10-19-2015 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

FILE#15-3784 19 October 2015 Page 3 of 3 Livin�walls. Concern: The City of Orono has placed great importance on the lake views enjoyed from homes on lake shore properties, initiating the Average Lake Shore setback for structures in late 1974. No new structures may be placed within the Average Lake Shore, and any variances requested are scrutinized carefully. Other than removals,the code is silent on landscaping in these same areas, though they can have the same screening impact. Of secondary concern is a hesitation to over-regulate landscaping. Most cities do not regulate landscaping, so the public will plant trees and bushes with no expectation of specific rules. The City should anticipate higher than normal education and enforcement costs related to living wall administration. Solution: The proposed ordinance defines a living wall and establishes the same as a nuisance when placed within the average lake shore setback. A living wall must be ever�reen plants lap nted. Evergreen plants include pine, arborvitae, and spruce. Other plants (lilac, dogwoods, etc.) may provide similar screening characteristics part of the year are purposefully not included, as these varieties are not likely to be chosen for 'nuisance landscaping'. Trees placed by nature, regardless of size, type, and location, are not a living wall, and non-evergreen trees planted are not a living wall. This ordinance only identifies living walls in the required lake yard. Living walls (or landscaping meeting that definition) are frequently used for screening throughout the city. Issues for Consideration 1. Should living walls be regulated,and if so, should the regulation apply to the average lake shore or lake yard setback? 2. Does the lighting limit proposed (1.0 fc) appropriately define a nuisance situation? 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this proposed ordinance?