Laserfiche WebLink
Item 2 <br /> To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members SLOAt� <br /> Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator <br /> From: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director �F c';� <br /> <1 H <br /> Date: May 15, 2017 <br /> Subject: #17-3925,City of Orono,Text Amendment Setbacks for small lots <br /> Public Hearing <br /> Application Summary: The proposed ordinance would impose different setbacks for <br /> residential lots, based in part on the lot width. <br /> Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends adoption of the ordinance as <br /> drafted. <br /> Background <br /> The issue of setbacks for small lots within the city has been on the ordinance review list for <br /> several years;for 2017, it ranked as the 5th most important issue. In 2016,the city processed 41 <br /> variances of various types; side or street setbacks were included in 19 of them. <br /> There are several areas of the community where the development pattern is inconsistent with <br /> the zoning district. The attached Exhibit B includes three maps, each labeled individually. Map <br /> A shows lots in red that are less than %acre,with clusters of these lots in%2 acre, 1 acre, and 2 <br /> acre zones. Map B shows lots in blue betweenY4 and 1/2 acre,with clusters of these lots in <br /> acre, 1 acre, and 2 acre zones. Each map includes the zoning legend. The Table below shows <br /> the required setbacks associated with lots zoned 1/2, 1, and 2 acres. You will note that <br /> approximately 95%of the non-conforming lots are within one of these 4 zoning districts. <br /> Front Side <br /> Zoning Lot size yard yard Side street <br /> District Neighborhood(s) (acres) Width setback setback setback <br /> North Long Lake, <br /> LR-1A Crestview 2 200 50 30 50 <br /> Forest Lake, Kelly Avenue, <br /> LR-1B Tonkawa 1 140 35 10 35 <br /> Casco Point, Navarre, <br /> LR-1C Fagerness point 0.5 100 30 10 15 <br /> RR-1B Dickenson, Briar/Arbor 2 200 50 30 50 <br /> Originally,the intent with the zoning was to encourage lots to combine with neighboring lots to <br /> create larger, conforming lots;while this does occasionally occur, it has not been as common as <br /> originally hoped. The result is a number of non-conforming lots. The effect on lot owners of <br /> non-conforming lots is that a new, or expansion of a portion of the structure within the required <br /> setback, including expansion up, requires a variance. <br />