Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-26-2012 Council Work Session Minutes.z O a MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION Monday, March 26, 2012 • 5:00 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono City Council and Planning Commission met on the above - mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Lili Tod McMillan, Council Members Cynthia Bremer, Aaron Printup, and David Rahn; Planning Chair Loren Schoenzeit, Planning Commissioners Denise Leskinen and Lizz Levang. Representing Staff were City Administrator Jessica Loftus, Assistant City Administrator of Long -Term Strategic Planning Michael Gaffron, Planner Ben Gozola, Planning Assistant Christine Mattson, City Engineer/Public Works Director Jesse Struve, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor McMillan called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. 1. HARDCOVER REGULATIONS DISCUSSION Ben Gozola provided an update on Orono's hardcover regulations. Gozola stated at the last work session in January, Staff was asked to draft up a new ordinance option for consideration. The three options for consideration tonight are keeping the existing ordinance in place, the revised prescriptive ordinance, and the new performance option that was reviewed at the last meeting. Staff is looking to obtain direction on which of the options should be pursued as the language is finalized. Gozola stated currently the City has hardcover regulations scattered throughout its code, it is difficult for residents to understand, there is a lack of consistency on the terms, almost everything is considered is hardcover, and the "hardcover by zones" approach requires advanced calculations and shifts bias from lot size to lot shape. Gozola stated one of the goals is to use consistent language throughout to avoid confusion. The revised prescriptive ordinance includes all regulations coordinated into one overlay district, which is the same option incorporated into the performance option. The prescriptive ordinance is designed to eliminate confusing issues like the overhang and bay window type penalties, provides for credit for the first 100 square feet of pervious pavers; 50 percent thereafter. No credit is being given for driveways. In addition, the zone concept is eliminated, with the parcels within the overlay district being assigned to specific protection tiers. For the lakeshore properties, or Tier I, no credit is being given for the 0 -75 foot zone to maintain consistency with the existing regulations. Gozola noted the parcels highlighted in yellow language signify a significant departure from the existing code. Gozola displayed the proposed overlay district map on the overhead. This is essentially the same map that was prepared for the performance option. The parcels primarily regulated at 25 percent hardcover today have been assigned to Tier I, parcels at 30 percent have been assigned to Tier II, Tier III is 35 percent, Tier IV is 40 percent, and Tier V is 85 percent, which essentially contains the industrial parcels. The new performance based option was crafted based on the initial direction from the City Council. This particular option has up to four ways to comply with code. A storm water management plan is required, incentives to eliminate legally nonconforming hardcover are provided, and it addresses concerns about long/large Lakeshore lots. Staff has made some changes to the proposed ordinance from the last meeting in that it now includes a provision to limit overall hardcover on long/large lakeshore lots. is Tier I has now been separated into two categories consisting of Tier IA and Tier 1B. Parcels with a depth of less than 500 feet are in Tier lA and parcels with a depth of 500 feet or more are in Tier 1B. Tier 113 calculates overall hardcover based on the area 0 -500 feet from the lake. Any hardcover beyond 500 feet Page 1 of 9 u MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION Monday, March 26, 2012 • 5:00 o'clock p.m. would be ignored. Tiers 1 and 2 provide clarification to the reader of the new ordinance as to how hardcover regulations will differ from lot -to -lot within the City. Gozola stated the matrix compares the three different options that have been provided tonight against the various goals given to Staff at the beginning of this project.. The do nothing column in red depicts basically no changes to the current regulations. The prescriptive option meets approximately half of the goals and simplifies the regulations, with the parcels being coordinated into one hardcover district. The prescriptive option also fills in the gaps that exist in coverage where appropriate via the overlay district map and provides a direct link between all hardcover goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The prescriptive option meets approximately five of the City's goals. The performance option meets all 12 of the different goals that were set out to be accomplished. It allows new technologies, provides multiple avenues to comply with goals, and shifts the focus to accomplishing good water quality instead of an overall hardcover number, provides an avenue for maintenance and enforcement through a voluntary storm water management -program, and provides incentives to eliminate legal nonconforming hardcover. Bremer asked how Staff feels about the various options. Gaffron indicated he has not had enough time to digest all of the information. Gozola indicated he did spend some time selecting various lots of different sizes and configurations to • illustrate how the options would work. Parcel one is a small, skinny lakeshore lot that consists of approximately 250 to 283 feet in depth from OWHL, is 57 feet wide and .36 acres in size or 15,500 square feet. Under the current ordinance, the parcel will be divided into three zones given its depth. The first zone is in red and is the 0 -75 foot area. The land in this area does not count towards the allowed hardcover on the remaining lot. The second zone under the current ordinance would be allowed 2,521 square feet of hardcover based on a 25 percent maximum hardcover limit. The final zone shown in green consists of approximately 1,000 square feet in size and allows for approximately 3,000 square feet of hardcover. The potential total hardcover for this lot is 2,823 square feet. Analyzing that parcel under the new prescriptive ordinance, there still would be no hardcover allowed in the 0 -75 foot area. The second zone is also identical to the current ordinance. Under the prescriptive option, the third zone would not be regulated. This accomplishes two things: The property owner in this case has a 12 -foot wide driveway located in this area because it was the safest portion of the street to provide access. Technically they would be allowed 300 square feet of hardcover in this area, but the distance between the two lines is 35 feet. If you divide 35 by 12, that would technically put you over the hardcover limit. Gozola commented that regulation likely has probably never been enforced and that technicality could be eliminated. The second item by keeping this area unregulated would be to build in an encouragement to push lakeshore construction a significant distance from the lakeshore, which has historically been important to the city. If you analyze this parcel under the new performance option, it would also include the prohibition on hardcover within the 0 -75, but that area is now factored into how much overall hardcover the property owner would be allowed. The area above the OWHL consists of 15,681 square feet. In this situation, the • landowner could propose 15 percent or less hardcover without any further review. They could also propose hardcover between 15 to 25 percent, which is 3,920 square feet and go through the administrative review process or they could pursue a conditional use permit for 5,488 square feet or 35 percent. The Page 2 of 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCEUPLANNING COMMISSION'- JOINT WORK SESSION Monday, March 26, 2012 • 5:00 o'clock p.m. final option is to submit a variance application for anything over 35 percent, which would be very difficult to obtain. In comparing the three options, the existing and prescriptive options are essentially the same. The performance option allows for less hardcover but there are higher thresholds that would have to be met without having to obtain a variance. Parcel 2 represents the long lakeshore lots that exist throughout the community and would be Tier 1B type lots. In this situation you are looking at a lot that is 220 feet wide with an overall depth of 930 feet and a total of 1.2 acres. Under the current ordinance, the parcel would be divided into three zones, with the 0 -75 foot zone being essentially hardcover free. The second zone consists of 38,768 square feet and would allow for almost 9,500 square feet of hardcover based on 25 percent. The third zone would be 17,000 square feet based on an area of 1.3 acres. The final zone in purple would be at 35 percent based on 1.53 acres for a total hardcover amount of 1.15 acres. The prescriptive option is similar to what currently exists and would essentially not change given the large numbers. The prescriptive option provides some incentive to encourage construction further away from the lake. The performance based option would not have any land area included beyond 500 feet in terms of calculating what the allowed hardcover would be and the numbers still end up being very large as they would be under the current ordinance. Gozola stated based on those numbers, the City Council may want to look at how to limit overall hardcover on these longer lots. Finally, Parcel No. 3 represents the small lakeshore lots that are approximately 100 feet long and • generally have a 0 -75 foot zone and a 75 -250 feet zone. This particular parcel is approximately half an acre in size. Under the current ordinance, this parcel would have two zones, with essentially no hardcover being allowed in the 0 -75 foot zone. Up to 3,723 square feet would be allowed based on the area in the second zone, which would be the maximum amount of hardcover allowed on the lot. In comparing the parcel under the current regulations and under the prescriptive option, there would be no change in terms of what is required. The performance based option takes into account the gross area above the OWHL in determining hardcover. Under this option, the property owner would be allowed 3,353 square feet without additional review and up to 5,589 square feet through an administrative process or 7,824 square feet under a conditional use permit. The performance based option will generally have a smaller amount that would be allowed under an administrative review process. Gozola stated he is looking for direction on which option or components the City Council prefers. McMillan stated under the prescriptive option, she is struggling with including the 0 -75 foot zone in the total lot area. McMillan asked if, under the five tier scenario, Tiers II and III, since they do not have the 0 -75 foot zone, whether their hardcover would be determined on the total lot area. Gozola indicated that is correct. McMillan commented in her view that seems to penalize the landowner and is an unfair piece in the analysis. McMillan stated to her recollection the DNR does include the whole lot area. Gozola indicated they do. • McMillan stated some lots have small 0 -75 foot zones and others have larger 0 -75 foot zones and that is something that needs to be considered. Page 3 of 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCEUPLANNING COMNIISSION JOINT WORK SESSION Monday, March 26, 2012 5:00 o'clock p.m. • McMillan stated she also does not like the board spacing option with less than 1/4 inch since that seems to be getting too picky. McMillan indicated she would like to give credit for either 100 square feet of permeable feet of patio pavers or 100 square feet of decking and not doing the 50 percent credit. If you have a lakeshore home, that would allow you 100 square feet without it being counted towards hardcover. Rahn commented a quarter inch spacing used to be very typical but that has kind of gone away. McMillan stated she does not feel they need five tiers and that perhaps three should be the maximum. The DNR allows 25 percent regardless of lot size. McMillan stated one of the problems the City has had with lots that are not quite located on the lakeshore is that their property drains to properties that are on the lake. Bremer commented it also depends on the topography of the lot. Some lots are quite a distance from the water but have had drainage problems. If the back of the lot is not regulated as much and there are larger structures, in that area, it could create a worse situation.,,. Rahn stated you cannot assume the topography slopes down to the lake because it may slope toward the adjoining property. Rahn asked what the 35 percent hardcover would be in relationship to the structural coverage. Gozola stated structural coverage would be a separate issue. • Rahn commented that goes hand -in -hand with his concerns about the performance based design. The City has seen over the years that builders will do whatever they can to gain a square foot of space, and under the performance style it will turn into a hardcover game where they will try to gain as much as they can. Rahn stated he also understands there has to be some method of enforcement and that the performance based option talked about a voluntary fee and yearly inspections. Rahn stated he has an issue with that since new owners of the property will be unaware of that aspect. Bremer asked how the City can communicate to the long -term residents the new regulations. Gozola stated the City could go to the people who submitted applications previously and wanted to do a big project but felt that these regulations shut down what they wanted to do and the City could explain that they did not necessarily want to stop that project. The new regulations would allow you increased hardcover if you are willing to show us that you will implement certain measures to ensure the City is still meeting their goal of protecting the lake. The new regulations will make it easier for people to do what they want to do but putting regulations in place to monitor the hardcover and the lake. McMillan stated the performance based option is the most complicated option because you have to rely on an engineer to get the added hardcover. Engineers were big on curb and gutter 20 years ago and now they have gone away from that. There are some engineering techniques that are felt to be good today but may not be found as effective 10 -15 years from now. Rahn commented the new regulations may bring a whole new round of applications and that he is not sure • whether that is good or bad. Rahn stated he likes the prescriptive option since it is very similar to what the City is currently doing and allows for some of the things that the residents would like. Page 4 of 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION • Monday, March 26, 2012 5:00 o'clock p.m. McMillan stated if they go to 25 percent and include the 0 -75 foot zone, the City needs to be serious about side setbacks and structural coverage. If we do include the 0 -75 foot zone in the overall area, they will be allowed more hardcover. Gaffron commented it would depend on the lot. With the typical half -acre lot, 25 percent of the 75 -250 foot zone usually equates to approximately 17 percent of the whole lot. If you include the area in the 0 -75, that would result in approximately 25 percent hardcover overall for the lot. Depending on the shape of the lot, the 75 -250 foot zone could be pretty small and you could end up with a number of variances. McMillan stated if the 0 -75 foot setback is included, the City will need to adhere to the side setbacks and limit the number of side setback variances that are granted. Gaffron stated if you get rid of the two -tier concept and you instead have a percentage of the whole lot, that is simplification people will understand. Bremer commented there will still be variances required on some lots even under the new ordinance. Bremer stated she looks at the role of the City as being good stewards of the property. Loftus asked if the task force looked at what is expected from the new DNR rules and if that is what prompted Staff to look at a performance option. • Gozola stated the DNR provides communities with options and you can set a threshold at 25 percent or you can have performance based. The performance based option helps the City achieve more of their goals. Loftus asked if the DNR decides that 15 percent is now the magic number, if the City would be required to go down to 15 percent as well. Gozola stated he is not aware of that unless it would be legislatively controlled and that generally communities allow 25 percent. Bremer stated if the legislature mandates something, the City would need to follow it. Gaffron noted the legislature now requires the City to allow construction on small lots. Gaffron stated he is more concerned with the small lots that are located off the lake since it is a question that the City does not have a good answer for. Gaffron stated in his view they would still have the ability to require a variance and say that no hardcover is allowed in the 0 -75 percent. McMillan noted most cities allow 25 percent for the entire lot. Gaffron stated it becomes a question of massing. Gaffron.stated the 15 percent structural coverage may need to be done away with for certain categories of lots. • Bremer noted a 1,500 square foot house is not a very big house. Bremer stated she has a concern with people constructing large detached garages closer to the lake. Historically the City has looked at detached garages as an issue and that a lot of people have constructed a detached garage in addition to their attached garage. Another concern that needs to be taken into account is when you allow people to build, Page 5 of 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCEUPLANNING COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION Monday, March 26, 2012 . 5:00 o'clock p.m. the City is not just protecting the view of the water and the massing but there is also the view of the lake from inland properties. As people are constructing bigger structures closer to the road, the inland properties do not see the lake anymore. Rahn stated the third tier is what caused that. Gaffron stated approximately half of the lakeshore lots are deeper than 250 feet. A lot of those are 10 to 15 feet past the 250 foot line and there is also a large number that is further beyond that. Bremer asked on her lot that is 100 feet wide and 770 feet deep, what she can have under the performance based option. Gozola stated with a lot that large and excluding the 0 -75 foot zone, the property owner would be allowed a significant amount of hardcover under the existing ordinances. Under the performance option, there would be no set threshold that dictates where the structure could go. The property owner would need to show Staff their proposal. If they are not exceeding the threshold, they would be allowed to construct the structure. If they do exceed the threshold, they would need to provide Staff with additional documentation. If Staff finds administratively that it is allowed, then that permit would be issued. The next step up would be requiring a conditional use permit, which would need to go through the Planning Commission and City Council. Gaffron stated the new ordinance allows for more subjectivity on the part of Staff, which will require • additional time. If it is something that is there forever and needs to be monitored, it will require more Staff time. Rahn commented he would prefer the prescriptive option. Printup stated you may have people purchasing properties in the future with no idea of why something was constructed, such as a holding pond. Gaffron stated the City is hindered by the fact that the state's BMP study is not complete at this time. McMillan stated a number of groups want the BMPs to target neighbors. Bremer commented that perhaps the City should look at specific bays on the lake where the City feels the water quality is impacted. Levang asked what Staff feels about the neighbor targets. Gaffron stated that is an appealing concept and that the Watershed District is looking at a variety of projects within specific neighborhoods. It does not address, however, one person being able to get more than someone else could because they are using a BMP. Schoenzeit commented there is also a significant amount of city -owned land that could be looked at. Levang asked if it would be difficult to determine which neighborhoods are most in need. • Page 6 of 9 i MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIUPLANNING COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION Monday, March 26, 2012 5:00 o'clock p.m. Gaffron stated Staff could look at it in conjunction with the Watershed District staff and identify problem areas. Consultants could also be hired to look at certain areas. Bremer commented that water quality is also an important component of the hardcover regulations. Gaffron noted water quality is not always directly related to the density. Rahn stated the worst bays are the ones that have the streams flowing into them. Rahn stated if we get back to what the initial group was directed to look at, the City is getting close to achieving their goals with the prescriptive option, which is easier to understand and allows for some of the things that homeowners would like. McMillan commented she is in favor of the prescriptive option as well. Levang stated she prefers the prescriptive option and that the performance option requires too much Staff time. Schoenzeit stated until the state study is finished on the BMPs, the City is probably premature in some of its regulations, but that the City still has to be receptive to new technologies. Schoenzeit stated there are probably some things the City can implement right now as far as technology and then revisit it later once • the state study is completed. Leskinen stated initially she was in favor of the performance based option, but that following tonight's discussion, she is leaning more towards the prescriptive option. The bigger issue might be drainage, which the prescriptive option addresses better. As the state finishes their study and there are more technologies available, those can be incorporated or encouraged. Bremer indicated she is also in favor of the prescriptive option. Schoenzeit stated in theory the performance option is appealing, but that given Staff time and expense, the City is not quite ready for it. Rahn commented once the state completes its study, it could perhaps be incorporated into the prescriptive option at some point in the future. Gaffron stated by incorporating some of the suggestions tonight, more of the goals are met under the prescriptive option. McMillan asked what the group thinks about the tier concept. Gozola stated the tiers are based on the City's current system and that they looked at it on a parcel by parcel basis. Gaffron stated the tier system assigns one number to every lot within that tier. Tiers 2 and 3 are non- • lakeshore lots. Page 7 of 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIDPLANNING COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION Monday, March 26, 2012 5:00 o'clock p.m. i Gozola stated the map illustrates Tier 1 lots as lakeshore lots. Tier 2 falls typically within the 250 -500 foot zone and Tier 3 falls within the 500 -1000 foot zone. Tiers 4 and 5 are the ones that are currently regulated zone specific. Gozola indicated he took all of the different regulations and put them into the overlay. In five to ten years, if the DNR requires performance standards, the prescriptive option is in a format that would allow the City to quickly transition to the performance based option. McMillan commented that Tiers 2 and 3 are less restrictive than the DNR's requirements. Gozola indicated that is correct and pointed out that the City currently is less restrictive than the DNR. Rahn commented that a lot of it also has to do with the type of soils.' Bremer stated consistency with the DNR makes sense. ;+ McMillan commented that Tier 3 looks like it goes beyond 1000 feet. Gaffron stated that is possible since there might be portions of the lot that are beyond 1000 feet. McMillan stated the tiers may be confusing and that some people may protest the tier they are located in. Gaffron stated there are a lot of properties that are off the lakeshore, such as in the Navarre area, that have . gotten hardcover variances that are in a 30 to 35 percent zone and they become nonconforming under the new regulations. Gaffron noted the City has always had lots that are nonconforming and that in the half acre zone, more than half 'of the lots are substandard and require variances. Gaffron stated the City needs to decide how to deal with nonconforming lots that were not previously nonconforming. Gozola stated in summary, based on his understanding, the City would like to pursue the prescriptive option; include the 0 -75 foot zone in the hardcover calculation; update the paver /deck credit to allow for up to 100 feet, with no credit being given after that; address the definition of board spacing to make sure it is pervious underneath but not necessarily regulating the space of the board; consider making properties that are iip against a creek a Tier 1 parcel; do a more in -depth analysis as to what properties are assigned to what tiers; look at whether the City can move to a 25 percent requirement for all parcels; and look at the impact of creating nonconformities and how to deal with those in the future. McMillan asked if you have a bluff area in the 0 -75 area, whether that would be excluded from the lot area. Gozola stated typically you would not exclude it in counting overall hardcover and that the bluff would be an unbuildable area. Gaffron stated steep slopes have also been defined in the code but that it has been typically ignored over the years. Anything over 12 percent is not considered dry buildable. Rahn noted the steeper the bluff is, the less land that is included in the bluff zone. Rahn asked if landscape fabric and top of walls would also be included. Gozola stated it is included. • Page 8 of 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION Monday, March 26, 2012 5:00 o'clock p.m. Rahn stated the other questionable item is swimming pools. Gaffron stated the City's definition of hardcover is anything that prevents water from being absorbed into the ground directly. While the pool retains water, it does not let water get into the ground. 2. CITY LOGO UPDATE It was the consensus of the City Council that the logo should be blue with gray shading. 3. COMMENTS REGARDING INFORMATION UPDATES There were no comments regarding Information Update items. Upcoming work session topics were briefly discussed. ADJOURNMENT The joint work session of the Orono City Council/Planning Commission was concluded at 6:33 p.m. • ATTEST: = (/ Linda S. Vee, City Clerk U ,". Jmf Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor Page 9 of 9