My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/21/2013 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2013
>
10/21/2013 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/20/2018 3:42:07 PM
Creation date
12/20/2018 3:42:01 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
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
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,October 21,2013 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Grittman noted the intent of tonight's sketch plan application is not to approve or deny either of the <br /> proposals but it would be helpful from the Planning Commission's standpoint to give direction to the <br /> development group so they can prepare plat drawings that would meet the City's expectations. Grittman <br /> stated the number one issue is probably the best way to address traffic issues in the area as well as <br /> pedestrian issues and how they would be impacted by additional development on the site. Grittman noted <br /> there are already pedestrian issues with the traffic and the design of North Arm and how they might <br /> interrelate to these two projects. <br /> In addition, stormwater issues would also need to be addressed given the lay of the land and how <br /> development might impact those and how they might be managed. Grittman noted stormwater <br /> management is largely the purview of the Watershed District but the City has a large interest in making <br /> sure it does not impact other portions of the community and that it is developed in a way that it would <br /> eliminate any other storm water issues. <br /> Grittman noted finding suitable septic sites would be a restricting factor on the number of developable <br /> lots that could be proposed. <br /> In summary, Staff is recommending approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The reason for <br /> that is Staff believes there are very few options under the existing land use category to develop this <br /> property and the City has limited authority to require that continued land use. <br /> Staff has made the following findings: <br /> a. The existing land use designation no longer provides a viable use of land for a private property <br /> owner. <br /> b. The land use designation,in this case,unreasonably restricts the owner's use of the land in an <br /> economically viable way. <br /> c. The restriction to the current designation places an inordinate burden on the landowner to provide <br /> public open space. <br /> d. The surrounding land uses are dominated by rural density residential uses, along with some urban <br /> residential uses. <br /> e. The area is not within the MUSA, in which public sanitary sewer would be available for urban <br /> densities. <br /> f. The area is within the northwest portion of the City, in which road uses and densities are <br /> designated <br /> g. The most appropriate use for the subject project is Rural Residential,reflecting the policies of the <br /> Community Management Plan and the existing zoning of the property. <br /> McGrann asked whether the one-acre lots would support the two septic sites. <br /> Grittman stated the developer's burden is to show they have a house site and a primary and secondary <br /> septic site. Given the slopes and soils, it may be difficult at one acre sizes and it might also be difficult at <br /> Page 27 of 42 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.