My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-13-2006 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
11-13-2006 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2012 4:40:03 PM
Creation date
7/25/2012 4:40:03 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES Or THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, November 13, 2006 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />(9. #06 -3240 CITY OF ORONO ZONE CODE SECTION 78 -1— DEFINITIONS OF <br />"BASEMENT" AND "STORY" ZONING CODE AMENDMENT, Con.tiniceil) <br />building code. Gaffron stated if half of the home is located below grade, it should be considered a <br />basement and if half of it is located above grade, it should be considered a story. <br />Schoenzeit agreed that the City should have good definitions of what a story is and what a basement is but <br />that the impact of this ordinance on smaller homes should be taken into consideration. Schoenzeit <br />requested some accommodation be made for the smaller homes. <br />McMillan stated if Mr. Schoenzeit's basement is considered a story because it is more a walk -out, he <br />would lose the potential of adding a story. McMillan stated this ordinance could also potentially limit the <br />expandability of her house. <br />Schoenzeit stated there . are sections in the ordinance that would have huge impacts on the smaller houses. <br />McMillan inquired whether the 50 percent is contained in the building codes. <br />Gaffron stated it is. Gaffron stated the majority of the plans that have come before the City in the past <br />few months do not meet the current code. Gaffrons suggested Staff look at the impact this ordinance <br />would have on a smaller house and perhaps draft a different standard that could be drafted for the smaller - <br />sized residence. <br />Brokl pointed out there is a big difference in the City's regulations for new construction versus remodel. <br />Gaffron stated based on the way Staff is dealing with it today, people can put the foundation two feet <br />deeper into the ground to meet the City's ordinance. Gaffron stated Staff would like to measure from the <br />floor above and measure down. <br />White stated he would like to know what the ramifications of this ordinance amendment are for the <br />smaller sized homes. <br />McMillan inquired what the ramification would be to a house that is not located on the lake. <br />Gaffron stated the issues would be the same and that the ordinance is attempting to limit massing on a lot. <br />Murphy proposed the ordinance amendment be tabled and discussed in a work session. <br />Gaffron stated there are two or three items on next week's Planning Commission meeting that are out of <br />compliance with the City's current policy but would be in compliance with this ordinance. <br />Schoenzeit stated inclusion of a definition of walkout might also help. <br />Gaffron stated a walkout versus a lookout is a major issue. <br />McMillan inquired whether two and a half stories are the inaximum. <br />Gaffron stated that is correct. <br />PAGE 12 of 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.