Laserfiche WebLink
iVIINUT~S <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />JULY 23, 1997 <br />did not benefit adjoining property owners, but rather the entire Dianna <br />Lane development. The wall adjacent to the Jaszewski property benefits <br />only the Jaszewski property in Morelan's opinion. <br />LaValle felt that the issue should be addressed once again with the <br />Jaszewski's insurance adjuster. <br />Jane 7aszewski reported that the insurance adjuster is claimin~ that the <br />damage was a water issue; therefore, the company will not pay. <br />Scalze pointed out that the wall is located on private property and is a <br />private wall. The taxpayers of the City would not support the City's <br />paying for the replacement of a wall on private property. Scalze suggested <br />that before the property was purchased, the Jaszewski's should have <br />checked out the integrity of the wall, given that they were purchasing the <br />wall along with the lot. <br />Morelan pointed out that the wall has lasted almost 20 years, and it was <br />not clear to him that the wall failed because of a design issue. <br />Jane Jaszewski felt it was a function of causation and location of the <br />causation. Jaszewski reported that three people have given their opinion <br />that the bottom tier of the wall failed. Jaszewski indicated that they <br />believe the bottom tier of the wall is located within City right-of-way. <br />The City Administrator agreed that the bottom of the wall could have <br />failed first since it carries the most wei~ht. However, the wall is one unit <br />and not a series of walls. <br />Scalze pointed out that the City has an easement for road purposes for <br />Dianna Lane. If a property owner chooses to put something within the <br />easement area, that would still belong to the property owner. <br />Jaszewski asked if the wall could be pushed further into the right-of-way <br />at the time it is reconstructed. <br />Scalze suggested that that could be researched. Scalze pointed out that it <br />does not appear there is any support for the City's participation in the cost <br />of wall replacement. Scalze indicated that the Mayor informed her that he <br />does not support the City's participation iu the replacement of a wall <br />which is located on private property. <br />The City Attorney stated that construction of a wall on public ri~ht-of-way <br />would be at the propeRy owner's own risk. The Attorney stated that he <br />