My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-25-2006 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2006
>
09-25-2006 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2012 4:37:48 PM
Creation date
7/25/2012 4:37:48 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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, September 25, 2006 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />• (6. #06 -3212 HEMPEL PROPERTIES, O UTLOT A STONEBAY (NYP CORNER OF WILLOW <br />DRII%E NORTHAND HIGHWAYI2), Continuedl) <br />Murphy stated in his view if tonight's comprehensive plan amendment is not approved, the City would be <br />better off if the first comprehensive plan amendment is undone and the site is rezoned. <br />Gaffron stated if the Council undoes what was done a few years ago, it would allow an office <br />development on this site. <br />White stated the consensus of the Council is that they do not want retail on this site. <br />Kerznack stated if the comprehensive plan is not amended, they have zero options available to them and <br />that they are not able to construct the medical office building without the retail component. Kerznack <br />indicated they would be able to wait for enough medical users to occupy the building but that without the <br />comprehensive plan amendment, they have no ptions for developing this site. <br />Murphy inquired when their option for financing expires. <br />Kerznack stated they have until October 13`x'. <br />Gaffron stated the Council would be taking one 'step back if they undo what was done last time, which <br />would leave the City Council with a site that was zoned RR -1B office, which would need to be rezoned to <br />B -6, and would require a RPUD. <br />Kerznack inquired if the comprehensive plan amendment is approved tonight, whether they would be able <br />to proceed forward with the medical building. <br />Sansevere stated they could but that it sounds like one of the other partners is not interested in <br />constructing a medical building without the retail component. <br />Kerznack stated if they have the option of constructing a medical building, they could at least look at that <br />option and hold the land until they have enough ;tenants to make the project viable. <br />Murphy inquired whether the Council is in agreement with a medical building on this site. <br />White stated it appears the consensus of the Council is to allow a medical building on this site. <br />Murphy inquired how the Council could approve that option. <br />Sansevere suggested the Council table this application until October 9°i, which would give the applicants <br />time to design a plan depicting a medical office Building on this site. <br />Kerznack stated they could go ahead and constrict a medical building on this site, but that it is likely it <br />would sit vacant for some period of time. <br />McMillan stated she personally would like to undo the comprehensive plan amendment that was approved <br />a couple of years ago and that she is not able to nuke any decision on what type of development she <br />• would approve for this site at this time. <br />PAGE 5 of 14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.