
>
1988
>
Agenda Packet Cc - regular meeting 9/12/1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/6/2025 10:14:49 AM
Creation date
9/16/2025 1:34:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Administration
Admin Doc Type
Agenda Packet CC
Section
City Council
Subject
regular meeting
Document Date
9/12/1988
Retention Effective Date
9/16/2025
Retention
Permanent After File Date
Protection
Public
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.
/
493
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
Zoning File #990 <br />November 13, 1985 <br />Page 5 of 5 <br />A furthRr criteria to consider i.s how do the lots in question fit int <br />the neighborhood as far as lot size. Given a radius of 1/2 mile frog.. <br />Ferrell's property, 39 developed lots are 2 acres or ii,.nre, 13 are 1.25 to 2 <br />acres, 23 are .75-1.25 acres, and 11 are less than .75 acre. (These <br />increments were picked so that the Terrell lots could be categorized in one <br />group.) (Note that the Stubbs Bay Study Area, where sewer is contemplated <br />to serve Eastlake Street, Tonka Avenue, and Crestview Avenue, was excluaed <br />although it is within the 1/2 mile radius. Those 38 or so houses are on <br />lots averaging 1/2 acre or less.) It is clear to see that in Orono's two <br />acre zone north and east of Stubbs Bay, the majority of existing lots are <br />less than two acres. In general terms, the existing density and lot sizes <br />are detrimental to our long-term program of development without City <br />sewers. Additional houses on relatively small lots will not help that <br />situation. <br />Recall that the Alden Anderson application to allow a second building <br />site on adjacent properties totaling 3.5 acres, was in effect turned down a <br />few years ago. <br />Are there any circumstances rr hardships in the Ferrell application <br />that justify a recommendation of approval? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.