Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 <br />( #2) #2065 SAMUEL MARFIELD, 2455 SCOTCH PINE LANE/MR. & MRS. H. <br />DOUGLAS HILL, 2425 SCOTCH PINE LANE, AND WILLIAM TOLES, 2435 <br />SCOTCH PINE LANE - VACATION OF SCOTCH PINE LANE - VACATION OF <br />DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION <br />(REPEAT) 8:00 -8 :37 P.M. <br />The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. <br />The applicants, Mr. & Mrs. Marfield, Mr. & Mrs. Hill, and William Toles, were present. <br />Gaffron reported that the request is for a vacation of a road right -of -way and utility <br />vacation with a rededication of utility easement and replat of the Dicon Addition. The <br />property was platted to create 3 buildable lots and a public road in 1974 when it was a 1- <br />acre zoning area and consisted of 3 -1/2 acres. The replat would allow the Hill property <br />better lakeshore access. A 50' utility easement runs east to west in the existing plat. The <br />current plat includes a 50' dedication of CoRd 51. The proposal is to regrant easements <br />necessary to accommodate existing and future utility needs. <br />Gaffron noted that a letter from NSP indicates there is a distribution facility in the area. <br />NSP will not give their approval for the easement vacation and any changes will have to <br />AM be made at the expense of the applicants. Gaffron thought if the existing utility lines were <br />located that NSP would possibly approve the easement vacation in exchange for new <br />easements. A Minnegasco letter said there are natural gas lines in the area, and the <br />company objects to the proposal unless suitable right of way and rededication is resolved. <br />Peterson clarified that the utility easements must remain as they now exist. Gaffron <br />confirmed this. <br />Gaffron said City sewer was extended to the area in 1980 with 10' easement on either side <br />of the line. The City Engineer indicates 30' total width is needed for that utility easement. <br />It was noted that the applicants have not provided a survey of where all the utility lines are <br />located. This is required and is being asked for from the applicants. <br />• <br />