My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 3608
Orono
>
Resolutions
>
Reso 0001-7499
>
Reso 3600 - 3699 (September 11, 1995 - March 11, 1996)
>
Resolution 3608
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/18/2015 2:15:52 PM
Creation date
11/18/2015 2:15:52 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
.��,_��,.r.�' � . <br /> � O� <br /> • O O <br /> n_ - CITY of ORONO <br /> � � <br /> �� �'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> � ��kESHOg'� NO. � � � � <br /> A RESOLUTION V�CATING <br /> A DF.AINAGE EASEMENT OVER. <br /> LOT 6, BLOCK 1, STIEL4W ADDITION <br /> FILE NO. 2020 <br /> W�$E1�EAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing <br /> under the laws of tYie State of Minnesota; and <br /> W�-I�htE�S, on April 21, 1955, James Brure and John McCoy filed a petition <br /> with the City of Orcno requesting the vacation of a drainage easement o.riginally dedicated in <br /> the plat of Stielow Addition legally described as foilows: <br /> The drainage easement over Lot 6, Block l, Stielow Addition as ciedicated in�.he Plat of <br /> • Stielow Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and <br /> WH�RJEAS, after due published and posted notice, a public hearing was held <br /> bef�re t�'�e Planning Commission on May 15, 1995 regarding said vacation and all interested <br /> persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and <br /> V6'HEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the Plannin� ConLrnissio�i <br /> recommended unanimous approval of the proposed vacation and the Council of the City of <br /> Orono finds that said vacation as proposed is in keeping with the public interest and in the <br /> consideration of the following: <br /> 1. The current drainage easement does not accurately define the 3-4' wide <br /> drainageway that intersects the property. <br /> 2. Portions of the dedicated drainage easement as it currently exists would serve no <br /> public purpose. <br /> • <br /> Page 1 of 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.