My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2001_0924_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2001
>
2001_0924_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 3:07:23 PM
Creation date
10/25/2010 1:38:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
169
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
i ` <br />Request for Council Action <br />Date: September 24, 2001 <br />Item Number: C-1 1 <br />Department Approval Manager Approval Agenda Section <br />Item Description: <br />Consent <br />Approval of Encroachment Agreement Allowing a Garage at 1144 Dionne Street <br />to remain located upon a City Drainage and Utility Easement subject to conditions. <br />Back�round: <br />The City Attomey's office was contacted by counsel for Fred and Catherine Klug, owners of the apartment building and accessory <br />structures located at 1144 Dionne St. The title and survey review for a proposed sale of their property identified that one of their <br />garages (located at the Northeast comer of the property) was constructed over a city utility easement. The easement was retained by <br />the City after the City vacated the southern half (33') of the platted Dionne Street. It is unclear from the records whether the vacation <br />of the southern porkion of Dionne Street was in contemplation of the garage construction or not, but it has been established that a <br />building permit was issued for the construction of the garage. The new owner of the property, Metro Properties, L.L.C. is interested in <br />clearing up this issue to the extent possible. <br />The City Council has at least three options: 1) begin legal proceedings to ha�e the garage removed; 2) vacate the utility easement, or; <br />3) enter into an agreement allowing the garage to remain subject to conditions. <br />Analvsis: <br />Legal proceedings to force removal would be costly and perhaps difficult given the fact that a permit was apparently issued for the <br />garage's construction in the mid-1980's. Additionally, the garage is not in disrepair, is not easily movable due to site constraints and <br />its brick construction, and serves a valuable public putpose by providing residential tenants with off-street parking. Vacating the utility <br />easement is not possible because the City has in place a water service line within the easement area. The preferred alternative appears <br />to be to allow the garage to remain, but to establish conditions protecting the City's long term interest in effectively providing utility <br />services to its residents. An encroachment agreement allowing the garage to remain upon certain conditions has been drafted and is <br />attached to this report for Council consideration. <br />Council Action Reauested: <br />Adopt a motion authoizing the Mayor and Manager to execute an Encroachment Agreement allowing a garage at 1144 Dionne St. to <br />remain located upon a City utility easement subject to conditions. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.