Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, September 10, 2012 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> Page 10 of 26 <br /> <br />(5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) <br /> <br />and that he wants to make sure the Council is okay with allowing people to take their hardcover from the <br />250-1000 foot zone up to the 75-foot line. <br /> <br />McMillan stated on narrow lots, the side setbacks might come into play if someone would like to <br />construct a big house at the 75-foot line. On a wide, deep lot, they will have more room to put hardcover <br />at the 75-foot line and still meet setbacks. McMillan noted on the long, deep lots, a lot of the hardcover <br />tends to consist of driveway. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated that is the reason why he provided some examples to the Council last week. A 500-foot <br />deep lot will have twice as much hardcover as a 250-foot deep lot. Gaffron noted under the new <br />ordinance they can take all of that hardcover and put it within the 75-250 foot zone. The Council has not <br />asked for any mitigating measures or performance measures in that scenario. Gaffron noted the City has <br />followed that practice for 40 years so they do not end up with a lot of hardcover fairly close to the lake. <br /> <br />Bremer stated that goes back to Council Member Rahn’s comment at the beginning that the numbers are <br />quite a bit higher than what the City would normally allow. Bremer noted the average lakeshore setback <br />is intended on the lake lots to push the house further back from the 75-foot line. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated the fact that the City Council is going to review the impacts of the ordinance changes in a <br />year does provide some comfort. <br /> <br />Rahn commented it may not take a year if a certain pattern develops that Staff finds problematic and <br />adjustments can be made prior to 12 months. <br /> <br />Bremer stated she would like to hear Staff’s comments regarding the retaining wall issue. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated it is likely regulating retaining walls evolved over the years and became more significant in <br />the scheme of things as time went on. Gaffron stated in his view there is some value to reducing the slope <br />and slowing down the runoff. A flat terrace will hold more water than a 15 percent slope with a retaining <br />wall. Gaffron indicated he can go either way with the retaining walls but that it would be simpler if they <br />do not count retaining walls as hardcover. <br /> <br />Curtis stated some applications have walls that meander rather than being a straight staircase and there are <br />applications that request grading in the 0-75 foot area, which can result in the creation of a little retaining <br />wall to hold the stairs up. The City now has an engineer in-house that can evaluate those applications. <br />Curtis stated in her view those are the areas where the City can make it easier for the residents and that <br />residents are limited to stairways that are no wider than four feet. <br /> <br />Rahn amended his motion, Bremer seconded, to adopt, as written, an Ordinance Amending <br />Regulations Governing the Regulation of Hardcover and Establishing the Stormwater Quality <br />Overlay District. <br /> <br />Mattick noted it is still the City’s intention to not allow those items in the 0-75 foot zone even though <br />they have been excluded from the hardcover calculations in other zones. Mattick suggested the Council <br />may want to consider revising the exclusion introductory language by amending Section 78-1680 to <br />basically say that you cannot put any hardcover except for these following items in order to clarify that <br /> <br />Item #02 - CC Agenda - 09/24/2012 <br />Approval of Council Minutes 09/10/2012 <br />[Page 10 of 26]