01-17-2001 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday. December 18,2000 (#2550 Charles Van Eeckhout, Continued) development. Moorse indicated this application has been going on for a considerable period of time, \\ith the review period hav ing been extended a number of times. Moorse stared the Applicant s letter indicates that he is willing not to exercise any rights he may have acquired regarding the 60 day time period at this time. Moorse staled the Applicant’s letter is not a formal extension of the cj day time period but in his view a request to table the application to allow the Planning Commission another opportunity to review his application Van Ecckhoul stated in his opinion tiK 60 da\s has expired, but as his letter indicates, if he has acquired any rights with regard to the 60 davs, he is agreeable to not exercise those nghts dun.-.g this process Kelley staled in his view the City Attorney needs to get involved in this matter in order to ha*, e the proper paperwork signed by the Applicant Mav-o; Jabbour stated the City of Orono needs to have in writing an agrtement b> the Applicant to extend Uie 60 day lime period. Van Ecckhoul slated he agrees not to exercise any of his rights regarding the 60 da>s Ma>t)r Jabbour inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to sign a letter indicating he is willing to extend the 60 day lime period. Van Ecckhoul staled he has been instructed to not sign an extension Icner. Moorse indicated that early on in the application process the City received a general l^cr the Applicant giving the City an extension of t.mc until the major issues were resolved, which have not fully been resolved at this time Moorse stated as the application process coniinuew each 60 day time period elapsed, the City requested the Applicant sign an extension letter. wh::h was done. In the middle of the process, one 60 day time period elapsed and an extension lene: wds not signed by the Applicant Moorse stated it is unclear whether the Applicant has gain:, any rights from that failure to sign an extension letter Flint stated in his \ icw there arc two issues before them One is whether the time period elapsed and it is his understanding that the Applicant docs not wish to give those rights up a. uus lime The other issue is the ongoing period of time and whether or net there has in fact been • waiver of the 60 day time period Van Ecckhoul stales his letter indicates he is willing to not exercise any rights he may have acquired. Flint stated in his opinion that is different from an actual extension of 60 day lime period, and at the end of this process the Applicant may choose to exercise those rightt that be may e acquired. Flint slated in hU view the letter should be amended to say that the Applicant does cot waive any rights as of today. Flint stated that wouldpreservc any rights the AppUcant may have PAGE 4 II