Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Cox stated that the sewer and water trunks will only be <br />brought to the edge of the Schwartzman property. <br /> <br />Randy Elofson - Inquired if a buyer of his property would be required to <br />provide mn easement for a service road. <br /> <br />Mayor Reimann replied that when the property was platted, an easement for a <br />service road would be required. <br /> <br />Mr. Winslow Holasek - Stated that the City can't force the property to <br />provide the easement; if the property owner refuses, the City would have to <br />go to the condemnation process. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich stated that the site plan review process allows cities to <br />require easements in the interest of good planning. <br /> <br />Mr. Holasek - Questioned why the property owners should donate the land <br />when an MSA road is used by everybody and paid for by everybody indirectly <br />through fuel tax. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cox reiterated that the MSA funds could be used to actually <br />construct a road somewhere else rather than for easements for Front Street. <br />Councilmember Cox noted that Ramsey has severe east/west route problems and <br />there are areas willing to donate the right-of-way in order to see those <br />kinds of routes developed. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich stated that if Council decides to offer the $25,000/acre <br />quoted in the appraisal, the property owners can reject that offer and <br />retain their own appraisor; the City would then have to decide whether to <br />pay the amount quoted in that appraisal. If Council rejects that amount, <br />the court would appoint 3 commissioners and the City's appraisal and the <br />property owner's appraisal would be provided to the commissioners as <br />testimony and they make the award. If the property owners disagree with <br />the award of the commissioners, they can appeal to district court. The <br />city can request that the court hold the initial public purpose hearing on <br />October 16; the property owners do not need to have their appraisal <br />completed by October 16. At that hearing, the City tells the court it has <br />reason to go forward with the project; the court will then appoint the 3 <br />commissioners; then the property owners should seek their appraisal and <br />coordinate a hearing date with the City Attorney. The City would be <br />obligated to pay the property owners $500 for their appraisal fees, no <br />matter what happens. <br /> <br />Mrs. Ed Hamilton - Inquired if the State can take away driveways onto Hwy. <br />#10 and require accessing via a service road. <br /> <br />Councilmember DeLuca replied that the State can take away driveways as long <br />as they can provide for perpetual access; the State interprets eventual <br />access as perpetual access. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich stated that if it is determined that a removal of access by <br />the State is an inconvenience to the property owner, it can be a <br />compensable taking. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich dismissed himself from the meeting at this time. <br /> City Council/September 15, 1987 <br /> <br />Page 5 of 8 <br /> <br /> <br />