Adopt Resolution #21-138 Relieving Property Owners of Reimbursement Requirement for Conservation and Trail Easement Partial Vacation Associated with Retaining Wall at 7349 168th Cir NW; Case of Jodell and John Seaman

The purpose of this case is to consider a final settlement agreement with John and JoDell Seaman (the "Homeowners") for an encroachment into a Conservation and Trail Easement along Trott Brook in the Brookfield Neighborhood. This is the final step in a three-step process.
 

1. Settlement Agreement per Code Enforcement Case (approved Summer, 2020)
2. Floodplain Encroachment (approved by Council in November, 2020)
3. Conservation and Trail Easement Encroachment Requiring Easement Vacation and Partial LCCMR Grant Reimbursement (Current Step)

 
Staff became aware of the retaining wall through the City's Code Enforcement program in May 2020. The Applicant has stated that the intent of the fill was to address erosion occurring in their back yard. There may have been erosion issues along the trail, but the City does not have any documentation of this item. This is one potential solution to this issue amongst other alternatives (some requiring fill, some not). At the end of the day, the Property Owner has the ability to make this request to the City for consideration. The City can choose to approve or deny at this point. Staff is comfortable with any solution so long as said solution meeting applicable requirements. This is a very complex case that includes numerous layers of government regulation. Staff has attached the November, 2020 City Council case for more detailed background.

This step is the result of the Settlement Conference related to the Code Enforcement Case. The City is attempting to find a compromise. The intent of tonight is not to debate the boundaries of floodplain or conservation easement.

This case is focused on the Conservation and Trail Easement (previous approvals focused on Floodplain Amendment, which was required in order to move onto this step). This easement was secured with a grant from the State of Minnesota, prior to the development of the Brookfield Neighborhood. If approved, partial repayment back to the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources would be required. The estimated cost ranges from $500 to $2,000, depending on outcome of a required appraisal. The City Council will need to decide whether this partial repayment is the responsibility of the City or the Homeowner that installed the improvement.
 
Staff has had difficulty finding a certified appraiser willing to do this required appraisal that meets the requirements of the LCCMR Grant. Staff is now working with a third appraiser, and has requested that LCCMR Staff consider an alternative scope for this minor encroachment. Staff is presenting a compromise solution that allows the Homeowner to finalize the improvement while still retaining the ability to require reimbursement based on final outcome of the LCCMR process.

While this individual case may have minor implications to floodplain and Conservation Easement, it does open the door to a number of other requests. Now that Staff has a better handle on the process to vacate portions of the Conservation and Trail Easement, Staff plans on holding a neighborhood meeting to discuss broader options while still maintaining a majority of the floodplain and Conservation Easement.
 
Alternatives:
 

1. Reimbursement Agreement (Alternative #1)  – City allows Owners to finish project; Owners agree to reimburse the appraisal amount when approved by LCCMR
2. Reimbursement Agreement (Alternative #2) – City allows Owners to finish project; Owners agree to reimburse the appraisal amount when approved by LCCMR; City agrees to waive reimbursement amount if a broader corridor solution is approved
3. Relieve this Property Owner of this reimbursement amount and agree to have the City be responsible for the reimbursement and continue to plan for the corridor-wide solution to vacate the portion of the Conservation and Trail Easement between the trail and back yards (note – floodplain boundaries would still remain)

In recognition of 1) the perceived complexity of the boundary of the Conservation and Trail Easement and overlap with floodplain boundary, creating a unique physical condition; and 2) the complexities and delays in obtaining outside agency approvals; and 3) the need to look at a broader corridor solution, Staff is recommending Alternative #3, relieving the Property Owners of the reimbursement agreement and agreeing that the City will pay the required reimbursement to vacate the portion of the Conservation and Trail Easement.

The Floodplain Boundaries will remain, but the City has since better defined smaller floodplain amendment processes in coordination with the DNR (may not apply to all properties).
 
With recent feedback and direction from LCCMR, Staff will now begin a broader corridor approach, beginning with a public workshop.
 

Motion to adopt Resolution #21-138 relieving the Property Owners of the reimbursement agreement and agreeing that the City will pay the required reimbursement to vacate the portion of the Conservation and Trail Easement.