Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, April 27, 2015 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />Page 9 of 21  <br />  <br />5. #15-3722 STORMWATER AND DRAINAGE TRUNK FEE – SECOND REVIEW <br />(continued) <br /> <br /> If desired by the Council, an overall development acreage credit for one or more of the following <br /> can be established: <br /> <br /> - All wetland acreage to the boundary delineation line <br /> - All areas in easements for stormwater ponding <br /> - All conservation easements resulting from Conservation Design process. <br /> - Drainage ways in easements but not for standard perimeter D&U easements. <br /> <br /> c. For the 1-acre and ½ acre zones, establishes the maximum fee-calculable acreage per new <br /> lot at 1.0 acre and 0.5 acres respectively, and establishes that the fee is charged just to <br /> acreage in lots, not to acreage outside of lots. No reduction or credits are proposed for <br /> these zones. <br /> <br /> d. For multi-family and higher density residential developments, the ordinance has been <br /> drafted to remain on a per-total-acres basis rather than a per lot basis, but allowing a <br /> calculable acreage reduction for all acreage of delineated wetland and stormwater <br /> ponding areas. <br /> <br />5. At this time, no revisions to the commercial/industrial fee structure are proposed. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated the Council should review the draft ordinance and provide direction to Staff as to what <br />code revisions the Council desires. Based on Council’s direction, Staff will make whatever changes <br />Council directs and bring back a final draft ordinance for consideration at the next meeting. <br /> <br />Council Member Levang stated she appreciates the chart that Staff compiled. Levang stated she is in <br />agreement that the reapportionment options one and two do not appear to work and the City would never <br />get affordable housing if those were the trunk fees. Levang stated she hopes the Council can agree that <br />reapportionment would be off the table. <br /> <br />Council Members Cornick and Printup indicated they would be in agreement with that. <br /> <br />Printup stated there was talk on how the wetlands would fit into the possible reduction. Printup asked <br />how onsite facilities for cleansing and retention of water would fit into that. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated he is assuming Council Member Printup is talking about wetlands and stormwater <br />ponding, which could include rain gardens within an easement. Gaffron stated typically those would be <br />in addition to the two acres dry-buildable in the 2-acre zone or the one acre dry buildable in the 1-acre <br />zoning. Gaffron stated the way it is structured in the draft ordinance is that the Council would set the <br />base fee in a 2-acre zone, which would be the number of lots times two acres per lot times the base fee, <br />which would give the base development trunk fee. That number would then be reduced by 25 percent or <br />whatever number the Council determines is appropriate based on the entire percentage of the property that <br />is put into easements. Gaffron stated in his view that may be the most focused and easiest to follow.