Laserfiche WebLink
�(�vS J / ���'�``�' ,,>7�, <br /> -�__� � <br /> �% ���� <br /> � � 0� \\�. <br /> ,, <br /> ii�� '� ���� <br /> ��� '= � '���� CITY of �RONO <br /> . <br /> r �, - <br /> '� � '3'�� �e � �' � <br /> �. ,�., � <br /> ����� �� � �'`� ���,, �'�'�� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> I��,;.,�j�,���� �/ <br /> ��kESHOg'�/ N0. 2 9 8 3 <br /> A RESOLUTION VACATING <br /> IINIISED PORTI�NS OF <br /> A 14' ALLEY WITHIN THE PLAT OF <br /> CRYSTAL BAY VIEW, <br /> HENNFPIN CODNTY• <br /> CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA <br /> FILE #1653 <br /> WHER$AS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation <br /> organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; <br /> and <br /> WHERBAS, on May 24, 1991 Jeffrey J. Johnson filed a <br /> petition with the City of Orono requesting the vacation of <br /> certain portions of an unimproved alley originally dedicated in <br /> the plat of Crystal Bay View, legally described as follows: <br /> That portion of a 14' platted alley that abuts the south <br /> line of Lot 3 and the west half of Lot 2, Block 7 , Crystal <br /> Bay View, Hennepin County, Minnesota (south half of Section <br /> 08 , Township 117, Range 23 ) ; and <br /> WH$REAS, after due published and posted notice a public <br /> hearing was held before the Orono Planning Commission on June 1'7, <br /> 1991 regarding said vacation and all persons interested were <br /> given an opportunity to be heard; and <br /> WH$REAS, after due standing and consideration, the <br /> Y'1dI1T1].Ilc� l.�I(tT115S1.0I1 Y'ZGt7iiiIii2iiucu appr�va� O� }h2 res„este� <br /> vacation and the Council of the City of Orono finds that said <br /> vacation, as proposed, is in keeping with the public interest in <br /> consideration of the following findings: <br /> l. The existing 14' width of right-of-way would not meet <br /> required standards for development of a public road. <br /> 2. The location of a designated wetland within the right- <br /> of-way of the alley would prohibit the total development of <br /> the right-of-way for access purposes. <br /> 3. Based on the pattern of development and current <br /> ownership there is. no use of right-of-way for access <br /> purposes. <br /> 4. Any public interest in this unimproved right-of-way can <br /> be achieved with the granting of necessary easements. <br /> Page 1 of 2 � <br />