Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />September 19, 1983 <br />:)a=2 <br />: act -s _.. �3 zed at a <br />�W densi`'I an(c t:?a7 the 5` _.3t�C3_ - ibabil. cf the <br />combination or events that would need to occur to prohibit <br />passage in an emergency are very small. They may have <br />additional arguments in `'avor of their proposal, but we believe <br />,sse __ ho "e__ "aln <br />Clearly, no one involved in this process wants to clear any <br />more trees and understory than is absolutely necessary. It is <br />also true that the statistical probability of blocked access to <br />remote lots in this subdivision are eery small. But, the <br />problem lies with the fact that we are dealing with the set of <br />rules that apply to the entire community and to the standards <br />that you feel are reasonable throughout the City. It is also <br />unfort.iately true that we do experience tornadoes and wind <br />storms in this area and given the narrow width of the proposed <br />streets and the densely wooded nature of the property, a tree <br />could blow over in a storm and block the street. The <br />statistical probability may be 1cw, but the down si e risk <br />could also be very high i.f a resident needed emergency <br />treatment. <br />SUMARY/ RECO-MKZ dDATION <br />we recommend that -.he Planning Commission approve the proposed <br />rezoning of this portion of the Rebers property. This request <br />can be developed in a ma,iner that is fully consistent with the <br />Comprehensive Plan and from all representations it appears to <br />be a very high quality development. We would recommend acting <br />on this portion of the request as a separate motion. <br />We also recommend that you approve the proposed PRD <br />(conditional use permit) and subdivision and we su.,jest three <br />alternative actions for your :onsideration. They are by no <br />means suggested as all of the reasonable actions that you may <br />cho..se to ta'.a, but we believe t`at there is a rational basis <br />for each approa-h. <br />i. Accept the Applicants Plans is Presented <br />S?nce the proposed cul-de-sac length does not require <br />variance, you do not legally need tc find a hardship o approve <br />it and the argumen`.a advanced by the proponents do L,rovide a <br />rational basis for tr:Ls request. If you choose this <br />a' .ernative, we recommen-_i ttit findings be preparei before <br />final approval is grsnted to acknowledic the uniqueness <br />