12-18-2000 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

R 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, with the review period having been extended a number of times. Moorse stated the Applicant's letter indicates that he is willing not to exercise any rights he ma,.- have acquired regarding the 60 day time period at this time. Moorse stated the Applicant's letter is not a formal extension of the 60 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 Eeckhout stated in his opinion the 60 days has expired, but as his letter indicates, if he has acquired any rights with regard to the 60 days, he is agreeable to not exercise those rights during this process. Kelley stated in his view the City Attorney needs to get involved in this matter in order to have the proper paperwork signed by the Applicant. Mayor Jabbour stated the City of Orono needs to have in writing an agreement by the Applicant to extend the 60 day time period. Van Eeckhout stated he agrees not to exercise any of his rights regarding the 60 days. Mayor Jabbour inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to sign a letter indicating he is • willing to extend the 60 day time period. Van Eeckhout stated he has been instructed to not sign an extension letter. Moorse indicated that early on in the application process the City received a general letter from the Applicant giving the City an extension of time until the major issues were resolved. which have not fully been resolved at this time. Moorse stated as the application process continued, as each 60 day time period elapsed. the City requested the Applicant sign an extension letter, which was done. In the middle of the process. one 60 day time period elapsed and an extension letter was not signed by the Applicant. Moorse stated it is unclear whether the Applicant has gained any rights from that failure to sign an extension letter. Flint stated in his view there are two issues before them. One is whether the time period has elapsed, and it is his understanding that the Applicant does not wish to give those rights up at this time. The other issue is the ongoing period of time and whether or not there has in fact been a waiver of the 60 day time period. Van Eeckhout states 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 the 60 day time period, and at the end of this process the Applicant may choose to exercise those rights that he may have acquired. Flint stated in his view the letter should be amended to say that the Applicant does not • waive any rights as of today. Flint stated that would preserve any rights the Applicant may have PAGE 4