08-13-2012 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. (5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) conservation efforts undertaken by the residents. Bremer stated the City has a hardcover limit for a reason in that area, but to go to the 25 percent standard on Casco Point would make their properties nonconforming. Bremer stated that is not a reason to not consider it, but the City has to be mindful of the outcome. Bremer stated one of the things she likes about the new ordinance is that the map is visual and people can easily identify which tier they are in. The map also helps to reduce the amount of interaction with Staff. Bremer stated one of her concerns is that the map appears visually to have some inconsistency inherent with the map. Bremer commented no method would be perfect given the different shapes of the lots and that the map is not going to look visually 100 percent like you would expect. Bremer stated she does not know how people will react to that, but that is also not a reason not to go forward since there will be a learning curve with any new system. Gozola stated he also noted which method was used to designate each parcel. Mattick indicated he has not reviewed the proposed ordinance in depth at this point and was waiting until the City Council determined whether they would like to proceed forward with the tier system. Mattick stated if the Council directs him to review the ordinance, he would look at the methodology that was used to create the tiers to help ensure that the rationale used supports the designation. Mattick stated once the Council gets close to the final ordinance language, he will take a look at it more closely. Mattick noted that hardcover is a big issue given the amount of Lakeshore in Orono. McMillan asked how much time the City Attorney would need to review the ordinance. Mattick indicated it would depend on what the City Council would like him to review. If the Council would like just a review of the methodology and the language contained in the definitions, he would be able to have that review completed by the next meeting. Mattick stated it has been his experience in working with some of the other city ordinances that it is beneficial to run some real life scenarios. Bremer noted there were some questions raised in the e-mail and that perhaps the City Council could walk through those. As an example, it was requested the City allow 150 square feet of patio versus 100 square feet. Bremer noted there was a concept proposed originally that property owners be allowed 100 square feet plus 50 percent credit for pervious pavers. Bremer stated in her view that could cause some confusion over what is considered pervious versus impervious. Bremer asked how that would affect a property that is already at the maximum hardcover level. Gozola stated every property within this particular overlay district would get credit for either 100 square feet of deck or pervious patio that meets the requirements of the code. If you have an existing deck and an existing hardcover percentage, you would get the same hardcover credit as everyone else, and that 100 square feet would not count against your total hardcover, just like it would not count against the adjoining property if they went ahead and constructed a 100 square foot deck. Gozola indicated it would be a straight credit across the board. Bremer asked whether she would be allowed another 100 square feet if she already has a 100 square foot deck. Gozola indicated she would not and that the credit is limited to 100 square feet of deck or patio. — Page 11 of 19