Loading...
PL SUBCOM 10/24/1973 - 31142�.; s.�,�-- � � � CITY OF FRIDLEY PLATS & SUBDIVISIONS- STREETS & UTILITIES SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING OCTOBER 24, 1973 PAGE 1 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Harris called the meeting to order at 8:05 P.M. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Harris, Christensen, French, Meissner Members Absent: Forster Others Present: Darrel Clark, Community Development Adm. APPROVE PLATS & SUBDIVISIONS-STREETS & UTILITIES SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES: AUGUST 15, 1973 MOTION by French, seco,nded by Christensen, that the Plats & Subdivisions-Streets & Utilities Subcommittee minutes of August I5, 1973 be approved as written. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimousZy. 1. CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED REGISTERED LAND 5URVEY, P.S. #73-08, BY HARLAND BERRY: Described as being 180 foot lot extensions into Locke Lake, (part of Lot 3, Revised Auditor's Subdivision No. 23) of Lots 2-6, Block 1, Ostman's First Addition, Lot 4, Ostman's Second Addition, and Tracts A& B, Registered Land Survey No. 20, generally located along the West and North shores of Locke Lake. Mr. Harland Berry was present. Mr. Clark said the lake bottom of Locke Lake is under private ownership. It is owned by Otto Ostman. Some property owners on this lake do not own property to the water's edge. There were deeds drawn up, but because this is torrens property, the County Auditor would not a��ept a metes and bounds description. Mr. Berry said these deeds went all the way through until they got to the Register of Title. The taxes were paid this year, but the property owners can't get clear title until this Registered Land Survey is recorded. Mr. Christensen said this property is already on the tax rolls then. Mr. Clar� said it was. Mr. Berry had copies of the deeds which were shown t�o the 3ub- committee. Mr. Harris said on some of the other lots they already have extensions into the lake. Mr. Berry said this land was deeded before 1968, at which time the law was changed on torrens property. Plats & Subs -Str. & Util. Sub. Meeting - October 24, 1973 Page 2 Mr. Berry said all the property owners were in agreement with this request. Mr. Antell, 6801 Hickory Street N.E., and Mr. Bolkcom, 6821 Hickory Street N.E., were present, and M�. Berry had the signa- tures of all the property owners who were deeded the 180 foot exten- sions. Mr. Harris said he thought at one time there was a proposal that the entire lake bottom was going to be platted. Mr. Clark said at the time that Donovan Schultz platted out Registered Land Survey No. 42, it was thought that all the owners could join together and replat, so all the property lines would come together in the middle of the lake. This does involve so many property owners that it doesn't look as if this will happen. Mr. Clark said from the City's standpoint, the more extension of property lines that can be handled together, the better, but I don't think we want to hold up this request because of that. Mr. Harris asked if Mr. Ostman owned all the lake bottom. Mr. Berry said he owned it all except for a small portion owned by Mr. Scherer in the Scherer Addition. Mr. Berry said this had gone tax delinquent about 10 years ago. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Clark to check on this property and see that it didn't go up for sale in a forfeiture sale. Mr. Berry said he didn't think it would come up again for sale for another three years. Mr. Clark said the same thing should be said for the lake bottom if it should go tax delinquent. Mr. French said he thought this request was a good step in the right direction. Mr. Clark said this has been approved by the County and will satisfy titles on the property you have deeds for. What it would mean if this was not approved is that it would be difficult to sell this property with a clear title to the next owner. Mr. Harris asked if the taxes were paid on this property. Mr. Berry said all the taxes were paid by Donovan Schultz so he could register his Registered Land Survey. He said he had all the checks from the owners to pay the taxes, but when he got out to the County he found that the taxes were already paid. Mr. Clark said the Council should consider asking Mr. Ostman for a deed for the balance of the lake bottom. Mr. Harris said the City should have this, especially if they have to work on the dam. Mr. Christensen said he hadn't been aware that this was all private property. Mr. Clark said the dam was constructed and paid for by Mr. Ostman and the City took over the maintenance of it. Plats & Subs.-Str. & Util. Sub. Meeting - October 24, 1973 Page 3 Mr. Harris asked if there was a siltation problem. Mr. Clark said there is only normal siltation, however in 1965 when Highway #47 was under construction and there was flooding, there was a massive siltation problem. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Clark that if the City got title to the lake bottom, would they be responsible for maintaining it, for instance, if it had to be dredged. Mr. Clark said they could be, however, the benefiting property owners might be assessed the cost for maintaining the lake. Mr. Harris said he thought this would come under the jurisdiction of public waters. Mr. Clark said he could talk to Mr. Roy Schultz of the Department of Natural Resources and check on this. Mr. Berry said it was his under�tanding that the State only has jurisdiction on mearider lakes and this can never be considered a�eandered lake. Mr. W. Balkcom said the dam could be washed out and there could be a Creek running through the lake. Mr. Harris asked how this was affected by the Creek and River Preservation Management Ordinance. Mr. Clark said it follows the shoreline of Locke L�ke. Mr. Clark said the dam elevation can be controlled. Mr. Harris asked the property owners present, if they had any objection to the City owning the lake bottom on the balance of the lake. They said they had no objection. Mr. French said he thought it should be a stipulation of this request to encourage the City Council to obtain a deed for the balance of Locke Lake that is still in private ownership by Otto Ostman. This would ensure that if the property went tax forfeit, it would not go back into private ownership. Mr. Balkcom said a great part of the lake is only two to three feet deep. Mr. Harris asked why the size of the extensions were 80 feet by 180 feet. Mr. Clark said that just happens to be the description on the deeds that were deeded away. Mr. Clark said he thought the extensions of the lots should be combined with the lots they are extending, so they cannot be separated. They should be all one tract or all one lot. It all depends on how much red tap� there would be, but the new tracts could be combined with the old tracts. There are deeds that are fileable. There should be one tax statement for each property. Plats & Subs.-Str. & Util. Sub. Meeting - October 24, 1973 Page 4 Mr. Meissner said he was concerned about the size of the extensions. The extensions by themselves, are buildable sites. As long as the deeds have already been started with the lot size, it would really complicate everything if the size were changed. Mr. Balkcom said they were made this size so there would be a margin if the lake went down. Mr. Harris said we are actually platting land locked lots. Mr. Clark said the lots they are extending are not land locked, and if we can find some way to tie the extensions to the existing lots, there won't be a problem. We can have the petitioners first try to replat this to tie the extensions onto the existing lots, or else a legal document can be executed to tie the two parcels together. Mr. Harris asked what the taxes were for the lake bottom. Mr. Berry said they were about $65 a year. Mr. Balkcom said he hoped it wouldn'.t increase the taxes if the two parcels were tied together. Mr. Clark said it shouldn't, however, they should check with the Assessor. Mr. Berry said if these two parcels were going to be made into one parcel for each owner, it could cost about $1,000 per lot for surveying, etc. Mr. Clark said he didn't think the lots would have to be surveyed because they couldn't put stakes out in the lake. He said he would contact Rollie Anderson, the County Surveyor, and see what this would involve. It might just be paper work, and the costs could be checked. Mr. Meissner said he didn't like being put in a position of approving something that was already a fact. Mr. Clark said this was done inadvertently because there has been a change in the law regarding torrens property. MOTION by French, seconded by Meissner, that the Plats & Subdivisions-5treets & Utilities Subcommittee recommend to the Planning Commission approval of the proposed registered land survey, P.S. #73-08, by Harland Berry, described as being 180 foot lbt ex- tensions into Locke Lake, (part of Lot 3, Revised Auditor's Subdivision No. 23), of Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, Block 1, Ostman's First Addition, Lot 4, Ostman's Second Addition, and Tracts A& B, Registered Land Survey No. 20, generally located along the West and North shores of Locke Lake, with the foZlowing stipulations: 1. Encourage that P.5. #73-08, a proposed registered Iand survey, include the now platted Iand with the extension into Locke Lake. 2. If this cannot be don�, a Iega1 document should be filed with the property that the two parcels cannot be separ�ted. Plats & Subs -Str & Util. Sub. Meeting - October 24, 1973 Page 5 3. The City investigate the possibi3ity of obtaining a deed to the remaining Zak� bottom property. Chairman Harris adjourned the meeting at 9:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, C� � Dorothy Ev son, Secretary