Laserfiche WebLink
7.02: Adopt Ordinance #13 -06 Authorizing the City of Ramsey to Sell / Convey Surplus <br />Land (Windsorwood Property) <br />Management Analyst Brama reviewed the staff report. <br />Motion by Councilmember Tossey, seconded by Councilmember Riley, to Waive the Reading as <br />required by the City Charter and Adopt Ordinance #13 -06 Authorizing the City of Ramsey to <br />Sell /Convey Surplus Land and authorize the City Attorney to draft the purchase agreement <br />selling the property to David Francis Pommy in accordance with the terms approved by the City <br />Council including a sale price of $42,000 and authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to <br />sign the purchase agreement on behalf of the City. <br />A roll call vote was performed by the Recording Secretary: <br />Councilmember Tossey aye <br />Councilmember Riley aye <br />Councilmember LeTourneau aye <br />Councilmember Backous absent <br />Councilmember Elvig aye <br />Councilmember Kuzma aye <br />Mayor Strommen aye <br />Motion carried. <br />7.03: Consider Request to Waive Fees for Easement Vacation on the Property located at <br />6100 Bunker Lake Boulevard NW; Case of Dennis Sharp <br />Development Services Manager Gladhill reviewed the staff report. <br />The Council agreed staff's recommendation results in a fair resolution. <br />Motion by Councilmember LeTourneau, seconded by Councilmember Elvig, to waive the <br />standard application fee and half of the required escrow fee for an Easement Vacation request, <br />requiring that the Applicant pay for all hard costs incurred by the City including, but not limited <br />to, public hearing fees, mailing fees, copying charges, and recording fees, but not require the <br />Applicant to be charged for City Staff time to process the request. <br />Further discussion: Dennis Sharp, 6100 Bunker Lake Boulevard NW, stated he assumes the <br />Council understands what happened and clarified he was requesting the City correct its mistake <br />when the second easement was placed and created a 99 -foot easement instead of a 66 -foot <br />easement. Development Services Manager Gladhill explained that during site plan review, the <br />applicant advises of easements encumbering the property; however, that did not occur, resulting <br />in liability on both the City and applicant since the easement had not been relayed to staff at that <br />time. Mr. Sharp stated he would agree with staff's recommendation but still found it to be an <br />error made by the City's Engineering Department when this additional 33 -foot easement was <br />taken by mistake. <br />City Council / March 12, 2013 <br />Page 5 of 8 <br />