My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/05/2004
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2004
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/05/2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 9:33:03 AM
Creation date
2/3/2004 10:00:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
02/05/2004
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
297
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
Councilmember Kurak stated that she did not believe that the City needed the easement at this <br />time. She felt that the City should wait for future development. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Developrnent Director Trudgeon explained that the easement was <br />requested to preserve land for future road. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cook inquired if Mr. Bauer was not opposed to the easement, but did not agree <br />with the language that states the City can construct the road at the City's determination. <br /> <br />Mr. Bauer replied that that was correct. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cook inquired if it was possible to remove 12a or reword it so that it is more <br />acceptable to the landowner. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon replied that eliminating 12a does limit <br />the City's options. <br /> <br />Councitmember Cook inquired if it was possible to change the language to make it more <br />acceptable, but yet make the land more available to the City. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon replied yes. <br /> <br />Mr. Bauer stated that he agrees with the City taking an easement but it was his understanding <br />that the use of the easement or the taking of the easement was if and when Lot 1 or 2 is <br />developed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak questioned what the point would be to take an easement if they eliminate <br />the language included in 12a. <br /> <br />Mr. Bauer replied the one benefit to the City with taking the easement is if he were to sell the <br />property at some given time and there was not an easement in place the City would have to <br />negotiate with the new property owner. He stated that he was agreeable to the language included <br />in 12b. <br /> <br />Assistant Director of Public Works Olson stated that 12a allows for the flexibility for the City to <br />prevent a dead end if development occurs adjacent to the property. There would be no reason to <br />take an easement if 12a is eliminated. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated it does make sense to take an easement so that if Mr. Bauer sells <br />the property an easement is in place. <br /> <br />Assistant Director of Public Works Olson replied that the property owner that purchases the land <br />would still have the same rights Mr. Bauer has. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon stated that the Council should decide to <br />remove the easement completely or leave it as is. <br /> <br />P88 <br /> <br />City Council/December 16, 2003 <br /> Page 18 of 32 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.