Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Monday, October 21, 2013 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />Page 27 of 42  <br />  <br />Grittman noted the intent of tonight’s sketch plan application is not to approve or deny either of the <br />proposals but it would be helpful from the Planning Commission’s standpoint to give direction to the <br />development group so they can prepare plat drawings that would meet the City’s expectations. Grittman <br />stated the number one issue is probably the best way to address traffic issues in the area as well as <br />pedestrian issues and how they would be impacted by additional development on the site. Grittman noted <br />there are already pedestrian issues with the traffic and the design of North Arm and how they might <br />interrelate to these two projects. <br /> <br />In addition, stormwater issues would also need to be addressed given the lay of the land and how <br />development might impact those and how they might be managed. Grittman noted stormwater <br />management is largely the purview of the Watershed District but the City has a large interest in making <br />sure it does not impact other portions of the community and that it is developed in a way that it would <br />eliminate any other storm water issues. <br /> <br />Grittman noted finding suitable septic sites would be a restricting factor on the number of developable <br />lots that could be proposed. <br /> <br />In summary, Staff is recommending approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The reason for <br />that is Staff believes there are very few options under the existing land use category to develop this <br />property and the City has limited authority to require that continued land use. <br /> <br />Staff has made the following findings: <br /> <br />a. The existing land use designation no longer provides a viable use of land for a private property <br /> owner. <br /> <br />b. The land use designation, in this case, unreasonably restricts the owner’s use of the land in an <br /> economically viable way. <br /> <br />c. The restriction to the current designation places an inordinate burden on the landowner to provide <br /> public open space. <br /> <br />d. The surrounding land uses are dominated by rural density residential uses, along with some urban <br /> residential uses. <br /> <br />e. The area is not within the MUSA, in which public sanitary sewer would be available for urban <br /> densities. <br /> <br />f. The area is within the northwest portion of the City, in which road uses and densities are <br /> designated <br /> <br />g. The most appropriate use for the subject project is Rural Residential, reflecting the policies of the <br /> Community Management Plan and the existing zoning of the property. <br /> <br />McGrann asked whether the one-acre lots would support the two septic sites. <br /> <br />Grittman stated the developer’s burden is to show they have a house site and a primary and secondary <br />septic site. Given the slopes and soils, it may be difficult at one acre sizes and it might also be difficult at <br />Item #01 - PC Agenda - 11/18/2013 <br />Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 10/21/2013 <br />[Page 27 of 42]