Laserfiche WebLink
s <br />•04-2974 StoncbayMarkctpUcc <br />February 13.2004 <br />PagcSor« <br />Staff has enggnttarf to the appUcants that the Walgreens signage not include a manual reader board, <br />as they tend to be poorly maintained. Orono codes prohibit the use of illuminated scrolling or <br />flashing reader boards. <br />The exterior parking lot lighting plan is in Sheet E2.1 . Applicant should be requested to describe <br />the intent for lighting at building entrances, etc <br />8. Building Desim andMaterials Planning Conunission should carefully review the building design <br />and style exhibits in the January 16 memo. Applicant has provided a board with building exterior <br />material samples for review and approval, this will be available at the meeting. <br />9. T jindscaping. Please review the landscaping plans (Exhibits L2.1 and L7.1 from l-16memo,and <br />new site plan exhibits). Staff has not had a chance to thoroughly review the latest revisions; the B-6 <br />landscaping standards establish a percentage of the overall project value to define the minimum <br />landscape value required. <br />10. Other topics of concern or interest <br />Preliminary Piat <br />The prc^x)sed plat would create three building lots, one for each proposed building, with each lot fronting <br />on two roads. Access and other site functions will necessarily be shared between the three parcels, <br />requiring shared parking agreements, for instance. This was discussed briefly at the February 11 work <br />session. Staff is confident that cross easements and covenants will be establishedto ensure ongoingaccess <br />and maintenance of the site. <br />Piat iqiproval will include the establishmentofdrainage and utilityeascmcnts, payment of park fees and <br />stormwater & drainage trunk fees (both established as part of the previous Stonebay PUD approvals), etc. <br />Preliminary plat approval will be concurrent with site plan approval. <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Staff supports the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the rezoning to B-6 PUD. Planning Commission <br />should reach a conclusion on the Comp Plan Amendment before proceeding with its site plan review. <br />The rezoning goes hand in hand with the Comp Plan Amendment, and can provide for a greater level of <br />detail than the Plan. For instance, if Planning Commission wishes to define a specific list of allowable or <br />unacceptable uses for the site, that is certainly an option. If you wish certain potential uses to be subject <br />to conditions, that is an option. The PUD approval for this site can be defined very specifically to ensure <br />that inappropriate uses do not occur.