My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-22-2004 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2004
>
03-22-2004 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/31/2012 1:54:57 PM
Creation date
5/31/2012 1:54:57 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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, March 22, 2004 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />(11. #04 -2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT CORP., HWY 121WILLO WDRIVE • <br />OUTLOT A, STONEBAY, continued) <br />Applicant stated there is not a lot of interest from banks. They haven't given up yet and will <br />try to incorporate. They have approached most of the restaurants growing in the metro area <br />and they say the day population isn't big enough to support a restaurant. In addition, <br />because of the bypass, traffic will be going down. <br />Mayor Peterson took a poll of the Council that indicated all were in favor of moving forward <br />toward a Comprehensive Plan amendment. She also indicated that one Planning <br />Commission member was in favor of an amendment. <br />Mabusth stated that she feels this application started off in the wrong place and that although <br />she couldn't attend the meeting, the joint meeting with Long Lake was a great step forward <br />and no one said they were against it. <br />Mabusth stated she thinks it would be exciting to have a commercial development be in <br />place for our neighboring community as they face re- development and believes there is a <br />spirit to continue to work together with the Long Lake Planning Commission. <br />White moved and Mayor Peterson seconded to grant conceptual approval for a <br />Comprehensive Plan amendment to reflect the conditions in the March 1, 2004 letter. <br />Discussion was opened and Moorse commented to clarify what the expectations are that: • <br />1) We don't want to say we are approving 30,000 square feet of retail. Instead we want to <br />be more specific and he believes the pharmacy is key to this site and if the pharmacy is gone <br />and we are just trying to fill up the space that is a different plan than is being talked about <br />here. <br />Gaffron stated that the City will establish parameters in the Comp Plan for development of <br />this Outlot A that will include whatever conditions felt appropriate, whether this developer <br />or any developer. <br />Moorse responded to the applicant that we wouldn't amend the Comp Plan to simply say <br />"retail ". We amend the Comp Plan to say it's fine to do retail in this area versus office as <br />long as the retail serves the neighborhood and fits these parameters. One of the parameters <br />Moorse suggests would be it has to be a pharmacy or something that provides the same type <br />of service uses that a pharmacy provides. <br />2) Moorse continued to say that the other thing he would suggest is the far westerly space <br />has to be food oriented if it is all going to be retail because if it's not then we have wasted <br />that whole building. <br />• <br />PAGE 18 of 23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.