Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-06-22 09-220 ORDINANCECOUNCIL ACTION Item No. 09 220 Date: June 22, 2009 Item/Subject: Ordinance, Amending Land Development Code, Chapter 165, Section 165-13 -- Definition of Building Height Responsible Department: Planning Division Commentary: This proposed Amendment to the Land Development Code changes the location of the starting elevation for determining building height from the street curb line elevation to the elevation of the ground adjacent to the proposed foot print of the structure. This will provide a better method of measuring building heights where the street grade is radically different than the adjoining street grade. For referral to Planning Board Meeting of Tuesday, July 7, 2009 7:00 p.m. Manager's Comments: Associated Information: Of)ft�1761-, 417 Budget Approval: Legal Approval: Introduced for Passage X First Reading X Referral to Planning Board Meeting of 3uly 7, 2009 /s/ James D. Ring Department Head F/1*4 BE 4� f' •%City Manager Finance Director r If solicitor Page 1 of 1 09 220 Assigned To Councilor Blanchette June 22 2009 • ?� CITY OF BANGOR (TITLE.) Ordinance, Amending Land Development Code, Chapter 165, Section 165-13 -- Definition of Building Height Be it ordained by the City of Bangor, as follows.- THAT ollows:THAT the Land Development Code Section 165-13 be amended by replacing the definition of Building Height with the following: § 165-13. Definitions. BUILDING HEIGHT - The vertical distance from the stizeet frent gFade te the top of the highest roof beams of a flat roof or to the mean level of the highest gable or slope of a hip roof to the average grade adjoining the building footprint prior to construction. STATEMENT OF FACT: Additions are underlined,, deletions are StFWE FhFek. IN CITY COUNCIL June 22, 2009 First Reading and Referred to the Planning Board Meeting of July 7,2009 at 7:00p.m. CITY CLE IN CITY COUNCIL July 13, 2009 Motion Made and Seconded for Passage Vote 8 -0 - Councilors Voting Yes: Blanchette, Bronson, D'Errico, Hawes,'Nealley, Palmer, Stone and Wheeler - Councilors Voting No: None Councilors Absent: Gratwick Passed CI?Y CLERK A 09-220 (TITLE,] AmpnAing Land nPVPI =s-nt Definition of Building Height Assigned to Councilor 1; f fi 1I4 1 MEMORANDUM DATE: July 8, 2009 TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: David G. Gould, Planning Officer SUBJECT: Amending Land Development Code 165-13 Council Ordinance 09-220 Please be advised that the Planning Board at its regularly scheduled meeting on July 7, 2009 held a Public Hearing on the above Land Development Code Amendment. Planning Officer David Gould provided an overview of the proposed Land Development Code Amendment. Mr. Gould explained that this amendment to the definition of Building Height changes the location of the baseline elevation when determining building heights as it changes the point from which to measure the elevation from the street curb line to the elevation of the ground adjacent to the proposed footprint of a structure. Mr. Gould indicated that while not perfect, this amendment will provide a better method of measuring building heights where the street grade is different from an adjoining land grade. He indicated that Staff looked at other ordinances from around the State and found that there are a variety of ways in which this is handled. In reviewing the reason for height limitations Staff felt measuring the height of a building from the original grade at the building footprint would be a truer measure of the actual building height. Mr. Gould gave examples of places in the City where this would apply such as along the interstate, along the Kenduskeag Stream and places where there are dramatic changes in topography. No one spoke either in favor of or in opposition to the proposed zoning amendment. Planning Board Members expressed concerns as to how this new language will affect development. The Board discussed a recently approved development along the waterfront and how that particular building height was determined. Some concern was raised as to when the initial elevation grade would be established. Mr. Damon felt that this amendment was an ordinance for the sake of legislation and it could require a small business person to have to come before the Board twice, once seeking to fill their site and secondly for building approval. He felt that it was common sense to fill a property to the street line and this amendment would be an inducement to work around the requirements and be a step backward for the City. Mr. Rosenblatt felt that in comparison to the existing language use street grade this amendment may represent a better solution than what presently exists. The Board discussed what other options might provide more flexibility in determining how height might be measured so as not to adversely impact projects. Mr. Gould noted that the present definition has benefits to structures located below street grade but disadvantages to structures that would be constructed above street grade. The change is to use the existing elevation at the footprint in lieu of the street grade. The Board voted five in favor and one opposed to recommend the proposed language to the City Council as contained in C.O. # 09-220.