Laserfiche WebLink
,probably shortly after his 2003 letter to Block informing her to discontinue her Hillside driveway and put back <br /> the fence (Lyle had written a similar letter to Block's predecessor owner in 1998). Obviously it is now causing <br /> a problem—whether the problem is legitimate is another issue. Block indicated she needs the access because <br /> it's impossible to maneuver vehicles around the house to get to the lower garage from the Bayview side. <br /> Regarding your second question, Lyle inspected the site a few weeks ago, had gone back to re-inspect, and has <br /> just advised me that there are no storage violations on the property. Items stored <br /> I'm attaching sketches that show the location of the various properties described in the Agreement, and a copy <br /> of the Agreement. Based on the notations on the front of the Agreement, it apparently was only filed against the <br /> title of the two properties for which legal descriptions were attached, and not the 2260 property which was also <br /> affected by it. <br /> I would conclude that we likely have the ability to require the access to go away based on the Code, but we <br /> can't require the fence to be replaced because the document requiring it wasn't filed against Block's property. <br /> How do we guarantee Johnson that Block's access will be restricted without a fence or other obstruction? Do <br /> we as a City have the right to place a fence or other barrier(in the right-of-way)to limit Block's access? When <br /> Johnson claims"it's my private road"based on the Agreement, and he is required to maintain it per the <br /> Agreement, to what extent do we have an obligation to defend the provisions of the Agreement? We have a <br /> dedicated public right-of-way, not open to the public, not improved to City standards for a private or public <br /> road, containing municipal sewer lines the City maintains, subject to an Agreement for private road <br /> maintenance by two property owners who are the only ones the Agreement allows to use it. If we were to begin <br /> to maintain it, take it over as a City road, we likely would want to pave it; who pays for that? The two who have <br /> the maintenance obligation, or all who abut the street? And if we take it over, would we allow Block to have an <br /> access to it? <br /> A tangled mess, I'm afraid. <br /> Mike <br /> Michael P.Gaffron <br /> Senior Planner <br /> City of Orono <br /> (Street Address)2750 Kelley Parkway <br /> (Mailing Address) P.O. Box 66,Crystal Bay, MN 55323 <br /> Phone: (952)249-4622 <br /> Fax: (952)249-4616 <br /> From: Soren Mattick [mailto:SMattick©ck-law.com] <br /> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 5:34 PM <br /> To: Andrew Mack; Mike Gaffron <br /> Subject: 2260 Bayview <br /> Andrew and Mike, <br /> I had a conversation with Steve Johnson regarding the driveway. I expressed my concerns regarding the enforceability <br /> of the CUP because it had not been recorded against the existing property. <br /> Two things: <br /> 1) Is the property allowed two driveways pursuant to the City code? <br /> 2 <br />