Agenda - Council - 11/09/2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CC Regular Session Meeting Date: 11/09/2021 Submitted For: Kurt Ulrich, Administrative Services By: Kathy Schmitz, Administrative Services Information Title: Elmcrest Park Entry Road 7.5. Purpose/Background: The City uses a 60-ft easement across private property as the northern entry into Elmcrest Park. The underlying property owner has used portions of the Elmcrest park easement for storage of agricultural equipment and material. This has generated numerous complaints from the neighborhood. This issue was brought before the Council on October 26, 2021 by neighboring residents. Council direction was for staff to review alternatives and to schedule for the agenda on November 9. I spoke with Mr. Sykes today about selling his property and he is interested in selling. He is going to calculate a price and send it to me. He is interested in maintaining access to his property with a driveway from this direction. He also mentioned that he is moving some of the material he put next to the road and "cleaning it up" a little and demonstrating cooperation. Notification: N/A Time Frame/Observations/Alternatives: Staff suggests discussion of the following alternatives: Continue to use access road as is. Under the current easement, the City can continue to use the road as public access to the park and enforce the Cit's rights to maintain a clear and unobstructed easement. The previous City Attorney (Joe Langel) was of the opinion that it is the City's right to have an unimpeded easement to the park. The underlying property owner has made recent progress in moving some material back from the road over the past week, and the City would requirement the easement to remain clear in the future. The City's new Attorney (Fritz Knaak) has been informed of the situation and will be at the Council meeting on November 9. This alternative is the lowest direct cost, but likely will result in various neighborhood conflicts over subsequent years. Purchase fee title to property. The underlying property owner has indicated an interest in the sale of the property to the City and said that he would provide a price to the City. As of this date, a price has not been received. The City could acquire the property for public purpose of parkland and access. In any event, the City is obligated to pay at least fair market value. City purchase of the property is a solution that avoids the cost of relocating the road and eliminates the conflicts caused by a park road, agricultural use, and adjacent residential uses trying to occupy the same space. Note, the underlying property owner indicated a desire to maintain a driveway access over part of this property to the remainder of his property (lying to the west).