Two property owners’ request to the City of Mustang to vacate an easement was stalled Tuesday and rescheduled for the next council meeting.
Jeff Lindsay and Shawn Tidwell are asking the city to vacate the utility easement on the western 15 feet of Rancho Drive to “preserve the peace and harmony of Rancho Estates.” Both live at the end of Rancho Drive, which dead ends at Deborah Jansak’s property.
Jansak joined Lindsay and Tidwell in attending Tuesday’s meeting. She is asking the city for denial of the easement request as she has already been granted approval by the city to install a gate to access Rancho Drive.
“I have a problem with the city giving the public easement away. There are 20 other plus dead-end streets in the city and if this is granted, this will set a precedent for future developments,” Jansak told the council.
Sarah W. Moore of Bass Law in Oklahoma City spoke on behalf of Lindsay and Tidwell in Tuesday’s meeting. She said Jansak has other options besides Rancho to exit her property, like W. Wildflower Court Drive. Jansak commented this is a private drive and she does not have public access.
Moore also stated that the utilities located in the easement can stay as her clients are not wanting to move and could give them to the utility companies.
Finally, Moore commented that there is no “buffer zone” between Jansak’s agriculturally zoned property and that of her clients’ residential property.
The morning after the meeting, Community Development Director Melissa Helsel said Oklahoma Natural Gas sent a letter of objection to the city against the easement being vacated and Caddo Electric also called with concerns.
Helsel said the mix of zonings, Moore pointed out, is not out of the ordinary. She explained that there are many different residential zoning categories and the Rancho neighborhood is rural estates with large lots.
“They are not necessarily incompatible.”
She added that it would be more out of line for Jansak’s property to neighbor a R-1 subdivision like Savannah Lakes, which is not the case with the Rancho Addition.
City staff have already recommended denial of the easement vacation request. Helsel said staff does not see it as a benefit to the city and also because of the utility objection.
“I’m always looking at what is beneficial to the city at large,” Helsel said. “But if someone can show me a real benefit, I would reconsider.”
City Attorney Johnathan Miller said the city should have allowed for a public hearing on the matter and said the city would have to postpone further discussion to the next meeting.
The council will have a hearing at its Dec. 20 meeting, which starts at 7 p.m.