Conservation Easement - amazing findings

When is a permanent conservation easement not permanent?

When someone can buy a piece of land with an existing conservation easement to protect that property, decide not to honor that prior agreement and convince the second party of the agreement who was entrusted to protect the property to go along with terminating it.

That's exactly what is happening with Malt-O-Meal and the City of Lakeviile, Minnesota

An article in the October 30th Life & Times newspaper (http://www.thisweeklive.com/2010/11/03/malt-o-meal-considers-expanding-lakeville-site/) describes how Malt-O-Meal is requesting that the Lakeville City Council vacate a recorded permanent easement on a property that Malt-O-Meal recently purchased and wants to build a new office building.  Malt-O-Meal's request indicates that they have no intention of honoring the prior landowner's permanent conservation easement to protect the land for scenic beauty, vegetation and wildlife that was entered into by the prior landowner and the City.

 

A copy of the conservation easement is recorded with Dakota County Minnesota which is dated July of 1995 between New Morning Windows, Inc and the City of Lakeville granting "a permanent easement for conservation purposes over, under, and across the north 155.00 feet" and indicating that any construction, excavation, or "activity detrimental to the preservation of scenic beauty, vegetation, and wildlife" would require the written consent of the City.  This has already happened since Malt-O-Meal has recently created a large dirt mound within a portion of the 155 foot conservation easement.

 

The timeline is:

In April of 1995, the plat for Fairfield Business Campus was created.

In July of 1995, a permanent conservation easement was recorded between New Horizon Windows and the City of Lakeville for an area of about 2.5 acres to protect the land as undeveloped and undisturbed open space

In September of 2009, Malt-O-Meal purchased the property

In September of 2010, Malt-O-Meal requested that the City of Lakeville vacate a portion of the permanent conservation easement on the property

 

I see this as a bad precedent if a company can buy a piece of land and then decide to not honor an existing conservation easement and the City's ability to rescind a permanent agreement they entered into. I believe the decision will be made rather quickly since when I talked to the staff at the City of Lakeville, they expressed that it was unfortunate that the article had been published in the local paper and that they are moving forward with their review and recommendations regarding a new parking lot and building.