Agenda - 03-06-1996 - X-B - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

5 PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS: The Planning Board considered the Flexible Development proposal are its January 17, February 7, and February 19 meetings. Rather than prepare a recommendation on the entire proposal, the Planning Board elected to focus on the specific issues raised at the public hearing and provide recommendations to the Commissioners concerning them. Those issues and the actions taken by the Planning Board are summarized below. 1. Affordable housing applicability. The specific issue is whether it is discriminatory to allow developers of affordable housing to submit a conventional subdivision plan only. Planning_Board Decision: That both conventional and flexible development plans be required of all subdivision, including those which are to provide affordable housing. Vote: 8-2. 2. Groundwater resources - quantity and quality. The specific issue is whether cluster lots will be subject to well failures because of the number and proximity of wells. No decision - The Planning Board asked that it be kept advised of the status and findings of the USGS groundwater resources study so that this concern may be addressed in the future. 3. Community sewage disposal systems. The specific issue is whether community sewage disposal systems should be allowed, given problems encountered with such systems in the past. Planning Board Decision: That the Planning Board is generally supportive of the use of community sewage disposal systems to encourage open space development. However, the Planning Board has specific concerns about the financial security of such systems and asks that the appropriate staff be directed to deal with such issues as soon as possible. Furthermore, the Planning Board wishes to stress that a"yield plan" is a determining factor in terms of how many units or house lots may be served. Vote: Unanimous. Planning Board Decision: That the number of lots permitted in a subdivision be based on a "yield plan" (e.g., conventional subdivision plan) as the Flexible Development proposal permits. Furthermore, that the staff continually evaluate the use of the soil survey and the effect on"yield plans" prepared using survey data. Vote: 8-2. 4. Higher administrative costs. The specific issue is whether the adoption of the Flexible Development provisions will require additional staff and whether developers will incur additional cost to adhere to the standards.