My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-23-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets - Historical
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
08-23-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2023 12:34:48 PM
Creation date
1/25/2023 11:45:54 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.
/
335
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 CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, August 9,2004 <br />7:00 o ’clock p.m. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION COMMFNTS - Roland Jurgens, Representative <br />Jurgens stated he did not have any comments pertaining to the items on tonight’s <br />agenda, but requested a joint work session be scheduled between the Planning <br />Commission and the City Council to discuss the moratorium. <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS <br />None <br />ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT <br />5. #02-2843 PROFESSIONAL PROPERTIES OF ORONO, 2765 KELLEY <br />PARKWAY - PUD AMENDMENT FOR WALL SIGN <br />Gaffron stated Orono Dental Care is requesting a sign permit to allow a wall sign on the <br />southeast wall of the Orono Professional Properties building in addition to the existing <br />12’ 8" monument sign which was previously approved by the Council. Orono Dental Care <br />is requesting a 7’ 11" wide, 6' tall internally illuminated wall sign. Gaffron noted the <br />wall sign, along with the existing monument sign, will total less than the ma.ximum sign square <br />footage allowed for this property in the B-6 District. Staff recommends approval of the PUD <br />amendment. <br />Dr. Karl Berg noted the sign would be located on the southeast side of the building rather than <br />the northwest side as originally proposed. <br />Murphy stated he was recently in this area during the nighttime hours and had noticed that the <br />night lights on this building are white in color. Murphy commented that the majority of the <br />night lights currently in the City arc amber lights, which in his opinion arc aesthetically more <br />pleasing than the white lights. Murphy inquired what the rationale is for having amber lights <br />versus white lights, and suggested the City look at requiring the night lights throughout the City <br />be more uniform. <br />McMillan commented she prefers white lights and questioned whether the lighting at this <br />site should be pointed more downward rather than outward. <br />Berg slated he has questioned the architect concerning the lighting on the building and was <br />informed that they do comply with the City’s lighting regulations. <br />City Administrator Moorse noted the City would soon be installing a number ol lights along <br />Kelley Parkway and that a quick review of this situation w ould be necessary if any changes <br />arc to be made to the color of the lights. Moorse indicated he is unaware of what color lighting; <br />has been chosen along Kelley Parkw ay and would check on the siniation. <br />Roland Jurgens, Planning Commission, stated there are two types of night lights av-ailable, <br />a mercury vapor light and a high pressure sodium light. Jurgens stated the high pressure <br />sodium lights, which are amber in color, are more efficient. <br />PAGE 3 <br />I
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.