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. Trautz added that commercial lighting needs are different from residential and require more light intensity <br /> for safety. Because they want a higher light level in the commercial area,they proposed the box-type lighting <br /> as installed on the medical building. <br /> Leslie agreed with Mr.Trautz' comments, explaining his office is in a situation where lack of lighting creates <br /> employee concerns. <br /> Jurgens asked if box-type lighting is proposed for the office buildings and suggested differences in lighting <br /> styles might be desirable. <br /> Bremer commented that with Walgreens being open 24 hrs/day there is a need for more light and perhaps <br /> different styles of lighting could be proposed, one for the residential side and one for the commercial. <br /> Kempf stated that function comes first and the box-type lighting is the most appropriate type throughout the <br /> parking areas. However,he asked the applicant if they could tie in the lighting style from the residential area <br /> along Kelley Parkway and possibly around the edge of the parking area. Kempf further commented it is not <br /> necessary for the office area to be similar to the retail area,as the office area is with the City Hall area. <br /> Ms. Van Dell observed that upon review of the lighting plan that once building lights are shown on the rear of <br /> the buildings and actually show the locations of the Kelley Parkway fixtures,rear lights may not be needed at <br /> all. She advised they would review this again. <br /> Chair Mabusth asked the applicant if it does not work, did they have a problem with using a more <br /> complementary,residential-type light fixture on the north side of the property. <br /> Mr. Trautz pointed out that if the goal is to match what is on Kelley Parkway and it is a residential-type light, <br /> many more lights fixtures would be necessary to get the correct light level. He commented he was not sure <br /> how to answer Chair Mabusth's question yet. <br /> Leslie pointed out there is a fair amount of screening between this development and the street, assuming the <br /> combination of the berm and taller trees, and he advised he will request more trees to be included,that there <br /> will not be a direct,visible conflict between box-type lighting and the Kelley Parkway lighting fixtures. <br /> Kempf asked staff where the lights are located on Kelley Parkway, one or both sides of the street. <br /> Gaffron confirmed the lights on Kelley Parkway are on both sides of the street with regular spacing. <br /> Fritzler asked for clarification that if the Kelley Parkway lights were sufficient,no new lights would be on the <br /> buildings. <br /> Ms.Van Dell clarified that building lights will remain but there may not need to be additional lot lights. <br /> Bremer asked for information about the location of employee entrances. <br /> Mr.Trautz explained the service entrances are on the rear of the buildings. <br /> Gaffron recommended that functional lighting is needed at the rear of the building but does not have to be <br /> nearly as intense as the parking lot lights. He indicated he expected to see downcast box lighting fixtures on <br /> the rear of the buildings. <br /> Page 11 of 40 <br />