Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, June 25, 2012 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />LJ <br />(3. #10 -3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) <br />McMillan stated if the City went with the DNR percentage, any lot within the first 1000 feet from the <br />shoreline has to be 25 percent. McMillan noted the DNR has just one set number for all lots within 1000 <br />feet of the lakeshore with no tier system. <br />McMillan noted the City does see applications for hardcover on properties that are not next to the lake but <br />the runoff does impact the shoreline properties. <br />Gozola stated there are a lot of situations in the City right now where properties are not regulated at all <br />and that the overlay map and tiers gives a sense of fairness. <br />McMillan commented she would like to know the impact that the lots located further away from the lake <br />have on runoff. <br />Rahn stated that Mayor McMillan is really talking .about two zones; one tier for properties that are <br />withinl000 feet and another tier for properties beyond 1000 feet. Rahn stated in his view tiers are very <br />similar to zones. <br />McMillan noted Staff did not run any numbers on various lots using the DNR regulations and how that <br />would compare with the different tiers. <br />Gozola stated they attempted to match the City's existing regulations as well as they could. • <br />McMillan commented it might be worth it to look at having simply 25 percent of the lot area as the DNR <br />does. <br />Gozola stated they have not looked at that and that it would result in a number of properties that are at 30 <br />percent becoming noncompliant. <br />Franchot asked if the whole approach was to try to avoid creating nonconformities. <br />Gozola indicated that was the case. <br />Franchot pointed out if they went with 25 percent across the board, that it would create a lot of change for <br />a number of people. <br />Rahn stated the direction at the beginning was to try to simplify things and see if we can go away from <br />zones. <br />McMillan stated the people with 0 -75 foot zones would stand to gain under that scenario since they are <br />not allowed to include the 0 -75 -foot setback in their calculations. <br />Rahn commented it would be interesting to look at case studies of what a variance would look like under <br />both sets of regulations. <br />Bremer asked as it relates to Division 4, if someone wanted to• change the pitch of the roof and update • <br />their house, whether that would be allowed. <br />Page 10 of 15 <br />