Laserfiche WebLink
w m <br />t. <br />acceptable to the City of Long L-ke, and a vay which will allow <br />the City of Orono to continue to enforce those regulations# then <br />resolutions would be presented to both c ties, mi^morlalizing <br />their intent not to seek further annexation or detachment of the <br />other’s property in the future, and a resolution seeking from the <br />Municipal Board an Order allowing the detachment and annexation <br />of the property to the City of Long L=ke.” <br />Scheuer asked if in essence the Municipal Board is expending <br />its supervision over the additional negotiations between the City <br />of Long Lake and the City of Orono. <br />i^jpiied, "The Minicipal Board is continuing their <br />supervision .so tlie applicatio.is c.in be processed and ue can <br />determine that all of the interests are there. If negotiations <br />were to break down, of course, the City of Long Lake would be <br />free to go back to the litigation if they choose." <br />Scheuer asked, "Even if a resolution is accomplished at the <br />end of the negotiations, does the M.inicipal Board have t.o <br />validate it?” <br />Barrett replied, "Yes, it can only be done by an Order of <br />the Municipal Board." <br />Art Toranqeau, 2060 Spates Avenue, referred to Council action <br />that was taken a year ago regarding the property on 1960 <br />Shoreline Drive. He asked what deadline had been established for <br />the property owner to remove the condemned buildings. <br />Mabusth stated that <br />deadline date. <br />June li, 1991 w-.s t'le established <br />Bernhardson stated that if the buildings are not removed <br />within 30 days of June 15, 1991, the City has the right to remove <br />the buildings and assess the cost back to the property owner. <br />Mabusth noted that it ;.s her <br />buildings may be moved off the property <br />understanding that the <br />SOMIlItt AOM1HI8TBATOR*S REPORT: <br />(#6)S0IIIHG #1555-E.1I. BLANCH, JR. <br />2501 OLD BEACH ROAD <br />RBQ0B8T TO ANBHD RESOLUTION #2947-FINAL PLAT APPROVAL <br />BB80LUTI0N <br />Mr. James MacK.’.nnon, Attorney, was present on behalf of his <br />client, E.H. 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 />■old to someone other than the Freshwater Foundation or <br />Institute. He noted that Lot 8 conforms to ail standards of the <br />3-4 Code, and that any future use of Lot 8 >,^ould have to conform <br />- 6 -