My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2016_0411
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
CC_Minutes_2016_0411
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/29/2016 3:50:46 PM
Creation date
4/26/2016 9:47:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
4/11/2016
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
84
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, April 11, 2016 <br />Page 24 <br />corporated into the motion. After further debate, Mayor Roe further clarified that <br />language from the August 24, 2015 action and January 25, 2016 language includ- <br />ed reference to "meander" and remained consistent with the intent of his motion. <br />Froin his perspective based on the language recommended by staff, City Attorney <br />Gaughan advised that the applicant's position is that the easement precludes the <br />fence being installed 10' from the property line due to that easement. However, <br />Mr. Gaughan opined that this language didn't serve to clear up that language; and <br />his office's position on the easement having never seen any such document and <br />without any ability to review the supposed easement agreement for confirmation, <br />and also beyond the 1968 conveyance referencing an easement, it assumes the <br />easement to be non-conclusive. Therefore, Mr. Gaughan advised that there is no <br />city presumption that the fence can't be installed on the easement; nonetheless <br />that language as addressed by Ms. Collins in the RCA, clears up the applicant's <br />contention if the city chooses to handle it. Mr. Gaughan noted that the city had <br />and is still asking the applicant for such a document, but never having received <br />the actual document to-date even with reference to it by the 1968 conveyance <br />document, it cannot speak for the document itself. <br />Mayor Roe sought clarification if City Attorney Gaughan was suggesting adding <br />language that was clearer than the administrative ruling as to the actual location of <br />the fence. <br />City Attorney noted that there was a proposed deadline for installation of, July 29, <br />2016, unless the applicant provides the actual easement agreement document. <br />Mayor Roe further clarified that the fence has to be installed by that date whether <br />or not the docuinent is provided, leaving the only question the location of the in- <br />stallation. <br />City Attorney Gaughan responded that the City has had two years attempting to <br />interpret language; but clarified that the approved and confinned language re- <br />mains that the fence is to be installed at the northernmost property line unless an <br />easement precludes that location. Mr. Gaughan stated it was his opinion that the <br />applicant continues to state they can't install the fence at that location because <br />there's an easement there and it won't allow fence installation; while others con- <br />tinue to there is no easement. Mr. Gaughan suggested that this body may want to <br />simply be more definitive on where the fence is going to be installed; and provide <br />staff with that clarification; and if an encroachment agreement can be submitted <br />for review, consideration can be given to deviating 2' or where needed. From his <br />personal perspective, Mr. Gaughan opined that more clarity was needed to direct <br />staff accordingly in order for them to enforce the location for installation. <br />Mayor Roe questioned if revision to the language that "unless an easement or en- <br />croachment agreement is submitted" would suffice without making it too broad. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.