My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2005-09-28 CC Packet
Centerville
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1996-2022
>
2005
>
2005-09-28 CC Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/21/2009 10:22:42 AM
Creation date
7/21/2009 10:22:13 AM
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.
/
64
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
<br />Mayor and Members of City Council <br /> <br />September 24, 2005 <br /> <br />The Bergelands purchased their property in May 2004 and constructed their dock in July <br />2004. The Bergelands were unaware of any code or ordinance violation at the time they <br />constructed their dock. The dock itself is a small affair, measuring approximately 6 feet <br />long and three feet wide as it extends into their pond. Until the Bergelands received a <br />letter from the City dated August 22,2005, requesting the removal of the dock, they were <br />unaware of any problem or concern that the City might have. <br /> <br />In a letter addressed to Dallas Larson, City Administrator, dated August30, 2005, the <br />Bergelands, joined by other dock owners, indicated their willingness to have the City <br />. covered under an umbrella policy as part of their private homeowner's policy. The cost <br />ofthe aclditional coverage would be incurred by the homeowner. This proposal is <br />-identical to one recommended by the League of Minnesota Cities in their materials <br />included in your packet of materials for your September 14 meeting. <br /> <br />. - <br />The Bergelands very much wish to retain their dock. They constructed their dock in good. . <br />. faith, believing it to be part of the quiet enjoyment oJ their property. They would view <br />the removal" of their dock to be a misuse of your easement and.a takfug of their property. . <br /> <br />I hope you can resolve this matter Without requiring the Bergelands to remove their clock.' <br />. There are other less drastic options open to you. You could requite that the Bergelartd~' . <br />'tUJ.d ofuerssimilarly situated name the city as an "additional insured" on the insurance. <br />'. policy relating to the dock. You could allow the Bergelands to retain their dock with the. <br />writtertunderstanding that the dock would be removed upon the sale of their property. .' <br />Such all approach would leave open the amending of your Ordinance Number 4 to- <br />_ reference docks and remove the present ambiguity. <br /> <br />., ~ <br /> <br />Very truly yours, <br />~'OI'.i ~ - (J\",>--: <br /> <br />James S. Silen <br /> <br />-- <br /> <br />. cc: John and Jamie Bergeland <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />MEMBER MINNESOTA BAR ASSOCIATION / It.... <br /> <br />jAMESS. SILEN. ATTORNEY AT LAW' <br />"'Also Certified Public Accountant <br /> <br />.." \. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.