Laserfiche WebLink
the effectiveness of the Subdivision Resolution. <br /> 100. Compliance with the Conservation Design Plan was a condition precedent <br /> to the effectiveness of the Subdivision Resolution. <br /> 101. The Conservation Design Plan requires that "future property owners will <br /> maintain the North Tree Stands, and the South Native Grassland" and that "the future <br /> property owner will agree to the items specified in [the Conservation Design Plan] by <br /> covenant agreement with the City of Orono." <br /> 102. The Conservation Design regulations in the Orono City Code, § 78-1639, <br /> as referenced, cited, and quoted in the Conservation Design Plan, require a "defined <br /> program for education of the initial purchasers of lots within the development as to the <br /> limitations that affect future use of the property." <br /> 103. Neither WPLLC, Stephenson, Gherardi, nor or any of their agents made <br /> any effort to educate Plaintiffs with regards to the limitations that affect future use of the <br /> property as embodied in the Conservation Easement. <br /> 104. Plaintiffs never agreed to the terms of the Conservation Easement by <br /> agreement or otherwise with Orono or any other party. <br /> 105. The Conservation Easement is ineffective due to its failure to comply with <br /> the Conservation Design Plan. <br /> 106. The Conservation Easement is invalid, ineffective, and unenforceable <br /> against Plaintiffs for the reasons indicated in Count I. <br /> 107. The Subdivision Resolution is invalid and ineffective due to the non- <br /> occurrence of the conditions precedent to its effectiveness. <br /> 17 <br />