Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. David Drown <br />Roseville <br />ERWIN A. PEIRRSON <br />ROBERT C. BELL <br />WILLARD L. CONVERSE <br />ROGER A. JENSEN <br />KURT Ir. WALTHER <br />W. TIMOTHY MALCHOW <br />MARTIN J. COSTELLO <br />DAVID S. ANDERSON <br />JAME$ C. ERICKSON <br />WILLIAM M. DRINANE <br />PAM6LA J CONVERSE <br />LAW OFFICES OF <br />PETERSON. BELL & CONVERSE <br />2100 AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK BUILDING <br />101 EAST FIFTH STREET <br />ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101 <br />(612) 224-4703 <br />April 17, 1985 <br />Mr. Thomas H. Borman <br />NIASLON, i::DEL.VAly, 3ORMiAN d- 13RAND <br />Attorneys at Law <br />1800 Niidwest Plaza <br />Minneapolis, INZIrinesota 55402 <br />Re: Tanurb Developments, Inc./City of Roseville <br />Our File Nlo. %113-1714 <br />Dear Tom: <br />You have cxpressed some concern with regard to the casements the "At}, of <br />Roseville will maintain over portions of your client's land in the L'ity of <br />Roseville. Tt1e concern deals with the ('ity's obligation to return the surfa:.e} <br />area to the condition it was in Lefore any niaintenancer or other work was clone by <br />the City. <br />If the i,Ity does work in an casement area requiring the disturbance of the <br />surface: area, the City considers it its obligation to return the surface to the <br />same condition as It was In prior to the .e,ork being clone. <br />That obligation is consistent %vith `linnesota law•which is generally described as <br />the "reasonable" use standard. By virtue of a numl,,er of cases starting with <br />Bruns v. Williams, 142 Minn. 473, 172 iN 177i (1919.1, through Giles v. Luker, 2.15 <br />;Vinn. 256, ° NW2d 716 (1943), and '%AInnearpalis Athle•iic 'ALIb V. Colder, 287 <br />Vinn. 254, 1.77 Nt/2d 786 (1970), a city's right to use an easement area is limlted <br />to a "reasonable use." The City of Roseville considers such "reasonable use" to <br />require completing %vrrk in the easement area promptly and, further, the turning <br />back of the surfac- area of the easement to the property owner in the same <br />condition It was found before, the work iegan. <br />I an -I aware of no circumstance In Roseville where a property owner has <br />complained' that City crews have failed to complete work promptly or have failed <br />to return an easement area to the owner in as good a shape as the property was <br />In prior to the ccmrnenc---m^-.^t of vhc work. T`, City has a number of shopping <br />centers similar to your client's and, in most of those shopping centers, the City <br />maintains utility easements similar to the ones which ,v.ill br- running across your <br />client's property. <br />o <br />