Laserfiche WebLink
November 16, 1978 11 <br />Hennepin County Park Reserve District <br />Big Island - Road Vacations <br />Page 4 <br />9. Is the Park Reserve District's current acquisition plan in <br />conformance with the policy intentions of the City of Orono <br />as established by Resolution 446? <br />After the fact finding, the Planning Commission must recommend <br />a policy finding to the Council. <br />Do the facts sufficiently support vacation as requested by the <br />Park Reserve? <br />If no, the reasons must be stated and the recommendation will be <br />for denial. <br />If yes, the recommendation will be for approval in one of two ways. <br />In bot1- cases, the following findings must be made: <br />1. The vacation does not affect access to or use of any <br />affected or adjoining property. <br />2. The City has not and doe^ not intend to develop, improve <br />or use the property in any ;say. <br />3. The property as it exists serves no public purpose. <br />4. The vacation is in the PUBLIC INTEREST, by: <br />a) furthering the Flans of the Park Reserve District; <br />b) reducing city liability for maintenance, or <br />c) increasing taxable valuation. <br />If the recommendation is for vacation in return for relocation of <br />right of way, the following findings should be made: <br />1. The Minnesota Supreme Court in E31dwin et al (see attached) <br />prohibits vacation of public access to the lakeshore without <br />suitable replacement. <br />2. Public Right of Way is necessary to maintain access to affected <br />properties. <br />3. Relocation and consolidation of the access would serve the public <br />better than does the existing configuration (because of topography, <br />or the existing lot divisions, or the configuration of the existing <br />streets). <br />4. The City policy established by Resolution 446 precludes any <br />relinquishing of public aerty on Big Island. <br />