09-18-2017 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

16-3807 February 11,2016 Page 12 5. A small number of lots will have relatively short "back yards" where the home will be no more than 20 feet from a wetland buffer, ponding area or perimeter berm. Are these acceptable? 6. The proposed front setbacks have been increased since the Sketch Plan Review in order to allow for driveway parking without interfering with sidewalk or streets traffic.. 7. Given that the wetlands will be contained within individual lots, they likely cannot be considered as a recreational amenity for the development as a whole. They do provide open space. Planning Commission should discuss whether this development should be required to create the RPUD standard 10% private recreation space. Prior discussions have suggested that the proximity to the Orono Schools campus justifies not requiring recreation area within the neighborhood. 8. Should a connecting sidewalk to OCB Road at one of the two road entrances be established? The intent would be to provide an alternate access to the existing trail along the east side of OCB Road; a crosswalk would have to be striped. 9. The perimeter berming and vegetation plans should be reviewed— will the result be an appropriate balance between the need for buffering the homes form the surrounding roads while maintaining views into the site rather than becoming a solid barrier?. 10. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation This development proposal exhibits a significant level of refinement as a result of the developer's response to issues raised during the Sketch Plan Review process. Discussion of the above topics and any conclusions reached by the Planning Commission should provide applicant and staff with direction as to whether or how the proposed plat should be further revised. Any remaining topics left unaddressed to date should be brought up for discussion. Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, with the caveat that the City should identify alternate sites for higher density development. Staff recommends approval of the rezoning to RPUD, to be formally approved at the time of final plat approval. Staff recommends preliminary plat approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Flexibility being granted for the lot area, width and setback standards of the RPUD District. Hardcover will be limited to the assigned Tier 4 level of 50% on each individual lot. The 0.50 FAR shall be adhered to on each individual lot. 2. Development shall be subject to adherence to the proposed Basic Conservation Design Master Plan, also subject to removal of buckthorn on the site. 3. Approval of filling of Wetland #3 as proposed subject to mitigation as required by MCWD (off-site mitigation proposed) and Wetland #3 to be removed from Wetlands Overlay District. Wetlands#1 and#2 subject to standard City Flowage and Conservation Easements, and subject to MCWD buffer requirements and City wetland setback requirements.