CCP 03-13-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. ~ () " l1 F~h '. "'- ".l '} d>p~ .:0 ,', . ~ ~~~ l-'" with regard to the two rear lots being held until the access situation is resolved, this must be '....):: rectified within 24 months. To him this meant that, if the situation is not rectified within 24 \., :" months he would have to walk away from the two lots and he was not willing to do this. He hoped tllat tile wording could be changed to say that, if the situation were not resolved within 20 months, he would have to come back to the City Council in order to strive for a solution. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JUNE 28, 1999 . Mr. Rekuski stated that he has worked with the two neighbors for three weeks and has still not come to an agreement with them. He indicated that the neighbor to the east, Ms. Rushenburg, is very upset with the City Council. He believes that the only way to ease her mind would be if the City Council spoke witll her and explain that she would not be losing anything by allowing the needed easement. It was his understanding that Ms. Rushenburg is concerned that, if she gives up the easement, she will be left with a non-conforming lot. Mayor Probst stated that if there were a request from Ms. Rushenburg to clarify what an easement means, the City would certainly be willing to do this. Mr. Rekuski stated that he had spoken with staff and received clarification of easements. He had attempted to explain this to Ms. Rushenburg; however, she is still very uncomfortable. He suggested that he bring Ms. Rushenburg to the City staff in order for them to sit down and explain the situation to her. Mayor Probst stated that if Ms. Rushenburg has questions, the City staff would provide answers. . Mr. Fritsinger stated that one issue from the staff s point of view was that, it is one thing for staff to answer questions with regard to Code requirements and expectations of the City. However, staff is trying to avoid having to negotiate what had become a part of Mr. Rekuski's development process. j Councilmember Malone stated that the condition for approval of the plat was correct as it appears in the minutes. The intent of the City Council was to find a way to approve the plat and the problem was that there were two westerly lots that, in order for them to actually be lots, they had to have public access. The easterly lots were acceptable because they have public right-of- way access. The condition for approval was to allow two years to settle the access issue. If, after the two years, the access situation were not resolved, the plat approval would become null. Mr. Rekuski stated that the four lots could have access to Lexington A venue at this time. He had wanted to eliminate this access due to the agreement with Mr. Bachman for access to the cul-de- sac. Councilmember Malone reiterated that the City Council couldn't automatically approve a plat that includes two lots without access. . Mayor Probst stated that the City Council would not have approved the four lots if the current access situation were permanent. The Council has given approval for the four-lot configuration under the assumption that the final platting process would be expedited. The two-year time frame was intended to ensure action was taken to rectify the access situation. Mayor Probst stated that the minutes of the meeting were accurate. Mr. Rekuski stated that the City is asking for something he has no control over. Councilmember Malone expressed his understanding of Mr. Rekuski's predicament. He pointed out, however, that the only alternative would have been to deny the plat. )