12-12-2016 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO TRUTH -IN -TAXATION MEETING and the ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, December 12, 2016 6:30 o'clock p.m. 14. #15-3763116-3860 CHRISTOPHER AND GAIL BOLLIS/CHRISTOPHER AND RACHEL BOLLIS, 200-350 STUBBS BAY ROAD NORTH -FINAL PLAT APPROVAL — RESOLUTION NO. 6708 (continued) Mattick stated in return the applicant proposed that Lot 5 retain access over Outlot A, but on a permanent basis Outlot 6 cannot. In the event that Lot 5 is sold and the applicant retains Lot 6, he would be able to transfer that access to Lot 6 as long as something is recorded against Lot 5 prohibiting access. Levang noted that would be Scenario 2. Gaffron noted the proposed lot line splits the existing driveway in half. Gafrron stated whichever lot ends up with the access, they will be driving over a portion of the other lot unless the driveway is moved. Mattick stated the applicant controls both lots at this time but that he will need to tidy that up with the declaration. McMillan asked if there is room on Lot 6 for a septic field. Gaffron stated the lot line could be moved by approximately 20 feet without having an impact on the septic field. Levang stated otherwise it could be an easement. Bollis stated that is one option. Bollis stated if the driveway moves one way or the other, depending on which lot has the access, there would not be a need for an easement. McMillan askcd if the applicant has discussed this with the neighbor. Bollis indicated he has but that they are not in agreement. Walsh commented he has a problem with the City being an enforcement agent on the access road and that he would be more comfortable if the line is moved either completely to the left: or right so it is very clear. Levang noted Scenario 2 says that this requires establishment of covenants and perhaps also physical barriers to ensure compliance. Levang stated she is assuming physical barriers means some sort of barrier prohibiting it from being used. Gaffron stated it could be a physical barrier or moving of the lot line. Gaffron indicated his preference would be that the lot line move. Mattick noted there is also language included in the resolution that allows the City to assess any costs they may incur in enforcing that. Walsh stated he would still prefer the lot line be moved or Scenario 3. Page 16 of 33