Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, November 10, 2008 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />______________________________________________________________________________ <br />Page 5 of 13 <br /> <br />(4. #08-3381 BARRY TANNER, 3435 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued) <br /> <br />McMillan stated the Council is attempting to get a feel for what improvements will be made to <br />the building or whether the applicant is just going to do the bare minimum to get the place open. <br /> <br />Tanner stated he has spent over a year of his time on his application, that he is committed to the <br />project, and that he plans to invest over $100,000 in the project. <br /> <br />Bremer commented in her view there appears to be a disconnect between what the Council would <br />like to see required and what Staff is requiring. Bremer stated she expected to see detailed <br />information submitted by this point. <br /> <br />Turner stated Staff is looking for the floor plan so they can judge the amount of seating. Turner <br />indicated the site plan is based on a survey that was completed as part of a previous proposal and <br />that the applicant could go back to that surveyor and have him draw the plan more formally. <br />Turner stated there are some broad issues about parking spaces and when they would need to be <br />paved as well as the lighting that should be discussed further. The Planning Commission felt that <br />44 spaces would be adequate, and if not, the upper area would need to be blacktopped. Turner <br />noted there is shortage of approximately 10 or 12 parking stalls from what the code would require <br />in this case. In addition, Staff is looking for additional detail on the lighting issues and that it is <br />her understanding that the lighting situation became worse after a new light fixture was installed <br />in the parking lot. <br /> <br />Bremer asked whether the City Council would be reviewing this application again if it was <br />approved tonight. <br /> <br />Turner stated the Council would look at it at its next city council meeting as part of the resolution <br />approval process. <br /> <br />Bremer stated if this was a new building that was being proposed, the Council would have <br />reviewed every aspect of the project and have required very detailed information on the interior <br />and exterior. Bremer asked whether a conditional use permit application gives Council that same <br />ability to require that thorough of a review. Bremer stated in her view she had the understanding <br />that there would be further details provided by this point in time. <br /> <br />Tanner noted he did spend time at two meetings discussing this application with the Planning <br />Commission. <br /> <br />Bremer stated she is not saying that any of the time spent by the applicant has been wasted, but <br />that in her opinion the Council should have more detailed information on the project to review by <br />this stage. <br /> <br />White commented one of the missing pieces in this application is the owner of the building is not <br />present at the meeting and that the owner has to be responsible to the City as well as the tenants. <br />White stated in his view the applicant will need to supply detailed information on the parking and <br />other outstanding issues. <br /> <br />Tanner stated the owner of the property resides in California and that there is a property manager <br />that takes care of the property. Tanner stated to date the owner has done the things that have been <br />Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/24/08 <br />Approval of Council Minutes 11/10/08 [Page 5 of 13]