06/02/2009 - City Council Public Works Committee
AGENDA
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING
TUESDAY, JUNE 2, 2009
4:30-5:30 P.M.
CONFERENCE ROOMS 2A&B
1. AGENDA ADOPTION
II. TREE TRIMMING CLAIM AND RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION
III. OTHER BUSINESS
IV. ADJOURNMENT
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
June 2, 2009
II, NEW BUSINESS
TREE TRIMMING CLAIM AND RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION
ISSUE: As a result of a $50,000 claim for trespass and damages filed against the City by the
property owner of 3120 Pilot Knob Rd. (Gordon Huisentruit) for trimming 9 pine trees
adjacent to Quarry Lane, the City's insurance company (LMCIT) investigated and
subsequently denied the claim. But the LMCIT also recommended that the City consider
acquisition of sufficient right of way to mitigate potential future claims.
At the May 5 Council Listening Session, the Council directed the Public Works Committee
to review the LMCIT recommendation in conference with the City Attorney's office to
determine a suggested course of action for the City Council's consideration.
BACKGROUND:
• On February 12, 2009, a City Public Works Street Maintenance crew trimmed 9 pine trees
along the south property line of 3120 Pilot Knob Rd (adjacent to Quarry lane) to eliminate a
sight obstruction of the west bound Stop Sign at the corner of Quarry lane and Pilot Knob
Rd. These trees are located approximately 7 feet behind the Quarry Lane curb line and were
believed to be located within a typical 13 foot boulevard (i.e. public right of way) and the
City's responsibility.
• Immediately following that maintenance activity, the property owner informed the City that
the public ROW extends only 1 foot behind the curb and that the trees are in located on
private property. They subsequently filed a claim for $50,000 for Treble damages and
trespassing (see attached cover letter from the multi page claim document).
• The claim was submitted to the City's insurance company (LMCIT) for adjustment. On April
22, they denied the claim based on City Ordinance 7.08 - Regulation of Grass, Weeds, Trees
and Landscaping (see attached copy of Ord).
ACTION FOR CONSIDERATION:
• An attorney for the LMCIT also opined in a separate privileged communication to the City
recommending follow up action by the City in regards to possible acquisition of additional
right of way (enclosed under separate cover). The City Attorney will be present to provide
legal guidance in this discussion.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Cover letter of submitted claim, enclosed on pages a through
2. Damage Claim submitted photos, enclosed on pages through
3. Pre-trimming photos, enclosed on page d
4. Ordinance 7.08, enclosed on pages through
5. LMCIT privileged communication, enc osed under separate cover.
I
'WME
,6LgW
NG p~PAR~Nt~NT
Mr. Kenneth R. Newlin L~G'j~EER
Grandson of
Mr. Gordon A.. Huisentruit
3120 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55121
March 10, 2009 Area code 218-
Telephone 11259-7403
259-7418
To: The City of Eagan
Mayor, Mike Maguire
Eagan, City Counsel
Eagan's Dept of Public Works
Mr. Tom Calbort
Enclosed are
1. Front Letter
One page
2. Letter of demand for damages caused by the negligent's throughout the
offices of Eagan's Department of Public Works, upon the property of Gordon
Huisentruit at 3120 Pilot Knob Road Eagan MN 55121..
Six Pages
3. Letters from 1981 concerning this act of negligence and the proof there in
Six Pages
4 Copy's of Quit Claim Deed 585547 & Form No 32-M
Four Lrg Pages
5.. Photos of the Huisentruit's property and surrounding vicinity that look the
way the Huisentruit's property had, prior to this act of vandalism, caused by
The City of Eagan's Department of Public Works (Approximately 33 pictures)
Eight Pages
6 Proposal from Timberland Tree Spade Services of Farmington MN
One Page
7. Proposal from Quality Tree Moving of Stillwater MN
One Page
8 Proposal from 39 S TA Q-r 514 40 E 7 7"j•.ac .
.Y'qGjq-"
9. Receipts of services rendered that I Kenneth Newlin had to perform in
retros ection of this proximate causation to this negligence.
10
a
Mr. Kenneth R Newlin
Grandson of
Mr. Gordon A. Huisentruit
3120 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55121
March 10, 2009 Area Code
218-
Telephone # 259-7403
Or 259-7418
To the City of Eagan
Dear Mayor, City Counsel,
Mr. Tom Calbort and Russ Matthys, P.E.
Of Eagan's Dept of Public Works
Tom Calbort knows why this demand is being drafted and full reason it is
warranted to having this fully settled in thirty days. As warranted under Minnesota
Statutes: Trespassing, Cutting on 30ft pine trees 9ft up on private secluded property,
taking away this very seclusion, with no fore warning for this unwarranted act. The
wood itself stolen off of Mr.. Gordon Huisentruit property is very much also, still
against the law. I, Kenneth R Newlin, have been given full authority by my
Grandfather, Mr. Gordon A. Hulsentruit, to address the problem herein.
On Feb. 12, 2009, or there about, the Eagan Dept of Pubic Works came out to
3120 Pilot Knob Rd, Eagan, MN 55121, In Violation of Minnesota Statutes of Law to
include M.S.160.20 sub 10. A town must give written notice to abutting owner of its
intentions, 14 days before any removal could be undertaken on Mr. Huisentruit's
property.. M.N. 160.20 sub 5, states 10 days notice if a hearing has been set, along
with the opportunity to be heard. Sub 6, a notice of determination should be made,
Sub7, Gives Mr. Huisentruit, by law, a chance to appeal, this decision..
Sub 4, Is Irrelevant due to the facts of this case is in part as follows: Eight of the
nine trees butchered this day, all but one starts 78ft from the curb of Pilot Knob Rd
and Quarry Lane. Thirty ft is the law for parking a car from this stop sign. Why
should Eagan's Department of Public Works think 140ft plus is needed, and what is
their reasoning when these 8 of 9 that were butchered are nearly 5ft up on a hill?
One can not see much but dirt driving by anyway In fact, this hill was created in
1.981 when all this was addressed, with much disputing between the city and The
Hu€sentruis. These letters will show that Mr.. Calbort, head of this dept then, as now,
knew full well, this land had been in dispute in times passed. He is negligent in his
decision to not making sure; he was not looking at one of the faulty section maps.
By going to the county recorder to again be sure, where the easement is on the
section map, and compare it to the quit claim deed #585547, that Mr. Calbort
personally had drawn up in the summer of 1981,
Mr. Calbort sent the crew of Russ Matthys to the Huisentruit's address without
looking further into just where the property line actually lays. This is where I
understand Tort comes into reality, as this raping of 9ft of limbs off of these trees of
Mr.. Huisentruit, is in fact, due to Mr. Calbort's contributory negligence and his
improper conduct, for not making sure all faulty section maps were destroyed in
1981. This is well a breach of his legal duties, the duties he possesses and what they
require of him, as well as, obligates him to be aware, of all property lines, before
commencing his position of authority and sending crews out to do any work.
It is well documented that In June of 1981- August 1981 Mr. Calbort received
numerous documents concerning the property line; (All these documents and
3
conformation letters are enclosed-) The fact that, the 165ft in question, (the
easement) of this property, was taken when a dirt road was put in many years
earlier, not 33 1/2 ft. that they thought unlawfully back then was theirs. This was the
second dispute over these faulty section maps concerning the Huisentruits property.
All the land taken then was My Grandmother's, nothing south was taken from the
owner of the farm land at that time, nor was it taken during this 1981 dispute, as
this road is said to not have been widened.
These arguments with Mr. Calbort are the very reason why so much emphasis was
put into the paper work from the Attorneys offices of Paul H. Hauge Attorney for the
City of Eagan, to insure there would never be reason to dispute it in the future! But
here we are, Feb 2009, and Mr. Calbort did not "remember" the confrontations with
all those concerned in this matter? That even had to go in front of the Mayor and the
City Council in June, July and August of 1981! Hard to believe, considering all the
hassles as a young Mr.Calbort and what he went through, over this mess at this time.
The first letter I have is one of three, dated June 19, 1981_ It is From David G.
Keller Attorney, at the law office of Paul H. Hauge. It states: Tom Calbort (Colbert),
of the City of Eagan, received letters regarding the easements relative to this
property, and that the situation with Quarry Lane had been resolved, entirely to the
Huisentruit's satisfaction.
Though, as you will see, this was not the case In 1981, as the lane was
reconstructed and a hill was formed. The access to the garage, which entrance is
from Quarry Lane, became totally useless, No cars and very few trucks can
maneuver the incline created at this time in 1981.At this time; the Huisentruits lost
the use of this garage for what it was intentionally built for, crushing My
Grandmother's Spirit at the time. This is the way it still stands today: impassable.
This has caused damage to more then one of my vehicles; finding this out the hard
way. Before 1981, this garage and driveway were level to the height of Quarry Lane..
The reason I bring this up, is so that you can see, the Huisentruit's are not
unknown to Mr, Tom Calbort, as, his name, is specifically mentioned more then just
once in these documented letters.. In another letter dated June 19, 1981 from David
G. Keller, it states the " controversy; (Notable word used here knowing My
Grandmother the way I did, as I spent my first 4yrs of life in her bedroom. The
house raised 6 kids at the same time; I was the youngest of my siblings.) My
Grandmother was at her wit's end over the fact that The City of Eagan's Department
of Public Works was not treating Her fairly. As it was Her land that was taken from
both sides, on more than this one occasion. Fact is My Grandmother never recovered
from the "controversy" over this mess in 1981. She quickly became incapacitated at
this time.
As She became so ill, She could not even feed her self, and was taken care of by
others at the end time of this controversy. I write this so that you can see where I
am coming from, and why we seek compensation under the fullest existent the law
allows. This is not vengeful, as nothing here within compensates for the losses of the
past. It just reminds us how we thought all this had been resolved with all the
promising letters from this period in 1981, which conclude as to the following:
"And the relationship to the trees" which you-Tom Calbort had indicated, "will not
be damaged by any of this construction". This is all the proof needed to show a jury
that you -Mr. Tom Calbort unquestionably, knew the trees at the North East corner
lot of Quarry Lane and Pilot Knob Rd are on the Huisentruits private secluded
property and never should have been approved for any cutting whatsoever
As letter #3 is addressed to you- Mr. Thomas Colbart from, Mr. David G. Keller
explaining various effects on the Huisentruit's property, including an error in the
making of the section maps, (which must 'not' have been corrected by you- Mr. T.
Calbort). Though this letter to you indicating a wider easement across the
Huisentruit's property for Quarry Lane than actually exists. Requesting that Tom
Calbort correct all the section maps and get a Quit Claim Deed # 585547 to be given
to the Huisentruit's from the City, deeding back to the Huisentruits the 13.5ft and
purchasing 2.5 ft from the plaintiffs which was under this err taken as an easement,
although it was the Huisentruit's private secluded property. This shows how much
you did know at this time in 1981, Mr. Calbort, and that very much was counting on
you to the keeping of the peace, concerning the property, and its lack of a right of
way or easement being only that of aprocsemently 1ft, from the north side of the
curb, not 1.1 plus feet or 16ft.
The unnecessary damage's Mr. Huisentruit claims is this 9ft of butchering due to
Mr. Caibort's negligence. It is in the way that these trees were so intentionally ruined,
as there is, no justification to the cutting away (nine feet) of branches, starting some
140 plus feet from a corner, when there is 78 plus feet from the corner to the first of
these Eight of nine cut, one is nearer to the corner yet it is still clearly on the private
land of the Huisentruit's.
So why, when just a few years ago there were three large pines, at this corner
and nothing was ever done or said about these trees, or ever in time past? I will tell
you why! At that time, Mr. Calbort knew this was Mr. Huisentruit's private property,
and His private property was respected by your people and as these trees grew this
property was respected by others. This is not the case today!
We as a societal group; via through our courts under punishment of the laws,
"that must be enforced, in the order for us to bring this respect back into our
society". Without it, "we crumble Into disrespect for government, throughout our
generations" until there are no laws to uphold.
I must further expound on the laws I understand broken during this violation on
the Huisentruit's property, His Civil Rights, "that includes, the right to equal
treatment under the law. No other trees anywhere in the vicinities were spotted cut
that day, nor 2 &1/2, weeks after when these pictures were taken, and no where
have they been cut this brutally.
Included in this package are pictures of their surrounding area all the trees of
similar landscape, in accordance to stop signs like that of Quarry Lane and Pilot Knob
Rd, in Eagan. I Kenneth Newlin drove up and down Pilot Knob Rd, Lone Oak Rd, and
Yankee Doodle Rd, all within a few miles of the Huisentruit home, nothing has been
found in accordance to the response I Kenneth R Newlin was told by Russ Matthys:
that they were out cutting trees exactly like this about the neighborhood that day.
He then included that they were going all over Eagan cutting trees in this fashion.
Mr. Hulsentruit's Civil Liberties, concerning: his ability to doing as he wants, on
his own property, and over the years watched what He envisioned become reality,
was then taken away from him, while he was home and totally oblivious to what was
going on upon his property. He went out his door, walked to his mail box, turned
around, and lost His composure, His belief, His faith in the system that exists in our
governing bodies and those we put in charge and the keeping of our laws.
The purpose or desire as to what Mr. Huisentruit wanted from these trees, of
which now have been devoid of, (completely lacking their ability to perform this
purpose they were originally planted for), Was that in the eyes of Mr. Huisentruit,
whose eyes it only matters, they were planted too. (This is his right under the laws
of our land). This man planted these trees as a ground wind brake, a child deterrent,
as this corner has been a bus stop for the last 55 plus years that I know of, as I
myself stood at this corner to catch my bus to school. (This is His right under the law
of our land), To plant for what ever reason he so deemed.
Trespassing has been a problem in times long past, due to the traffic of children
and others congregating at this corner. As these trees reached their full stage, the
Huisentruits had planted them for; they did exactly what the Huisentruis wanted out
of them. People don't normally like to walk through pine trees; they rather annoy the
human species, (It is the protection, which these trees gave, the peace and
tranquility even the deer know, as every winter these pines gave shelter and food to
meandering deer that come from the river to the take close buy. The seclusion
weather proofed the Huisentruits yard and is now void at one side; his seclutional
privacy is destroyed on the street side of his home. You have raped Mr. Huisentruits
house of its Isolation to the passersby on this road side view. Devaluing his property,
in his eyes and others like him. The value of something is in the eye of the beholder
"no one else in this matter's.
Mr. Huisentruft knows how many trees he wants on this side. It is at his
discretion as to where and how far apart he wants them, as these and all his trees
when planted were planned for, before 1953 this lot was a farmer's field. It was
definitely not Mr. Huisentruits desire, to have enough room for a Giant to walk
around the trunks and not worry about hanging branches; in fact, he did not want
even little people walking in his yard that had not been invited by his grandchildren
nether did he want the many congregating at this bus stop.
Mr. Hulsentruit has designed his own equipment to tend to his yard; with it He
has designed and landscaped it, to His own happiness, another law of our people
infringed upon here. Mr. Huisentruit has tended it very nicely, all these years. Now,
every day he has to see the rape of his property and Popsicle sticks; pine trees.
Reminding Him of the past, causing him now to take drugs, for an ailment
throughout his body, which he has never had before. What his Dr. has called Tension
and Mixed nerves an ailment of its own, anxious Feelings, this ailment is caused by
mental worry, due to emotional strain, which makes His natural relaxation impossible.
His state of wariness is due to this newly formed mistrust, now causing him fear to
deal with others. His muscle fibers bundled intensely, it is these fiber bundled
transmission of impulses between His brain and spinal cord and His motor nerves
that carry these impulses to His muscles. The Improper conduct of the Tortfeasors
breach of legal duty, Mr. Calbort's improper conduct (contributory negligence),
caused the plaintiff this harm as Mr. Huisentruit has had very little to do with Dr's or
any medications in his past.
The Law states Proximate Causation exists, concerning all City employees
involved. Immediately preceding, or following (as in a chain of events,) cause or
effects, the act, or process, of causing the act, or the agency which produced the
effect. This will in view of all, which will have to take place, to begin the chain of
events, which must now take place, to bringing Mr. Huisentruits Property back to the
way it was. And bring Him back some peace of mind, renewing His faith in our
governing bodies and relieving him of this tension.
Why do some people in high places think they can do whatever they think they
want to, and cause ailments to people, by the hiring of people with no skill or
understandings, to the way things should be done? For, if only one knows the rules
of law, there Is no one to protect the people and there private property, is there? As
Mr. Calbort told no one, no one recognized the surveyor's stakes put in by the
original surveyor, of Eagan in 1981, no one on this crew knew the rules and
regulations, or what Protocol is there's, for Eagan's work crews to follow. These men
came on Mr. Huisentruits private secluded property, not knowing the laws their
supervisor has known for the last 29 years. How did Mr_ Calbort in his first years
miss, making sure these faulty section maps of 1981 did not come back to haunt you,
as they were not destroyed?
The same way it is haunting Mr. Huisentruit, Evoking sadness, evoking strong
emotions especially to his sense of sadness, that is persisting still today, and more
on the days he goes outside, this whole mess has caused this emotional strain, and
is turning Mr. Hulsentruit into a recluse in his own home.
(0
Treble exists here, as who I have talked to, figures a jury will too, as this would
be Mr. Huisentruits desire for a trial with a jury, if this is not resolved immediately,
which is his right by law. As no probable cause exists, Mr.. Tom Calbort was sent
these letters, and yet his crew through Mr. Russ Matthys, P.E. City engineer Dept of
Public Works, Eagan, MN 55122, Went out to the Huisentruit residence and
proceeded to butcher these wonderful trees, which I know will exasperate the 'Tree
Huggers of America Group' of which, two of my sisters are members.
Tort: wrongful act against ones property, involves compensatory damages, to
providing, with mean of counter variation, to neutralize the effect of variations. To
attempt to return the property of this petitioning party to the position the property
was in before this incident mentioned within occurred.
This outrageous reckless disregard of private property is this conduct that caused
this, and is clear and convincing evidence as to why the law exists pertaining to this
case. It is why there are rules like unto, the 14 day rule and the 10 day rule, rules
that were made to protect the public from Government entities or affiliates, and to
give each land owner the right to speak on his behalf before any damage could occur.
Had the rules been obeyed, do you not think that all these documents from 1981
would have been brought to the court house in Eagan by Mr.. Huisentruit to putting
an immediate stop to these plans to cut these trees on his land? Z8yrs He held on to
these documents, and I am so amazed He did. As He did not get any forewarning
whatsoever, no letter of explanation as to the City of Eagan's Intentions, not even a
knock on his door on Feb 12, 2009, to ask Mr.. Huisentruit if He would want His own
wood, the city workers stole it. You not only took his right to speak; you took his
only way to protect himself, and stole from him on top of it.
The City of Eagan is liable for Breech of Contract, Unlawful Destruction, Trespass,
Cutting trees without proper authority and or permission of lands owner, Timber
trespass as you did not even offer, the wood you cut to Mr. Huisentruit contrary to
the law, due to land surveyors errors, a land surveyors error is a charge of its own.
The fact: rules and laws were put in place that must be strictly followed. To
protect the public from government entities or affiliates, and give the public a right
to speak before the cause, equals this effect; we simply would not be here if the
flawed section maps were destroyed, and all rules and laws were followed. This City
is very strict about rules. Our Honorable Host or Hosts should decide the strictest
punishment in return, so as to insure the City of Eagan will not find Itself in the same
mess in the future, I understand you are willing to settle this right now, as I was
informed you would by Thomas Calbort.
The City Engineering Department of Public Works should have an overview of all its
property lines. For errors do exist in the section maps, indicating where easements
lie. The proof is before your eyes; look at the documents and the pictures.
We will ask that Honesty and the Integrity of the Law be upheld and enforced to
its full existent, if it is that Mr. Huisentruit needs to Hire His Attorney to file, it will be
then, at his attorneys discretion, to the charges as His Attorney sees fit, which would
include Treble for the act and compensation for all harm here within, to included
what he my find with further investigation and all fees.
So as, this is why Mr. Huisentruit is demanding 'Treble: To the amount' for the
cost of removal of these, ten very large Pine Trees, Ten because Proximate
Causation exists with the tenth He is claming because this pine tree can not be save
while the other trees are removed, as advised by the arborists We have contacted.
Treble should be paid, and within 30 days of the receipt of this demand, as I
understand the MN statutes state by Law concerning Tort.
The trees, as they are, cannot ever again perform the purpose the Huisentruits
had for them.. He does not want to lose more property to the planting of more trees.
He liked the way the trees were, and he deserves the right to have his property look
as close as he can to the way it was which will include replacing all 10 said trees with
20 ft full grown pine trees in there same spots these mismanaged trees are today.
The charges of an attorney, comes somewhat as follows: under Minnesota
Statutes
15.471 Filing Fees, Subpoena Fees, Mileage, Transcript Cost, Court Report Fees,
Expert Witness Fees, The Cost of any Study, Analysis, Engineering Report, Photo
copies and Print Cost, Postage and Cost of Delivery, Services of Process Fee.
Sub.5 Reasonable Fees Charged by a Person Not an Attorney, Who is authorized by
Law or Rule to Represent the Party at the Prevailing Market Rate, For Kind and
Quality of the Services, Furnished Not More than $125.00 an hour.
Mr. Huisentruit served in WWII. He came back when his family members did
not. Serving in Army Air force transferred to the infantry and then into the
Paratroopers an honorable man. My Grandfather has about 50 patents accomplished
designing truck bodies, between the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s, manufacturing them at
Lahass Manufacturing Corporation, which sat just south of HWY 13 and Yankee
Doodle in Eagan.
Mr. Huisentruit has had a good reason to know excellent Attorneys. He has
another patent more then likely on its way. Much of your City's equipment during His
time at Lahass, were equipment trucks he worked on in some way shape, or as still
today in the Forming of them, Designing New York City's Tallest Firemen's Ladder
Truck for its day in 1978. Mr. Huisentruit's accomplishments are awe inspiring.
Money is the issue here. Just how much damage was done on Feb 12, 2009?
The total cost to bring this property back to as much as it is possible, to its original
look. Will included as follows; a tree sheerer, (large enough for these 35ft trees and
a semi to haul It, so they may be safely removed), a spade, (large enough to take
the stumps out and put the new pine trees in), 10 semis or moor to haul them away.
Delivery charges to haul 10 trees as high as 20ft, the highest the nurseries can
handle or find and the cost of the trees, all the extra labor and laborers, the dirt
removal and replacement, top soil and the sod replacement as well.
Three estimates come with this by three reputable nurseries.,
The total is Including Treble; $50,000.00 is Mr. Gordon Huisentruits Demand,
as Justifiable under Minnesota Statutes.. This will be a firm and final settlement for all
damages inquired this day February 12, 2009 by this crew from Eagan's Department
of Public Works and Mr. Thomas Calbort, and The City of Eagan.
Please make this payment to Mr, Gordon Huisentruit 3120 Pilot Knob Rd Eagan MN
55121
I will close this in saying "Please; the sooner I can enact the nursery and restore
the view my Grandfather once had, the sooner He might be able to become naturally
calm and relaxed, as He had been for so long, and the more days I might be able to
be lively inspired by Him.. Most importantly save His Health!
Sincerely,
Kenneth R. Newlin
Mr. Gordon Huisentruit
Page 6
F 2« r
war -
V
~ .f ' 1313
tJ
7!R
{
F ^f f1
w
RUSS MATTHYS, P
City Engineer
M Department of Public Works
rmatth s@cityofeagan.com
www.c tyofeagan.com
rt
d Y R , f Pte.. Y-7 c'r 1
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
yV II~~111 Pp
01 Q~ Phone (651) 675-5646
U1 J j LQ Fax (651)'675-5694 Lh~
n fem. ~
~.y
77-
±J ~y
Ah'
F
-
_ .y
4~~L ~ s ? 5
I. t
I .1
K vj ft _
t
M t~
1
GOC)'RIC Address 3130 Pilot Knob Rd
Address is approximate
Maps Save trees. Go green!
Download Google Maps on your
phone at google.comlgmm
J-vcs
Creation Date: Apr 23, 2008 12:49 Copyright X2007 Pictometry International Corp.
Modification Date: May 01, 2008 16:35 Scale: I inch = 19.7 feet
Sec. 7.08. REGULATION OF GRASS, WEEDS, TREES, AND LANDSCAPING. (Emphasis added)
Subd. 1. City to control landscaping and irrigation.
A. In no cases shall prohibited species be planted within street rights-of-way. Prohibited species
are defined as the following trees:
Ginkgo (female only)
Box elder
Non-disease-resistant elm species
Nonhybrid cottonwood species
B. The city shall have control and supervision of planting shrubs and trees and installation of
landscaping and irrigation systems upon, within or overhanging all city streets or other
public property. The city shall establish and enforce uniform standards relating to the species,
varieties and sizes of trees and shrubs to be planted, and the installation, standards, and the
placement of trees, shrubs, landscaping and irrigation system. These standards shall be on file in
the office of the city forester.
C. Any owner or occupant of a lot or land parcel abutting a public street shall, prior to the planting
of trees and shrubs or installation of landscaping or irrigation systems within the street right-of-
way, obtain a written permit from the city. Permits, when so issued, shall identify the species to
be planted, size, location thereof, and timeline for installation and the terms of which, in
addition to the regulations of this Code, shall be met. The city shall retain the authority to
regulate, authorize or deny any request for said permit in the interest of ensuring the public's
safety and general orderliness of improvements within street rights-of-way.
D. The placement of trees, shrubs, landscaping or irrigation systems in public property and street
rights-of-way shall be in compliance with the following requirements, in addition to the
standards on file with the city engineer:
1. Trees, shrubs or landscaping shall not be planted nor installed within ten feet,
horizontally, of any sewer line, water line or driveway or within four feet of any public
trail or sidewalk.
2. The placement of trees, shrubs and landscaping shall not disturb any ground within two
feet, horizontally, of any gas lines, electric lines, phone lines, or cable television lines,
except in those specific cases where utility easements provide for wider setback
requirements.
3. Any trees, shrubs or landscaping planted or installed within a street right-of-way shall
be at least ten feet from the back of curb or 20 feet from the edge of the road
surface where no curb and gutter exists.
4. Trees, shrubs, and landscaping shall not be planted or maintained on public or
private property, in such a manner as to obscure or impede the visual sight
lines required to ensure the safe and efficient circulation of vehicles and
pedestrians on streets, intersections, trails, pathways and sidewalks. Trees,
shrubs or landscaping shall not be planted as to block the visibility of any
regulatory, warning, or street identification sign or block the illumination of
streetlights or as a physical obstruction for the street right-of-way maintenance. The city
shall have the authority to determine the minimal amount of required setback and clear
zones in each circumstances subject to the minimum standards on file with the city
engineer.
5. Branches of all deciduous trees which overhang street rights-of-way or public trails or
pathways, shall be at least 131/2 feet above street surfaces and at least eight
feet above any public trail or pathway. This requirement includes trees that are
lLE
planted on private property, but overhang street rights-of-way or public
trails or pathways.
6. The city may establish a master plan for street tree planting. The plan shall identify
those streets which have been designated by the council for the planting of said
boulevard trees. In accordance with the master plan, responsibility for the planting and
maintenance of boulevard trees shall be the responsibility of the city, except for new
subdivisions where the developer shall be responsible for planting boulevard trees. The
planting and maintenance of trees within residential street rights-of-way, not included
in the city's master street tree planting plan, shall be the responsibility of the abutting
property owners. In such cases, the property owner shall first obtain, from the city
forester, a written permit to plant, in accordance with the requirements of this
subdivision.
E. Any tree, shrub or landscaping within a street right-of-way, which is in violation of
this section, shall be trimmed or removed, as the city shall require, as to ensure
elimination of any threat to public safety due to sight line or physical obstruction.
The city shall have the authority to remove or trim any tree, shrub or landscaping,
without first notifying the property owner, in the case where imminent public
danger exists if removal or trimming is not immediately completed. It shall be the
property owner's responsibility to trim, or remove when necessary, any shrub or landscaping
within the street right-of-way which is in violation of this subdivision. It shall be the
responsibility of the city to trim and the responsibility of the property owner to remove when
trimming is not a feasible option, any tree in violation of this subdivision. The city may
perform the work that is the responsibility of the property owner when the
property owner has failed to do so. The city may charge the property owner the cost
incurred by the city in performing any work required under this paragraph pursuant to
subdivision 5 herein.
F. The city shall establish and enforce uniform standards for the maintenance of trees, shrubs and
landscaping planted or located within the street right-of-way. Such standards shall be kept on
file in the office of the city forester.
G. It is unlawful for any person to deface, destroy, or tamper with any trees or landscaping on
public property, including trees within a street right-of-way.
H. A tree within a public right-of-way shall not be used for signs, permanent lighting, television
antennas, or other inappropriate uses.
1. Removal of trees and shrubs from public property shall be by city permit only.
j_,EAGUE of
MINNESOTA
CITIES
April 22, 2009
Thomas A. Colbert
Public Works Director
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122-1810
RE: Gordon Huisentreuit/City of Eagan
LMCIT Claim No. 11068252
Dear Mr. Colbert:
CONNECTING & INNOVATING
SINCE 1913
Direct Dial: 651-281-1268
jhennen@lmc.org
PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY-CLIENT
COMMUNICATION
On April 16, 2009, I had an opportunity to briefly discuss this matter with our claims adjuster,
Phil Trebatoski. I have reviewed his entire file, including documents relating to the Quit Claim
Deed and property line markings. Based on the records on file, including "Dakota County Real
Estate Inquiry" records that show that the trees in question were located within the City road
right of way, I have recommended to Mr, Trebatoski that the City deny this claim. It is my
understanding that the trees were actually located on private property because back in 1981 the
City conveyed to Mr. Huisentreuit a Quit Claim of its right of way interest on Quarry Lane.
Photos taken before the tree trimming show trees located on private property that encroach not
only upon the public right of way, but actually across the curb line where they impede vehicular
traffic and would be a direct and substantial public safety hazard. Claimant appears to have been
in violation of City Code Section 7.08. Claimant's failure to maintain the trees located on his
property created a significant safety hazard to the motoring public that appears to have required
the City of Eagan to act fairly quickly. A city does have some authority to abate a public
nuisance in emergency situations.
Because via a Quit Claim Deed in 1981, the City of Eagan deeded part of its right of way back to
Claimant, the tree truriks themselves, and in fact most of the foliage for the pine trees trimmed by
the City appears to have been located on private property. Accordingly, it appears that the
trimming of these trees may have involved a trespass by Eagan City employees on private
property. If there is a trespass onto private property that results in damage to or destruction of
trees, the property owner may be able to recover treble damages for damages to his trees. This
right to recover treble damages exists only if the trees are located on private property at the time
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES WS UNIMSITY AVE WEST PHONE: (651)281-1200 FAx: (651) 281-1298
INSURANCE TRUST 57 PAUL. MN 55103-2044 TOLL PREE: (800) 925-1122 WFB: WWWLMCOKG
Thomas A. Colbert
April 22, 2009
Page 2
that both liability and damages are determined. Here, the trees, post -trimming, appear to be
healthy. Accordingly, Claimant's "damages" claim is based on the appearance of the trees and
the fact that they no longer provide the same "screening" to Claimant's property that they did
prior to tree trimming.
I recommend that the City work with its City Attorney to promptly reacquire the 13-1/2 foot strip
of land on which these trees are located. This may be done by purchase or via eminent domain
proceedings. There should be no doubt that acquisition of this property is for a public purpose.
Without property reacquisition, the City does not have a uniform right of way and in all
probability cannot safely maintain the right of way and appropriate sight distances for the stop
sign at the intersection of Quarry Lane and Pilot Knob Road. Secondly, the cost of acquisition of
this strip may be significantly less than the treble damages for the trees. If the City pays fair
market value for the property on which the trees are located, it will then own the property and the
trees located on it. Upon purchase and acquisition, Claimant's claim for damage to those trees
becomes moot. Finally, reacquisition of this easement is probably required to avoid any fixture
claims, to provide for appropriate snow storage, and to prevent any future sight line issues at the
intersection in question. Given the claims being made on behalf Mr. Huisentreuit by Kenneth
Newlin it is also important that this property acquisition occur before any additional tree
trimming is done and certainly before the next snow removal season.
If the City "owns" the land and either the topography of the land and/or vegetation on it cause
sight line problems, the City as the owner of the right of way will have the ability to take
appropriate steps to maintain a safe intersection now and in the future. If you have any
questions, please feel free to give me a call.
Sincerely yours,
;ohn E. Hennen
Attorney at Law
r'
C. Brian Pulczinski (#11068252)
Phil Trebatoski, LMCIT Claims
Michael Dougherty, City Attorney
JEH/dre