My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-17-1995 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1995
>
04-17-1995 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/27/2023 3:44:01 PM
Creation date
9/27/2023 3:40:04 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
236
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
ilaraeportioo of the right-of-way was vacated. The <br />On the lake side ot the propemes. a large po _ <br />, •• »r^ thi* Nelson oropem- was not vacated since it serveaportion along the dnveway leading to the Nelson prop . <br />I. V • r, nrnnem* Mt Joluison is A».iHing to proNtde an as the onlv leoal access to the Netson property w. r <br />easentent hut is reguesring the City vacate the lakeside fo-nnson sees the two issues as <br />b„„o unrelated Mr. Nelson is concerned that with the vacanon of the lakestae. e <br />.ould lose his only legal access to his driveway. Barrett said that the nwo are not relate <br />terms of access but ,n legal terms. His opWon was to move ahead wnh the vacauon o <br />the riuht-of-wav. Moorse said Staff is brtnmng this before the Councd to etther ue. e <br />two i'ssues together or move ahead with vacarion wtthcut the easentent being solv«f. <br />fahhour asked if the lakeside right-of-way was under water. Moorse relied rimt it was <br />partiaUy under water and is very low in elevation. <br />Callahan clarified that the reason for dte hesitation in vacating the lakeside right-of-way is <br />the fear of cuning the Nelson's property off wifi, no legal access. Moorse satd that ^ <br />Nelson does have legal access Barren said Nelson has a prescriptive (private, easemen <br />through the continued use over the last :5 years but not tide to that property There <br />would be a cloud on the title without coun approval. Barren sard it is not a lawve s <br />riaht to determine legal access but it is a factual base. If the coun is able to conclude a <br />fa;mal base, the pubbc interest has to be based on acmal use. Callahan said he was <br />concerned that the vacation had not been done and asked Barrmt if rite vacanon could b <br />completed without incurring Uability and damaging .Mr. Nelson's property. Barr« sat <br />dte cloud in the tide is already in place with the mistaken vacation of the alley. « » a <br />maner efface and no further damage to dde is found, there could be access by getung <br />the alley back, condemning it or representing Mr. Nelson.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.