Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,June 17, 2002 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#02-2786 JOHN R.JONES,Continued) <br /> While he acknowledged that varying definitions exist,Rahn stated that the general definition agreed upon <br /> by the Commission dictates that the 30' height point be taken from the midway point between the ceiling <br /> joist to the peak, which is assumed to be halfway up the roof, thus, this clearly exceeds the 30' <br /> requirement. <br /> Rahn supported staff's general policy that the 30' building height be based on the average height between <br /> the ceiling and the peak. <br /> Mr. Jones suggested that he cut off the roof,by making it a flat roof in order to meet the 30' and 2 '/2 <br /> story house standard. <br /> Bellows reiterated that this proposal is still too much for this site and the suggestion put forth by Mr. <br /> Jones would merely make the structure appear even more massive. <br /> Mr. Jones stated that if the Commission looks at the sites next door they would see that on either side of <br /> him, they have both been granted variances allowing much more lot cover than he is proposing. <br /> Bellows stated that neither of these homes have the bulk he is proposing. <br /> Mr. Jones insisted that both properties do have bulk, in fact,his first and current proposal is smaller than <br /> the home built recently next door. <br /> Bellows asked if the lot sizes were similar. <br /> Mr. Jones stated that the dimensions are the same. <br /> Bremer questioned if the neighbor in question is the same neighbor who spoke to the Commission last <br /> month. <br /> Mr. Jones stated that she was. <br /> Bellows believed the drawings looked like much more bulk. <br /> Mr. Jones stated that the figures in the drawing are not done to scale and look tiny in the sketches. <br /> Bellows stated that they should be drawn to scale in order to give the City a true representation. <br /> Gaffron pointed to figure E.2, a photo of the Jones and the two neighbors properties. The house on the <br /> right shows a two story home four feet above grade, while the one on the left is lower and consists of a 2 <br /> '/2 story home. Gaffron felt that in order to squeeze this house in between the other two,you would see <br /> what appears to be in effect a three story home with a flat roof,which would be taller and somewhat <br /> overwhelming to its neighbors. <br /> Smith clarified, with the Commissions support,that there is no problem with width and area variances; <br /> however,there is objection to the height and concerns pertaining hardcover. She continued by referring <br /> PAGE 4 OF 29 <br />