Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,April 17,2017 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:43 p.m. <br /> Leskinen stated in concept an interim use permit can be a tool for the City. Leskinen noted when the <br /> Planning Commission discussed this a long time ago and to her recollection there were some cautionary <br /> tales. Leskinen stated the City would have to be very diligent about it and that she is concerned there are <br /> uses that can either be inappropriate and hard to get rid of or may do irreparable damage to the site. <br /> Leskinen indicated she is open to the idea but that she does have some reservations. <br /> Landgraver indicated he is in favor of it since it is another tool in the City's toolbox. Currently the only <br /> tool the City has is a conditional use permit, which goes with the land and is permanent, and the interim <br /> use permit only goes for a certain time period. Landgraver stated it would force the City to be disciplined <br /> and make sure all the T's are crossed. <br /> Leskinen noted in Exhibit A, Section 78-1728c, it states the interim use permit shall be renewed annually <br /> by the City Council. Leskinen asked if they would be reviewed for compliance if they are renewed <br /> annually. <br /> Gaffron stated when the initial interim use permit is established,there would be a trigger date for when it <br /> ends. If the Council decides they want to conduct an annual review,the Council does have the authority <br /> to require that, and can end the interim use if established conditions are not being met. <br /> Leskinen asked if it can be terminated for cause. <br /> Gaffron indicated it can be. <br /> Thiesse asked, once this IUP option is adopted, how many interim use permits might be in place at one <br /> time, 30 or 40? <br /> Gaffron indicated maybe three or four. <br /> Thiesse stated if there will not be that many permits, he would like to review them every six months. <br /> Gaffron stated the time period for the reviews can be written into the IUP resolution for each specific use <br /> and for each specific site. <br /> Leskinen stated the resolution format would be very much like a traditional conditional use where the <br /> conditions are spelled out. Leskinen asked if the main differences are that it does not run with the land <br /> and has a sunset date. <br /> Gaffron indicated that is correct. Gaffron noted the list of allowed interim uses could be a number of <br /> different uses or it could be limited to one use. <br /> Lemke asked what would happen if the site is not restored to its original condition. <br /> Gaffron stated with each interim use permit, an escrow could be established. Gaffron indicated he would <br /> prefer to have incentives to comply included with the approval, such as a larger escrow. <br /> Landgraver asked whether a public hearing would be required. <br /> Page 12 of 48 <br />