CCP 03202023 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Page 3 of 5 over Shoreland ordinances, they must approve any deviations from their model ordinance, 81 which contains the 25% limit and 1,000 overlay. City staff, through our consultant, requested 82 a 30% limit within the 1,000’ overlay given that is the City-wide standard for residential 83 properties. This request would not be approved. In order to move to the current model 84 ordinance, staff cannot pick and choose what model standards to adopt or not. Thus, if the 85 Council wishes to move forward, the 25% limitation must be accepted. This change was 86 directly communicated to the public, via a letter mailed to each resident, through Open House 87 materials, and through the City’s website content. Only one resident expressed concern in 88 regards to this specific issue. 89 90 Using GIS data, staff examined impervious surface across parcels within both the 300’ and 91 1,000’ shoreland overlay. This data illustrates the following: 92 o Within the current 300’ overlay, 208 parcels already exceed 25% impervious surface.93 o By going to the 1,000’ overlay, an additional 417 parcels would exceed 25%94 impervious surface.95 o Whether in the 300’ or 1,000’ overlay, approximately 2/3rd’s of the parcels will remain96 in compliance and 1/3rd would become legal nonconforming.97 o Of the 1/3rd that is legal nonconforming, 5% of those exceed 35%, meaning they are98 already over what the Stormwater Permit would allow.99 o Many of these 417 parcels are located along the periphery of the Shoreland Overlay –100 or where only a portion of the parcel lies within the 1,000’ overlay. Under these101 scenarios, only the portion of the property within the Shoreland Overlay would be102 subject to the 25% limitation. The portion outside would be allowed 30% impervious.103 104 While 1/3rd of the parcels within the overlay would become legal nonconforming through 105 adoption of the updated ordinance, in terms of impervious surface, they would be 106 grandfathered-in. Grandfathering means the property owner would be able to maintain 107 impervious surface at the current amount but not increase it. Depending on the specific 108 characteristics of a project, the variance process can be used to exceed 25% (or whatever the 109 grandfathered percentage is). If it can be demonstrated the additional impervious surface will 110 not negatively impact the lake, it’s likely the “practical difficulty” test can be met and a 111 variance could be approved. Staff is confident the need for a variance under these scenarios 112 would not be a regular occurance. Staff is also fairly confident the DNR would not object to 113 these variance requests. 114 115 There was also some discussion about impervous surface vs. improvement area. Impervious 116 surface only is referred to in the LDR and LMDR zoning districts, whereas improvement areas 117 are referred to in all districts. All impervous surfaces are included in improvement areas. The 118 existing improvement area standards outside LDR and LMDR zoning districts will remain 119 unchanged even if those parcels are within the Shoreland Overlay. 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 •Defining what “open area” means as it relates to multi-family landscaping (specifically tree) requirements (lines 837-838) Instead of defining “open area” staff redrafted the standard to say “Multi-family residential dwellings shall require 1 canopy and 1 evergreen tree per two thousand (2,000) square feet of site area not occupied by structures” given the definition of structure includes any buildings or127