10-29-1984 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

F Ms. Jeanr:e Mabusth October 17, 19f4 Page 6 lot or lots were originally buildable sites, the passage of time or change in development patterns have rendered them simply too small to be built upon today. We suggest that a request to build on a parcel which is less than one -quarter of the required size is Leyond that point and ore which merits denial. E. Health, Safety and Welfare Implications There has beer. much Jis..ussion during previous Council meetings regarding the ianpact the proposed variance will have upon the health, safety and welfare not oT'_v of toe imniedie.te neighborhood but of the City as a wnole. We suggest that there are two respd,,ises to this issue. The first is to acknowledge that any increase in development will have some impact on a neighborhood when, as here, there are a number of un6eveloped situ in the neighbor- hood. This is a neighborhood which has only a single outlet and in which the streets are quite narrow. Development on substandard lots dill place an amount of traffic onto these streets which is ir: excess of what could be anticipated from development accoreng to the standards of the zoning ordinance. More basically, however, we believe that the implication:: of development of suhstar:dard lots is a matter which has alread-y been determined by the City. By establishing lot area requirements and other development standards, the City has established a density ccf development which it believed was optimal for this neighborhood. It iss obvious that allowing development to occur on quarter acre parcels would quadruple the residential density over that which was anticipated when the area was zoned for one acre sites. We believe that mane of the comments with regard to this issue which have been made at pre- vious Council meetings would be more appropriate in the context of a discussion regarding the adoption or amend- m,:!nt of a 7oninq ordinance. While the merits of development on quarter acre parcels is cper, tc discus- sion, it is a discussion which should be had by th,} City Counci: in its capacity as the author cf the zoning ordinance. Presumably, had the Council wished tc see development occur in Orono on parcels of that size, it would have written the zoning ordinance according!%,. However, the Council has chosen not to allow development to occur in this neighborhood at that density. The most logical assumption which ca.. be drawn from the Counc:l's