Laserfiche WebLink
MIMTESOFTIIK <br />OKONO ('OM>iissio> mf.ktim; <br />Moflday. Sc|tfcinb«r 20. 2004 <br />6:00 o ’clock p.m. <br />OI.D BISIM SS <br />3. 402.2830 cm' OF OKONO. BI'II.IIIX; IIFIOIITS. COI>F A>IFM>\IFNTS. <br />6:06 pjn.-6:ll p.m. <br />Gundiach noted this item was renewed at the last Planning! C'ommission work session (lundlach <br />indicated the Ctt>' of Onmo is requesting that the current building height code he amended to relicct the <br />cunent policies which base been in place since 20«J1 or earlier and which have been written asa ptilicy <br />statement since November of 2*K)2. (iundlach indicated it was the intention of the C'lty in November of <br />2002 tluii the policy statement would eventiuilly be incorporated into the code, which is the action that <br />Staff IS proposing at this time. <br />Gundiach indicated the proposed new building height language has changed slightly since the last <br />review by the Planning C'umnus.sion. w ith SlatYelectmg t«i amend every single height code m each <br />zoning distnct rather than uy mg to clanfv the 2-1 2 story limitation and the .0).|vHit limitation within the <br />building height definition. <br />Gundiach indicated Stall felt the amendment to each zoning district was a clearer clanrication and that <br />Staff has alsti defined the half-story separately rather than dctming it in the building height definition, <br />(iundlach noted the word median has replaced the word average in the definition of building height, <br />which was discussed at the work session. In addition, the highest point for measuring was further <br />clarified when dormers and windows evi.st in the upper story or half story, with the upper nx'asuri.ig <br />point being the median pviint betw een the top of the w indow and the top of the jvak <br />•Staff IS recommending appmval of the language a> outlined in the Plamicr ’s Kcporl dated <br />SeptemKT 20.2004 <br />There were no public comments regarding this application. <br />Bremer commented she prefers the new language <br />l-cshe stated he concurs v% nh Bremer, and commenle«l that in his opinion the proposed language is more <br />consistent with vvhat the onginal intent wxs when 2-1 2 story v»r .'O-fiKii was initially drafted <br />Ralin moved. Bremer seeomlrd. to recommend approval of the Building lleigiil Code Amendment <br />for the ( ity ofOrono as oulUMd In the .September 20. 2004 Planner ’s Report. <br />VOTF: Ave«6..Nav%0. <br />4. 404-3024 Cm OF OKONO. (IP FOR VFIIK I F STOR \( JF - (OOF A.\IFM).MK.NT. <br />6:12 p.m.-6:45 p.m. <br />Gaffron m>ted this is the latest version of the aiTX'ndment to tlw City's large vehicle storage for vehicles <br />exceeding 14.000 pounds gross weight. The Pbnmng ('ommission at us .August .11” work session <br />reviewed the pros and cons of allowing large vehicle storage as a conditional asc Gaffron indicated he <br />diKs not feel a conditional use permit is the best approach to this situauon since a condiuonal use permit <br />in a code generally means that that is a use that is allowed in a district provided certain conditions are <br />met. Gal Iron noted the Planning Commission at its work session dtu express some concern whether it is <br />legal and advisable to limit the conditional use permit to just those existing users llur ( ity Attorney <br />PAGE 2 <br />Milfc ittiiftai rtmiii* ■