12-12-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

¥ #05-3152 October 19,2005 Page 3 A major difficulty in rural cluster development is (and always lias been) tlie need to provide for individual septic systems. Due to the steep slopes, this site is not readily conducive to a shared or community septic system, and Orono lias never promoted tlie use of such systems for a variety of reasons. Tlie nearest municipal sewer is less tlian 'A mile distant (at Leaf Street to the east and at Eileen Street to the soutliwesO but this area is not in the MUSA and the City has no expectation or intent to bring sewer to this area of Watertown Road. Therefore, it is imperative that individual building lots have adequate area for primary and alternate septic sites. Further, where the lot size is so small as to limit the ability for amenities such as pools, tennis or sport courts, accessory buildings, etc., it would be prudent that covenants be established as part of the subdivision process that will protect the septic sites. For the record, I vowed many years ago that Orono would never create another French Creek, the subdivision just west of die Mimietonka Ai t Center where lot sizes ranged from 1 acre to 1.5 acres. Preservation of septic sites was at best difficult and at worst a nightmare, due to the property owners’ expectations of large homes, patios, decks, pools, tennis courts, loop driveways, and landscaping, all of which in nearly every case resulted ui complicated site plans with less-than-optimum or compromised drainfleld sites. Issues for Consideration 1.Does Council support the concept of a PRD development for tliis site, on the basis that PRD i*- die only way the Zoning Code would allow development of substanuard let sizes in the rural zone? 2.Does Council support the creation of substandard, unsewered lots in the rural zone to accomplish the intent of Conservation Design in meeting the City’s “Rui-al Oasis” goals, for this property? - If so, does Council have any thoughts or concerns about imposing strict limitations on development of the substandard lots to avoid future septic problems? - If not, does Council support 1) pursuit of expansion of the MUSA to allow sewering of rural cluster developments that meet the “1 unit per 2 acres” density standard?; OR 2) reduction of the number of lots in order to meet those goals? COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Review the proposed subdivision as a sketch plan, and advise applicant whether to pursue the cluster concept as proposed, or to pursue other options. ■ ^ ■