08-17-2009 Planning Commission Packet

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

/ ' , ' v { To: Chair Kempf and Planning Commissioners 1 From: Mike Gaffron, Asst. City Administrator Date: August 13, 2009 Subject: #OS-3164 Zoning & Subd. Code Amendments: Conservation Design Ordinance-PUBLIC HEARING Attachments: A- Conservation Design Ordinance Draft#4 -August 10, 2009 B - Conservation Design Excerpt from Draft 2008-2030 Comp Plan Rural Oasis Study Protecting its rural community aesthetics while maintaining and enhancing its ecological health has come to the forefront of Orono's planning efforts in recent years. While the City has reacted to the needs of a changing population by providing for a wider range of housing options,maintaining the rural character as that development occurs has presented di�cult challenges. In 2004 the City Council placed a moratorium on urban-density development and engaged a consultant planning firm, DSU, Inc. to conduct a study to define the values that make up Orono's rura.l character. The resultirig work became known as the Orono Rural Oasis Study. A principal goal of the Study was to identify methods to preserve and enhance those values while at the same time allowing for continued residential development. The resulting "Conservation Design" development parameters embraced by the City have been found to have equal applicability to rural density development. However, implementation of these parameters has to date been unstructured since an ordinance formalizing them has never been adopted. ' Ordinance Background The first draft of a Conservation Design ordinance was reviewed by the Plauning Commission at a work session in November 2005. The item of most concern identified at that time was the proposed inclusion of specific numerical standards for possible density bonuses to be afforded developers who adhered to the principles of Conservation Design and provided amenities or enhancements beyond the minimum standards. The Planning Commission indicated that while the idea of a density bonus was reasonable, the ordinance should provide the Council with substantial flexibility in whether to grant such � a bonus and in determining the magnitude of the bonus for a given application. However, since the density bonus was viewed as the primary incentive for developers to follow Conservation Design principles, exclusion of specific standards was seen by staff as leaving a significant gap in the ordinance. As a result, the ordinance was tabled pending additional consideration and comment from DSU which was not immediately forthcoming.