Laserfiche WebLink
Rural Density Issue. Met Council's Regional Development Framework places all of Orono's <br /> non-MUSA areas in the category "Diversified Rural" and within the Long Term Service Area for <br /> the Regional Wastewater System. They consider all of these areas as "temporarily rural". Met <br /> Council policy would disallow new development at densities greater than 1 unit per 10 acres in <br /> this area, consistent with their recently adopted (August 2008) Flexible Residential Development <br /> Guidelines, which identify, encourage and promote development that is the pure antithesis of <br /> Orono's low-density philosophy. Those Guidelines (copy attached) are based on the premise <br /> that "existing regional wastewater treatment plants and the broader infrastr�ucture efficiency of <br /> contiguous sewered development are predicated on a residential densiry of three units per acre <br /> or greater. " To that end, the Guidelines suggest that all new non-MUSA development should be <br /> planned and developed on an interim basis as "staging areas for future urbanization". The <br /> Guidelines suggest clustering at high density in no more than 2�% of a given parcel, to preserve <br /> the remainder of the developable land for future urban development at urban (3-plus units per <br /> acre) densities. <br /> Because we have already developed much of our non-MUSA acreage at densities greater than 1 <br /> unit per 10 acres, Met Council considers Orono as "inconsistent with the Flexible Residential <br /> Development Guidelines". They would like to meet with us to discuss how this issue might be <br /> addressed. The number of remaining developable non-MUSA parcels over 10 acres left in <br /> Orono is not large, but the potential implications for the owners of those properties is a concern. <br /> For instance, could Met Council re uire that no such property be subdivided to a density greater <br /> 1 unit per 10 acres? If so, it functionally places a development moratorium on those properties, <br /> unless/until they are allowed to be developed at a density of at least 3 units per acre... <br /> 4. PARKS <br /> "The comprehensive plan update is incomplete for regional park review pufposes. Lands <br /> within the regional parks system need to be guided with a future land use of ��Park, <br /> Recreational and Open Space" and regional parks and trails need to be appropriately <br /> referenced in the Update. In order to be complete for ��eview and to conform to the <br /> 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan� (Pa��ks Policy Plan), the following revisions need to <br /> be nzade: <br /> • The Council-approved master plan foi• Morris T. Baker Park Reserve includes <br /> "inholdings'; which are parcels that are within the boundary of the park reserve but <br /> have not yet been acgui��ed by Three Rivers Park District. The inholding parcels, <br /> which are shown outlined in pink on the following graphic, need to be guided with a <br /> future land use of "Pa�°k, Recreational and Open Space" on the Land Use Plan <br /> 2008-2030 Map (Map 3B6). These parcels also need to be shown as 'p��oposed <br /> acquisitions for Baker Park Reserve" on the Pa��ks, Open Spaces, Trails & <br /> Recreation Areas Map (Map 4E-2). <br /> • The parcel that is outlined in pink on the following graphic is o��ned by Three <br /> Rivers Park District as part of Big Island Regional Park. The future land use need.s <br /> to be guided as "Pai°k, Recreational and Open Space"on the Land Use Plan 2008- <br /> 2030 Map (Map 3B6). This parcel also needs to be shown as part of the regional <br /> park on the Parks, Open Spaces, Ti�ails & Recreation Areas Map (Map 4E-2) and <br /> on Map 3B-9. <br /> RevieN�of Met Council Comp Plan Initial Response Page 13 of 17 <br /> August 28, 2009 <br />