Laserfiche WebLink
MIHOfSS OP THB PLANNIHG COMHISSIOH TING HELD AUGUST 15, 1988 <br />ZONING FILE #1321 CONTINUED <br />Mr. Haislet asked what language the Planning Commission would <br />like to see in the purchase agreement. <br />Cohen inquired as to who currently owned the property. Mrs. <br />Albin Theis introduced herself as being one of the sellers. She <br />confirmed that the information about the purchase agreement was <br />correct and that the two parties were trying to reach a <br />compromise on a few issues, but for the most part, the parties <br />were in agreement. She felt confident that the School District <br />did intend to purchase the entire parcel. Bellows stated that <br />this whole procedure could be eliminated if the School District <br />would agree to do a subdivision of the entire parcel. This would <br />allow the City to have some control over the property should the <br />School District not purchase Lots B, C and D. Mabusth clarified <br />that they would need to provide the City with a plat that would <br />show a dedicated road. Mr. Haislet stated that the Lots were set <br />up so they have a frontage road. He added that the School <br />District's ultimate goal is to purchase Lots C and D. The <br />agreement is being set up so the School District must purchase A <br />and B before they can purchase C and 0. Cohen stated that he <br />could not presuppose that the parcel would be used strictly for <br />school use, because the next school board may decide that they do <br />not want to purchase the land. He stated that school districts <br />in general are usually under financial constraints and it would <br />not be unlikely that this land acquisition may be deemed <br />unnecessary at some future date. Cohen reiterated that he would <br />vote no until he had reviewed the purchase agreement. <br />Be 1 lows inquired as to why there was a problem doing a plat. <br />Mr. Haislet stated that time was the major reason. Mabusth said <br />that it would require two more months of review time for approval <br />of a plat. Johnson inquired as to whether or not a restriction <br />could be included in the agreement that would limit to whom the <br />property could be transferred should the School District not <br />purchase the entire parcel. Cohen asked Commission members to <br />envision the worst scenario; the School District purchased Lot A, <br />but then decided that they have no funding to purchase B, C and <br />D. Mr. Haislet stated that it would not be in the best interest <br />of the School District to do that because they are signing an <br />obligation for a ten year lease for those three parcels and will <br />pay interest on them right up to the end of the agreement. Cohen <br />asked how much they would be paying. Haislet stated $35,000.00 <br />per year for leasing the three Lots. <br />Orono's policy states that if there are more than two lots, <br />there must be an interior road and an access has to be achieved <br />through a single curb cut. Johnson asked whether the Planning <br />Commission or the City would see any land use application that <br />the School District put forward. Applicant asked what he would <br />need to do to get approval of the subdivision as currently <br />proposed. Mabusth stated that he would need to show an interior <br />road that would provide an east/west connection and provide <br />A