01-19-2000 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i % ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13,1999 (§7) »2540 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELLY AVENUE - Continued Jabbour said that some members of the Council are not aware of the litigation. He s^d that most of the Council did not know the content of the lawsuit or what issues are pen ing. Barrett said that because the applicants have suggested that they are unclear ® ^ that the City seeks, he would support the Mayor’s motion that the matter be tabled and extended for 60 days. He asked that the City staff prepare a letter to Mr. Ho>t which lays out precisely what is required of him if he wishes to be successful in his application for a conditional use permit. It doesn’t mean that if he applies for the variances, that they e granted. It does demonstrate what the City needs in order to evaluate the vanances^He said he has a copy of the letter and he would be happy to give the letter to Mr. Hoyt or ms attorneys at this time. He suggested that the matter be heard after better notice to the pubUc and a reopened pubUc hearing on January 19th for the purpose of havmg a public heanng in front of the Planning Commission with all the facts which the City believes are necessary. At that hearing the Planning Commission wiU make a recommendation and then the Couned wiU make a final decision. Jabbour suggested that perhaps the City staff should change its way of ^tmg reports. He said the report should refer to the land instead of saymg that Mr. Hoyt filled m the lake. He said the applicant is probably right that no one can say that Mr. Hoyt physicaUy took a shovel and started filling. He said the only thing the City has in its records is what was from the hist appUcation versus today. He said the City and the appUcant can work together to obtwn tota between 1990 and 1999, such as aerial photographs, and if something has is a problem with the land and the present owner is stuck with that problern. Until the City has all of the information, there is no way to make an educated decision regarding the land. Sheridan asked if the 60-day rule is being started over based on an incomplete application or if this is an extension. If this is an extension, he would like to know what the reason is. Barrett said the City will send him a letter pursuant to the statute which extends for 60 ^ys the time witmn which the City has to make a decision on this matter. He said the letter he wUl give Mr. Sheridan now will suggest the information and the form the City needs in order to be certain that the variances are properly noticed and applied for. Sheridan asked why they are getting this information now and why they didn’t get it previously. Barrett said he does not know . r.ether the applicant has willfuUy misunderstood the request of staff or whether staff has misstated the requests. He said this letter will clarify the the matter can go before the Planning Commission for proper consideration wth the facts ana it can go before the City Council for a final decision. That is the reason for the extension. Sheridan said he does not understand what is wntten by the City staff. Page 11