My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-28-2015 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2015
>
09-28-2015 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/1/2015 1:57:17 PM
Creation date
12/1/2015 1:56:15 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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 28, 2015 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />9. ##15-3768 MICHAEL AND LISA LARSON, PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT <br />RELATED TO DOG BOARDING AND GROOMING IN B-1 ZONING DISTRICT (continued) <br />Printup asked what protections the neighbors would have if the dogs are outside barking. Printup stated <br />he is less concerned about the barking on the inside of the building. <br />Barnhart stated in this situation, with a conditional use permit and a license being required, the City has <br />more protection. Barnhart stated the conditional use permit is based on standards, which is where the <br />weakness is with the City's standards and is why Staff added the license requirement. Chapter 62 talks <br />about ratios and a number of standards in terms of noise mitigation. <br />Barnhart stated the City Council would review a conditional use permit based on meeting those standards <br />and also require license. Those would be renewed annually. Barnhart stated if the applicants are not <br />meeting those standards, it is easier to revoke a license than it is a conditional use permit. <br />Walsh stated if someone is investing $1 million in a business, it is difficult not to renew the license. <br />City Attorney Mattick noted once the conditional use permit is issued, it runs with the land. A license <br />provides the flexibility to address the concerns and make them a condition of the license. Mattick stated <br />at the last meeting there were concerns about how to address the concerns and that Staff has been trying <br />to figure out ways to move the application along. <br />McMillan stated the amount of investment puts the City in a tough position to say there are too many <br />dogs or too much play time since it would impact the business's economic viability. McMillan stated dog <br />noise is hard to control but a noise caused by a human being is easier to place tighter conditions on it. <br />McMillan stated the issue she has is controlling the dogs is difficult other than reducing the number, <br />which then becomes an economic issue. <br />Lisa Larson stated that is very true and that they have to stick to a certain number to make the business <br />viable. Larson stated they do not want 60 square feet per dog and that they are looking at 85 square feet <br />per dog. Larson noted these are small dogs and not large dogs and that they are willing to perhaps limit <br />the number of dogs for the first year or two to prove that it can be done. <br />Mike Larson stated in year one of the business they do not expect 100 percent occupancy. By the end of <br />year one, they anticipate 50 percent occupancy. Larson stated they are talking about 25 dogs the first <br />year. <br />Lisa Larson indicated they have worked with a consultant out of Madison, Wisconsin, who owns a <br />facility there and they know where they need to be with the number of dogs. Larson stated they are <br />willing to make that number less than what other facilities have. <br />McMillan asked if they will be occupying the entire building. <br />Mike Larson stated they will have 6,241 square feet out of the 7,200 square feet. <br />Walsh stated it is his understanding the owner of the building will occupy a small bay. <br />Page 14 of 27 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.