06-10-2013 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 18 (3. #13-3596 CITY OF ORONO – ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES – ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, Continued) Gaffron stated in his mind pump houses and lock boxes are oriented to the lake and should be located close to the lake. Bremer commented it would also depend on the topography of the lot. Anderson noted the City has regulations on flagpoles and that she is not as influenced by the proximity to the lake. McMillan stated in her view the side setbacks are more important than the closeness to the lake. McMillan noted there are currently a number of flagpoles located in the 0-75 and some smaller ones are located on people’s docks. Levang asked if it could become a visibility issue. Gaffron stated that could become a factor in certain situations. McMillan noted the side setbacks and height restrictions would help to some degree. Gaffron stated it could then read; one flagpole set back from a lot lines a distance of no less than and strike the language to be located X feet from the ordinary high water level. Section 28 should be changed to allow structures that are past the average lakeshore setback by specifically adding flagpoles and pump houses. Gaffron noted Ordinance Section 20 as reviewed on May 13th included five options for regulating “height of structures.” As a result of that review, it became clear that the City Council was interested in continuing to regulate excess structure heights via the conditional use permit and/or variance processes, based on whether the structure in question was attached or detached to the principal structure. The draft language now establishes that attached features of a building would need a variance for any height increase above the standard permitted building height for that district and that freestanding detached structures would need a conditional use permit to extend up to 50 percent above the permitted height, but a height increase greater than 50 percent would require a variance. McMillan asked if the advantage of requiring a variance versus a conditional use permit would be that variances are harder to obtain. Gaffron stated a conditional use permit, if the standards are met, will typically be granted. The City has not established any standards for increasing the height except for requiring a conditional use permit that allows an increase in height. The City has historic language that talks about the process for doing it but not the reasons why. Gaffron stated it currently is not spelled out in the code so it would be a variance by default. If the City Council would like to require a variance before the higher height is allowed for a flag pole or other accessory structure, Staff would suggest that language be included. Mattick stated if the City Council wants to limit it to a certain height, it should be spelled out, which would help the City create a standard that can be enforced. Mattick recommended the City not create a process where either a conditional use permit or a variance is required depending on different levels. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 06/10/2013 Approval of Council Minutes 05/28/2013 [Page 4 of 18]