My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council Work Session - 09/12/2017
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council Work Session
>
2017
>
Minutes - Council Work Session - 09/12/2017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/13/2025 1:11:51 PM
Creation date
10/17/2017 3:29:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
09/12/2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
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 />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.