Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> • Monday,July 18,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3131 Steve Bohl,Continued) <br /> wetlands have ever been used as passive or active recreational use in order to qualify for the 10 percent <br /> clause. <br /> Gaffron stated the City has only one other RPUD,which is Stone Bay, and that the wetlands on that site <br /> were not used as passive recreation in that situation. Gaffron noted there is a city park located across the <br /> street from this proposed development. <br /> Jurgens inquired whether some type of fee could be imposed to help improve the park located across the <br /> street in lieu of the 10 percent of land dedication. <br /> Gaffron stated the RPUD standards do not contemplate a fee. <br /> Jurgens stated he would like construction limits demonstrated on the plans,noting that in his view this <br /> site is going to be completely cleared to allow for construction. Jurgens stated he would like to see what <br /> is being proposed for the land to the south and the impact it would have on the roads in this area. <br /> Rahn inquired whether there are any lots that are less than 14,000 square feet. Rahn stated it is his <br /> understanding that the 14,000 square feet was agreed to in order to allow more affordable housing in this <br /> area. <br /> Gaffron stated one of the goals in the changes in the Comprehensive Plan was to allow for densities <br /> greater than two units per acre, which is a huge change from what it is currently zoned for. Gaffron stated <br /> the lower square footage allows for higher density in this area but does not guarantee that the housing <br /> being proposed for this area would be affordable. <br /> Rahn inquired whether the 15 percent would be more restrictive than the floor area ratio. <br /> Gaffron stated it would be difficult for the developer to adhere to the 15 percent limit given the type of <br /> housing being proposed for this area. Gaffron stated the City's code does not say that an RPUD is subject <br /> to the 15 percent. <br /> Jurgens stated in his view this development will end up being a number of large houses on small lots and <br /> gives the appearance of a large amount of massing. <br /> Winkey stated in his view the 15 percent is too restrictive. <br /> Gaffron stated if the developer is required to adhere to the 15 percent, it is likely that tuck-under garages <br /> would be constructed,which would have a negative impact on the marketability of the project. Gaffron <br /> stated the question is whether this development would be viable if held to the 15 percent. <br /> Rahn questioned whether rezoning of Lot 3 is necessary at this point. <br /> PAGE 22 <br />