Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF TAE � <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, September 21, 2015 <br /> 6:30 dclock p.m. <br /> Barnhart stated under the proposed language, any nonconforming would be allowed to remain. In <br /> addition, the language identifies criteria for a foot candle so Staff will have something to measure against. <br /> The criteria states that"lighting which casts light on adjacent resident property that exceed four-tenths <br /> foot candles as measured at the property line for a period longer than two hours. Barnhart indicated <br /> moonlight is .3 foot candles. <br /> The second issue being address with the ordinance is living walls. Barnhart noted Orono has placed a <br /> strong level of protection on lake views from the residential lakeshore lots to the lake. The City Council <br /> in the past has been reluctant to make changes to the landscaping ordinance because once you start <br /> regulating landscaping, it can become a slippery slope. A livin�wall means a combination of evergreen <br /> plants that are six feet in heiglit and planted in such a manner that their spacing is equal to the width of the <br /> plant. Non-evergreen trees would not constitute a living wall. <br /> Barnhart noted the City does not allow fences in the 0-75 foot zone and that this ordinance proposes that <br /> living walls also not be allowed. <br /> Landgraver asked whether it could be described in a different way than plants that are six feet in height <br /> and planted in such a manner so the spacing is equal to the width of the plant. <br /> Barnhart stated generally arborvitaes ar evergreens have a described width. If the width of the plant is <br /> four feet and they are planted every four feet apart, half of that plant is two feet, and if it touches the other <br /> half of the next plant, so a living wall has essentially be created. Barnhart stated if they are planted <br /> further apart and there is an opening, it would not be considered a living wall. <br /> Lemke asked whether the ardinance should say at least six feet in height. <br /> Barnhart stated the language could be changed if the Planning Commission determines it is appropriate. <br /> Leskinen asked if there is a prescribed width of the living wall that would trigger this. <br /> Barnhart stated that is not being proposed but that could be added if the Planning Commission desired. <br /> Leskinen stated that would help clarify what a living wall is. <br /> Schoenzeit noted arborvitaes also grow in other directions, and when they are on the property line, they <br /> are growing into the neighbor's yard and essentially taking their property. <br /> Barnhart stated this is regulating the screening characteristics and that the ordinance does not cover that. <br /> Schoenzeit noted an existing living wall would be allowed to be grandfathered and replaced. Schoenzeit <br /> stated in his view it would be just like someone rebuilding a new house and having a clean slate. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the goal should be to get rid of these. <br /> Barnhart stated the City would look at it as a nuisance primarily and it would not necessary be <br /> grandfathered in. Staff did look at it from a regulatory standpoint but discarded that. <br /> Berg asked whether it can be replaced if it exists now and it dies. <br /> Page 42 of 46 <br />