My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-20-2014 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2014
>
10-20-2014 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2018 12:25:24 PM
Creation date
4/6/2015 1:35:14 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
470
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, September 15, 2014 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 28 of 59 <br /> <br />Gaffron stated during all the sketch plan reviews, the discussion was that this was going to be an RPUD <br />rezoning. When the Comprehensive Plan was revised in 2008, it did not change this area and it is still <br />zoned LR-1B, single family residential. Gaffron indicated the planned residential development is one of <br />the options the City has for a development but that RPUDs and PRDs are limited to single-family <br />detached dwellings. Gaffron stated the RPUD is probably the most logical to use in this situation. <br /> <br />Gaffron noted the City also has an M6, multiple family, option that the City has never used but that it <br />applies to two-family dwelling units. Under that option, the units must meet the underlying zoning <br />district standards for a single-family dwelling, which means the double units would need to meet the one- <br />acre zoning requirement. Gaffron stated based on that, under the current zoning, if the two-family <br />dwelling provision is taken advantage of, a total of eight units would be allowed. In addition, the <br />multifamily twin home use is not allowed via a PRD. Gaffron indicated there are also other regulations <br />that would apply if the land is located within the shoreland. <br /> <br />Mack stated regardless of what happens with this particular project before the Planning Commission <br />tonight, he would like to make a commitment on behalf of the City to the neighborhood that the City will <br />continue to look at the drainage problems in this area. Mack stated he is not an engineer either, but that he <br />does know the City has the ability to go out and do what it can to solve the problems to the best of their <br />ability by taking the steps they have available to them at this point in time. <br /> <br />Mack stated he has discussed the situation with the street superintendent and the utility superintendent, <br />who has a great deal of background and understanding about the situation. Mack indicated they went out <br />last Friday and took a look at it and that the City will try to take immediate actions, if possible, this fall to <br />replace the collapsed culvert in the hopes that will help lessen the problems. Mack indicated he is not <br />sure whether it will solve the problems entirely but that it has to be done, including replacement of other <br />pipes. Mack stated taking a comprehensive look at the whole area is important and that the City will do <br />everything they possibly can to address the problem. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit stated if the developer is planning for anything beyond the four single-family homes that <br />would be allowed as currently zoned, he would guess that Shadywood would be a catalyst or a facilitator <br />for improving the water issues. Schoenzeit noted the architect made mention of the fact that they would <br />take care of their own water, but that he would suggest they give some thought to perhaps handling some <br />Item #01 - PC Agenda - 10/20/2014 <br />Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 09/15/2014 <br />[Page 28 of 59]
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.