04-22-2015 Council Workshop Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL APRIL 22, 2015 assessment. Therefore, if the road is improved, the City Administrator recommended that the City obtain Waivers of Right to Appeal Assessments from the impacted property owners. The Administrator noted that the Council called the workshop this evening to discuss options relative to unimproved Rose Lane. He reviewed the options that are outlined in his April 16th report. These include: *Doing nothing; *Vacating 15 feet on both the north and south sides of the right-of- way leaving 20 feet that would be utilized for the 298 Rose Lane driveway including snow storage area and an easement for the City's sewer line that runs through this area. *Developing Rose Lane as a City street. The City Attorney reported that there are many cities that are confronted with the issue of platted streets that have not been developed. He cited State Statutes relative to unimproved street rights-of-way which allow cities to hold these rights-of-way for public purpose. He also cited a 2008 Duluth case that is very similar to the one before the Council wherein the courts have said that the public can enter onto property that is being held for public purpose. The City Attorney indicated that in the situation before the Council, the Council can vacate all or a portion of unimproved Rose Lane. If right-of- way is vacated, the City is saying that there is no public purpose for this land. The Council can also choose not to vacate the right-of-way. The Attorney noted that White Bear Township had several unimproved rights- of-way that lead to Bald Eagle Lake. The Township took the position that these unimproved rights-of-way held no public purpose and chose to vacate all of them. The Attorney reported that the Duluth case resulted in a lot of turmoil on the issue, as the case said that unimproved rights-of- way held for the public interest could be used by the public. The City Administrator indicated that Mr. Roberto had given him a copy of the Duluth case asserting his ability to use unimproved Rose Lane. The Administrator reported that based on the City Code which both requires curb cut access and limits the number of curb cut access points, Mr. Roberto was informed that he could not use unimproved Rose Lane. Roberto indicated that he was not asking for access to his property via unimproved Rose Lane, but rather wanted to landscape the unimproved right-of-way to enhance his yard. Roberto also felt that given the Duluth case, he would have the ability to walk across the unimproved Rose Lane 2