Laserfiche WebLink
REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COU�CIL, JULY 25, 1983. page 3 <br /> GUTHRIE (CONT) Guthrie stated that their concerns ar2 basically not <br /> with the Council ' s present intentions but with the <br /> building of a pier with only holding a public hearing . <br /> Councilmember Frahm noted that if the City was to let <br /> that land remain in a private sector the DNR could come <br /> and take it any time they wanted , He noted that the <br /> DNR is less likely to do that i £ zt is under City <br /> contro]. . <br /> Guthrie noted iE it is in a private sector that tne D��R <br /> would have to pay for ir_ , <br /> Mayor Butler noted that the reason th� City initially <br /> got into this dialogue was because the titles weren' t <br /> clear and part oF tne City' s task was to ctear those <br /> titles up. She noted that Resolution No . 1482 has <br /> ���n executed by the City and is being held pending <br /> completionof thetorrencing procedurebythe Gregorys <br /> an�] ti�e �ufEs with t'n� �ounr_y an� ��ie �tate . As soon <br /> as t'nat is ^1:-���red , rhe �uFFs and Gre�orys G�i11 sign . <br /> Butl er noted L-'nac tile ones w�io st.�nd to �-air� c�r 7.os� t'n� <br /> �nost are in agreement with t'_ne C.ity and the Council <br /> �loesn' t want to get into restructuring that <br /> Resolution. Butler asked if Hamm could hold up this <br /> Resolution by not signing it? <br /> City Planner Olson stated that the Gregorys , the <br /> Duf f s , the Co unty and the Ci ty co uld go ahead wi tho ut <br /> Mr . Hamm if needed . Olson noted that Mr . Hamm was <br /> included in that plar_ because oF t��,� sur. v:�ying ���.�t �.vas <br /> required to dc�i ine thP �roperty lin�s a�z:� :�?.50 :>e;:-�us� <br /> oF til� c1�?5ir� to restrict the County Hi�7hway rig�lt= �f_ <br /> way. �-ie noted that Mr . Hamm an� "�Ir . Gregory �nt:�re�_l <br /> into quit claim deeds �ark a�d forth 'oased on possible <br /> title conflicts ber_ti��e�n t'nemselves over who owne:� w'�at <br /> portions of pronerty descri��ed on tize 'oasis original <br /> Bracketr_ Av�nue location. i-1? stated that if Mr . Hamm <br /> really di�n' t want to sign anything that t'ne plat could <br /> be redrawn to e_lir�inate Mr . Hamm' s property entirely <br /> and 'ne would then not get t{ze �eneFit oE any oF the <br /> ��acated land or tne 'oenefit oE determining where t'ne <br /> e::lqe o � �.'za rigi�t of way line was along his property and <br /> it woul� still be in lim'c�o as it is today. <br /> Olson repl ie�l to �Ir . Gur_hr ie ' s statements about i�r . <br /> Hamm "giving an e�se�ne�it. �or nothing" , the intention <br /> of. Resolution No . 14�2 is that i-ianm actually will <br /> receive a substantial triangle of vacated Brackett <br /> Avenue that he had not claimed before , he will receive <br /> uncontested title to 3 ' of highway right of way, and <br /> �_'ne ownership lines in Lize entire ar�a will 'oe cle�r��l <br /> up as nev;�� ��F��;�r;� , <br />