06-21-2004 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17.2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. (S. M4-2974 RELIANCE DEV’ELOPMENT COMPANY. LLP, Coniiancd) Mr. Tmutz added that commercial lighting needs are diflerent from residential and require more light intensity for safety. Because they want a higher light level in the commercial area, they proposed the box-type lighting as installed on the medical building. Leslie agreed with Mr. Trautz' comments, explaining his office is in a situation is here lack of lighting creates employee concerns. Jurgens asked if box-t>pe lighting is proposed for the office buildings and suggested differences in lighting styles might be desirable. Bremer commented that wnth Walgreens being open 24 hrs day there is a need for more light and perhaps different styles of lighting could be proposed, one for the residential side and one for the commercial Kempf stated that function comes first and the box-type lighting is the most appropriate t>pe throughout the parbng areas. However, he asked the applicant if they could tie in the lighting st> le from the residential area along Kelley Parkway and possibly around the edge of the parking area. Kempf funiter commented it is not neces.sary for the office area to be similar to the retail area, as the office area is with the City Hall area. Ms. Van Dell observed that upon review of the lighting plan that once building lights are shown on the rear of the buildings and acluaily show the locations of the Kelley Parkway fixtures, rear lights may not be needed at all. She adsnsed they would review this again Chair Mabusth asked the applicant if it does not w ork, did they have a problem w ith using a more complementary, residential-type light fixture on the north side of the property. Mr. Trautz pointed out that if the goal is to match what is on Kelley Parkway and it i> a residential-type light, many more lights fixtures would he necessary to get the correct light level. He commented he was not sure how to answer Chair Mabusth's question yet. Leslie pointed out there is a fair amount of screening between this development and the street, assuming the combination of the berm and tallw trees, and he advised he w ill request more trees to be included, that there will not be a direct, visible conflict between box-type lighting and the Kelley Parkway lighting fixtures. Kempf asked staff where the lighu arc located on Kelley Parkway, one or both sides of the street Gaflron confirmed the lights on Kelley Parkway are on both sides of the street with regular spacing. Fntzlcr asked for clanfication that if the Kelley Parkway lights were sufficient, no new lights would he on the buildings. Ms. Van Dell clarified that building lights will remain but there may not need to be additional lot lights. Bremer asked for information about the location of employee entrances. Mr. Trauu explained the service entrances are on the rear of the buildings. Gaflron recommended that functional lighting is needed at the rear of the building but does not have to be nearly as intense as the parking lot lights. He indicated he expected to see downcast box lighting fixtures on the rear of the buikluigs. Page 11 of40