Laserfiche WebLink
the easement but they then want the City to state that they relinquish any other rights for <br />easements on their property. <br />Councilmember Kuzma asked what would happen if this were to go to court, whether the <br />Schmitzs would then be liable for the entire cost or the 25 percent cost -share. <br />City Attorney Langel stated that if the City moves forward with the declaratory judgement and <br />prevails, the turnaround would remain as -is. <br />Mrs. Schmitz asked if that were the case, would the City then bring the cul-de-sac up to the <br />current standards in that location. She stated that this has been the frustration she has dealt with <br />for the past 20 months. <br />Councilmember Shryock stated that if this were not occurring the City would then pay for the <br />project and then assess a portion of the cost to the residents on the roadway. She asked if the <br />road is planned to be paved in the future. <br />Public Works Superintendent Riemer replied that the road is currently gravel and stated that if <br />the property to the west were to develop, the roadway would be paved. <br />City Attorney Langel stated that if the City were to create the cul-de-sac to current standards, it <br />would be larger than what currently exists. <br />Councilmember Kuzma asked and received confirmation that if the City were to go to court, the <br />turnaround would remain as is and the City would only be out the cost of court fees. <br />Councilmember Williams stated that she would not support litigation due to the cost of the <br />project. She stated that she would be inclined to consider the offer if the City is able to obtain <br />typical easements in the future should the road change if the property to the west is to develop to <br />bring the road to current standards. She stated that she would be reluctant for the City to release <br />their rights for easements that may be necessary. She acknowledged that the residents have <br />improved the property. She stated that she would like to resolve the issue without going to court <br />and without relinquishing future rights for easement in the case the road is expanded in the future <br />to meet current road standards. She explained that she would not want the City to incur <br />additional costs in the future to obtain those easements, should they be necessary. She stated that <br />she would be willing to accept the $3,000 if that also came with the easements that may be <br />needed in the future. <br />Councilmember Kuzma stated that the City would then have the $21,000 cost for the cul-de-sac. <br />Councilmember Williams stated that she is okay accepting that as a cost for the City as a whole <br />rather than one homeowner individually. <br />Councilmember Shryock agreed with the comments made by Councilmember Williams. She <br />stated that this road will need to be updated and improved and all the residents will take part in <br />that improvement through assessment. She stated that she would support finding a solution that <br />City Council Work Session / September 12, 2017 <br />Page 4 of 8 <br />