Laserfiche WebLink
From:Melissa Munsch <br />To:Melanie Curtis <br />Cc:Melissa Munsch <br />Subject:Feedback on 1003 Wildhurst Application for Proposed Vacation - To be presented at Nov 21st Planning <br />Commission Meeting <br />Date:Sunday, November 20, 2022 7:57:56 PM <br />Hi Melanie, <br />My name is Melissa Munsch and I'm the homeowner at 1001 Wildhurst Trail in Orono. I will be present at <br />tomorrow's 6pm Planning Commission Meeting and am also sending my concerns to you via email so <br />that you have my concerns documented. <br />I have lived at 1001 Wildhurst Trail for almost 13 years. All of the unimproved right-of-ways the applicant <br />is requesting to be vacated are visible from my front or back door and a 15 second walk from my home. I <br />have not met the applicant nor know anything about him. He doesn't live at 1003 Wildhurst nor has he <br />owned the property for more than a couple of months. <br />This email documents why I oppose the applicant's request: <br />I don't support the request because I don't have any information regarding the reasons for the request <br />and how the applicant intends to utilize the land and right-of-ways. <br />I don't support the request because I don't see how it benefits the public nor the existing Wildhurst <br />neighborhood community. <br />I don't support the request because the DNR does not support the request. I am extremely concerned <br />that the Planning Commission has not acknowledged the concerns of the DNR in its summary statement. <br />I don't support the request because I see no merit in one applicant achieving personal benefit at the <br />sacrifice of the neighborhood and the public benefit. Why does this applicant have more rights than any <br />other resident on Wildhurst? <br />I don't support the request because I am concerned that the applicant is using a piecemeal approach to <br />city approvals, which feels like an underhanded and secretive approach. The applicant is not making any <br />attempt to provide full disclosure or transparency in his motives. <br />I don't support the request because it prohibits public access from Saga Hill Park to the lake. <br />I don't support the request because it prohibits public access to the channel, which is used by the public <br />for fishing in the summer and snowmobiling, skiing, ice skating and walking on the ice in the winter. <br />I don't support the request because the summary mentions there is an identified lake access point 1/4 <br />south of the property on Forest Lake Landing. There is NO identified lake access point. This has been <br />disputed by neighbors on Forest Lake Landing for years. There is NO identified or allowed lake access <br />point on Forest Lake Landing. <br />I don't support the request because vacation of ROW's will likely lead to a building of multiple homesites <br />on this property. This will result in the removal of extensive trees which provide a home for flora and <br />fauna. There are dozens of turkeys, deer, foxes, squirrels, and birds that make this property their home. <br />The recent building of new homes on Wildhurst has decimated the tree population. Look at the new <br />homes on 1025 and 1035 Wildhurst. The lot was cleared at 1025 Wildhurst within the last month for a <br />new home. Eighty to ninety percent of the living trees on that property have been removed for the building <br />of a new home. Trees that have been there for decades maybe hundreds of years. <br />If you'd like to discuss my concerns, I'd be happy to do so. I can be reached at my cell, 612.749.0739.