My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-14-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2004
>
06-14-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2023 11:14:59 AM
Creation date
1/25/2023 8:56:22 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
627
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 OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />change per day and no flashing, scrolling, etc. would be more attracnve than a <br />manual board. <br />• Gaffron commented that the problem with allowing the illuminated board as <br />proposed is that it could require ongoing monitoring, and that once it goes up, <br />every other retail business in town will want one, but without the limitations. <br />Approval of this one would set a negative precedent. He .^tJ^ed it would be an <br />enforcement issue and potentially could see many other applications for an <br />illuminated reader board sign from the Navarre area and Hwy 12. At this time <br />staff recommends that the illuminated board not be allowed, and that if a message <br />board is proposed that it be a manual board. <br />H. Lighting.^ Gaffron referenced the exterior parking lot lighting plan shown on Sheet E2.1 <br />in the packet. It shows the standard box-type, downcast lighting fixtures but does not <br />specifically show whether any building-mounted lighting -s proposed. Staff recommends <br />asking the applicant for this information. Also, Gaffron observed there is a fairly <br />standardized lighting style for Stonebay Development and here at the commercial comer <br />that there is a question of whether to have a more decorative fi,xnire given this is intending <br />to set the tone for the Stonebay residential development. <br />L Matters . City Engineer Tom Kellogg provided his comments in Exhibit G <br />dated April 23, 2004. He has alto reviewed the May 7,2004 plan set and his comments <br />remain unchanged. His recommendations relate primarily to matters that will be <br />addressed during the final plan stages of development. <br />4. Preliminary Plat <br />Gaffron illustrated the two-lot layout resulting from the lot subdivision with separate <br />owtt.rships, Walgreens' parcel and the parcel with the other two retail buildings. <br />5. Rezoning <br />Gaffron advised that the draft rezoning ordinance for the site has yet to be prepared by staff, <br />but will be prepared for Planning Commission review at its June work session prior to final <br />Council action. <br />Gaffron stated the Planning Commission had about 8-9 remaining issues to address: <br />Page 11 of 58
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.