05-18-99 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Teague stated a 40-foot greenspace setback will be required for the Freeway Towing proposal. The issue is where the setback will be located. Is the setback off I-35W? The property cannot be accessed from I-35W. Teague pointed out the location where Freeway Towing proposes to provide the 40-foot strip of greenspace. Freeway Towing would like a 20-foot greenspace, through a special use permit, off I-35W, which would constitute the side street. The location of the setback will be considered when Freeway Towing formally presents its proposal next month. O’Brien asked about access to the south property and the easement to maintain the billboard. Does that include any development on that property? Teague responded that, as it is now, nothing could be developed on that portion other than the billboard. If this piece of property were combined with another property, it could possibly be developed. O’Brien asked for clarification of the billboard parcel. Teague showed the parcel area. O’Brien said now was the time to make sure the easements are done so the site could be developed. Don Leier, owner of the berry farm, explained the history of his parcel. Schiferl asked if the property is divided into three parcels. Leier stated the berry patch that is south of the proposed lot split is one parcel. Schiferl stated that developing the berry patch is not the issue. Teague stated the berry patch would have to be combined with another parcel before it could be developed. Schiferl asked what language would need to be included with the easement language. Teague responded the surveyor would draw up the legal language providing a cross easement to the property to the south to access across Parcel B. The language would be subject to review by the City Attorney. Schiferl stated that no parking would be allowed in the ingress and egress easement. Would that apply to the area in question? Teague responded negatively, only Parcel A would be involved. Baker stated that the proposal would provide easements to the new Freeway Towing site, but it would not be a dedicated easement per se. It would give Mr. Leier access through their lot to the gate in back. Teague stated the easement would not be specific to this 20-foot area, but would be through the site in general. Zisla stated he did not think the City should get involved in this type of easements that are not specifically located. These easements can create trouble in the future. The intent is for the plat to require access to another property, but not specifying where that would be. The best the City could do now is to recommend that the parties negotiate a specific easement agreement. How does that get shown on the plat? Would it be specified in a notation to the plat, subject to an unspecified easement in an unspecified location to access another property? Schiferl asked if a surveyor can frame this language before the next Council meeting. Teague responded affirmatively. Zisla stated that would be a legal description, not an easement. Baker asked about the location of the existing easement. Teague responded no easement exists; Leier has used it for years and would have to make an adverse possession claim. Stark is agreeable to providing Leier that legal access. Zisla stated the City should not have to negotiate the easement. The owner should record the easement along with the plat as a condition of the plat. Zisla referred to the Staff recommendation, Condition #1, “Ingress & Egress shall be subject to review and approval of the City Attorney.” Zisla suggested that the condition be more specific by saying “and driveway maintenance agreements.” To get the lot split done, the applicant would agree to a simple ingress/egress easement. Since this easement is not defined, the property owners could have a disagreement about the easement in the future. Because this is a substitute for a public street, a driveway maintenance agreement should be provided now and the City Attorney should review it. Stark stated that was part of the purchase agreement. Zisla stated the easement should be part of the plat and should be a I:\COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\MINUTES\1999\05-18-99.WPD