03-08-2010 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, February 22, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 16 of 19 (4. #10-3442 THE EMILY PROGRAM, 2180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued) Bremer stated she was happy to see a large number of residents turn out for the meeting tonight and that there is a balance to determining whether additional information is required and taking action on an application. Bremer commented they likely will not know the impact on the real estate market or the traffic conditions simply because there are a number of other variables that could come into play. Bremer indicated she is supportive of The Emily Program. Based on her own research, everything she has learned about the program has been positive. Bremer commented that she wished the property was larger and that the intersection of County Roads 51 and 15 was better. Bremer pointed out that this is the property that is being considered and that the City Council has to deal with an application as it is presented to them. The City Council, however, owes the applicant a fair shake as they go through the process. Bremer recommended the application be tabled tonight because, one, in her view it is important that Mayor White should be here to provide input into the matter based on his experience in doing real estate development for a living. Bremer indicated the second reason for recommending the application be tabled is that she also shares in some of the concerns that were raised tonight. Bremer commented she would be remiss if she did not step back and think about the zoning implications of this property. Bremer noted she is not that concerned about the finances and some of the other issues raised, but that she would like to work with Staff to develop a list of additional information that should be submitted. Bremer noted she is an attorney and that the City owes it to everyone to figure out if there a legal way that the City can do this or whether they should do this. The City Council does not do anyone a favor if the council goes into an application half-heartedly or with partial information. Bremer noted this is a complicated issue and agreed that it would be nice to do it in incremental steps, but pointed out that a business probably would not be willing to enter into a long-term commitment if there are not some guarantees that they will be able to operate the business for longer than 12 months. Bremer commented that she hopes the City Council will work diligently to find the applicant a different location if this location does not work out, but that she does not feel Snyder‟s or another commercial office building is a good location. Bremer indicated she is not aware of anyone else that has expressed interest in the property, and that the owner of the property has the right to sell his property to someone who wants to buy it. Bremer pointed out that in the event the property does sell, the use of the building will likely change. Mattick stated the City is not able to put a sunset provision into a conditional use permit, and because the City does not have the ability to issue an interim conditional use permit, the applicant has agreed to withdraw their conditional use permit should they ever vacate the property. Mattick stated in his opinion he does not feel an interim use permit would be difficult to implement as a city ordinance but that it would take some discussion with the applicant on how to incorporate that into this application. Mattick noted the creation of an interim use permit would require a code amendment. Bremer asked if other communities have interim use permits. Mattick stated IUPs are becoming more popular. Historically the use that brought IUPs into existence was gravel pits. With a CUP, the right to operate that business is granted forever. Mattick noted that when you are talking about spending $800,000 to purchase a piece of property and doing $2.8 million in improvements, the applicant will want some guarantees that they will be able to operate longer than 12 months. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 03/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 02/22/2010 [Page 16 of 19]