Laserfiche WebLink
was not exiting the site. Emergency work was done and the contractor used that drive for access <br /> with heavy equipment. The drive was already in poor condition. After emergency work was <br /> completed the damage was brought to Mr. Newell's attention. The City would then replace the <br /> sidewalk and drive approach. Mr. Newell stated that it was the property owner's solution that the <br /> alley could be vacated then he would be willing to call the rest of it no problem. The owner <br /> would acquire the property except for the easements and the City would not be obligated to <br /> replace the sidewalk or approach. If a sa�ety hazard would occur the sidewalk would be repaired <br /> orreplaced. <br /> Mr. Schiller asked why the contractor wouldn't have to pay, assuming that they had property <br /> damage insurance. Mr. Newell stated that the contractor accessed the property at the direction of <br /> the City. Damage to the sidewalk was already evident, as much as 98-99% of it. The property <br /> owner acknowledges that most of the damage was done before the contractor accessed the <br /> property. <br /> Mr. John stated that functionally, the alley had been vacated and the alley approach is no longer <br /> there as it was removed when the cleaners constructed the parking lot and incorporated it into <br /> their parking area. Mr. Newell stated that was correct and that there is a vacated railroad <br /> easement on the south end. The owner was allawed to pave over the approach when the site was <br /> developed. <br /> Mr. John stated that comparable situations should be dealt with proactively and it should be <br /> understood that once land is vacated and the City retains an easement, if the sewer is excavated <br /> the City will only put back what has been displaced. Mr. Newell stated that is generally the case <br /> although property owners at times are responsible for structures that are not appropriate to be <br /> built in an easement. <br /> There were no objectors present. <br /> It was moved and seconded (John/Anderson)to forward Cal. No. 02-09 to City Council with <br /> recommendation for approval. Motion carried unanimously. <br />