Laserfiche WebLink
8. Soon after the easement grant, Petitioners constructed a home on Tract H, using <br />the utility easement over Tract G for ingress and egress to Tract H. Petitioners <br />/ <br />have used the driveway easement within its scope for about SO years and the <br />utility easement for about 30 years. <br />9. About 3 years ago. Petitioners sought permission from the Duruis and the City of <br />Orono to expand the driveway easement on Tract G. The Dunns have asked for <br />reasonable offers of compensation in exchange but Petitioners believe the current <br />easements scope satisfies the expansion of driveway. Respondent Dutui does not <br />dispute that the driveway easement can be used by 7 homes but argues that <br />Petitioners are seeking to create a public road easement to the City of Orono. <br />Petitioners argue they are not seeking to create a public roadway out of tlie <br />driveway easement. <br />10. The City of Orono requires a 50 feet easement for residential roads. Tract G is 40 <br />feet wide in its entirety. <br />ll. Two issues were raised respective to Petitioner’s motion. The first issue relates to <br />the utility easements’ scope and the second issue relates to the scope of the <br />driveway easement. <br />12. This Court hereby adopts the Report of Examiner of Title’s Findings of Fact, <br />Conclusions of Law, Including Recommended Order and Memorandum with the <br />following modifications: <br />iHiia