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.