10-08-2012 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES October 8, 2012 APPROVED 134 Petitioner's portion of the land,the bridge and the roadway to extent that he will utilize them. With that basis for calculation,the damages would come to approximately$52,000. Maintenance costs 136 would be beyond the calculation of damages. He explained that the HOA has reported that 137 maintenance costs are not the same every year and there are costs to plan for in the future. The 138 resolution reflects the option that Petitioner would pay 1/6 of the cost of maintenance of the bridge 139 and 1/6 of 12 percent for the roadway. 140 141 Council Member Roeser asked how Mr. Johnson would receive information about maintenance since 142 he would not be a member of the HOA. Attorney Langel explained that damages and future costs 143 would be a private matter between the HOA and Mr. Johnson and he could specify that in the action. 144 145 Council Member O'Donnell clarified that the cartway would,by default, be established as a public 146 cartway but that the HOA could request the council to accept it as a private cartway by resolution. 147 148 Attorney Joe Barnett, on behalf of Petitioner Adam Johnson, addressed the council. He pointed out 149 that it is clear that the threshold for establishing the cartway is met. Mr. Johnson is concerned that, in 150 determining damages,the council should clearly understand that his use of the roadway and bridge 151 will just be access and he will have no ownership rights. The damage estimate offered by Mr. 152 Johnson represents that best. He won't be causing a burden to the HOA. 153 154 Mark Smith, HOA member,told the council that he believes the professional appraisal of damages 155 submitted by the HOA represents best, or even under, a fair assessment of the damages. He believes '56 that the Petitioner should be able to move across the bridge and then directly down to his property- Ll57 that would be less use of the roadway. Mr. Smith also pointed out that the roadway also has a storm 158 drain element that was very expensive; he's not certain that is being taken into consideration. Also 159 how would enforcement be handled? Attorney Langel responded that the damage amount determined 160 by the council would eventually become a judgment and would be enforceable as such. 161 162 The council discussed establishment of the cartway and the following elements: 163 - The threshold for a cartway is there; 164 - The private bridge and roadway involved are quite expensive; 165 - The suggestions for the amount of damages range from $1,800 to more than $700,000; the 166 attorney is presenting a damage suggestion between those two; 167 - A question of drainage infrastructure and how it may serve the Petitioner's property has been 168 raised; 169 - A suggestion has been raised to shorten the cartway to the end of the bridge but it's unclear if 170 that is topographically possible; would a shortened cartway mean lower maintenance cost; 171 - Use of the property may be discussed but not as part of establishment of the cartway; 172 173 Some council members indicated that they still have questions about establishment of the cartway. 174 The council concurred that a special meeting would be held on October 15, 2012 at the site of the 175 proposed cartway and bridge. 176 177 Council Member Roeser indicated that he sent information to the city administrator including an ,178 alternative for this situation. He asked that staff share that information with the council. 4