Laserfiche WebLink
COUNCIL MINUTES March 26, 2012 <br /> APPROVED <br /> 135 <br /> �..i36 Julie Jeffrey Schwarz addressed the council. She noted that the association board of directors has no <br /> 137 intent whatsoever to allow this easement. She added that she is a professional appraiser of easements <br /> 138 so she recognizes the problems that will arise in this appraisal. Mr. Johnson is requesting two rods <br /> 139 rather than one as would be a normal size cartway easement; there is some concern that building is the <br /> 140 ultimate goal. This should have been considered when the land was originally platted. When the <br /> 141 mayor suggested that such details will be appropriately considered at a public hearing, Ms. Jeffrey <br /> 142 Schwartz noted that she is attempting to explain the complexity of the situation so the council can <br /> 143 understand that more time is needed for review. A council member noted that the public hearing <br /> 144 could be extended also if more time is needed at that point. <br /> 145 <br /> 146 The council again discussed an appropriate time frame for a public hearing. The city attorney <br /> 147 confirmed that a full appraisal process could take 90 days. Staff confirmed that the city is at the point <br /> 148 where it is necessary to set the hearing. <br /> 149 <br /> 150 Adam Johnson told the council that he has been working at this situation for some time and he prefers <br /> 151 that the council establish the hearing as soon as possible. The mayor noted that he hears that the <br /> 152 council wants to be fair and reasonable and allow for input and there's been information provided that <br /> 153 indicates 12 weeks may be necessary. <br /> 154 <br /> 155 A council member suggested that a third party appraisal would seem appropriate especially since the <br /> 156 council will be asked to set damages. There would also be a cost to the homeowners association for <br /> 57 an appraisal. Mr. Snyder replied that the process is more of an agricultural inquiry and it allows for <br /> 158 all parties to gather information. Also Mr. Snyder added that July 9 would be the earliest that Ms. <br /> 159 Jeffrey Schwarz's schedule allows for her work. When the council concurred with that time frame, a <br /> 160 member commented that there is anticipation that the necessary work will be completed. The city <br /> 161 attorney suggested that any written materials should be submitted in advance of the meeting to allow <br /> 162 for proper council review. The mayor suggested that the council will discuss the matter first at the <br /> 163 work session early in July and all parties are invited to attend that discussion. <br /> 164 <br /> 165 Council Member Roeser moved to approve Resolution No. 12-29 as amended to reflect a public <br /> 166 hearing date of July 9, 2012. Council Member Rafferty seconded the motion. Motion carried on a <br /> 167 unanimous voice vote. Mr. Grochala noted the petitioner's responsibility to serve proper notice. <br /> 168 <br /> 169 6B) 2012 Intersection Signal Improvements <br /> 170 i. Resolution No. 12-30,Approving a Joint Powers Agreement with Anoka County for <br /> 171 the Birch/Ware Signal Improvements; <br /> 172 ii. Resolution No. 12-31, Approving a Joint Powers Agreement with Anoka County for <br /> 173 the Main/Lake Signal Improvements. <br /> 174 <br /> 175 Community Development Director Grochala noted the two agreements with Anoka County governing <br /> 176 two intersection improvement projects. The agreements lay out cost sharing and administration for <br /> 177 the projects. He explained the total estimated costs, noting the split for city funding and county <br /> 178 funding and that construction should begin in August. Costs are estimated to be under what was <br /> originally projected by about twenty three percent. <br /> 4 <br />