My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-13-2020 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2020
>
01-13-2020 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/8/2020 3:24:24 PM
Creation date
3/20/2020 11:07:17 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
112
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, December 9, 2019 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />Walsh said he was at the Planning Commission meeting and it was very clear the access on the public <br />easement doesn't make a lot of sense for the applicant or from a City perspective for emergency vehicles <br />or barges that come and deliver stuff, because if there was a dock there, they could not get there. One of <br />the problems is that there's an overall encompassing ordinance that says you can't grant lake access, which <br />is what the applicant is getting from her neighbor to be able to have a dock and have ease of access to her <br />property. He does not know if tabling the application makes sense or if it makes more sense to deny it <br />because the City wouldn't put anything there to begin with. The bigger change would be to take the <br />existing ordinance and craft out an exception for people on the two islands, that you could get a Right -of - <br />Way from your neighbor to get to the lake, which would be the only way to do it because it's landlocked. <br />At the Planning Commission he said he thought that would be an easy solution to solve a problem for a <br />landlocked piece of land in the middle of an island that's been using a gracious neighbor's land who is <br />willing to give an easement to solve the problem. It seems to be the logical solution, to carve out <br />something very particular for a unique situation. <br />Printup clarified that Walsh was saying the dock would stay where it has been for half a century but <br />they'd make it legal. <br />Walsh said the applicant would be able to get an easement from the neighbor, which would be part of his <br />title, that would enable her to walk down his property to the dock and it would be permanent. Right now, <br />the City's ordinance does not allow her to do that. <br />Printup clarified that it would stay where it's been. <br />Walsh indicated that it would stay where it's been forever. <br />Printup confirmed the Council would not be dealing with any City property. <br />Walsh said the Council would not be dealing with any City property and the Council is saying no to the <br />City property because it really does not make sense. <br />Crosby asked if the easement would stay with the property. <br />Walsh stated it would be a private transaction between the applicant and the neighbor across the street and <br />it would be a permanent easement he's willing to give her across his property so she has dock access. <br />Printup noted no one would be hitting electric lines or anything else. <br />Walsh stated no one would be hitting electric lines or barges trying to get past her dock or anything like <br />that. He thought it would be an easy solution but something Mattick would have to craft, and it could be <br />ready by the first meeting in January to vote on so the applicant can move forward. <br />Crosby asked if that language would stay with the property. <br />Walsh confirmed that it would stay with the property and would be an easement that would basically give <br />her permanent access. <br />Johnson stated it seems to him they could have a dock there in the City easement, based on the ordinance <br />for the zoning district. <br />Page 21 of 34 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.