Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monda,y,January 6, 2014 <br /> 7:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (1. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT <br /> WENICS'TERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 40�NORTHARMDRIVE—COMPREHEn'SIVE <br /> PLANAMENDMENTANDSKETCHPLANREI'IEW, Continued) <br /> Bremer asked if the City Council had never previously required that type of information in the context of <br /> another application, if it would not open the City to a claim of dissimilar treatment in a very similar <br /> circumstance. Bremer indicated she does not recall a time where the City Council required an expert to <br /> say that this use warks better or that use does not work. Bremer stated she cannot recall a time in any <br /> context as she sits here tonight where the City has required that type of detailed information. <br /> Thieroff stated he would answer that question by saying that if there is a concern on the part of the City <br /> Council about a potential for a takings claim, one approach they could take would be to suggest that the <br /> 60-day deadline for the decision be extended because you would like to receive additional information to <br /> back up the statements made in the application that the property cannot be operated in an economically <br /> viable way. <br /> Bremer asked if the applicant agrees to extend the deadline and the City Council has requested that type <br /> of information, if, after those 60 days have expired, whether their position would be that the City Council <br /> has done sufficient homework that they would feel comfortable that the City is now exposing themselves <br /> to a takings cause of action. <br /> Bremer noted she has read the cited cases and that she has a slightly different opinion but that she is not a <br /> real estate attorney. Bremer asked what Mr. Thieroff would do if he was in her position and the 60 days <br /> have gone by and the information submitted by the applicant shows all those things are true that they have <br /> told the City. Bremer asked if the information shows that the golf course is not viable and that there is no <br /> way to make it economically viable, what the City should do in that situation. <br /> Thieroff stated then the City Council should go ahead and approve the application,but at this time the <br /> record does not show that information. Thieroff stated in his experience in trying these cases, he has <br /> found that the golf course industry in the Twin Cities does not correlate to the economic performance of <br /> the golf course alone but that it correlates to the real estate market and the profit they can make by <br /> developing the land. <br /> Bremer asked what exposure there would be to the City of a takings claim if the assumption is made that <br /> the City Council approves the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Bremer asked if the City Council would <br /> have the discretion to make that decision if they decide they can trust the information and representations <br /> they have from the applicant even if the information is not as thorough as Mr. Thieroff thinks it should be. <br /> Thieroff stated on the takings issue, there is not an inverse claim and there is not a claim the proponents <br /> for the project could brin�against the City Council for accepting the risk of a takings claim in granting <br /> the application if it is based on proper findings and rationale. Thieroff stated on the Comprehensive Plan <br /> issue, the points raised by Tom Radio regarding judicia] discretion apply both ways and that it would be <br /> difficult for the applicant to challenge the City Council's decision not to amend the Comprehensive Plan <br /> if it is made on proper findings. <br /> Page 9 of 27 _ . __ <br />