09-23-2019 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 9, 2019 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 10 In response, Staff drafted options for Planning Commission review during a public hearing held on August 19th. These options included Option 1 (line of sight version, Exhibit A-1), Option 2 (true average, Exhibit A-2), and Option 3 (exception). Staff does not support Option 3 because it was not sufficiently clear. At their meeting on August 19th, the Planning Commission discussed the options. After much discussion, the Commission voted to recommend Option 2, a true average, which is easier to understand but may not always protect the view. The Planning Commission minutes from that meeting are attached as Exhibit E. Staff has applied the options to a number of lots in Orono, attached as Exhibit C. The red line represents the ALS based on Option 1. The Planning Commission’s recommendation, Option 2, is shown as the blue line, and the dashed black line represents the existing ordinance. The black dashed line is the current average lakeshore setback as it is applied, which uses the closest point to the lake on either adjacent property. In this example, the shaded area cuts through the house so the average lakeshore setback is established by the corner on the other side of the house. This created some concern to the City Council in January as it reviewed an application. In response to that concern, one of the options was Staff’s proposal that is depicted as the red line. That takes away the opportunity for the line to cut through the adjacent property. Staff also prepared an option that takes the average. That option is depicted as the blue line. The example lot is 110 feet from the closest point of the house to the lake. The adjoining house is 100. The average of that is 105 feet. Staff then applied that setback from the lakeshore to create the average lakeshore setback. That option was preferred by the Planning Commission. This option is easy to understand but may not always protect the line of sight goals that the Council desires. Barnhart noted either option does not affect the 75-foot lake yard, which would still apply in either case. Another example shows how the line curves a bit to follow the lakeshore. In January the City had a surveyor who was confused about what the average lakeshore setback was even though he had performed survey work in the City for a number of decades. That highlighted the need to come up with something that was easier to understand. Staff recommends the option depicting the red line. Six or seven examples have been provided in Staff’s report illustrating the different options. The red line is the most proximate line from corner to corner and the blue line follows the average along the lakeshore. Crosby asked if the red line should go from the other corner. Barnhart indicated Staff went from the closest to the house and the most lakeward point but that was not the closest. Staff is trying to avoid situations where it cuts through an adjacent property. Since the packet went out on Friday, a number of public comments have been received regarding some confusion over what is being proposed. Those comments have been provided to the Council. Walsh noted this arose from an application where the average line of sight went through the neighbor’s house. The Council felt that could not be a line of sight since it was already blocked and that the ordinance should perhaps be amended. Whenever the City fixes an ordinance, it goes through the