Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Tuesday,January 19,2016 <br /> 6:30 dclock p.m. <br /> Page 4 of the draft ordinance talks about prohibited lighting, such as neon lighting to accent buildings and <br /> the use of lasers. Barnhart noted he has not performed a walk-around the City to determine how many <br /> prohibited lights there are in the City. Language has also been included regarding exempt outdoor <br /> lighting, such as underwater lighting in pools, lighting required by city, state, or federal law, such as <br /> lights on tall buildings for airplanes, decorative fire lights, lighting for a temporary special event for the <br /> City, emergency lighting, and holiday decorating. <br /> Schoenzeit asked if the City has any regulations regarding how long Christmas lights may remain up. <br /> Barnhart indicated the City does not. <br /> Thiesse noted it says temporary lighting. <br /> Barnhart stated at the bottom of Page 4 the ordinance talks about the approval process, which will be <br /> folded into the City's site plan. At that time Staff will determine the lumens, acreage, and maximum and <br /> minimum light levels for all parking areas, entryways, signs, and walkways. Barnhart stated the lighting <br /> could be part of a conditional use permit. <br /> Barnhart noted Section 2 contains new definitions that are used in the ordinance. <br /> Barnhart stated in his view this is a good starting point but that he would also like to discuss this at a work <br /> session and then bring the draft ordinance back before the Planning Commission at its February meeting. <br /> Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 10:03 p.m. <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 10:03 p.m. <br /> Lemke asked if the change from incandescent to LED would impact any of the language. <br /> Barnhart stated incandescent lights are typically warmer lights, which results in LEDs being perceived as <br /> brighter lights. Barnhart stated the main factor to keep in mind is the perception of the light. <br /> Landgraver asked if the light level is being reduced to 0.1 rather than the 1 foot candle. Landgraver stated <br /> they might want to think about the impact to homes. <br /> Barnhart stated based on the ordinance, existing lights that exceed that level would be nonconforming and <br /> would be allowed to continue. Barnhart stated the amount of foot candles was the issue previously and <br /> that it was looked at from a nuisance standpoint. The way the current ordinance is drafted, it would be <br /> part of the zoning code. Barnhart stated he will be looking into that some more. <br /> Landgraver moved, Schwingler seconded,to table Application No. 15-3784,City of Orono Text <br /> Amendment to 78-1 Definitions Regarding Residential Lighting. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS <br /> Page 28 of 30 <br />