Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, August 21, 2017 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />them to the 2 -acre dry buildable. In order to meet the 2 -acre minimum lot size, the number of lots will <br />need to be reduced and the remaining lots made bigger, which is partly why the applicant is proposing <br />this as a sketch plan. <br />Barnhart stated the yellow on the overhead depicts the wetland, the green is the wetland buffer, and the <br />pinkish color is the wetland setback. Barnhart noted the City has an additional ten feet of setback in <br />addition to the Watershed District's requirements. The area in blue is a proposed conservation easement <br />and the MUSA boundary is depicted in pink. The property is adjacent to the MUSA but not included <br />within that boundary and would require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. <br />The developer has submitted four different house styles which were included in the Planning Commission <br />packet. <br />The property is within the defined Rural Area of the City in which new development is expected to occur <br />with lot sizes of two to five acres. The boundary between the defined Urban and Rural Areas was <br />established in the 1980 Community Management Plan. At that time the boundary was consistent with the <br />USA line and it has been the City's intent to avoid creating new pockets of higher density within the <br />defined Rural Area. <br />Issues for discussion by the Planning Commission include the following: <br />1. Is the property in a location where the City should depart from the current zoning and <br />Comprehensive Plan guiding and allow higher density development? <br />2 If so, what are appropriate standards for such a development? <br />3. Portions of the property located less than 250 feet from the creek are not eligible to be rezoned to <br />RPUD and therefore would not benefit from flexibility in terms of lot standards. The applicants <br />are requesting that these areas be included in the RPUD rezoning. <br />4. The property is not in the MUSA and therefore is not eligible to be provided with municipal <br />sewer. Is expansion of the MUSA boundary appropriate for this project and this parcel? If so, <br />Page 2 of 7 <br />