11/25/1985 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

0198 COUNCIL MEETING November 25, 1985 Page Eight Eilene Rolstad said she has lived on Holly Drive since 1960 and did not object to keeping it open for traffic but wanted to make sure they don't expect them to pull them out of the mud at 3:00 - 4:00 in the morning. Mayor Benson said he did not know how this could be stopped. Nancy Rolstad said that the people should be told what maintained really means. She did not remember the road being maintained enough so that a car could be driven down the road. Just because this is an easement does not mean that the roadway has to be main- tained. Mr. Behr said signs will not work. This has been tried but did not work. The roadway has to be blocked. People have come down this road and have tried to break into his house four times. Mr. Reinert said the Council will have to make a policy decision; keep it as a road right of way or vacate it. He favored just holding it for future use and felt this was the intent of the petition. Mr. Behr said if the City has ownership or liability for this roadway the City would be liable if people try to break into his house. 1 Mr. Klimik asked about the width of the road and asked if the City will fill in a swamp to make the roadway 60' wide. Mayor Benson said prob- ably nothing will be done with the surface at this time. Mr. Volk said when it is improved to City standards a 30' road will be placed in the middle of the 60' right of way. Mr. Marier said he felt that what is being considered at this time is just maintaining the easement of the road not improving the road as well as minimum maintenance for the utility providers in that area. Mr. Klimik asked about a fence he has placed on the City right of way. Mr. Marier said it probably would not have to be removed if it is not needed. Ms. Rolstad asked if the City maintained all City easements. It was explained that the City does not. She asked who is responsible for utility easements. It was explained that the utility company must be able to get to their lines for maintenance. Mr. McKenna said he had spoken to the former City Attorney regarding this situation and he had informed Mr. McKenna that the City had forfeited this right of way through failure to maintain it. He asked Mr. Hawkins if he had a different opinion. Mr. Hawkins said it is his opinion that the City has not abandoned any interest in this right of way. He has not seen any indication that the actions of the City would constitute an abandonment of the right of way. Mr. McKenna asked if there was some case law already on the books that would show that the City has lost its interest now whether or not they think they have.