%@LANGUAGE="VBSCRIPT" CODEPAGE="1252"%>
|
||||
There is strong agreement that developing policies
to protect
scenic views, scenic roads, and developing a stricter junk/blight
ordinance are highly important to township landowners with over 90% of respondents
supporting this policy. Preserving historic buildings
is important
to over 80% of respondents with architectural controls and sign regulations
of lesser priority (70%). The environmental protection policies most strongly supported by landowners
(over 80%) are addressing solid waste/recycling concerns, developing septic tank/drain
field regulations; adopting groundwater protection measures; protection of
farm and
forest lands from development, and developing a noise ordinance. Over 70% of landowners agree that policies should be developed to address the
following concerns: oil and gas development; shoreline zoning; open space for new
development; and stormwater
drainage control. A private road
ordinance policy is needed according to a majority of landowners (55%). Forty five percent
of landowners agree that a park on each lake and river is needed. The most supported
growth management policy agreed upon by landowners is to concentrate development to preserve open space and rural character, (88%). Over 70% of landowners agree that limiting residential and commercial strip
development, and limiting the intensity of land
use are good policies. COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS A number of
possible development trends were discussed by the Planning
Commission and included in the survey of stakeholders (land owners holding in excess of 100 acres of land).
These options were derived in part from the responses to the community attitude survey while others reflect
newly emerging forms and methods of
development. The advantages and disadvantages of each type of development
types listed below were examined. Some of these
development patterns reflect the types of development that occurred during the late 1800's and early 1900's.
Others indicate types of development
that are 2 - 7 occurring today. Still others
are development options that have not been used to date in Forest
Home Township. Appendix B
contains the actual survey along with diagrams and commentary regarding the
pro's and con's of each option. 1 Conventional
style development following the Subdivision Control Act. - This type of development consists of a number
of residential lots smaller than
one acre in size with the roads and utilities provided prior to
construction taking place. This type of development has taken place in limited locations
in the township in the past, most
notable along Bellaire Highway south
and east of Vandermark Road 2 Conventional
style development avoiding the Subdivision Control Act. This
generally results in larger lots, most in excess
of 10 acres in size that in some instances are further divided into smaller lots over time. In many cases these lots have irregular shapes and
are difficult to service with
utilities and community infrastructure.
Long narrow lots and flag shaped lots
often result along with high numbers of driveways fronting on major
county roads rather than the driveways
fronting on roads designed to handle
small volumes of low speed local traffic. 3 Existing
vacant, agricultural and forested land remain devoid of non-farm related
structures. Under this type of
development pattern, only owners or employees
necessary to work or manage the land for timber and
agricultural purposes would live in those areas of the township that have
good productivity potential. 4 Concentrated
development around the Village of Bellaire. This development pattern would encourage
higher density development residential
development and any commercial and
service businesses to locate within or
in close proximity to the Village. This
development pattern would allow for an
area for higher density, potentially
smaller homes for the young and the elderly that would be located close to jobs, shopping and other amenities offered by the Village of Bellaire. It would have the effect 2 - 8 |
||||