01-19-2016 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Minutes January 19, 2016 Page 4 that this property had not been used for 40 years. He indicated that 99.9% of Elk River residents probably did not know this was public property. He felt $150 does not meet the intent of the public purpose law. He stated he would not support granting the street vacation. Councilmember Burandt stated she was in favor of the street vacation and felt this property, by vacating it, would result in a public good, as it would go back on the tax rolls. She didn't feel there was a specific amount of money that this definition needed to meet. She felt it important to remember that the road in question is an easement, which is different from city property. She felt a public good has been identified and would support vacating the property. Councilmember Westgaard stated Councihnember Burandt made a good point in remembering this property is an easement and not public property. He agrees as well that no matter the amount, placing this land back on the public tax rolls shows it's a benefit to the city. He asked if the law requires the property be split equally in half between the two adjoining properties, and if so, ones driveway isn't a five-foot setback and could that matter be resolved between the two property owners. Counsellor Beck stated the property would need to be split equally in half and that could be resolved between the two property owners by a transfer of all or a portion of the vacated right-of-way or by an application for a variance. Councilmember Westgaard also commented that he did not expect anything less from the DNR regarding their response to this request but the DNR's letter also states to notify them with the decision the council makes. He stated he supported this request and in support of the resolution granting the vacation. Councilmember Olsen stated he considered this property to be a city asset and to protect that, and because of that, he is not in favor of granting the street vacation. Councilmember Wagner stated she spent a considerable amount of time reviewing both sides of this request and feels she understands both sides. She stated each situation brought before the Council is taken on a case-by-case basis, and that each case has its own sex values and this would not set precedence. She stated she appreciates the what -if scenarios that staff proposes, as much of what a Council decides affects future councils and residents. She is in favor of vacating the property, as she does not see the immediate or near -future benefit for the city to hold onto the property, and little as the added tax dollars are, she felt it still adds to the bottom line. Moved by Councilmember Westgaard and seconded by Councilmember Wagner to adopt Resolution 16-07 granting a petition to vacate a public street as outlined in the staff report and based upon the following Findings of Fact: A. Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851, allows for the vacation of a public street if it appears in the interest of the public to do so. fUR