Laserfiche WebLink
m <br /> A No. Summa Issues/Discussion Total Points <br /> WThe deflrntion of half story "Half story means the uppermost floor of a bmlding in which(f�the <br /> V lr�tersection of the exterior wall and the roof�s not more than thre�feet above the floor elevat�on, <br /> a and(f f)not more than 60 percerit of the floor area wrthin the extenor walls of the uppermost floor <br /> 23 1/2 Story defirntion exceeds flve feet m he�ght as measured from the floor to the rafters Floors exceeding these 29 <br /> parameten shall be deemed a full story"is very confusing for the public bo understand,causing a <br /> lot of resubmrttals and redesign of the house The definition should be amended to make it eas�er <br /> to understand <br /> The Crty should cons�der changes to ordmance standards and public street i�ght poliues which <br /> 2 Dark Slues Standards reduce ambient Itght em�ssions to reduce the�mpact of Iight pollutlon to the night sky in our rural 27 <br /> resident�al lake culture sern <br /> Accessory structures,includmg hot tubs and detached decks are required to be budt 10 feet from a 23 <br /> 38 Accessory Structures house This setbadc seems unnecpssa <br /> The definrtion of "Ex�sting ground IeveP'means the elevation of the grade at the base of an ewsting <br /> structure,measured at poirrts abutting the foundation wail,or the exist�ng grade of a vacani lot"is <br /> 30 F�asting Grade detinrtion not consisteM with the current practice employed,which is the grade at the tirrse of plat approval 20 <br /> The goal is to avoid the artrficially raising the grade to getting a h�gher house Cumerrc practice <br /> should be codified <br /> Section 78-98(b)does not make sense and its applicability is questioned It suggests a 6th month <br /> 33 Notice of Heanng w�ndow to acquire larxi Further,why is the puhlic notice 350 for CUP and 150 for variances� It may 19 <br /> be more beneflciaf for the notice area be consistent <br /> 28 Boundary Ilne adJustments �ot Iine arrangements,boundary Ilne ad�ustments,and other non-subd�v�sions that do not result in a �8 <br /> new lot could be handled admimstratively,saving applicant,council and staff t�me <br /> 5 RPUD process ordinance revisians PUD,RPUD&PRD contam overlaps in the code and are confusmg,A easier to understand code may 18 <br /> encourage more of these creatrve s of develo ment <br /> �> 16 <br /> Orono code language shoutd be clanfied to be cons�stent with state shore tand standards with <br /> 15 Existing substandard shore land Iots of record regard to minimum lot size and width vs underlying zornng Hss been smended three times(Ord. 16 <br /> 92,95,and 108) <br /> The sketch plan process�s a requiremerrt for class III subdiv�sions and may impact the 120 day <br /> review penod requirements Addit�onally,the sketch plan process does not prowde for feedback on <br /> 26 5ketch Plan process other types of applications where the process might be benefiidal,such as ordinance emendments, 16 <br /> Comp p�an amendments,slte plans Making the sketch plan opt�onal and an independerrt process <br /> would alleviate both concerns Should not�fication be added to the process? <br /> The C"dy's wetland setback requiremerm are greater than area communities and the watershed <br /> 31 Wetland Setbacks distrid. Perhaps the benefits are no longer valid.Further,there appears to be a conflict between 15 <br /> the se tic code and the we�tiand se�tback. <br />