Laserfiche WebLink
11686.2 <br />TO: Mayor and City Council <br />FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Adminitratorf' <br />DATE: November 6, 1986 <br />SUBJECT: Chapman Easement <br />ATTACHMENT: A.) Letter From Bradley Beisel Dated 11/3/86 <br />SSUE - Does the City Council desire to negotiate on the easement <br />esulting in a settleme;�t prior to the Letendres filing for <br />summary judgement? <br />DISCUSSION - On Thursday, October 30, 1986 Elizabeth Thompson <br />acting in the capacity of Orono's City Attcrney and myself rilet <br />with Ken Chapman; Chapman's real estate agent; Mr. Letendre, the <br />owner of the propery with questionable easement together w.th his <br />real estate agent and attorney. The City took the position that <br />the easement should not exist and that Mr. Chapman and Mr. <br />Letendre should work out a financial arrangement to compensate <br />Mr. Letendre for the extinquishment of the easement. The <br />easement was granted by Mr. Chapman in conjunction with the sale <br />of property the first time, which was one or two owners prior <br />tc Letendre. It is expected that Mr. Chapman received <br />coal tion in the granting of the easement. Mr. Letendre on <br />pure. the property was aware that the docking rights did not <br />go but felt that he still had a valid easement and had a <br />"spi.it. ard" to obtain docking rights through the City and the <br />LMCD. .t is interesting to note the selling price was reduced <br />from $170,000 to $130,000 based on the fact docking rights ' <br />not go with the property. The dock was not attached to <br />easement. The property owners discussed a number of issues a,: <br />proposed a couple of alternatives: <br />- Conversion of the easement to a 99 year lease some <br />consideration for docking at the Chapman's dock. <br />- Al' ing the easement that is on the bottom of the <br />title -o be incorporated into the legal description, but <br />an agreement that there would be no further docking ':han <br />the present three boats on a combined dock with Chapmans <br />thereby eliminating the second dock, <br />The City indicated while its position was that the easement be <br />extinguished it may entertain the easement continuing for a <br />period not to exceed 5 to 10 years and at that point the easement <br />be extinguished. Regarding the docking rights to the extent that <br />it is under three owners tt;e City may have no significant <br />jurisdi.ction as the easement and docking are two separate issues. <br />This is something that would be governed by LMCD ar. staff <br />