Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (5. #04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY,LLP, Continued) <br /> Mr. Mike Spina,Amcon Construction, explained their goal was to be consistent but not identical among the <br /> buildings. The brick will match the Walgreens building, fascia colors will be similar to Walgreens but the <br /> awnings will not match Walgreens. He stated their goal was to keep the building scale down to residential- <br /> type scale with the gable grooves and some other building features. <br /> Chair Mabusth summarized that the two retail buildings will have different exteriors than Walgreens. <br /> Mr. Spina agreed somewhat, clarifying they will look different enough but not identical so it would not look <br /> like one big broad development. <br /> Kempf asked where the blue color would be used. <br /> Mr. Spina tried to explain where the blue would be used and pointed out areas on the building elevation where <br /> the awnings are above the windows and doors. <br /> Rahn asked for information about if the brick extends up to the gables. <br /> Mr. Spina showed on the building elevation where masonry or brick will be used,pointing out the blue awning <br /> above the glass, clarifying roof and fascia colors,too. <br /> Chair Mabusth provided a copy of the Metropolitan Council letter, dated May 14,2004,regarding the <br /> Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Stonebay Outlot A—Waiver of further review to the applicant. <br /> Chair Mabusth asked for additional Planning Commission comments concerning the exterior. She asked for <br /> their opinions if it does meet the established criteria. <br /> Rahn and Kempf concurred that it does meet the established criteria. <br /> Mr. Trautz referred to the issue of whether building-mounted lighting is proposed. He stated it is intended to <br /> have building-mounted lighting but had not provided the City with any samples. <br /> Mr. Spina interjected that it was generically described in the submitted drawings/elevations. It will be more a <br /> decorative lighting, it will be completely cut-off and shielded with no projection of horizontal light. <br /> Chair Mabusth asked the applicant if they heard Gaffron's comments concerning the type of lighting proposed <br /> for the light poles as not being warm and residential as in the rest of the Stonebay Development. <br /> Gaffron clarified that the office area in the Stonebay Development does use box-type lighting. He brought up <br /> the matter for discussion of whether to match commercial lighting with the residential area, or to match with <br /> what is along the street or the site interior. <br /> Chair Mabusth asked for information on the approved lighting for Kelley Parkway. <br /> Gaffron described it as somewhat screened but more visible and decorative. <br /> Ms.Van Dell clarified the lighting is spaced every 15' which is more residential and uses smaller scale, <br /> residential-type fixtures. <br /> Page 10 of 40 <br />