12-12-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i. #0S-31S2 October 19,2005 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Notice of PC Action, 10-19-05 B - Revised Site Plan Reviewed by PC 10-17-05 C - Original Site Plan Reviewed by PC 9-19-05 D - Memo and Exhibits of 10-13-05 Background Applicant originally proposed a 6-lot standard plat, with each proposed lot meeting the 2- acre rural zoning standards for width and area. However, certain issues with that plan quickly became apparent: - the lot proposed at the southeast comer of the property would have to hug Watertown Road, would result in a separate driveway off Watertown Road ratlier than fiom the new private road, and its 2 dry buildable acres were not contiguous but were split between area NW and SE of the wetland near the front of the property; and - the proposed lot layout had significant negative impacts on the long views from Watertown Road through the site (which were identifie.l in the Rural Oasis Study) by either blocking the open views or by removing the wooded backdrop behind those views. Planning Commission suggested that the applicant consider a “clustering ” concept whereby the long views would not be blocked by a new home, and whereby the loss of th '; wooded backdrop could oe reduced. The revised plan creates lots that are in all cases narrower than the 200’ required by the Planning Commission, and ranging in size from 1-1/3 to 2-1/2 acres. An outlet would be created in the front 1/3 of the site, preserving wetlands and woods, and accommodating the required stormwater ponding. Planning Commission suggested some additional tweaks to this plan, recommending that the 3 easterly lots be squeezed a little narrower if possible to minimize loss and encroachment of the wooded slope at the center of the property. It was also suggested by the adjoining neighbor to the east, Gary Demolay, that the proposed stormwater pond be moved slightly further westward to avoid removal of trees at the base of the slope. PRD & ‘'Clustering*' Concept Because the revised plan incorporates substandard lot sizes and creates a large outlet for conservation puiposes, this application must be reviewed as a PRD. The primary question for Council to address at this Sketch Plan stage is whether there is support for the level of lot size reduction proposed. This proposal is not really "clustering” in the classic sense; it ic relics on individual large lots with their own septic systems, wells, outbuildings, etc., radier than individual house pads grouped togeUier in a small area with the majority of the site in common open space.