12-12-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MS-3131 Jnly 13.2005 Page 4 exploring with MCWD (Orono’s LGU for WCA regulations) whether this fill/miligation will be possible. Under Orono’spending wetland ordinance revisions, if the wetland basin is between 2,5 and 5 acres as anticipated, the City would require a 25* buffer and additional 20* buffer setback for structures from the wetland, which would have potential significant impacts on house placement and buildabilityfor Lots 8-9-10-11. Staff is also concerned about the location of homes so near the proposed stormwater ponding on Lots 10 and 1 1 . E. Stormwater and Drainage Improvements and/or Easements Needed The proposed development is required to provide stormwater management systems including ponding. Easements for the natural drainageway skirting the south end of the site will be required. The entire property including wetlands and the Williamson residence lot will be subject to the Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee established for 2005 as S4,l 60 per acre for the V2 acre zone; no fee has been established for SFR at 2-3 units per acre, but we would expect the above rate to be in the ballpark for the proposed development. )^ether the church parcel, Lot 3, should be exempt from the SW&DT Fee is an item for fUrther discussion. F. Wetlands and Ponds: Outlet vs. Individual Easements If this site is developed via the RPUD standards, and depending on whether the road becomes public or private, it may to most appropriate to place the wetlands and ponds into a commonly owned outlot. This would have a definite impact on the gross lot area for Lots 9-10-11 , which severely impacted by the proximity of proposed homes to the ponds and wetlands... G. Lot Layout and Lot Standards (RPUD) At the sketch plan review, Platming Commission concluded that the RPUD standards for SFR development are generally appropriate for this site, with a few minor revisions. The RPUD standards [Section 78-626(8)] are summarized as follows: -15,000 sf min. dry buildable lot area (PC indicated 14,000 sf min. was acceptable) - SK)' minimum lot width at the setback line (all 9 new lots meet this using a 30* street setback...) - 125* minimum lot dqith (all but Lots 2,4 and 5 meet this vriien measured fiom the new road to the midpoint of the opposite lot line; Lot 2’s short side along Willow is technically a firont yard, although the narrowness of the lot and the requirement for access to tihe new road rather than Willow force the south side to function as fix>nt yard, with functional lot depth of 75*-95*, and leaves only a minimally functional rear yard... Lots 4 and 5 stiU have reasonably functional fiont and rear yards...) - 40* rear yard or 20% of lot depth, whichever is less (Lots 2 and 6 don’t meet this standard but won’t be much affected if it it is required) - 25' front setback on internal streets (30 ’ was used on the plat, which allows the lots to meet the 90 ’ lot width standard...)