5. OPEN FORUM HANDOUT - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

At the time this Request for Action was brought before the easement was not listed in Exhibit B Conditions of Approval that went before you (see exhibit #3). After the City Council meeting we contacted the City to discuss the easement because we were not sure what was requested and what had been reviewed and after several discussions with City staff we learned that the easement was added and was going to be 20 feet along the entire western side of our property. We are coming before you today to ask that you amend the easement on the final plat of our request and only require the park dedication fee of $1,425.93. We feel that since the master plan indicates "Other Future Trails" are desired along the west side of Elk Lake Rd and not the east side this easement is not necessary. We feel that there may be some confusion by the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding our property. We reside within the city limits but live on a county road. This means that Sherburne County already has a 50 foot from center line easement on our property and has since we built our home. This easement would add an additional 20 feet onto the County's easement. As you may recall when CR 1 was widened several years ago many pine trees were lost due to the widening of the road. After the road was widened we hand planted over 500 pine trees along the western side of property next to the 50 foot easement to help create a barrier between the busy road and our property due to the increase in road noise. Our property is long and narrow and we have approximately 1660 feet of road frontage on the western side which would mean that the city would acquire approximately .79 acres of land. This easement has the potential to allow the city to remove the only barrier we have between us and the busy road and place a path of some sort literally in our yard. This easement is confusing to us in many ways and we feel as though it was thrown in at the last minute without much thought. • There is nothing noted in the master plan that indicates anything about future trails or anything else along the east side of CR1. There is currently a bike path on the west side of CR 1 so we fail to understand the need for another bike path on the east side of the same road. The trails are desired along the west side of CR1 so why is this easement needed? • The Exhibit B -Conditions of Approval contained in the Resolution for Case No. P 16-18 that were in the board packet that evening did not contain item #6 relating to the easement. There were 5 items listed on Exhibit B and none of those items were related to an easement. The board minutes now show a 6th item listed in the conditions which is a trail easement with no width indicated see exhibit #4 --Elk River City council Minutes. How can the board packet that we received that evening and that was voted on to approve only contain 5 conditions but now the board minutes contain an item #6? • Because our property did not meet "The Neighborhood Parks Service Area text in Chapter 5 of the master plan, recreation facilities should be developed when 300 or more households within cluster developments or on lots less than 2 acres located within 1.5 miles of the park". We had to pay $1,425.93 in park dedication fees. How can we have to pay park dedication fees of $1,425.93 because our property doesn't meet the master plan and then have an additional easement added on?