04-17-2006 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

' MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,March 13, 2006 7:00 o'clock p.m. (3. #OS-3121 NARROWS SALOON, 3382 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued) - 3. No amplification or speakers outside the building or in the outdoor seating area,to limit any ...._.. _...__._ ___.... : .._� ,outdoor noise impacts. _. , ..... . w .,._ . .. . ....... .... ._. �... .. . � . . ,..... ,�..,.. ..�. . . _. .,_.�, . .... .�. 4. The easterly access door to the outside seating area from the restaurant shall not be bi-fold but shall be a self-closing door to eliminate direct noise/music impacts to the outside area. 5. CUP approval should be subject to a specific written condition that the use be reviewed after one year of operation. Gaffron noted the liquor license is a separate license application from the zoning application. Gaffron stated the moratorium for the Navarre area is still in effect and that there is a neighborhood meeting scheduled for the end of March to gather input from interested parties to help guide future private and public investment in Navarre. Staff requests the following issues be considered by the Council: 1. Is the proposed location of the use in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Code and the puiposes of the B-1 District and the Comprehensive Plan? 2. Will the location of the proposed use and the proposed conditions under which it will be operated or maintained be detriinental to the public health, safety welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity? 3. Is the proposed use compatible with the surrounding business disirict and residential neighborhoods? If not,what aspects of the use make it incompatible? What methods are available to mitigate those aspects? 4. Is the proposed use supported by adequate infrastructure,primarily access and parking availability? How will other users of the municipal lot be affected by the expansion? How might the expansion affect future development or reinvestment in Navarre? Gaffron requested the City Council provide direction to Staff and the applicants on how this application should proceed. - - - - - Sanford stated this current proposal reflects a change in the business plan that addresses what the local area needs. Sanford stated this application is a shifting nlore towards a restaurant type operation than a bar and that the applicants are desirous of expanding the restaurant portion of their business. Sanford stated the applicants have made substantial changes to the plans relating to the concems raised at the previous meeting. Sanford noted the Planning Commission has previously recommended approval of the application prior to the further revisions. - Sanford noted the applicants have made changes to address the concerns of the neighbors,which includes the elimination of the outside seating area,restricting music to address the concerns regarding the noise, the limited parking in the area. Sanford stated the patio area is designed to be more of a smoking area and that the applicants are proposing screening for this area to help further reduce any noise that may come from that area. _ . .. „ _ ___ .. _ _ . . _ ._ .��_ .__ . - Sanford stated the parking study previously submitted mainly dealt with the municipal lot and concluded that there would be sufficient parking. Sanford pointed out the gas station parking was not included in the parking study nor in the city's calculations. Sanford stated the area to the right of the Narrows Saloon by the gas station provides some parking for the area,which would then bring the available parking to within the city requirements. Sanford stated 37.5 percent of the parking lot would be available during peak times once those extra spots are incorporated into the calculation. PAGE 3 of 27