10-10-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

/UM16.2005 JUN Jg Orono Planning Commin ion Ofono City Council Orono Plying Staff C/TVo, 20(S RE: Application g 05-31-21 UUerior Expansion of Conditional Use and Extenor Creation of New outdoor FnMit patio and rear deck for Drinking and Eating • Narrows Saloon Dear Commisaion, Council and Staff; I am writing this letter on behalf of Nelghbon For a Better Navarre, a growing organization of concerned residentt. the majority of whose members currently reside on or around Kelly Avenue. We have received and reviewed Applicant's plans for this proposed expansion at a meeting called especially for that puqiose Tuesday night, June 14. Applicant was invited to present their case and agreed to do so but decided not to attend without notifying us. Here is a list of our concents: 1. We strongly urge the Cily Of Orono to place a moratorium on development in Downtown Navarre and develop a vision and plan for this small area that we can all live with and be proud of. We first requested this in April. 2004 when tlic ill conceived Realaurant/Bar wet proposed by Mike Keaveny and Paul Ode. It is even more relevant today. Granting ihia masatve interior and exterior expansion of the Saloon, with outdoor party decks and an outdoor bar will set the reuil tone for Downtown Navarre for decades to come. We believe granting this request will lead to even more bars desiring to locale at this intersection and drive out more des'^le devekipmenl. The fact that the Keaveny property it npe for dev «dopment and the addition of Lund’s ownership of Rick's Market reinforce the common tense of the cily creating a plan. There ire already serious irafRc and noise polluiion issues in downtown Nsvsrre. This is the lime for the Cily of Orono to be proactive and show leadership, not just to react to every request that comes along, which will only lead to the ftmher deterioration of Navarre. While physically far from Orono Cily ORicea, we are still a part of the city, pay lax fiollari to the city and deserve the attention of the Planning Commission. Council and suff in dev^ing a sensible plait 2. In the event you decide not to place a moratorium, we believe that current problems with the applicsnt's operation must be addresacd in conjunction with Banting cny approval. There U loud noise that eminales from the property late into the night when the doors are opened and the homes near the Saloon literally vibrate when a liot bamT U playing. Chopper noise late at night and public drunkenness that spews down Kelly Avenue is slso a problem. 3. Here are our concern t with the specifics of the plan itself: «EC6/VfEn ''''■“'ORONO The front patio should not be approved First, there is no room for it unless the parking along Shoreline Drive is eliminated which would hurt other rcUilcrs Currently, the plan shows only 7 feet from the end of the patio to the curb However, an open car door lakes three feet and the new vestibule, with the door swung open takes another two feet. Therefore, at that narrowest point, there is only a two fool walkway. How is there any room for decorative trees even in the wider parts of the sidewalk? Why would the city want to grant such a plan that so greatly impinges on the pedretrian nght of way? In addition, while the applicant claims that the vestibule will eliminate noise from the cstablislimenl, the reality is lliat there arc two new doors that have no vestibule and the applicant lias a practice of leaving existing door open on many nights. Further, the vestibule interior and extenor doors will cunsianlly be open simultaniously with patrons and food/beverage server traffic which will allow noise to escape. If you do approve this part of llK plan, wc believe you need to require the patio be closed by 10 PM every night, that no outdoor speakers be allowed and that if residents complain of excessive noise that it be closed permanently. The rear deck, bolding 88 new seats, and an outdoor bar should not be approved until it is confimicd by llic cily I. that there is adequate parking in the muniapal lot to accommodate ih*s greatly cxpaixled use and the new coffee shop 2. that it is good public policy to dedicate 80% of the municipal parking to this one use and literally foreclose any ftiture major users on that side of Ihe street in Navarre 3. that the police are consulted and confirm that they have the ability and the manpower to handle another popular drinking establishment like Lord Fletchers, and if not, can Oreno ifford additional police officcis'^ 4 that the applicant come up with a noise abatement plan. 5. that there be no outdoor speakers. 6. that there be no outdoor bar 7 that the deck be closed by 10 PM nightly The Neighbors For a Better Navarre believe that strict, enforceable rulca be made a part of «id conditions of granting any outuoor activity to the applicant. This applicant docs not have a good track record of controlling noise and drunkenness Applicant claims it is trying to make the facility i family friendly restaurant and there will be no d slurbing noise or negative impact outside his facility. If this is the case, it should welcome a set of condiuons that ensures that Uiat will be the case. In closing, wc prefer that a moratorium be enacted and a plan created. In the event that is not going to happen, we believe the proposed expansion should be reduced significantly in scope, especially die outdoor componenL and strict conditions be ittached to any expansion Very Truly Yours. Charles E Nadler Neighbors For a Better Navarre