Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001 <br />• 4. #2631 City of Orono Zoning Code Amendment —RPUD Residential Planned <br />Unit Development District — Continued <br />use, i.e.: for higher density use. The senior housing project has caused them to move <br />ahead on the ordinance changes. <br />The RPUD district would accommodate a variety of housing types. It would be <br />residential only with no mixing of commercial and residential. The district would allow <br />all permitted uses of the R -IA basic residential zone and a multi - family attached <br />dwelling, but only in the urban zone. There is a minimum site area of 5- acres, and a <br />height limit of 2 %2 stories or 30', except on RPUD sites currently zoned/guided for <br />commercial use, which could be up to 3 stories. Ten percent of the site must be devoted <br />to private recreation area in addition to standard park dedication requirements, and there <br />are detailed landscaping/buffering /screening and architectural requirements. Currently <br />the RPUD rezoning would not be allowed in the shoreland areas. The RPUD could <br />replace the M6 district. <br />The Planning Commission voted 4 – 0 to approve the ordinance. <br />Sansevere asked if the shoreland areas should be included in the RPUD areas. Gaffron <br />stated that some properties could be redeveloped using the RPUD, and there are benefits <br />to using the RPUD in the shoreland. Nygard stated he prefers to exclude the shoreland to <br />is protect the cabin feel along the lake. <br />• <br />Flint stated he was concerned with density issues. Gaffron stated the RPUD district <br />could be used for apartment -type development only on land currently zoned for <br />commercial use. So the commercial area would become a higher density residential area. <br />Council would be creating a district to which properties could be rezoned, but the district <br />would never have to be used, as with the M -6. Flint stated he would like to keep M -6 on <br />the books, in addition to the RPUD, so that it remains as an alternative. Gaffron stated <br />that no residential property could be rezoned to a higher density than it is guided in the <br />Comprehensive Plan. <br />Mayor Peterson suggested discussing the RPUD ordinance in a work session. Items 4 <br />and 6 were continued to the next Council meeting. <br />Nygard moved, and Sansevere seconded, to table items 4 and 6. <br />Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />8 <br />