10-16-2017 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

City of Orono October 12, 2017 Page 3 maintenance or repair other than snow removal without obtaining two bids specifying the cost of the maintenance or repair work,which bids must then be delivered to the other party, who is to be given at least ten days to dispute it. We point out that those provisions apply to maintenance and repair;nothing in the Lot 1 Driveway Easement allows the Dunkleys to otherwise alter and expand the driveway, with one limited exception: if the Dunkleys want to relocate the driveway, they are given the right to do so under the Lot 1 Driveway Easement, subject to very specific requirements and limitations, including the relocated driveway having the same point of commencement and same point of termination as the existing driveway. Obviously,that is not what the Dunkleys are doing in this situation; they are wrongfully working on extending the driveway to the First Dunkley Property, in clear violation of the Lot 1 Driveway Easement. The Huelers have repeatedly attempted to communicate with the Dunkleys about this, with the goal of working toward an acceptable resolution. The Dunkleys have answered by commencing construction to modify and expand the driveway, without regard to the Huelers' desires or rights, and without regard to the fact that they have no legal right to modify and expand the driveway or to expand the use of the driveway to benefit a third property. On behalf of Dr. and Mrs. Hueler,we respectfully request that the Planning Commission deny the Applications premised on expansion of the driveway in question; it is clearly not authorized by the existing easements of record. In short,the Planning Commission cannot recommend actions in conflict with existing rights of record. Thank you. Sin ely William C. Griffith, for Larkin Hoffman Direct Dial: 952-896-3285 Direct Fax: 952-842-1729 Email: wgriffith@larkinhoffman.com cc: Kelli and Greg Hueler Soren Mattick, City Attorney 4838-4125-0641,v. 1