Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> JOINT WORK SESSION <br /> Monday,January 9,2012 <br /> 5:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Gaffron stated if you look at it from a septic system standpoint and you go to a performance standard that <br /> regulates the quality of water leaving the septic system, the issue then becomes who will perform the <br /> testing. The measurement of the performance standards could be costly to homeowners unless there are <br /> some prescriptive standards that the homeowner has to comply with. <br /> Schoenzeit stated when this project was started, it was thought that there would be a menu of different <br /> BMPs developed by the state that the homeowner could look at and incotporate on their property. There <br /> was some initial discussion about whether the Task Force should wait for the state to develop that list but <br /> it was decided to go forward with the process. Schoenzeit recommended the City pick three items that the <br /> City agrees on and assib a value to them so there will not be an ongoing maintenance issue. <br /> Rahn commented he would like to stick with things that are currently required and not add to them. <br /> Walsh recommended that they base it off of the current code and look at what needs to be fixed within the <br /> current code. Walsh noted the original goal of the Task Force was to simplify things. <br /> McMillan pointed out performance standards require land and space for rain gardens and other things and <br /> that they are better suited for larger lots. <br /> Rahn stated there are also issues when a new owner of the property enters the picture. <br /> McMillan stated a small lot may require the landowner to give up half of his back yard in order to have a <br /> rain garden. McMillan stated the City will need to determine whether these items are practical. <br /> McMillan commented she would like the property owners to elect to do it on their own and that the City <br /> has to decide whether it is practical to require the landowners to do this. <br /> Franchot commented the property owner could be given the option. <br /> McMillan stated she would prefer at the time an application comes in for redevelopment that the Council <br /> look at it then. McMillan commented things will change over time on any property and that she would <br /> prefer to grant fewer variances and perhaps not be as restrictive as the DNR. <br /> Rahn suggested the City look at a prescriptive based ordinance and then compare the two. Rahn stated <br /> the City struggles with situations where homes were built without a patio or deck and then the subsequent <br /> new owner of the property desires those items. Rahn stated in his view each home should be allowed 100 <br /> square feet of deck or patio and that permeable pavers should be allowed. <br /> Schoenzeit stated other items to consider could perhaps be fabric and overhangs, decks on ground, decks <br /> over hardcover,top of the retaining walls, and 100 square feet of patio. <br /> Rahn commented the amenities installed under the performance based standards would likely disappear <br /> after a period of time. <br /> Schoenzeit stated they should also include a two-car garage on every property. <br /> Franchot stated very few people have had complaints about the percentages per zone,but that the issue is <br /> that their property is not quite what they want and they desire a deck or an extra garage stall. Franchot <br /> stated if the City can come up with some sensible flexibility on certain items,he would be in favor of that. <br /> Printup commented over time the process became more layered and more complex. <br /> Page 8 of 11 --- --- <br />