04-24-2017 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 10, 2017 7:00 o'clock p.m. 23. #17-3924 CITY OF ORONO, TEXT AMENDMENT: REPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT — ORDINANCE NO. 192, Third Series (Continued) Barnhart stated the challenge with that clause is if you have a lawfully operating conditional use permit, that permit runs with the land. A clause in the ordinance that appears to potentially allow the neighbors to change that creates a false hope that the neighbors have the ability to do that. On the recommendation of the City Attorney, Staff has removed that language to be more consistent with state statute. Walsh stated an example of that was the church on Fox Street. A neighbor was having an issue with the amplified noise and the City had to tell the resident that he does not have that ability to petition the City. Walsh stated as a result, there is no good reason for that language to be in the ordinance, but the City Council can include in the conclusions section of the resolution what the conditions are for those conditional uses. Walsh stated the City Council would be able to review the conditional use permit if the person is violating any of those conditions. Mattick stated the findings and conclusions of the resolution are very important since the language of ordinances tend to change over time. Matt Johnson, 1432 Shoreline Drive, stated in his view, the City should always give neighbors hope that they can change something that they are uncomfortable with. Johnson stated in reviewing the language, it says that the conditional use permit should not be subject to periodic Council review for the purpose of change or revocation unless such a review is one of the conditions of the original permit unless the actual land use is determined to be a violation. Johnson noted the language goes on to say that basically the City cannot do anything unless the property owner gives the City that right or the City obtains a court order. Johnson stated to his understanding the Planning Commission touched on this and that the ordinance is taking away the City's authority. Johnson stated the City could have a marina that is allowed to have 20 rental boat slips but they could move up to 26. Johnson asked how the City goes about enforcing that change or if they receive a complaint. Walsh stated that is why it is so important to cover that in the conditions of the conditional use permit since state law already prohibits the language proposed to be deleted. The conditions give the City the authority to enforce different items. Walsh stated they are just getting rid of the language that says the resident can petition since that right does not currently exist and that it will be important in the future to codify the conditions required as part of the conditional use permit. Mattick stated the language that is being struck conveys false hope and is completely unenforceable. Johnson stated he understands that but that the residents should always have hope that they can effect change. Page 19 of 26