02-28-2013 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 28, 2013 proposal was actually less expensive given it would result in more lots. Brausen also pointed out that the ghost plat pushes houses closer to the existing houses on the Boog and Acosta properties, while his proposal keeps them further away, thus resulting in more privacy for Boog and Acosta. Brausen noted that the 50 foot building pads in the ghost plat are much tighter than the building pads in the Brausen proposal. Dave Brausen also pointed out that under the Brausen proposal, Boog and Acosta could develop their properties at any time they chose. Brausen stated that he did not understand why his proposal was not preferable to the ghost plat. Brausen also stated that it was his position that there are no grounds to vacate the existing 33 -foot road easement. Steve Brausen stated that it was his family's opinion that the Brausen proposal resulted in a net gain for everyone. He also stated that the road easement should remain in place and the reason the road easement was dedicated was to provide development potential for this area. Keis asked if the other two northeast property owners were in agreement with the Brausen's. Dave Brausen reported that Jerry Boog and Gail Acosta are not anxious to develop their properties, but also do not want to be landlocked. Brausen noted that the Brausen development proposal would require Acosta to trade a triangle of property and that she indicated that was something she would consider. McGraw pointed out that under the Brausen proposal Gordie Howe is being asked to give up a lot. Montour asked about the option where the road easement is being utilized to access the northeast properties. Steve Brausen stated that utilizing the existing road easement to access the northeast properties is a viable option and is the expectation that property owners in the area have had. Brausen indicated, however, that this option does not work as well for Boog and Acosta and results in fewer lots for Gordie Howe. Steve Brausen indicated that the Brausen option is preferable for all parties. The City Administrator noted that under the Pinetree Pond Preliminary Plat, the developer is proposing that the road easement be vacated. He pointed out that the developer's surveyor has looked at this easement and determined that it came from the 2966 LaBore Road property, therefore, should accrue back to that property. The Administrator indicated, however, that Ramsey County will make the final determination as to where the property will go if the easement is vacated. Dave Brausen again noted that the Brausen proposal yields one more lot for Gordie Howe and potentially one more lot for the northeast property 6