Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ' ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION . <br /> Monday,August 21,2006 � <br /> - � 6:00 o'clock p.m. : � <br /> (#06-3225 875 WSW,LLC,Continued) � : <br /> - 3. The proposed 20-foot roadway width is substantially less than the 28 feet width required by the � . • � . � <br /> � subdivision code for�rivate roads serving more tlian seven homes. � � - • " <br /> . �Gaffron noted the City Engineer has indicated in his merriorandum that City Code requires that all private.. <br />� streets that serve more than seven units be paved to a miiiimum width of 28'feet. . � . . <br /> Carlson addressed the Planning Coinmission regarding this application, noting that they liave reduced the � ' <br /> • number of town homes being proposed froin ten to nine to help address the concerns expressed by the <br /> Council regarding the massing on the site. Carlson indicated the empty-nester market is being pursued ' . <br /> with this type of development and the units would be wheelchair accessible. The exteriors will be ' <br /> constructed with cedar siding. <br /> Carlson noted the soil conditions on Lot 1 do not allow for a walkout or a basement,which requires them <br /> to construct a room within the attic space. Carlson stated their pla»s are in the process of being fiilalized. � <br /> Johnston stated the idea behind the zero lot line is that outside the front•door is ttte full yard between the :• . <br /> � one unit and the neighboring unit. The side with the zero lot line would be constructed with higher . ' � : <br /> transient windows to provide additional privacy. <br /> � Johnston stated tl�ey are looking at an outlot for the main street area,which could be continued out into � . " <br /> � the wetland if this is the recommendation of the Planning Commission. : , , <br /> Johnston stated the principles of conservation design were not listed on the City's web site and he would <br /> � request some more direction on that aspect. . <br /> Gaffron noted that ordinance has not yet been formally adopted by the City Council and has not yet been � <br /> . placed on the City's web site. Gaffron indicated he would be able to provide Mr.Johiiston with some <br /> information concerning the princi,ples. , � : <br /> Johnston stated they would be utilizing rain gardens to do the initial treatment on the stormwater runoff <br /> and the rain gardens would be connected with a final overflow to a pond located on Lot 1. The City , <br /> Engineer has confirnied that the runoff rates are being reduced witli this plan. Native plantings will be . � <br /> utilized away from the homes. Johnston indicated he would review tlie principles of conservation desia <br /> � to see if further modifications are necessary. . <br /> Johnston stated as far as the PUD requirements,this development wbuld be considered single-family <br /> detached. Johnson stated althougl� a 15,00 square foot lot area is not met on every lot,the average lot size <br /> is considerably more than that. The 90-foot width is not necessary in this layout since the majority of the <br /> � buildings will be 40-foot wide. � <br /> Johnston indicated they would work on the setbacks. The to«�n homes have tllree car gara;es, plus room „ <br /> in fi•ont of the ;araQes to park three additional cars. Johnston indicated in Stonebay the streets ��•ere 21.� <br /> feet�vith no curb,which is essentially the same width of this roadway. Johnston stated 20 feet is the <br /> minimal amount allowed by fire code and that a 28-foot roadway width is not necessary in this situation <br /> 1�GE 1� � � <br />