03-13-1979 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

P.EGTJLI�R i2EETIPIG OF iHE OROIdO COUi1CIL, P17�RCH 13, 1979 Page 5 r4r. Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into the record SUBDIVISION the request for a sul�division of Fred Herfurth, 225 225 North Ferndale North Ferndale Road, dated February 2 , 1979, which ;�434 states : Fred Herfurth The Planning Conmission recortr.lended cienial of this application because of neighborhood opposition to attached units and because of the density rec�uested. The rec�uested PRD density is 0. 836 acres/unit cor.►pared to R-lA zoning requirement of 1. 0 acres/unit. The proposal is to construct three new "duplex" structures and remodel the existing house into an additional "duplex" for a total of four residential structures on 6 . 75 acres . Contrary to the Planning Commission reconu*iendation, I recor�unend approval of the attached dwellinc�s for these reasons: Four buildings will have less visual irlpact on the neighborhood than 6, 7 or 8 individual buildings; platting into 6 , 7 or 8 individual lots would have less respect for the topography of the site, ��ould likely require a longer roadway, and would likely require houses located much closer to the existing neighboring residences than the planned location; the neighboring lots are small �aith houses located very close to this property, quality "attached" : condominium units will not detract fror.i neighborhood " property values , are intended to be ocaner-occunied and are representative of a growing trend in quality housing. Attached condominiui*i style housing will provide a quality housing alternative in Orono. I believe that this alternative could be appro��ed as a variance to 34. 029 lir.iiting "duplexes" to within 200 ft. of a comr.iercial area. A better approach would be to consider amending the ordinance to permit double attached condominium units in R-lA, R-1B, RR-lA, RR-1B and LR-1C districts (now perr.iitted in R-1B and LR-1C) . I recommend the latter. The density question ie more difficult. I ari cor.lfortable with the proposed eight units (four buildings) . Strict code enforcer:lent would lir_iit the develonr.ient to six units (three buildings) however, the lot size is very close to perr.titting seven units. Because seven units also means four buildings, I would, therefore, � recor.u�end approval of the proposed eight units as � being a reasonable use of this property. As a PRD Conditional Use Permit, the Council can retain close control over the type of developrient. This will ensure protection of the neighbors by control over use of the open space, plantings, buffers, and the tyr�e of . structures. I recommend that you retain review rights prior to issuance of building permits and that final �lat approval include a landscaping plan. (Continued)