08-10-2015 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 14 of 29 7. #15-3749 HOMESTEAD PARTNERS, 185 AND 225 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL – RESOLUTION NO. 6528 (continued) Scott Goldsmith, 265 North Old Crystal Bay Road, stated there is a boundary line dispute that is to the east at Old Crystal Bay Road. In some places it may be like a foot, but as it goes to the west, it ranges on our property between six and ten feet. At the northwest corner it is approximately eight feet. McMillan noted the Council is aware of that from the last meeting. Goldsmith stated he does not understand why they are where they are with this application. Goldsmith stated the City Council really has three broad possibilities: One, they can approve the plat as proposed. The effect of that would be platting his property as part of this development to the tune of six to ten feet along the south end of his property. The second option would be to say, well, when you come in and ask the City to plat property, it has a responsibility of demonstrating to their satisfaction that it is the applicant’s property that they are platting. The third possibility is to say, well, there’s a dispute here, is there a way to plat the property so that the dispute does not get in the way. Goldsmith stated clearly, depending on where the boundary line is, there are setback problems and plat problems since the property would have to be re-platted using the existing lines marking out the lots, which would result in two of the lots being less than two acres. In addition, the utility easement would create problems with some of the septic sites. Goldsmith stated in his view it seems that the first option is unwise and creates a problem because, as a practical matter, he would be forced to file a notice of a claim to that portion of the property being platted as part of this development. Goldsmith stated in his experience, that would mean that those lots are not going to sell until the property line dispute is resolved, which could take anywhere from 18 to 24 months. Goldsmith stated that is creating problems that do not need to be created. Goldsmith noted the City Council stated they could not decide the property line issue at the last meeting but that is exactly what they are doing in deciding that the applicant’s property line takes precedence over the fence line. Goldsmith indicated the fence line has been there for at least 50 years. Goldsmith stated he cannot ask the Council to decide if this would be an adverse possession, but that if the City Council decides to go ahead with the project, they are, in essence, deciding that point in favor of the developer. McMillan stated the City Council is looking at a certified survey from the applicant and that they do not have anything from Mr. Goldsmith showing that there is a dispute. McMillan stated to her understanding the fence is not a certified piece of the survey.