My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-13-2010 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2010
>
12-13-2010 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/26/2012 1:53:50 PM
Creation date
7/26/2012 1:53:50 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, December 13, 2010 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />(14. #10 -3493 GOOD SHEPHERD LUTHERAN CHURCH, 3745 SHORELINE DRIVE, <br />Continued) <br />Mayor White asked if they own Tract F and if that is only to allow access to their property. <br />Zachman indicated they own Tract F. <br />Carlson stated he does not think the church is planning on using this easement, but the documents are <br />good forever and the situation could change at some point in the future. Carlson stated they would like <br />that situation resolved. <br />White noted that is a matter between the church and the property owner. <br />Bremer pointed out the City does not have the authority to revoke the easement. <br />Carlson stated they would like the City to resolve it as part of the conditional use permit. <br />Mattick indicated he has not reviewed the documents and asked what the connection is between the <br />easement and the proposed use. Mattick asked where the church's easement is. <br />Carlson stated they have an easement on H to F. <br />® Mattick asked if the church can use the driveway to gain access to F. <br />Carlson indicated they can and that in his view they have a strong legal argument to get the easement <br />revoked. <br />Mattick noted they are not using F to get to the inurement area. <br />Carlson stated the church could use that easement to park or gain access to the church and that the <br />inurement garden will increase the amount of traffic to the church. <br />Mattick stated in his view the easement does not allow traffic to go to the church based on the <br />representations made by Mr. Carlson. Mattick stated before the City Council tonight is an application for <br />the church property. The easement does not say that the people can drive on Tract F, park their cars and <br />then enter the church property. Mattick noted none of the application impacts that easement. <br />Carlson indicated he would agree with that. <br />Mayor White stated Mr. Carlson is requesting the City use its leverage to not allow that at some point in <br />the future. <br />Carlson stated he would like the issue with the easement resolved as part of the CUP. <br />White stated the easement is a separate issue. <br />• Mattick stated the Council can impose conditions but they have to reasonably relate to the application that <br />is before them and Tracts F and H do not relate to this property and there have been no representations <br />Page 21 of 27 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.