08-07-84 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 7, 1984 PAGE 4 Eder stated that there still remains a question as to the ownership of the 33' easement. Washington County has been asked to research this, and to date they have not responded to the city staff as to who owns this 33' easement. Mr. Durand stated that he has approximately 3.75 acres and there is a 33' easement into the property from 30th Street to allow access to this property, and that he is asking a variance for a 12' driveway onto his property. He further stated that he would like to split the property into two parcels. Mr. Durand stated this easement is a public easement which was granted when his uncle purchased the property in 1946, to benefit the use of the property. Mazzara asked if the document Mr. Durand presented indicated that this 33' easement gave exclusive rights to the Durand property. Fraser suggested that Mr. Durand's document be reviewed by the city's legal staff for clarification. The City Engineer reviewed his report of July 20, 1984 in which he states that it would be appropriate to grant a road frontage variance because of the hardship of unbuildability. However, he also states in this letter that the request for a simple lot division be denied unless significant hardship can be demonstrated as this is the action the council has taken on similar requests in the past. The Engineer further stated that it was his understanding that the lot was 3.38 acres, not 3.75 acres as stated by Mr. Durand, and this is something that should be clarified. Donald Durand, adjancent property owner, stated that Richard Durand has a 6' encroachment onto his property (which is now in litigation) and he would like this problem resolved before this lot split is granted. Bill Taylor, adjacent property owner, stated that his abstract reads that this 33' easement is for the use of the public; and he would interpret that as meaning someday a village road would go thru. He asked if there are going to be homes back there, is there a better way to get a road back there? Mr. Taylor further stated that the easement area is now a drainage area for heavy rains and in the spring, and no matter what is done, something will have to be done with the water or it will end up in everyones basement along the street. Carol Kuettner, Planning Commission member, stated that the Planning Commission had concerns with the 1966 lot split -- what was the council thinking of when they allowed this parcel to be landlocked. Should we check our records to find out why this was done the way it was? Klaers stated the County will continue to research this question of the 33' easement. The Examiner of Titles will give us his opinion as to the ownership of this parcel as soon as possible. {