07-15-2002 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

capacity needs were considered as feasible. The current proposal for 1C3 residential units, plus the two commercial outlots having the capability of perhaps 75-100,000 s.f of office space, would in total likely have a sewer unit requirement of no more than 200-225 units, generally within the capacity needs range anticipated by the 2000-2020 CMP. Density Relationships. The CMP indicates that the area north of Kelley Parkway may develop at a density of “3-6 units per dry buildablc acre ”. What does this mean? First, this should be taken as an overall density for the area north of Kelley. Second, it suggests that an overall density of less than 3 or more than 6 units per acre would not be appropriate. The developer has a reasonable e.xpcctation based on the CMP that a proposed development with density in the range of 3-6 units per acre will be approved However, because this is a PUD and rezoning request, the City has the ability to determine whether the proposed density is appropriate in the conte.xt of the type and mix of the various dwelling units, as well as their massing, layout, site circulation, site amenities, etc. Density Numbers. The applicants ’ revised proposal is at 6 units per acre (including Kelley Parkw ay r.o.w. credit), and includes three types of dwelling units: 54 rambler townhomes, 43 two-story townhouscs, and 66 lofts/condo units, a total of 168 units on 23 dry buildable acres. To understand the density impacts, note that: - At a density of 5 units per acre, the total number of allowed units would drop to 140 - At a density of 4 units per acre, the total number of allow ed units w ould drop to 112 - At a density of 3 units per acre, the total number of allow ed units would drop to 84 Note that ‘Study A’ included approximately 75 units on roughly the same dry buildablc area as proposed by the developer, for a density of 2.7 units per acre. ‘Study A’ w ould nol ha\ c produced development at the minimum density for which this area was ultimately guided. Limiting density has its impacts, both for the developer and the City. The developer’s fixed costs (land, street construction, utility construction, etc.) likely increase on a per unit basis, tending to increase the price points. These increases can be minimized to some extent by varying the mix of unit types, their locations, and the length of streets and utility lines. As costs go up, the developer will tend to reduce the package of amenities, such as eliminating trails and landscaping features. From the City ’s perspective, rt lucing density may have both positive and negative impacts. The opportunity for a decreased massing of buildings may be created, although the type of units and layout of the development may have a greater effect on limiting massing. For instance, at 6 units per acre the developer might build three 66-unit condo buildings that leave a very' large portion of the site in open space; but this probably would not meet the intent of the Ci*y to provide a wider rance of housing options. Rementbcr that Orono has made a commitment to providing a w idei range of lifecycle housing options, and this is one of only three areas in the City where the 2000-2020 CMP allows for the higher densities necessary' to allow lifecycle housing to happen. In terms of thcConcepl Plan review. Planning Commission must attempt to reach a conclusion on whether the proposed density of 0 units per acre is appropriate, especially taking into account whether the type and mix of the various dwello'g units, their massing, layout, site circulation, site amen ties. etc. places the density on the land in an appropriate manner. #02-2789(Rc\ised) Dahlstrom Development LLC July 12, 2002 Page 6 of 13