The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About7.a. LeForet Entrance Monument , '' CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: August 5, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: LeForet Entrance Monument AGENDA SECTION: Old Business PREPARED BY: Bud Osmundson AGENDA NO. City Engineer/Public Works Director I ATTACHMENTS: July 15th Executive Summary, July 2nd APPROVED BY: �� Cit Attorne Letter and "Quote" This item is before the Council after it was tabled at the July 15, 1997 meeting. City Council has many options available to them, some of which are listed below. 1 . The City can declare ownership of the monuments, repair the damaged monument which would cost 52,500 - 53,500 at a minimum; then add these monuments to the City's list of assets and insure them at a cost of approximately S 100 per year. This would allow the City the ability in the future to repair or demolish the monuments as deemed necessary. 2. Another option is to demolish the monuments now and not incur any further costs. , The costs incurred would include City crew time to raze the monuments and have ', Dakota Electric install a typical residential street light at the intersection. , 3. Another option is to just remove the part of the structure that has been damaged and leave the part of the monument closest to Diamond Path as is. With this option the City should insure these monuments and claim ownership, again with the ability to do what it wants in the future with the monuments. My understanding is that the homeowners association may present other options for these monuments. Regardless of the final decision made, Staff recommends that Council pass a motion directing Staff with its wishes. If it is determined to repair and claim ownership of the monuments, that should be put into the public record with a motion. RECOMMENDED ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION: 2 f� ' CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 15, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: LeForet Entrance Monuments AGENDA SECTION: Oid Business PREPARED BY: Bud Osmundson AGENDA NO,,-� � � A City Engineer/Public Works Director H ATTACHMENTS: City Attorney Letter, Sample Letter, City APPROVED BY: Council Meetin Minutes, Letters to Residents Attached is some additional information regarding the LeForet Entrance Monument that was damaged by City snowplow operations last fall and that was discussed at the June 17, 1997 City Council meeting. The City Attorney and Administrator will present this item to the Council for discussion. The fourth paragraph of the City Attomey's letter describes three options the Council has in taking action regarding the monuments. The first option is that the City could demolish and remove the monument and/or monuments as they are within the City right-of-way and no one has claimed ownership. This may create hard feelings for the residents within the subdivision. This option is available now or in the future. If the Council accepts ownership of these monuments, the City "could incur liability in the event of an injury resulting from the monument due to the proximity of the road (as a traffic hazard) or for injury to, for example, children playing on the structure." In addition, the City should place these items on the list of City assets and insure them. This would add approximately 5100 per year to the City's insurance bill. As we have previously stated, the estimated cost to repair the damaged monument will be approximately 52,500 - 53,500 at a minimum. It is clear that the homeowners have the responsibility to maintain the monuments. However, if major maintenance is required on the structures, such as tuck pointing or major reconstruction, the City does not have the ability to enforce these costs onto the residents of the subdivisicn and the general taxpayers may have to pay for those costs. Staff realizes ihe consequences of each of the options available to the Council. However this is a major policy decision and Staff can only advise Council as to the consequences of each option. My only recommendation is that if the monument is rebuilt that an additional curb be constructed on the street side of the monument which will provide some protection to the monument. RECOMMENDED ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION: 1 ... . . � � .,� � s � s �_ �f� G �. ,� s T , `� �j� �t — � v�-- -- / �� r U/� l�� l UyZ�' r � C��t G�t F�J i, r- , � S; �� ,�'� ,—� W�/ � r f c� u..� N�, /(�`f EG� �.t/c G �r �JE S SOUTH METRD MASONRY � �" `�� `�' 811 8th Street, Apt #14 • Farminton, MN 55024 Phone: (612) 463-2443 To: �'t�-t� o-F �oSevYx.�u..�l"�- INVOICE �`J� 1 3 $ 5 Ja b � D�w rnoN,� �r�-Trr �o�-p �4S�f�GL�'!,� !Y1/t/ DATE �''�'�� P.O. NUMBER TERMS � � �31D �- � QUANTITY DESCRIPTION PRICE � �'e bCu ld �S�� er�� /'�°s�� e�� C'a�o. �r��e �vi// r�e,��r�.� C��l�Ci� a r� �C��o v�� md�-�zzr rxn� Si�l�rmm� c�Gt.u/k � .v7'�'(' � LIJC�, � �,iD. , � � � � PLEASE PAY THIS INVOICE. NO STATEMENT WILL BE SENT. - I 470 Pil(ab�:�:Ccnc�r I � � ,� �UU JULLC}l�StXCIt JCCCCL � . � � ' Minneap�lis�lN �5402 I (G l2) 33i-930U celephone I � , (G t 2) 33%-93I O fi�c II e-mail:acR•sC�kennedy-gravrn.com � CH.3RTERED CHARI.Fti I.. LNFr.VERE II Attomc at Law Y Ihruti l)ial Ibl2)?37A215 '' July 2, 1997 ' 3u� Os�nar.d��:: City Engineer City of Rosemount 2875 145th Street West P. O. Box 5 i 0 Rosemount, MN 5506K-t)51!) RE: LeForet Entrance Monument ' - Dear Bud: ' ' • -- . . . -.� ,- . � . . . . ; . . � � � , ;._ . I have reviewed the Declaration of Covenants�for the LeForet Additiori and a letter dated June 24, 1997 frorn Mr.'James Sample on behalf of the LeForet Neighborhood Association, and offer the follawing c;omments on the City's options and obligations. The letter from Mr. Sample states that.neither the Association nor its individual members has any desire to have any le�al or proprietary ownership of the structure, and asserts that the original owner of the subdivision stated that the structures were turned over to the City. The insurance imBlications of this assertion are that: (1) no one wi(1 claim ownership of the structure, and therefore the City's liability policy, which might provide c:overage for ciamage to the property of another individual caused by the acts of a City employee, would not provicie coverage in this case since no one's property has been damaged except property owned by the City, and (2) if the property belongs to the City, there is no property c:asualty insurance c:overage to assist in the recon�truction of the monument because, at leatit according to the LMCtT, the City has not secured insuran�e for these structures. Since neither the Atisociation nor it� members claim the improvementti as their property, the City may do with the manument a, the Council sees fit. That is, the Council could clemolish and remove the monument, ieave it as it is, or repair it. If the Courn:il ac:cepts that the City has ownership of the improvement1, the City could incur liability in the event of an injury resulting from the monument due to .he proximity of the road (as a traffic hazard} or for injury to, for example, children playing on the structure. However, 1 do not know whether there iti anything �•�.i.i.>� i,,� P"�.:1'...; . . . ' «, Bud Osmundson Ju(y 2, 1997 Page 2 about the loc:ation or design of these improvemen�ti whic;h would expose the City to any unusual likelihood of liability. Apart from the cost of repair of the monument and the potential for liability, there i� the issue of the cost of ongoing maintenance for the improvements. The properties in the LeForet Addition are subject to a declaration of covenants which state� that"all building plot owners will be responsible for the maintenance of the guard house and entrance gates." If the owners of property in the Addition fulfill this obligation, the City would not have any costs for ongoing maintena�ce. Hcw�ver, this c�venant is enforc;eable by owners of lotti in the s�bciivision or b;� the Barzh Development Corporation (the original owner) against each other; it is not enforceable by the City. If you have any further quesuons about any of these issues, piease give me a call. Very truly yours, �I �� I Charles L. LeFevere I CLL/cmm ••t.�,i.:�:,�,i � P.:f.:l`.-.1 � � � . . . . . �