Laserfiche WebLink
T <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />City Council Regular Meeting Minutes <br />April 25, 2023 <br />Page 4 <br />the land and Mr. Grittman stated the Hannays Group. They are requesting to put fencing on their <br />property. <br />Mayor Stille stated he looked at City Council Meeting Minutes from 1999. The City paid <br />$135,000 for a 24sf easement for the Hitching Post and an 84sf easement near the Dairy Queen. <br />The City paid money for the easements in 1999. <br />Councilmember Webster asked what the benefit is to St. Anthony for vacating the easement. Mr. <br />Grittman stated that is the decision point for the Council. If there is no longer a need to preserve <br />this or have a property interest to return it to the property owners. <br />Mr. Nathan Brandenberg, attorney for the applicant, appeared before the Council. He stated Mr. <br />Grittman's presentation did a good job of outlining the situation. The applicant is fine with <br />tabling this. The utility easements are not being requested to be released. At the time the property <br />was purchased by Hannays there was a possible plan to develop a park on the site. At this time <br />there is no plan for a park. This is what has brought the request forward. The parking lot is in <br />need of resurface and lighting. The applicant does not want to pay for these improvements only <br />to find the easement will not be vacated. <br />Mayor Stille closed the public hearing at 7:32 p.m. <br />Councilmember Randle questioned what this would be preserved for. The property has been <br />empty for 8-10 years. <br />Mayor Stille stated Council was advised by ULI to preserve the corridor. The easement gives the <br />City some leverage to help facilitate some redevelopment at some point. <br />Councilmember Jenson stated the $135,000 paid for the easements, would the City request those <br />funds come back to the City. Mayor Stille stated the decision is do we want to have additional <br />leverage to develop the site in the future. <br />Councilmember Webster there are so few places that are open spaces for new housing. The <br />southern gateway would be a possible site for that. She does not see a benefit to the City to <br />vacate the easement at this time. <br />Councilmember Walker stated he concurs. <br />Mayor Stille stated he would not want to give this leverage up especially since it was paid for. <br />There was a consensus of 4 Councilmembers. <br />Motion by Councilmember Webster, seconded by Councilmember Walker, to table consideration <br />of the Land Use Application to Vacate — 2550 Hwy 88 and direct Staff to come back to Council <br />with a Resolution for consideration. <br />Motion carried 4-1 (Randle). <br />