Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 28, 1991 <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS CONTINUED <br />Mabusth noted that it is her understanding that the <br />buildings may be moved off the property. <br />ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: <br />( #6)ZONING FILE #1555 -E.W. BLANCH, JR. <br />2501 OLD BEACH ROAD <br />REQUEST TO AMEND RESOLUTION #2947 -FINAL PLAT APPROVAL <br />RESOLUTION #2966 <br />Mr. James•MacKinnon, Attorney, was present on behalf of his <br />client, E.V. Blanch, Jr. <br />Bernhardson explained that the applicant had requested. that <br />the language pertaining to Lot 8 be revised so that it may be <br />sold to someone other than the Freshwater Foundation or <br />Institute. He noted that Lot 8 conforms to all.standards of the <br />B -4 Code, and that any future use of Lot 8 would have to conform <br />to the B -4 Zoning. <br />It was moved by Butler, seconded by Goett.en, to adopt <br />Resolution #2966, amending Resolution #2947, which grant approval <br />of the final plat of "The Marsh at Lafayette ". All voted aye. <br />Motion passed. <br />( #7)ZONING FILE #1641- RICHARD KEAVENY <br />3145 SHORELINE DRIVE <br />COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN <br />Bernhardson summarized -the information provided in Jeanne <br />Mabusth!s.May 15, 1991 memo, which outlined historical aspect of <br />the contamination, as well as the proposed recovery program to <br />clean it up. Bernhardson noted that the Planning Commission had <br />recommended approval of the Commercial Site Plan Review. <br />Subsequent to the Planning Commission meeting, Staff discussed <br />the issue further and is recommending, should there .be a motion <br />to approve, that it include language requiring removal of the <br />temporary structure once the recovery program has been completed. <br />Jabbour asked whether it would be appropriate for the City <br />to require the posting of a bond to assure that the building is <br />removed and the site is restored. <br />- Bernhardson stated that it may be more effective to include <br />language in the agreement stating that in the event the building <br />is not removed by a certain time, the City will remove it and <br />assess the costs back to the property owner. <br />Butler agreed that there needs to be some mechanism in place <br />so there is assurance that the City will not wind up paying to <br />have the building removed. <br />Mayor Peterson asked if the building will meet the required <br />- 7 - <br />