Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-01-12 09-040 ORDINANCECOUNCIL ACTION 09 040 Item No. Date: January 12, 2009 Item/Subject: Ordinance, Amending Land Development Code, Chapter 165, Section 165-13, Definitions Responsible Department: Legal Commentary: The City's Land Development Code currently defines "nightclub, dance hall or disco" as "any eating or drinking establishment serving 300 or more patrons". This Ordinance amendment will reduce the number of patrons required to be considered a nightclub, dance hall or disco from 300 to 80. In light of complaints received by the City regarding the behavior of patrons of some establishments that have occupancy levels of less than 300 patrons, it has been suggested that a reduction in this number is appropriate. This amendment will change the definition of nightclub, dance hall or disco as an eating or drinking establishment serving 80 or more patrons. At its January 6, 2009 meeting the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee recommended that this ordinance be first read and referred to the Planning Board. Manager's Comments: --I�U ER 11 Budget Approval: Legal Approval: Introduced for Passage X First Reading X Referral to the Planning Board, January 20, 2009 @ 7 p.m. Department Head Finance Director 09 040 SOF HA Assigned to Councilor Gratwick January 12, 2009 ij CITY OF BANGOR rED, (TITLE.) Ordinance, Amending Land Development Code, Chapter 165, Section 165-13 Definitions 1111,11111211, lilli;lIll: 11 -7 ri�� 111111111117- jjil1j'jjlj Zllo I ►If 0 �=A� I 1�sst 0 # jll� That the Land Development Code of the City of Bangor is amended as fbllows: 165-13 Definitions NIGHTCLUB, DANCE HALL or DISCO — Any eating or drinking establishment serving 38890- or more patrons (with a capacity to accommodate 388 80 or more patrons) or any entertainment facility offiering opportunity to488-�8-0 or more persons to dance, socialize, view entertainment, partake of food or beverages or congregate for other purposes whose normal hours of operation extend beyond 11:00 P.M. IN CITY COUNCIL January 12, 2009 First Reading and Referred to t$e Planning Board CITY CLERK IN CITY COUNCIL February 9, 2009 Motion Made and Seconded for Passage Vote: 7-0 Councilors Voting Yes: Bronson, D'Errico, Gratwick, Nealley, Palmer, Stone and Wheeler Councilors: Voting No: None Councilors Absent: Blanchette and Hawes Passed ,J4 13 'I'N �)±- o "it DEPUTY CITY CLERK ORDINANCE (TITLE,) Amending Land Develpment Code, Chapter 165, Section 165-13 Definitions Assigned to Councilor 6�—- MEMORANDUM DATE: February 4, 2009 TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: David G. Gould, Planning Officer SUBJECT: Amending Land Development Code 165-13 Council Ordinance 09-040 Please be advised that the Planning Board at its regularly scheduled meeting on February 3, 2009 held a Public Hearing on the above Land Development Code Amendment. City Attorney Norm Heitmann provided an overview of the proposed Land Development Code Amendment that was developed to alter the definition of nightclub, dance hall or disco by changing the capacity threshold from 300 persons to 80 persons (capacity). Since the original language developed in the mid 1990's there have been similar concerns about late night hours and noise complaints from adjacent residential property owners from establishments of far less than a capacity of 300 patrons. While the typical capacity is around 100 patrons the definition was set at 80 patrons such that a minor change in the facility's capacity would not offer a circumvention of the provision's intent. There were no proponents or opponents from the public in attendance. Some Planning Board Members thought the provision would limit such establishments or cause additional red tape, for business owners. Planning Officer David Gould explained that the proposal before the Board is simply a change in the definition of "Nightclub, Dance Hall or Disco;" the term would affect Zoning Districts where it is used. While the next Ordinance Amendment proposes some changes to the Downtown Development District and the Urban Service District relative to that use, the definition change has only to do with the number of patrons as a threshold of the definition. Additionally some members of the Planning Board were concerned that the existing language, now being proposed to be changed, may have some unforeseen consequences in how it could be interpreted. Attorney Heitmann noted in retrospect the language could likely be improved. As long as the Board understood the intent of what was proposed, Staff would attempt to better define the use in the near future. The Board was in general agreement with the intent of the new provisions but voted one in favor and six opposed to recommend the amended definition of Nightclub, Dancehall or Disco as contained in C.O. 09-040.