09-24-2012 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 10, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 9 of 26 (5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) wall will not continue down the slope but will start to be absorbed into the ground at that point. Kempf stated it would not be a situation where the runoff gains momentum toward the lake. For that basic reason it would seem that retaining walls are hardcover that has a real benefit to what the Council is attempting to achieve. City Engineer Struve stated Mr. Kempf does have a point with the retaining walls, and that if the grade is reduced, the speed of the water will potentially slow down and allow infiltration prior to the lake. Struve stated there can also be instances where you have a steep slope and they place rock up and down the slope to help stabilize the slope but that it does not necessary slow down the runoff. Rahn stated he is agreeable with retaining walls that run parallel to the shoreline or the width of the lot but that the City sometimes sees walls that are utilized for other reasons. McMillan commented that would then become a design issue. Bremer stated that is how the question came about on whether a retaining wall should be considered necessary or aesthetic. Bremer stated the City Council has the discretion to determine whether a retaining wall is truly a retaining wall and that Staff will need to enforce that. The Council has seen situations where people are constructing a number of retaining walls and that one factor that has to be considered is the visual impact of those walls from the lake. Rahn noted retaining walls could also change how people descend down the lake. Allowing retaining walls might make people construct them so they can traverse down the slope rather than having a straight stairway down to the lake. Curtis noted the City does permit walls differently depending on whether they meet the need for engineering, which would require a building permit, and that some walls require a zoning permit. Gozola stated if they are removing Item No. 4 with the motion, he would recommend putting the definition of retaining wall back into the definitions so it is clear that they are to be considered hardcover. Rahn stated his motion is to approve the draft ordinance as written with the removal of Item No. 4, retaining walls. Bremer stated retaining walls would be included as hardcover under that motion. Gaffron stated the Council appears to be comfortable with the 25 percent for the entire Tier 1, including the area past the 250 foot line. A few months ago in the process the area behind the 250 foot line was not being regulated and then the Council elected to regulate it at 30 percent. Gaffron noted the latest draft puts it at 25 percent but does not include any requirement that would disallow use of the 250-1000 hardcover within the 0-250 foot zone. Gaffron stated for the last 40 years the City has had a system of zones that was intended to make sure that properties that are very deep do not push all of their hardcover up to the 75-foot line. Without language in the ordinance that would require hardcover in the 250-1000 foot zone to be used in that zone rather than allowing it up at the 75-foot line, the City is not meeting their goal of having equal or better protection than what we started with originally. Gaffron stated that has been his position from day one Item #02 - CC Agenda - 09/24/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 09/10/2012 [Page 9 of 26]