My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council - 09/13/2022
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council
>
2022
>
Minutes - Council - 09/13/2022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/13/2025 10:33:37 AM
Creation date
9/30/2022 9:12:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
09/13/2022
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
<br />Councilmember Specht asked if Connexus Energy would be able to verify this line or if there <br />would be a City cost associated with finding out where the line is. <br /> <br />City Planner McCann said he is not sure and he assumes the property owners would have to allow <br />Connexus onto the site to verify that. <br /> <br />Councilmember Specht asked if it would cost the City. <br /> <br />City Planner McCann said no. <br /> <br />Demetrious and Christine Jones, 7160 148th Lane NW, came forward and shared they were not <br />aware of any kind of utility lines being in the egress area and stated there is only a small corner of <br />the shed that is encroaching in the easement. Mr. Jones said that originally they were told it was <br />only a five-foot easement before they bought the shed and the shed was purchased based on what <br />they were told. Mr. Jones stated the City website stated to check with the City before purchasing <br />a shed and he said he did call the City to find out what the easement was. <br /> <br />Mrs. Jones added that initially there was supposed to be a road behind their yard, since then the <br />City has built a storage facility behind them instead of the road and she does not understand why <br />there would be a need for a 10-foot easement. Mrs. Jones reiterated that they did call the City <br />before they put their pool in and there were no utility lines. Mrs. Jones shared she believed the <br />City would have acted in the Joneses favor when they built the storage facility. Mrs. Jones added <br />when she spoke to the City Planner, they were told it was a water issue and the Joneses have lived <br />there for 23 years and there has never been a water issue. Mrs. Jones said the storage facility was <br />allowed to put a six-foot berm 10 feet off their fence line which she believes would be more of a <br />water issue than their shed would be. Mrs. Jones shared that if anyone was to come to their yard, <br />they would see that the front yard is higher than the backyard. <br /> <br />Mr. Jones asked if it was a drainage location as there are no sewers in that location. <br /> <br />Mrs. Jones shared it is approximately 30 square feet of the shed that is encroaching. The Joneses <br />discussed the options that the City gave them if they did have to move the shed and why these <br />options were not feasible. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked the applicants who they called to spray for utility lines. <br /> <br />Mrs. Jones said she called City Planner McCann. She shared they did not buy permits for other <br />projects. She stated they wanted to put a sidewalk to their pool and their pool guy said since it was <br />a permanent structure that they cannot do that but they can put in a patio. <br /> <br />Mr. Jones added that they were quoted as a non-permanent structure. He commented that it does <br />not state anywhere that flagstone is a permanent structure. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked who came out and sprayed for the utility lines. <br /> <br />City Council / September 13, 2022 <br />Page 9 of 18 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.