My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-09-18-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2018
>
04-09-18-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/5/2018 3:20:28 PM
Creation date
4/5/2018 3:15:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
175
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).
View images
View plain text
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – MARCH 12, 2018 16 <br /> <br />Mayor Grant questioned how the future owner of Lot 2 would be impacted if the vacation of the <br />easement were not approved by the City Council. <br /> <br />City Planner Bachler commented the driveway for Lot 2 would cut across an existing sewer <br />easement. He stated the driveway would also cross a drainage and utility easement along Thom <br />Drive. It was noted a fair portion of the driveway would be located over easements and could be <br />impacted by the City if there was a need to get to the utility lines underground or do other work <br />within the easement areas. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant asked if the owner of Lot 2 would be required to construct a concrete or bituminous <br />driveway. <br /> <br />City Planner Bachler stated this would be required by the City. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes questioned if the City Council could make a finding that this vacation <br />would cost the City more money based on the State Statute referred to by Councilmember <br />McClung. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik stated this would be highly speculative given the fact any maintenance <br />would be required in 40 to 50 years from now. He explained a temporary easement may not be <br />required from Lot 2 as there may be other alternatives in the future. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden agreed but stated the Lot 2 property owner could be adversely impacted <br />by the City. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik commented this was no different than any other lot in the City that had <br />private improvements under their driveway. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant stated the difference with Lot 2 is that this driveway would have 40 to 50 feet of <br />City easement. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik indicated this was correct. <br /> <br />The motion failed 2-3 (Holden, McClung and Scott opposed). <br /> <br />9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS <br /> <br />None. <br /> <br />10. COUNCIL COMMENTS <br /> <br />Councilmember Scott commended Pang Silseth on her recent promotion within the Finance <br />Department. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung commented on an email received from City Administrator Perrault <br />regarding two of the City’s Public Works employees. He thanked the Public Works employees <br />and Director Polka for the great work they do on behalf of Arden Hills.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.