My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-21-2006 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2006
>
02-21-2006 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2012 9:55:39 AM
Creation date
6/13/2012 9:55:14 AM
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.
/
439
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
� <br /> , F, <br /> 1 <br /> A second issue invoives Munspn's proposed "Option B" which includes a second <br /> driveway over property owned by the Wageners'. While there was a narrow driveway <br /> easement created in 1962, it was intended to serve a carriage house which no longer <br /> exists. In any event, the easement use was abandoned in the 1960's when new � <br /> driveway easements out to County Road 51,were created in conjunction with installation <br /> of sanitary sewer in the neighborhood. The Wageners' have been in ownership and <br /> possession of their home since 1980. They have consistently prohibited any easement <br /> use and have forcibly blocked access over their property through construction of a fence <br /> throughout their ownership. On behalf of the Wageners', I have reviewed the historical <br /> conveyances of the property now owned by the Munsons' and have confirmed that the <br /> driveway easement over the Wagener property has not been carried forward on any of <br /> the deeds conveying title. In 2004, the immediate predecessors in title to the Munsons <br /> inquired regarding the easement. My office confirmed in writing to Albert C. Trapanese <br /> and Sheryl A. Trapanese that the easement was abandoned and that the Wageners' <br /> now own fee title to the property by adverse possession. A copy of my letter is <br /> � enclosed. <br /> Option B should not be considered for approval since the Munsons' will not be granted <br /> access over the property owned by the Wageners'. In addition, it is my understanding <br /> that Orono has a policy against allowing multiple accesses to public roads unless a � <br /> hardship is established. � <br /> Finally, the site plan proposed by the Munsons' shows.several feet of fill along the <br /> common lot line with the Wageners'. The Wageners' have landscaped the area with a <br /> bou(der wall and extensive trees. They wish to avoid changes to the drainage pattern <br /> on their property and want to preserve the appearance of improvements along the lot <br /> line. Consequently, the Wagener's request that fi(I not be p(aced within 5 feet of their <br /> common lot. <br /> In summary, the Wageners' will defend against any proposed use of their property for <br /> driveway access and object to any intensification of existing encroachments into the <br /> average setback area. They also request that any fill be kept at feast 5 feet away from <br /> their lot line. At present, I anticipate that Morrie Wagener and I will be present when the <br /> Munson Application is considered by the Planning Commission. In the event that we <br /> cannot appear, I request that you will brief the Planning Commission on the above <br /> . issues. . <br /> ery�1-a�� yours, � <br /> �� . . <br /> Pet . Johnson ^� <br /> PWJ/bj <br /> CC: Alan and Deanna Munson , <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.