07-15-2002 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

L. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 17,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#02-2786 JOHN R. JONES, Continued) stated that at no time during that meeting was he told anything about w indow usage. lie added that as he looks around Orono it is clear to him that numerous half-stories with windows e.xist on both old and new construction. There were no public comments. Bellows stated that, as an architect, it would set a bad precedent to sway from existing City rules. While the hal.f-story topic may be an issue to address in the future, she believed that the sum of all the pieces in need of approval amount to too much for this space. Bellows stated that, in her opinion, it seemed that too much is being stuffed on a lot of this size, w hich in turn creates too much bulk on this site. She added that she could support the approval for some of the variances but not the height issue. Smith asked the Commission if they could support the variances for *ot area and lot w idth. Bellows stated once again that the issue revolves around uie height problem mostly and visually the windows make it look like a three story building. Berg concurred with Bellows, stating that she was opposed to masstng in height. She pointed out that, unfortunately, Mr. Jones could probably not have eveiylhing he wants on that lot. In reference to the overhead of the proposed residence with dormer, Weinberger questioned when the Commission felt the plan becomes a third stoiy versus a half-story. Mr. Jones reiterated that neither during the meeting one month ago, nor since, had either the Commission or staff ever mentioned anything about not allowing w indows to him. Rahn questioned the roof hips on the overhead. Jones stated that the hipped roof line not only softened the look but brought down the roofline rather than extending it further. In an effort to meet the definition as proposed at the May meeting, Jones said that they took the floor plan from the second floor line and brought the roofline down to no more than three feet above the floor plane and brought it in to cut out 40% of the space at the five foot point. Bellows stated that the overhead elevation plan clearly reads as a three story in her \iewr. Mr. Jones argued that he had met the 2 '/»story definition as provided to him at the last meeting, he has not exceeded 30 ’ in height nor has he exceeded the half-story definition provided by The Illustrated Rook of Development Definitions. Bremer staled that Mr. Jones w as correct in his recollection that w indow s had not bem a part of the definition or discussion at the last meeting, it simply was never addressed. Gaffron stated that there is no definition in place that has been adopted by the City currently that defines a half-story, let alone w indow s on a half-stor>’; however, what is being proposed has been treated as a third story in the past. PAGE 3 OF 29