Project Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Charles E. Van Eeckhout January 21, 2000 Page 2 easement for road and utility purposes be granted over the Outlet to the public. In the past, the City has always required an easement over Outlets which provide private access to .multiple lots. In this case, there is a private roadway proposed to serve three or more lots and a portion of the private road crosses over land owned by Dunn. It is our · understanding that Dunn is not willing to join in the proposed plat to permit the private roadway to be platted as an Outlot, nor will Dunn join in an easement to the City for underlying roadway and public utility purposes. As a result, the City must consider a variance from its ordinances to permit access to the proposed subdivision over a private easement. The Easement is clearly granted for "driveway" purposes, not "roadway" purposes. We question whether the easement, as granted, is sufficient to support access to six or seven lots. Prior to approving the proposed subdivision, the City must receive sufficient evidence that Mr. and Mrs. Dunn approve of the proposed development and the increased use of the easement area. Such evidence may be in the form of Mr. and Mrs. Dwm's \vritten consent to the final plat or, preferably, an amendment to the current easement agreement that clearly reflects that the access rights benefit and run with all of the new lots and identifies maintenance obligations for the roadway. As you and I discussed, the City will allow you to make a case that the easement for driveway purposes is sufficient to meet to requirements of Orono's subdivision ordinances, but the title commitment to the City of Orono which you provided to staff on Wednesday evening was insufficient to resolve the problem. It merely guaranteed Orono's interest in the easement as stated, but did not assure that either Orono's interest in an underlying public easement, or that the access rights of the six or seven lots which are being platted, can be derived from the easement for driveway purposes. You have suggested that there is case law and other legal authority that either the Title Company or your attorney would be willing to provide, and we stand ready to evaluate that material. But if it should prove insufficient, then certainly some sort of undertaking by Mr.--ounn appears to be in order. If you have any questions regarding the access issues relating to the pending subdivision, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Thomas J. Barrett cc: Paul \Veinberger