Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-15-1997 Planning Commission Minutes.4 �J ROLL ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 15, 1997 W ' The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Dale Lindquist, Charles Schroeder, Sandra Smith, Elizabeth Hawn, William Stoddard, and Lili McMillan. Janice Berg was absent. The following represented the City Staff: Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, City Planner Elizabeth Van Zomeren, Planning Intern Brad Bressler, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Park Commission Chair Susan Wilson was present. Chair Lindquist called the meeting to order at 6:37 p.m. The agenda was placed in priority order for discussion and was reviewed in the following order: #1, 3, 2, 5, 4, 7, and 6. • ( #1) AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN NAVARRE UPDATE Bressler reviewed additional information to the Navarre Housing Report on affordable housing in both Navarre and the City of Orono. The Met Council's standard for affordable housing for 1997 was a maximum of $120,000, based on 30% of income for housing. It was determined that 75% of housing is considered affordable under this guideline by both the assessed and market valuations of homes in Navarre. Bressler reviewed the sub - areas. He noted the average property value in Navarre is assessed at $107,000 and at $227,000 for the City at large. There are 183 affordable housing units in Navarre, which is 6.5% of the total housing in the City. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 Lindquist asked what will be done with this information. Bressler said it has been presented to Council. It will be used in the Comprehensive Plan update and for application for grants for housing rehabilitation, such as the CDBG grant funding. Schroeder asked if the Planning Commission would review the Comprehensive Plan update. Gaffron indicated that the Commission would be involved in the process. The update is to be completed by the end of 1998 as mandated by the Met Council. Gaffron said the Council feels there are minor changes necessary in the areas of housing and transportation. Schroeder asked if there were expectations from Orono by the Met Council. Gaffron said he received information on population and housing for the future from the Met Council. • The forecast received is not based on the needs outlined by the City. Hawn asked if the housing in the affordable level was suitable for a family of four. Bressler said the results are varying. Gaffron said according to the Met Council, 30% of housing in Orono is considered affordable housing. The benchmark for cities is 60 -70 %, which is not possible in Orono. The percentage was based off a review of many cities. Schroeder noted that most suburban communities are sewered. Gaffron said there are alot of differences between the communities. Lindquist noted the difficulty in comparing Orono to other cities. McMillan indicated that the lake was a large reason for the difference. Stoddard said he was surprised by the low evaluations in areas I and II, which include lakeshore properties. Bressler said these areas include smaller cabins that are being torn • down and rebuilt with larger homes. 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 Hawn asked what will happen when property owners make application for variances to permit these larger homes resulting in the loss of affordable housing. Gaffron said he has been discussing this issue with City Administrator Moorse. He noted that the City would be losing ground on affordable housing when this occurs. Smith questioned how property owners could be requested not to build larger homes instead of maintaining affordable housing. Hawn noted that the lots are substandard, though have been receiving variances in the past. Smith acknowledged that the larger homes will have to be allowed to be built if the housing meets code. McMillan noted that the lot size will minimize what can be built on these lots. Schroeder indicated that rezoning could occur. Hawn questioned whether the Planning Commission would be inconsistent if variances are not granted in this area in a similar fashion as has occurred elsewhere in the City. Smith asked if the City has a vision on what there should be in affordable housing. Gaffron said he has no viewpoint at all on this topic; the housing is as it is. Gaffron said he has not seen the Council making any conscious decisions to change their direction. He cited the example of the Brook Park Realty Subdivision, where the Council felt the density was too high; and less density results in less affordability. Lindquist asked if this issue will be a consideration in decisions made regarding the Comprehensive Plan update. Gaffron said the City will have to state what will be done regarding affordable housing. No numbers have been developed as of yet. Schroeder noted that if sewering is used as a restraint in having affordable housing available, the Met Council is contrary in its discouragement from expanding the MUSA. • Gaffron said the Met Council has discouraged 2 acre and 5 acre housing, which is not Is MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 cost effective for providing sewer to. This housing density has caused the Met Council to bypass the City in its development to the west. He noted the Council and Met Council have not seen eye to eye on this issue. Schroeder added that the 2 acre and 5 acre density is done to protect the lake. Hawn noted there is alot of discussion regarding what the Met Council would like to see done. She felt the City should want to have affordable housing for those residents needing it who live and work here, and to enable those who have grown up in Orono to remain. She asked that the City consider what we want rather than concentrating on what the Met Council wants. Smith noted, however, that the City cannot have both 20% sewered properties and have 60% affordable housing; this is a oxymoron. • Lindquist indicated that this information will assist in providing input for the update of the Comprehensive Plan. Schroeder asked why this is being done. Van Zomeren said a component of the update is housing. The cities around the lake have been discussing the topic of affordable housing and pooling their ideas in providing such affordable housing somewhere around the lake. This resulted in the idea of reviewing the Navarre area. ( #3) TREE PRESERVATION Gaffron reviewed the information concerning the draft ordinance and the history behind tree preservation. He asked to review the information to see if the Planning Commission is in agreement with the goals listed and for direction. Gaffron reviewed the list of • exhibits provided. The draft followed the example presented in the ordinance for the City MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 of Shorewood with a purpose statement and followed with regulations stated in an adopted policy as a resolution rather than by ordinance. The ordinance is one page with a 15 page policy draft. Gaffron reviewed the procedure section, identification of spatial limitations, and methods of tree protection. Gaffron noted that the goals may need additional work but asked if they and the development orientation fit in with the views of the Planning Commissioners. Hawn voiced having difficulty with the first goal. She noted that the federal government has compensated farmers not to grow certain items and sees the goal in conflict in its designation of limiting what can be done in areas without compensation to the property owners. She asked if it is fair or warranted to be able to designate large stands of trees to . remain that are in private domain without offering compensation. Schroeder noted there would also be an increase in the work load for variances requested. Stoddard did not feel trees should be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Gaffron indicated it means that an inventory would be done on developed and undeveloped properties but would not apply to existing residential properties. It may or may not apply for new housing on vacant lots without subdivision. The inventory would provide what can be preserved but standards need to be determined. If preservation cannot occur, Gaffron asked what would be done for mitigation and follow up on plans. Gaffron said he was not saying that the entire City would be inventoried and determined what should or should not be saved. Schroeder and Lindquist noted there is a tree ordinance for the 0 -75' setback from • lakeshore. L� MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 Smith referenced the Dickey, Spring Hill, and Coffman developments. She asked for an understanding on how these developments would have been impacted by the ordinance and policy. Gaffron used Spring Hill Golf Course as an example, specifically the Big Woods. With the ordinance, an inventory would have occurred and the developer would have had to show what was being preserved and what was being planted. The property could still be developed but would have required the extensive inventory. Gaffron noted that the end result may not have been any different. Lindquist noted the satisfactory outcome of the Melamed Subdivision regarding tree preservation. Schroeder indicated the ordinance would have prevented any clear cutting which could have been done. Gaffron said the ordinance and policy would give the City a mechanism by which to define a subdivision. Smith noted that today, clear cutting can occur. Gaffron agreed. Gaffron added that the policy encourages homeowners to do what is right regarding tree preservation. McMillan noted that it is important to note that the buffering was maintained on the Melamed Subdivision. Stoddard said some developers leave significant trees while clearing out the brush. He would like to see developers encouraged to do similar projects to Sugar Woods by developing guidelines to follow. This would put the work load on the developer and builder rather than the City. Clear cutting guidelines could be offset with mitigation. Lindquist asked if the goal should apply to preservation of existing wooded areas. McMillan felt the goal was more for preservation of the rural character of the City. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 Hawn said community issues would be dealt with upfront by use of buffering zones without telling the property owners what they can do with the core areas of the property. This would place more emphasis on property that comes in contact with other properties and residents. Lindquist said this could be used with creative methods to keep the area similar to existing wooded areas today noting the land will be developed. McMillan felt that an ordinance restricting what may be the ideal building site would be too restrictive. Lindquist agreed that this could not occur but tradeoffs could be offered. The end result may be more trees. Smith referenced the Coffman Subdivision which resulted in buffering be removed. McMillan said this occurred after the development of the property. Schroeder asked if there were buffering guidelines now for subdivisions. Gaffron said the subdivision would be required to replant one tree for every 40' of right -of -way. In a PRD, more tree replacement can be requested but may not result in the creation of a buffer. Lindquist indicated there is general agreement with the goal with some differences as noted. Hawn would like to see the ordinance where cutting of buffer areas is not allowed. Park Chair Wilson said the tree preservation issue came from past Mayor Callahan, 0 whose goal was to protect the rural areas of Orono without restricting the people. One 0 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 way to accomplish this is through preservation of trees. Wilson said she would like to make general policies for buffering and reforestation, targeting developers, by using a brochure with guidelines. She would like the policy to protect trees without making it difficult for the property owner. Schroeder asked if this factors into whether land or fee is taken for park dedication. Wilson said it did as far as buffering and trails are concerned. Land is taken when it will enhance the area. Wilson said she likes the idea of reforestation. She does not want to make it impossible for people to do what they want with their land. Wilson feels that most people will do what is right as they moved to the area due to the rural character of it. She noted the slope and ravine issues in Saga Hill. McMillan suggested the policy come from a positive outlook. She would like to see natural buffering with trees every 20'. She noted once the trees are established, they generally will not be eliminated. Schroeder responded that each area is different making it difficult to establish whether there should be a 20' or 40' distance requirement for tree planting. Schroeder does not want to see the City having to make decisions on each tree. Lindquist added that he feels most developers are attempting to preserve trees and providing a buffer. Schroeder asked if some ordinances were more restrictive. Gaffron said some did not apply to Orono. He said some ordinances were fairly extensive in their preservation policies. Gaffron suggested some steps may be circumvented. An inventory should not be done if the goal cannot be met. Developers need to be given direction and standards by which to follow. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 Schroeder noted that there is the perception that there is no problem on large lots. Gaffron questioned why a policy if no problem with tree removal. The second goal related to conversation. If the land is vacant, are we regulating it before development. Hawn asked what occurs if a property is purchased that has a large stand of trees and the property owner decides to purchase horses and wants to cut down the trees. Lindquist cited an example of a large acreage of woodlands where the property owner cuts it down to sell the timber. Gaffron can forestry can be regulated if desired by putting restrictions on commercial use. Lindquist noted that large amounts of timber were removed from Spring Hill. Gaffron said Spring Hill recouped some costs by selling that timber but 0 indicated that this was not the purpose for the removal. Stoddard asked for consideration of using the conditional use permit process. McMillan would like to see no clear cutting of properties over one acre in size. Schroeder felt the probability of clear cutting lots is low due to the lots being worth less if trees were cut down and result in creating an economic disadvantage. Stoddard asked what is done if the neighborhood is against what is being proposed regarding tree removal. He suggested some guidelines be established for forestry, clear cutting, CUP, and neighborhood notification. C1 i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 McMillan felt trees are somewhat self - regulating in that people see the importance of trees. Importance of specific trees, however, may be viewed differently, citing old trees found in the Big Woods versus loss of one significant tree on Casco Point. Stoddard cited the example of tree removal on a property in order to build on it. He questioned what is done in that case. Gaffron said the owner can be encouraged to save trees or regulate what happens to the trees. Lindquist felt it was not an issue of not being able to remove trees but to save as many as possible, noting each lot has different requirements. McMillan felt the establishment of guidelines would work. Stoddard agreed. Lindquist felt guidelines should be included. He suggested the use of a short ordinance with policy attached. McMillan said she did not agree with the replacement policy with differing sites. Schroeder said tree mitigation is useful as a bargaining tool in determining tree replacement. Hawn said she would like to see the focus remain on buffer zones as opposed to inventorying, noting the cost involved in conducting an inventory, which would be passed on to the buyers. Gaffron agreed that it would be expensive to inventory trees. Gaffron reviewed the criteria used in determining compliance noted under "Procedures ", #1-6, on page 5 and the "Land Alteration Permit Supplemental Requirements ". Gaffron said stating the definition of a buffer and how it should be saved would be easier than • inventorying what is on the property. Lindquist said he would prefer the developer 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 telling the City what his plans are. Gaffron said a possibility is to have a policy with goals without the use of a list and formula and ask the developer how he will obtain the goals. This, however, would give no guidelines. Hawn asked if this could present legal problems. Gaffron said that may happen. Lindquist indicated that each lot is reviewed individually and sees the need to review each plan as they are all unique. Gaffron cited the example of the Sugar Woods Development and what could have occurred on that property. Schroeder said the enormous amount of tree saving was accomplished in part because the property is sewered. Buffering on Brown Road was also a good decision in that development plan. McMillan agreed that public good results • from buffering. Schroeder indicated that it is conceivable that a developer or homeowner may not want a buffer. The Dickey property was cited as an example. Schroeder said he would like to see the ordinance provide some "teeth" by which to ensure that a buffer is provided. Wilson agreed that buffering would aid in preserving the rural feel of the community. Hawn asked if the present resolution refers to any subdivision or a subdivision of at least three lots. Gaffron said a Class III Subdivision includes three or more lots. A Class I1 Subdivision is a lot which is split off from an existing property. There is also a metes and bounds division. Lindquist thought the policy should refer to subdivisions of two or more lots. McMillan noted that the Brook Park Realty Subdivision for townhomes is an example • where buffering is limited by the right -of -way due to wetlands. The buffering will be 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 closer to the homes. This circumstance should be reflected in the code with definition of where buffers will occur. She would like to see the code begin with buffering, which is not as restrictive, with further restrictions added at a later date if found to be necessary. Gaffron reviewed the purpose of the ordinance in Exhibit F. McMillan voiced her satisfaction with the purpose as stated. Schroeder felt conservation enhancement should receive more notice. Lindquist agreed with having the ordinance and policy. Hawn felt the last sentence under Subd. 1 should say "may" be required, rather than "shall ". Gaffron said the impression he has received from the Commissioners is that the policy is more intense than they prefer with requirements going beyond what is desired. Schroeder felt the main purpose is to preserve, protect, and establish wooded buffer areas and not necessarily to protect significant stands of trees. Smith noted that the reference is to what currently exists on a property rather than what can be added. Schroeder felt that buffering and tree preservation should be addressed first. Hawn asked about the need for tree surveys. Lindquist said the surveying is mentioned in the draft policy but may not be necessary. Gaffron asked and received positive feedback whether there was a preference for defining the category or characteristics of properties that need inventories. Hawn said she would like to know what it would cost to inventory a one acre wooded lot. Gaffron said he would investigate the cost. 12 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 Smith noted that properties being considered for development survey wetlands. Gaffron explained how the costs have escalated in surveying. Smith suggested identifying buffer areas and what is in that area which would result in the focus placed in that area. Gaffron said the goals can be defined and include what needs to be inventoried. There may be a need for selective tree survey. Wilson felt the Commission was on track in their direction taken regarding tree preservation. She would like to see the review continue. ( #2) VARIANCE REPORT Van Zomeren reported that the inventory of variances was over the past three years. The majority of variances were in the LR -1C district, along Shadywood or Casco, for lot width and area due to requirements being greater than the land platted. The overall approval rate was found to be 78.3% or 323 of 401 variance requests approved. Van Zomeren felt this high approval rate presents the question of what is being accomplished. Schroeder asked if the approvals were as presented in the applications. Van Zomeren said that approval rate was 70 %. The inventory is broken down by variance type and not by application. Smith asked what the inventory tells us. Van Zomeren said the inventory reveals that variances are not an effective land use tool. However, Van Zomeren said the Council wants to review all of the applications rather than codification. Van Zomeren said variances take away from planning. She noted if the process is of value, it should be • retained; but if not, it should be changed. Smith asked if the process should be used to 13 0 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 the point of where change can occur. Van Zomeren said it is not the catalyst for change but should be fine tuned. Hawn indicated that there is little discretion available if sewer units have been granted on properties in the past, even if the properties are substandard. It was noted, however, that these applications usually require other variances as well. Van Zomeren said it is her opinion that the 15% structural coverage limitation should be strictly adhered to with no variances allowed. There were 19 of 27 requests approved for structural coverage variances. Van Zomeren questioned what was the hardship. Gaffron referenced the opinion of Mayor Jabbour, who feels that if the standards are . changed, people will still request variances for more than what is being allowed. The reference point is what changes. Van Zomeren said she is not suggesting that hardcover requirements should change but sees a correlation where changes would benefit. She cited the oversized accessory chart includes what is reasonable but requires variance application for any amounts over that included in the chart. Gaffron said the Council had made the decision to review those applications that are not reflected by the chart. Schroeder asked if the Council and Planning Commission decisions were reviewed separately in the analysis. Bressler said he analyzed the resolutions approved by the Council. Schroeder asked what the variable is between recommendations made by the Planning Commission and Council decisions. Gaffron said there is a 10 -20% conflict in decisions and can go either direction. He noted that the Council finds it difficult to deny a request that was recommended for approval by the Commission. Gaffron said the Council prefers that the Planning Commission holds applications to code. 14 0 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 Van Zomeren said she questions the average lakeshore setback variance in examples where there is no impact. Gaffron said that variance has evolved to that point. Schroeder referenced the 0 -75' setback. There were 50 applications for hardcover variances in that zone and 34 were approved. This standard received the lowest approval percentage. McMillan questioned how many residents called about the possibility of a variance and did not apply due to information received. Gaffron indicated that changes to plans usually occur before applications are reviewed. McMillan felt this was a likely reason why the approval rate is as high as the analysis showed. Van Zomeren informed • McMillan that those applications that are outside the requirements of the code are usually not seen. Gaffron said these plans are "tweaked" to that point. Gaffron said the Council is concerned that there is consistency shown between the Planning Commission and Council. The Council wants the Planning Commission to be on the same wave length in their considerations, which Gaffron said usually does occur. Van Zomeren said the City needs to protect the land and ensure that the use is compatible. She noted that the burden is placed on neighbors, and not necessarily on the applicant, to prove that a request is not good for the neighborhood. Schroeder asked what the analysis revealed regarding where the Planning Commission fits in with the Planning Commissions of other communities. Van Zomeren said the • number of variance requests are greater in Orono than in other communities. Gaffron 15 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 noted that hardcover variances in Mound have increased with the hardcover regulations added. Smith noted that while the code is restrictive, the opportunity to get variance approval is good so residents take the chance. Stoddard felt Staff and Commission were in agreement over issues but felt there may be issues that should be reviewed by the Commission. Schroeder noted that all residents have the right to file for a variance. Gaffron voiced concern that if residents are informed of the standard and yet understand changes can be made to that standard, what then is the standard. Smith asked if there were variances where restrictions may be too tight but still be in keeping with the code. Gaffron said that might be a possibility but is limited. He does not believe a side variance should ever be allowed on a small lot. Smith reviewed that there are four choices that can be made: The Comprehensive Plan can be revised; the code can be made less restrictive; no changes made; or deny variance requests for areas that are cut and dried. Van Zomeren noted that the State law requires a hardship be shown to allow a variance. Lindquist brought forward the issue of lake lots. Van Zomeren asked if the goal is to intensify lots, noting lots with small cabins being replaced with large homes. Lindquist said the 1500 s.f. allowance for structural coverage can be adhered to on these substandard lots. Schroeder questioned why a harder stand would be taken regarding variances now. Smith said it would show consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Schroeder felt the 1500 s.f. allowance for structural coverage is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He noted, 16 E MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 however, that variances are worth money to the residents in terms of value to the property. Lindquist asked if changes should be made or maintain standards currently followed. Schroeder felt the Council should be consulted. Hawn said if all agree to the conclusions drawn, then the Planning Commission should vote in that manner. McMillan noted the need to define hardship in applications. Lindquist indicated if the Council is in agreement with the Commission 80% of the time, the Commission can make the effort to hold firm to the ordinances. Schroeder questioned whether any of the ordinances are irrelevant. He noted that in order to take a firmer stand, the Commission should debate the relevancy of the ordinances. Gaffron cited the is average lakeshore setback variance may be one that could be changed and brought before the Commission only when there is an impact. Lindquist asked what happens if the ordinance requires the application be presented to the Planning Commission. Gaffron said the ordinance would then need revision. Smith asked if the Planning Commission could make use of a consent agenda. Gaffron said this is not possible due to due diligence. Hawn noted the audience could be polled. Gaffron questioned if the Commission defines those variances that are going to be approved, are those ordinances necessary. Hawn said it was a matter of saving time. Lindquist suggested such applications be placed first on the agenda rather than going by application number. Hawn asked if the Commissioners could arrive to the meetings with a list of items that they are ready to approve. Gaffron noted that the Council has a consent agenda. 17 E MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 Schroeder felt that was not possible as the Commission is not always aware of what will be controversial. Lindquist suggested continuing in the same manner as currently exists. Schroeder said with respect to hardships, he believes remuneration is important. He noted the difficulty for applicants to state the hardship. Gaffron agreed that the applicant does not always know what is the hardship. ( #4) SIC INVENTORY Bressler said the business inventory was a study of the businesses in Orono based on standard business codes and are shown by zoning district. The information is based on 1996 information. Lindquist questioned whether the inventory includes all businesses. Van Zomeren said she did not know. Bressler said agricultural uses are not listed and some of the businesses have gone out of business. Smith noted the number of people working from home. Gaffron asked what source was used in gathering the information. Bressler said he used a state listing for businesses registered with the state found in the library. This did present a problem as the businesses are listed by zip codes and Orono does not have its own zip code. Van Zomeren said the list shows the creativity of the residents and the vast number of • businesses in the City. 18 u MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 Gaffron asked if there was a way by which to total the number of employees in the City for comparison with Met Council figures. Van Zomeren noted the difficulty in obtaining sound calculations but the information could be used for Comprehensive Plan update. ( #5) HOME OCCUPATION Hawn asked if the ordinance as written would ban Bed & Breakfasts in Orono. Gaffron said the code would not allow it as it is not listed. It would require a code amendment to be included. Van Zomeren said the ordinance is written restrictively. She reviewed the definition as is written of home occupation. The use is associated with the dwelling, which allows for discretion. The non - resident employee presents a correlation with coming to the site to work. The definition shows what impact is created by the home occupation and not by numbers. The ordinance requires that the person conducting business at the home lives there. Smith said she favored the wording, "for gain ". Van Zomeren said she found simplicity is the best form to use. Van Zomeren said 2A is purposely vague. 2B allows for personal services to be provided at the home. Smith asked if the ordinance allows for only one non - resident employee or only one employee on site at any one time. Van Zomeren said it refers to only one employee 19 0 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 regardless of when there. Smith questioned if the concern is with impact and not with numbers, whether there could be one employee in the morning and another in the afternoon. Van Zomeren said there is no distinction. Gaffron noted that the ordinance is written to be very restrictive. Smith asked if the ordinance is geared to what activity is taking place inside the home or the impact on the neighborhood. She felt this could be problematic. Gaffron said impact should then be discussed. A typographical error was noted in 2C regarding the word "on" not "or ". Smith asked the purpose of 2D. Hawn said it would eliminate the ability to turn the • residence into something other than a home, such as a warehouse. Smith questioned what difference it would make on impact if it looks like a house on the outside. Van Zomeren said it would then be perpetuating commercial use on residential property and made it difficult to revert to residential. 2E allows for uses on the west side of Orono, namely agricultural based businesses for storage in accessory structures. It does not allow for outdoor storage. Van Zomeren informed McMillan that accessory structures must still conform to standards. Van Zomeren cited the Holzer application, where the plumber wanted to use his accessory structure to store his plumbing supplies. This could not occur under current code but would allow him to do so under this ordinance. McMillan asked if the accessory structure does not conform, whether a variance would be • allowed. Schroeder felt it would be inconsistent to allow a variance for accessory 20 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 structure and not for home occupation. Van Zomeren said the intent is regarding storage and not for office use. Gaffron said it is not clearly written to understand that. Schroeder said he liked the idea. Van Zomeren said this would allow riding lessons to be held in a barn. Gaffron asked about situations where activities held in accessory structures. Smith said that could not occur. Gaffron asked how to deal with uses currently being conducted. Schroeder noted there are also alot of businesses with more than one employee. McMillan noted many businesses are also not registered. Under 217, the word "not" was deleted. 2G references lots where homes are closer together. is 2H, Van Zomeren questioned where the sign should be located. Stoddard suggested it be affixed to the business. He does not want a sign by the road. Hawn asked about the customer that finds it difficult to locate an address suggesting limiting the sign size. Lindquist did not want to see a road sign. No changes were made to 2H as written. McMillan felt 2I would present a problem for landscapers. Lindquist noted that the ordinance is there to use for enforcement when complaints are received. Van Zomeren said 2J was written to eliminate customers coming to the homes. 2K would eliminate the business use being seen from outside into the home, such as racks, inside signs in windows or in yards. • 21 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 Stoddard felt the hours of operation were late. Hawn noted the need for the hours for giving private lessons, such as piano. Gaffron indicated that the number is arbitrary under 2M. Commissioners felt no changes were necessary to 2M, N, or O. 2P referenced a call received on cleaning supplies. Smith questioned whether the supplies were hazardous. Van Zomeren said with chemicals, problems may occur. There was discussion regarding what is considered hazardous materials and quantities allowed. It was determined to be a question of re- bottling chemicals. They may need to be stored in approved containers. Commissioners felt re- bottling should not be allowed. • 2Q was written to eliminate having boutiques held on a consistent schedule impacting the neighborhood. The list of prohibited businesses were reviewed. Gaffron questioned whether 2C would be restricted. There are firearm dealers currently licensed in the City. Gaffron will investigate this issue. E was eliminated. Commissioners felt these businesses should be allowed. I, J, and K were also eliminated. Commissioners had different views regarding contracting, excavating, welding and machine shops (K). Schroeder noted that these businesses provide a service. Gaffron indicated there are some business owners who would otherwise find it difficult to survive • in these types of businesses if they have to rent facilities elsewhere. Stoddard asked if 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 • this addresses the size of the warehouse. Van Zomeren said the code already covers that 9 issue. This applies to all districts, which was discussed. Size of properties was also discussed. O limited the size of the kiln to keep it manageable. P was also eliminated as Hawn and Schroeder said they were not opposed to this business being conducted. Van Zomeren noted that this business could become noisy with the use of a staple gun. Schroeder said the noise would not be more than noise conducted by a contractor. Van Zomeren indicated that this would be on- going, however, and include storage of fabric as well. McMillan said referenced the noise ordinance that could be utilized. #4 shows a deference to demonstrated disability where this would be the only opportunity to conduct business. #5 allows for any complaints to be in writing. #5A was amended to include notification of the complaint to the alleged violator. Smith asked what occurs under 5B. She was informed that a notice of zoning violation is sent, the section of the code is cited, and process is followed for zoning violation. Schroeder asked how it would be enforced. Smith asked if complaints have always been mailed. This has not occurred but will in the future. She asked if a copy of the complaint will be sent to both the violator and complainant. Gaffron questioned whether the law preserves the anonymity of the complainer. If so, he feels this has to be respected that • information received becomes public property. Van Zomeren said the intent was to 23 0 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 eliminate the need to follow up on all phone calls. Lindquist said he would not investigate an anonymous call. Van Zomeren and Gaffron said this occurs frequently. Gaffron informed Schroeder that they follow up on complaints. Calls are investigated to determine whether a problem exists. Schroeder said many people will not want to write a letter. Van Zomeren questioned how follow up can occur. McMillan suggested getting advice from City Attorney Barrett. Van Zomeren said she would like to eliminate what is currently in the code. Lindquist, Schroeder, and Smith agreed. Hawn suggested the use of a fee. Smith asked what happens to businesses that are currently in effect that are not allowed under the ordinance. Gaffron said an amortization schedule could be used or be grandfathered in and acknowledged for the record. Schroeder referenced the use of marina licensing in order to correct deficiencies, which has not worked. Van Zomeren said licensing is extending a privilege but there is a right to conduct a business. Stoddard said he felt a fee creates an added burden. Van Zomeren said the $30 licensing fee is to cover the expense of investigating the business. Smith asked if a determination has been made regarding the use of plumbing in an accessory structure as a side line business. Gaffron said it has not. McMillan suggested reviewing the issue of grandfathering in a business. Lindquist noted that a person cannot be put out of business. McMillan asked about businesses that are non - conforming. Lindquist said they should be allowed to show conformity. Lindquist said new businesses that do not conform would not be allowed. 24 0 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 Hawn suggested making it clear that businesses must register. Uses that are grandfathered in will die with that business owner upon death or retirement. Lindquist agreed that it should not be allowed to be turned over to another person. Gaffron asked that if the home occupation is not on the list and is a non - conforming use, should it go with the property. He suggested this regulation be tightened. Smith questioned afffecting the livelihood or assets of a business. Schroeder said an argument could be made if the business was sold to another person. Van Zomeren cited an example of a home occupation license. It includes a compliance deadline, hours of operation, number of clients, and shipment and delivery. A use can be • lawful non - conforming until such date and then become unlawful non - conforming. Schroeder noted the need to have "teeth" in the ordinance. Schroeder asked how many complaints are received on home occupations. Gaffron said he receives a few a year but gets many calls on starting businesses. Schroeder noted many businesses are started without licensing. Van Zomeren said many business owners do not know they must license their business. ( #6) 1998 APPLICATION FORMS The tracking sheet is included in this information. Van Zomeren said information packets will be mailed on Wednesdays in the future. She indicated that the legal notice drives everything from a staff standpoint. i 25 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 • Schroeder voiced approval with the need for applicants to provide all necessary information by a particular date for review to occur. The 60 day time frame begins from the date of filing. Smith said the time frame assumes all information is provided. Gaffron questioned whether the waiver takes away from the right of an applicant to receive a conclusion to their application within the 60 time frame. Van Zomeren said no; the applicant was only being put on notice. It does not refer to a waiver. Van Zomeren emphasized that the applicant risks submitting applications on the deadline date as all information must be complete. Van Zomeren said the survey submittal needs to be 1] reviewed. Hawn asked if the $150 renewal is per variance or total. Gaffron said he would need to review it but it probably is $150 total. Smith suggested an introduction letter be included. She asked to see the final form and suggested color coding the application. Gaffron said the statement shows what is needed. Smith said lines should be provided. Pages 10, 11, and 12 were satisfactory to the Commission. Smith suggested giving definitions and examples of hardships. Schroeder did not believe giving examples would help. McMillan suggested applicants speak with staff about any questions they may have regarding hardship. Gaffron indicated that staff writes the majority of the hardships. 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 • Hawn asked how the applicant is to determine who to contact for hardcover calculations and survey. Gaffron said they are informed to contact a surveyor. He noted the difficulty in providing accurate information. Hawn suggested a work sheet be included. n LJ ( #7) 1998 CALENDAR 1998 calendar provided for information only. ADJOURNMENT Hawn will attend the January 12, 1998 Council Meeting. McMillan will attend the January 26, 1998 Council Meeting. Schroeder moved, McMillan seconded, to adjourn at 9:53 p.m. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Dale Lindquist, Chair Person 27