06-12-2017 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

AGENDAITEM Item No.: 25 Date: June 12, 2017 Item Description: #17-3925 City of Orono Text Amendment: Small Lots/ Setbacks Presenter: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Agenda Planning Department Development Director Section: Report 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to consider an amendment to the zoning ordinance related to setbacks for non -conforming lots. 2. Minnesota Statutes 15.99 Deadline. Not applicable 3. Background/ Summary. There are several neighborhoods throughout Orono where the zoning district regulations do not reflect the development pattem, for example, the Arbor/Briar neighborhood is zoned 2 acre lot minimum, yet many of the homes are on lots less than V2 acre. The Casco Point neighborhood is zoned for 1/2 acre lots, many of the homes are less than '/2 acre and even some less than 1/4 acre. In these neighborhoods, property owners often are required to request and receive a variance from the side or street setbacks in order to expand their home, a process taking 6-8 weeks. The Planning Commission considered an ordinance amendment that did three things: A. For non -conforming lots, adjusted the setback to non -conforming lots to 10% of the lot width, to a minimum of 8 or 10 feet, depending on the zoning district; B. For all lots, adjusted the side yard adjacent to unimproved rights of way to the setback established for interior side yards in that district; and, C. For all lots, adjusted the side street setback from 50 and 30 feet to 30, 20, and 15 feet, depending on the zoning district. 4. Planning Commission comment. Ultimately, the Planning Conunission elected to not recommend a change to the setbacks for non -conforming lots or changes to the side yard adjacent to street as they felt the 10 feet minimum was a good standard to follow, and there didn't seem to be much of a call to drastically alter the setbacks to reduce setback variances without negatively impacting adjacent parcels. They did support amendments to the setbacks adjacent to unimproved rights of way. 5. Public Comment. One resident has spoken out in support of amendment to the ordinance, though this resident supports lowering the minimum lot size in her neighborhood, this could potentially allow subdivision if a new minimum lot size is established. 6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends adoption of an ordinance. The Council could adopt the ordinance as proposed by the Planning Comniission (Exhibit A). The Council could adopt the ordinance as presented to the Planning Commission (Exhibit B). The Council could direct staff to review additional changes to an ordinance with either review by the Planning Commission or Council at a later date. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt either Exhibit A or Exhibit B as a solution to the small lot setback concem. Exhibits Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance from PC Exhibit B. Draft Ordinance from Staff Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: