Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutProject PacketCITY OF ORONO, MIN1Q11+8OTA Land Use Application 14ditional'bUse E OF REQUEST LOCATION OF PROPOSAL (or proper t dirision $150+$5/1c Address West Island, Big Island K a $50 See Legal Description Plat .42980, Parcel 1100 (Exhibit p) Hennepin County APP?,ICANT Name Park Reserve District Tel #473-469 Mailing Address P.O. Box 296, Maple Plain- MN�Sa _ OWNER Name _ 5 ame Tel # Mailing Address _ Variance $50 Rezoning $250 Riprap $15 ($65) FEE MIN Date Rec'd 3 By Present Zoning LA- 1 A-1 Present Use Unimproved _ Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request 32.70o Vacation of P►atr.A en,ds Specify Ordinance Requirements Platted road vacation reau i res a petition by a majority of the land owners abutting the property to be vacated. Explain your request and reasons rc. r same Request vacation of platted roads in Kate B. Plummer Subdivision Hennepin County Park Reserve District desires to vacate roads for the purpose of consolidating Lots I - VARIANCE required - extent of nonconformity Lot Area _ Setback Front Side Rear Width Other, explain Specify hardships to property SUBDIVISION application Residential Other, explain No. of Lots 0. VARIANCE required - extent of nonconformity Lot Area Setback Front Side Rear Width Other, explain Specify hardships to property SUBDIVISION application Residential Other, explain No. of Lots CONDITIONAL USE AND OTHER - explain proposed use of property in detail can the west island of Biq Island as per Board action on March 8, 1918. MINIMUI MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE APPLICATION (Must be submitted 10 days prior to Plai-,ing Commission meeting) 1. Application completed 5. 2. Plat map section 3. Certificate of survey of property sketch location and setbacks of proposal 6. 4. Construction plans, if applicabl•! Certified Property Owner's list" owners within (300') (150')- frc' Hennepin Co. Dept. of Finance A-603 Government Center Stamped, legal sized envelopes( pre -addressed to each of the n on the above list. DATE y Applicant' Signature t c��.� �� 0 Svj /1/�..hapr ��• •• f it�iv0,sAsk 4 t / 'f Owner's Signature AnoliclAnt horf-by agrhe� try provide -i' 1 inforrm �i'�r 'r,.�4yr� ram. �pgt �3 r CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Y, Land Use Application • PE OF REQUEST LOCATION OF PROPOSAL (or propert bdivision ft $150+$5. d Address' West Island, Big Island ditional Use $50 See Legal Description Plat •42980, Parcel I100 (Exhibit A) Hennepin County APPLICANT Name Park Reserve District- Tel #4jL- ,93 Mailing Address I.C. Box 296, Maple Plain, MN 55359 OWNER Name Same Tel # Mailing Address Variance $50 Rezoning $250 Riprap $15 ($65) FEE MIAJ *ISO.ew Date Rec'd By Present Zoning LA-1A-1 Present Use Unimproved Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request 32.7o0 Varation of Plattpd RnaA,- I Specify Ordinance Requirements Platted road vacat i un requires a petition by a 1 majority of the land owners abutting the property to be vacated. Explain your request and reasons for same Request vacation of platted roads in Kate B. Plummer Subdivision. Hennepin County Park Reserve Distr*,ct desires to vacate roads for the purpose of consolidating Lots 1 - 10. VARIANCE required - extent of nonconformity Lot Area Setback Front_ Width Other, explain _ Specify hardships to property Side Rear SUBDIVISION application _ Residential Other, explain No. of Lots roads for the purpose of consolidating Lots I - 10. VARIANCE required - extent of nonconformity Lot Area Setback Front Side Rear Width Other, explain Specify hardships to property SUBDIVISION application Residential Other, explain No. of Lots CONDITIONAL USE AND OTHER - explain proposed use of property in detail Hennepin County Park Reserve District intends rn diypg t itsaLf_nf prop—r*y—ruaaorship on the west island of Big Island as per Board action on March 8. 1978. MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE APPLICATION (Must be submitted 10 days prior to Planning Commission meeting) 1. Application completed 5. Certified Property Owner's list 2. Plat map section owners within (300' ) W1 O' )- frc 3. Certificate of survey of property Hennepin Co. Dept. of Finance sketch location and setbacks of A-603 Government Center proposal 6. Stamped, legal sized enve• lopes (9 4. Constructioa plans, if applicable pre -addressed to each of the nar on the' above list. DATE .S- �`P _ Applicant's Signature DATE_ 1 c/ - ! I _ Owner's Signature �,. Applicant hereby agrees to provide all inform a!��'req 1=e ors` a e``s*Pt by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City AttornA., Planninq Commission and council necessar}, to process this application and further 34rees to AI , r,Ps 71'i �,tablish?-_ '�)Y ordinance. I tc 504 DEPAPTMENT OF FINANCE A-603 GOVERNMENT CENTER MiNNEAPOLIS, MN 55487 4 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST BOO f 8 6 DESCRIPTION NAME ADDRESS LOT I BLK.1 PARCEL --Of &OVO& -NT LOT5_--_ ----- - CTION22-11z:Z5 1F TW ol E� - Kin -) mfnr-(�s <:-D(46 f� 13, 1-t-0 J)iV(5i6N 0--- LOT Z 0� X-1.'Tcff �Fj-s T- 790 jq-U I 'AIM OW ob I" #48#. @soft we onate-j'a" so I" replesentzition of Ir sm as It appears tMh dric , oocor& of " Henr6 CfN FlnS LO IDII.. t,., the best 04 my and basal. bioan. Co. MGM* CITY OF ORONO #4 ".4 NOTICE The Planning Commission will hold a Public Hearing in the Council Chambers at 1275 South Brown Road on Monday, November 27, 1978, at 7:30 P.M. on the matter of the Hennepin County Park Reserve District's application for proposed undeveloped road vacations on Big Island, Lake Minnetonka, legally described as follows: All of Linden Street, all of Elm Street, and all of Maple Place located within Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision of Lot 2 of Kitchel's Subdivision of Gov't lots 5 & 6. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available for review in the City offices. City of Orono By: Order of the Planning Commission Jeande Mabusth, Asst. Zoning Administrator EXHIBIT A •-" Lots 1 - 10 inclusive of Kate B. Plummer Subdivision, of Lot Ketchel's Subdivision of Government Lots 5 and 6. Section 22, Township 117, Range 23, City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota. iiEGEND ACQUIRED TO BE ACQUIRED NOT IN ACQUISITION PLAN SUBJECT PROPERTY KEY TO FACILITIES BIG ISLAND REGIONAL PARK LA£GENO Om ACQUIRED TO BE ACQUIRED NOT IN ACQUISITION PLAN SUBJECT PPOPERTY KEY TO FACILITIES BIG ISLAND REGIONAL PARK R1?S0l.t1•rI0N s440 A ;2,•a01;TIVN APPROVING Tilt' CONCbfyr ')r ['Cs ISOND AS A J'l1RL C PAU B)l 1T R-6.&OLVED by ,I)a Village of Orono that. .t i tv the J,!►blic itteerest of the ei t:'► ;en:; of Oronc that' "Bix ',sl tiid" beco.ne a public park ., It is a-t %nW1• d�=!c1 t ha•t sewer i:i not avn_i lair a to s!trva the existln; h+.naes o.-I tl tslaJt:i ad due to various reason; a i¢ improhtt1�lc thp.t )t b_ c.. sewar .+il, peer he alr it •►-lp, anti PUTt:l.R, t i:, a :ht►aivlt•,Ige t'*Alt till: PTO -Vied . n cf. �ttblic sei vice; iTicli.1dtttf folic►: -lid f..-e c e'.ttnn, Street r3Falr. st,ov removal, i.�tspe�:ti: j an(, or )f!r 414 )vt r icipal sosvict a are t. ffic:ttit a ►cr.ot:vtti'al end vt~Z..j.4 A. �r; •c5:,i+,le to r:tri, i,�e tJ restientitll l rn, .��t'� lat:a t t;t, :,�t ti i • i �� la►t,l TIIIiP,fi, i 71 1's Ri:SWI, .r) ..hJi;. t; r V! i °le C !t:1c:tl v4. t.h: Vi1.laRh of Or:)n.) ioeraf, ttja !. shf t,),, q r Ar,) w hi.pes -. ar J use if 1j. g I S AI bill is fOT Pa It puryonc i 1'!►B 1' :: ► O; �' in" at kn.)., ! e . ge ` t }i nt the fit k sh .,u i be $CI .; jv ; t,!T,3j by s11 ageikLy ka►h t.n'!tt I 4AJe risronsibiIity' sad w,,w 1 a)l:rove cjf ►ts mr�r:cisc,•tt.:�tt..;y ','vijnoj,!a c3iuity PAS RvsNrve histrxct. Alopted ;)y r►f tliv ire C)ttii.ili of the i ii rc of or^rn, 114:i :!sots Ott i t �r4. n, v t r iro U Regular Board Meeting - 5 - March 8, 1978 Authorization for Payment of Utility Hookup Charges for Bike/Hike Trail/ Regional Trailhead Maintenance Shop - Eln Creek Park Reserve HOOKUPS FOR THE BIKE/HIKE TRAIL/REGIONAL PARK RESERVE. MOTION was made by Commissioner Seagren, seconded by Commissioner DeMuse, THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT BE AUTHORIZED TO MAKE PAYMENTS TO THE CITY OF MAPLE GROVE AND THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANIES FOR SERVICE AVAILABILITY CHARGES, SANITARY SEWER TRAILHEAD/MAINTENANCE SHOP AT ELM CREEK ADOPTED Commissioner Barbeau arrived at 4:30 p.m. during discussion of the following agenda item. Rev'ew of Recreation Conte, Plan Superintendent French reviewed maps of and Approval of Boundaries Big Island showing the topography of the Big Island Regional Park island, proposed recreational use, and delineation of properties. The recreational use concept plan proposed that the recreation area be located in the eastern portion of the island where the existing Veterans Camp is located and nature trails around the Arthur Allen Wildlife Sanctuary. French informed the Board that the District's proposed legislation to transfer title for the Big Island Veterans Camp to the District was scheduled for review in the State House Natural Resources Committee. However, because of lack of a quorum, the proposed bill was not considered and no action will be taken this session o' the Legislature. The Board discussed at great length the boundary alternatives for the Big l.s:lat,4 Regional Park. After consideration of the topography of the island and the proposed recreational ple-,MOTION was made by Commissioner Seagren, seconded by Commissioner Hegstrom, THAT ThE BOARD ESTABLISH THE BOUNDARIES FOR BIG ISLAND REGIONAL PARK TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING PRE?ERTIES IN ADDITION TO THE PRESENT ARTHUR ALLEN WILDLIFE SANCTUARY: BIG ISLANV VETERANS CAMP WHICH INCLUDES GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SECTION 14; GOVERNMENT LOT 2, SECTION 23; AND PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3, SECTIO' 23; FURTHER, LOT A AND PART OF LOT B. LOTS 46 THROUGH 53, LOTS 39 THROUGH 45, ALL IN MORSE ISLAND PARK DIVISION; TRACT, A AND B, RLS ''1294; PART OF TRACT C, RLS #1092; ALL IN CITY OF ORONO; FURTHERMORE, THAT THr SUPERINTENDENT BE INSTRUCTED TO INFORM OWNERS OF PROPERTY ON BIG ISLAND OF THE EST=?LISHED PARK BOUNDARIES. SEE MAP, ATTACHMENT NO. 2. ADOPTED Cor-nissivner DeMuse voted against the motion, stating she did so because of her syr-rpathy for homeowners located wit -in the park boundary. Authorization to Petition the District Court for Divesture of Lots I through 10, inc usive, Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision - Big Island, Lake Minnetonka and authorization to petition the District outside the park boundaries. With the establishment of the boundaries for Big Island Regional Park, Superintendent French requested authorization to seek vacation of the plat or the roads, whichever is more expeditious and advantageous, on the former Specht property now owned by the District on the west island of Big Island Court for divesture of this property located 1E 1 iV! C f OEC '7 1M L CITY OF ORONO Regular Board Meeting - 6 - March 8, 1978 MOTION was made by Commissioner Seagren, seconded by Commissioner Barbeau, THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT BE AUTHORIZED TO SEEK VACATION OF THE PLAT AND OR THE PLATTED ROADS ON LOTS I THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE, KATE B. PLUMMER'S SUBDIVISION, CITY OF ORONO. ADOPTED MOTION was made by Commissioner Seagren, seconded by Commissioner Barbeau, THAT WITH THE BOARD'S ACTION TO DECLARE THE WESTERLY ISLAND OF BIG ISLAND OUTSIDE OF THE PARK BOUNDARY, THE DISTRICT'S PROPERTY ON THE WESTERLY ISLAND, KNOWN AS THE SPECHT PROPERTY, IS, THEREFORE, SURPLUS; THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT BE AUTHORIZED TO PETITION THE DISTRICT COURT TO APPROVE THE SALE OF THE SPECHT LAND WHICH IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE, KATE B. PLUMMER'S SUBDIVISION, ON LAKE MINNETONKA, CITY OF ORONO, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA; AND THAT DIVESTITURE OF SAID LAND MAY BE MADE I!J TRADE FOR LAND WITHIN THE BIG ISLAND PARK BOUNDARY AT A VALUE OF $37,000, WHICH VALUE IS THE APPRAISED VALUE OF A QUALIFIED APPRAISER APPOINTED BY THE DISTRICT. ADOPTED Purchase of Vetter Property - MOTION was made by Commissioner Seagren, Big Island Re§ional Park seconded by Commissioner Barbeau, THAT THE BOARD APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF THE DURWELL F. VETTER PROPERTY OF 8t ACRES ON BIG ISLAND, LAKE MINNETONKA, FOR A PRICE OF $85,000 CASH IR, PREFERRABLY, $48,000 CASH AND TITLE TO THE FORMER SPECHT PROPERT`; VALUED BY THE DISTRICT'S APPRAISAL AT $37,000. Legal Description of Vetter Property The North 800 feet of Tract C as measured along the Easterly line thereof of Registered Land Survey No. 1092, files Register of Titles, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Legal Description of Specht property Lots I - 10 inclusive in Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision of Lot 2 of Ketchel's Subdivision of Government Lots 5 and 6 in Section 22, Township 117, Range 23, City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plate thereof. ADOPTED Purchase of Kilbaine Properties - MOTION was made by Commissioner Seagren, Big Is end Regiinal Park seconded by CuoNnissi0ner Barbeau, THAT THE BOARD APPROVE THE NEGOTIATED PURCHASE OF THE DENNIS KILBANE PROPERTIES ON BIG ISLAND CONZISTING Oi ONE IMPROVED LOT WITH WINTEkIZED COTTAGE FOR A PRICE OF $58,000 AND A 2.51 ACRE OUTLOT FOR A PRICE OF $28,500. Legal Description - Improved Lot Lot 46, Morris Island Park, according to the plat �-i file and of record in the Office of Register of Deeds in and for said Hennepin County, Minnesota. Legal Description - Outlot Lot A of Morris Park Addition ac-:ording to the plat on survey and of record in the Office of Register of Deeds in and for said Hennepin County, Minnesota. ADOPTED Regular Board Meeting - 7 - March 8, 1978 Acquisition of Crear Property - Supintendent French pointed out Lots 48 and Big Island Regional Park 49, Morse Island Park Subdivision, Big Island, located among other shoreline lots between the Veterans Camp and the Arthur Allen Wildlife Sanctuary. There are no structures on this property. MOTION was made by CommissionerSeagren, seconded by Commissioner Barbeau, THAT THE BOARD AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF LOTS 48 AND 49, MORSE ISLAND PARK SUBDIVISION, CITY OF ORONO, AT A TOTAL PURC.4SE PRICE OF $10,000 FROM MR. 'JILLIAM CREAR III; FURTHEP THAT THE CHAIRMAN AND SECRETARY BE AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS IMPLEMENT THIS TRANSACTION. ADtrr TIED Authorization for Hydrological MOTION was made by Commissioner Seagren, and Water Quality Study of Cleary seconded by Commissioner Barbeau, THAT THE Lake - Cleary Lake Regional Park BOARD AUTHORIZE EXTENDING THE PRESENT CONSULTANT CONTRACT TO INCLUDE HYDROLOGICAL AND WATER QUALITY cTUDIES FOR CLEARY LAKE AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $1,150. ADOPTED Policy,_ Personnel, Finance and Land Acquisition Committee Vice Chairman Pihl called on Comn.issioner Durenberger to report for the Policy Committee. See Committee report for background information. Authorization for Payment of Real Estate Taxes MOTION was made by Commissioner on former Jensen Property - Baker Park Reserve Durenberger, seconded by Commissioner Hegstrom, THAT THE BOARD AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF REAL ESTATE TAXES DUE AND PAYABLE ON THE FORMER JOHN L. JENSEN PROPERTY, BAKER PARK RESERVE, IN THE AMOUNT OF $691.74. ADOPTED ".. 9.►+orization for Payments MOTION was made by Commissioner Durenberger, 1n eu of Taxes seconded by Commissioner Hegstrom, THAT THE BOARD AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF 30 PERCENT OF INCOME IN LIEU OF TAXES FOR DISTRICT PROPERTIES USED FOR OTHER THAN PARK USE FOR THE YEARS !916 AND 1977 AS OUTLINED IN A.TACHMENT NO. 3. ADOPTED OLD r"t.'S I NESS Assessment of Feasibilityof It w.is the consensus of the Board that otentia �y dr'oe I e c t r i c Power evert though the application for a grant Generation - Coon Rapids Dim from the U.S. Deoartment of Energy was not prepaid in final form to meet the March 8, 1979 deadline, the District should continue to meek funding for an assessment of feasibility of potential hydro- electric power generation in ccnjunction with the operation of a regional recreation park at the Coon Rapids Dam. PETITION CONCURRING WITH THE PROPOSED VACATION OF ROADS WITHIN KATE B. PLUMMERS SUBDIVISION, CITY OF ORONO, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA. 1 (we), the undersigned, owner (s) of property adjacent to Lots 1 through 10, inclusive, Kate B. Plummers Subdivision, of Lot 2 Ketchel's Subdivision of Government Lots 5 and 6 in Section 22, Township 117, Range 23, City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby concur with the Hennepin Cc--nty Park Reserve District's request to vacate the platted roads within the K&te B. Plummer Subdivision. � 7 Da 104 # � '"Mi BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS JUDITH S ANOERSON CHAIRMAN BLOOMINGTON CHARLES R PNIL VICE CHAIRMAN ORONO WILLIAM BARBEAU GOLDEN VALLEY AMELIA M D*MVSE MINNEAPOLIS DAVID DURENBERGER MINNEAPOW, ALAN K GREENE MOUND LAWRENCE F HAEG 4t1BBINSDALL JU1& HE139TROM MINNEAP7LIS LISA HOLLENDER MINNEAPOLIS RAYMONO N SE AGREN MINNEAPOLIS HENNEPIN COUNTY PARK RESERVE DISTRICT P O. BOX 296 MAPLE PLAIN. MINNESOTA 55359 TELEPHONE 473-4693 4 Mr. Walter R. Benson City Administrator City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Dick: Auqust 24, 1978 DROVE 0 AUG 23 1978 D nuAae oo awuo As you know, the Hennepin County Park Reserve District currently owns a parcel of land located on the west island of Big Island on Lake Minnetonka described as Lots 1 - 10 inclusive of Kate B. Plummer Subdivision, of Lot 2 Ketchel's Subdivision of Government Lots 5 and 6, Section 22, Township 117, Range 23, City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Enclosed is a half section map identifying the above -described property. On March 8, 1978, the District's Board of Commissioners established boundaries for Big Island Regional Park. The proposed park will be located entirely on the eastern island. At the same time, the District's Board of Commissioners declared the existing land holding on the western island as surplus and authorized the Superintendent to petition the District Court for approval to sell this property. District Court approval has been obtained and we are proceeding to ,ut togettier a transaction for the sale of this property. The sale of this parcel is tied directly to the District's purchase of a parcel located within the park acquisition boundaries. In order to combine Lots ' through 10 of Kate B. Plummer Subdivision CLIFTONE FRENCH into a single marketable building site, the District hereby requests SUPE RIN TEN DE N' the City of Orono to vacate the platted roads within the subdivision. Enclosed is a completed land use application form, a map depicting the plat, a certified property owners list of owners within 300 feet, a petition of concurrence from the abutting land owner and stamped pre -addressed envelopes. We hope to be able to proceed with this vacation at your earlier' convenience in order to meet a property closing date of on or before October 1, 1978. Mr. Walter R. Benson - 2 - August 24, 1978 1 assume that, as in the past, fees associated with the processing of this request will be waived. Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions regarding this request, please give me a call at 473-4693. Sincerely, t AA4t Grego . Mack Administrative Assistant GAM:ghd EncI. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS JUDITH S. ANDERSON CHAIRMAN ER cx-,m NGlON GHARLESR. PINL VICE CHAIRMAN ORONO WLLLIAM BARBEAU ST LOUIS PARK SHIIALEV A BONINE MAPLE PLAIN AMELJA M. DN.ALISE MINNEAPOLIS HENNEPIN COUNTY PARK RESERVE DISTRICT P.O. BOX 296 a MAPLE PLAIN, MINNESOTA 55359 0 TELEPHONE 473-4693 #�44 Mr. Walter R. Benson City Adminis�rator City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Dick: October 6, 1978 C �D I C T C111 OF ORONO. A short time ago, I spoke to you regarding the waiver of the City's application fee for processing the District's request for vacation of roads within Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision located on the west island, Big Island. As you know, this property was purchased by the District a few years ago when the intention was to eventually acquire the entire Big Island area as a regional park. DAVID DURENBERGER On March 8, 1978, the District's Board of Commissioners MINNEAPOLIS officially established boundaries for Big Island Regional Park. ALANKGREENE These boundaries were established after considerable discussion MOUND and review, including a joint public information meeting held LAWRENCEF ►,AEG with the City of Orono in February of 1978. The proposed park ROBBINSDALE wi l l be located entirely on the eastern island. Since the parcel located on the western isiand was no longer within the proposed JLP* HIEGSTROM MINNEAPOLIS boundary, the Board declared this 'and surplus and authorized the Superintendent to petition District Court for approval to sell LISA NOLLENDER this property. MINNEAPOLIS RAVMONDN SEAGREN Subsequently, an acquisition was negotiated whereby the District MINNEAPOL. IS would trade its ownership on the west island for property located ... within the proposed park boundary on the east island. Included in this negotiation was the stipulation that the District would attempt CI.IFTON E. FRENCH SUPERINTENDENT to have the roads vacated on the surplus property located on the west island. The District Board feels that in view of the heavy expenditures the District is making to acquire parkland on Big Island that Orono could show its interest in this project by waiving the fee. Thanks for what you can do in getting this requested granted. Sincerely, Clifton E. French Superintendent and Secretary to the Board CEF:ghd Telephone 473.7357 4 Jy CITYof ORONO 11u4t Office Box 66 • Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 • Municipal Officm y On the North Shore of Lak. Minnetonka October 16, 1978 Mr. Clifton E. French Superintendent Hennepin County P.O. Box 2Q6 Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359 Dear Mr. French. Park Reserve On October 11, 1978, the Orono City Council reviewed your letter to Walter Benson, dated October 6, 1978, regarding Big Island property transactions and an application for vacation of public property to the City. The Council does want to assist the Park Reserve in acquisition of Big Island property and is very sympathetic with the type of transaction you are involved with, however, the City does have statutory responsibilities which must be adhered to in review of this type of request. The City can be expected to expend substantial staff time in the review of your proposal. Therefore, the City Council has directed that your request for street vacations on Big Island be accompanied by the normal an-licatfon fee of $100.00. Sincerely, Alan P. Olson Village Planner APO: kh `1, .4 j CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. VILLAGE OF ORONO ) I, Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Zoning Administrator, of tha Village of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning Hennepin County Park Reserve District's application for proposed undeveloped road vacations on Big Island, Lake Minnetor*a, legally described as follows: All of Linden Street, all of Elm Street, and all of Maple Place located within Rate B. Plummer's Subdivision of Lot 2 of Kitchel's Subdivision of Gov't Lots S & 6, was mailed to the attached list of property owners. In Witness Whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal this Fifteenth day of November , 1978 . Jeai(* Mabusth, Asst. Zoning Administrator .e Nov I9TB CITY OF 0.11 SUNNEWSPAPERS AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION LAKE MINNETONKA SUN 040 lost Lake Street State of Minnettots ss. County of Hennepin Woysoto, Minnosata J. R. RITCHAY, being duly sworn, on oath says he is and during all limes here stated has Caen the vice president and printer of the newspaper known as 7%e Lake Minnetonka Sun and has full knowledge of the facts herein staled as follows: (1) Said newspaper to printed In the English language In newspaper format and in column and sheet form equivalent In printed space to at least 800 square Inches. (2) Said newspaper Is a weekly and is distributed at least once every week. (3) Said newspaper has 50% of Its news columns devoted to news of local Interest to the community which it purports to serve and does not wholly duplicate any other publication and is not made up entirely of patents, plate matter and advertisements. (4) Said newspaper is circulated in and near the munlcipaUtles which it purports to sere, has at least 500 copies regularly delivered to paying subscribers, has an average of at least 75So of its total circulaUon currently paid or no more than three months In arrears and has entry as second-class matter In Its local post -office. (8) Said newspaper purports to serve Carver County and the Cities of Excelsior, Deephaven, Shorewood, Greenwood, Woodland, Mound, Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach, Wayzata, Long Lake, Orono, Plymouth and that portion of Minnetonka serving School District No. 276 In the County of Hennepin and It has its known office of Issue in the Village of Excelsior in said county, established and open during its regular business hours for the gathering of news, sale of advertisements and sale of subscriptions ai.d maintained by the managing officer of said newspaper or persons in Its employ and subject to his direction and control during all such regular business hours and devoted exclusively during such business hours to the business of the newspaper and business related thereto. (6) Said newspaper files a copy of each issue immediately with the State Historical Society. (7) Said newspaper is made available at single or subscription prices to any person, corporation, partnership or other unincorporated association requesting the newspaper and making the applicable payment. (8) Said newspaper has compiled with all foregoing conditions for at least one year preceding the day or dales of publication mentioned below. (8) Said newspaper has filed with the Secretary of State of Minnesota prior to January 1, 1MB and each January 1 thereafter an affidavit in the form proscribed by the Secretary of State and signed by the managing officer of said newspaper and sworn to before a notary public stating that the newspaper Is a legal newspaper. to paying subscribers, has an average of at least 73% of its total circulation currently paid or no more than three months in arrears and has entry as second•ciaes matter in its local post -office. (S) Said newspaper purports to serve Carver County and the Cities of Excelsior, Deephaven, Shorewood, Greenwood, Woodland, Mound, Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach, Wayzata, Long Lake, Orono, Plymouth and that porUon of Minnetonka serving School District No. tf6 In the County of Hennepin and it has its known office of issue in the Village of Excelsior in said county, established and open during its regular business hours for the gathering of news, sale of advertisements and sale of subscriptions ar,d maintained by the managing officer of said newspaper or persons in its employ and subject to his direction and control during all such regular business hours and devoted exclusively during such business hours to the business of the newspaper and business related thereto. (6) Said newspaper files a copy of each issue immediately with the State Historical Society. (7) Said newspaper is made available at single or subscription prices to any person, corporation, partnership or other unincorporated association requesting the newspaper and making the applicable payment. (8) Said newspaper has complied with all foregoing conditions for at least one year preceding the day or dates of publication mentioned below. (9) Said newspaper has filed with the Secretary of State of Minnesota prior to January 1, 1906 and each January 1 thereafter an affidavit in the form prescribed by the Secretary of Stale and signed by the managing officer of said newspaper and sworn to before a notary public stating that the newspaper is a legal newspaper. He further states on oath that the printed___ Notice of Public -Hey ring hereto attached as a part hereof was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published therein to the English language, once each week, for 411ift.--su, c-e-ive weeks: that it was first so published on -Wed —the __-1_day of November i9_2y,i and was thereafter printed and published on every___-- _—_—_._..to and including the -_day of 111_ and that the following Is a printed copy of the lower case alphabet from to Z, both inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and publication of said notice, to -wit: ab( defghgklmnopyrslu%%xyz SuWcribed and sworn to before me this_. _day nf_—__NOVeMber 19_78 PHYLLI i S, BART7N NOTARY PUBLIC MINNESOTA 14E11tapfmi COUNTY MV C-1saiva Espret Age is, 19M TO: Planning Commission and Council FROM: Alan P. Olson, Village Planner DATE: November 16, 1978 SUBJECT: #444 - Road Vacation Hennepin County Park Reserve District - Big Island This application is made to vacate all of the public roads in ?n area of the west island which is now owned by the Park Reserve. The area is platted into ten (10) separated lots which are divided by the subject roads. The Park Reserve's intentions are to have the roads vacated to permit combination of the lots into one buildable/saleable lot. In the past, Orono has declined to vacate any public property on the island pursuant to Resolution #446 calling for eventual public ownership. This application appears to be contrary to this intent with the Park District actually divesting itself of land. Their intention appears to be a land trade between this parcel and another unidentified parcel on the west island. Perhaps a "trade" of access should be considered to justify any vacation. As to the buildability of this "lot" after vacation, there is a small area of wetlands along the inlet but the remaining area would exceed two acres. Septic testing would be required prior to any building permit application. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - NOVEMBER 27, 1978 Public Hearing held regarding the vacations. Greg Mack represented the Park District and Dennis Kilhane was also present. The Commission questioned the role of the Park Reserve District in a transfer of park owned land to a private citizen, land originally acquired for the Park Reserve at Big Island. They also questioned their role in determining a vacation of a public right of way for a lot that would be now privately owned. Mr. Mack explained that the Park District had drawn new boundaries for the Big Island Reserve and that West Island was not included. The subject property would be used in a land exchange for property within the primary land acquisition zone. Hf was asked to bring in an updated map indicating the new park boundaries and background information on policy changes. November 16, 1978 Hennepin County Park Reserve District 44 Big Island - Road Vacations Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - NOVEMBER 27, 1978 (Cont.) Staff was asked to draft a rationale determining the public benefits derived from the vacation of public easements. Staff would also determine the total area of right of way to be vacated and to evaluate the effects on neighboring property. Planning Commission tabled the application pending receipt of additional information regarding Park Reserve acquisition plans and pending general review of policy and law regarding public land vacations. STAFF UPDATE - DECEMBER 5, 1978 The Park Reserve is intending to submit a statement clarifying their reasons for requesting this action including information regarding the Board's action to divest itself of west island property. The District's contention is that this land trade is instrumental in affecting consolidation of their holdings on the east island. The Planning Commission must first make a finding of facts: 1. Are the public lands rights of way only or are they platted for or capable of other uses? The plat indicates rights of way only. 2. What is the amount of public land involved? Staff calculates: Linden Street (N1/2) (E1/2) Elm Street (w/tee to W) Maple Place 230 ft. X 40 ft. - 9,200 s.f. 290 ft. X 40 ft. - 11,600 s.f. 420 ft. X 40 ft. - 16,800 s.f. 260 ft. X 20 ft. - 5,200 s.f. Total - .98 acre = 42,800 s.f. S. What is the amount of private land involved? Staff calculates (from plat) 2.5 acres total, less .98 acre rights of way equals 1.52 acres. November 16, 1978 Hennepin County Park Reserve District Big Island - Road Vacations Page 3 4. Are the rights of way developed or used in any way? Staff is aware of no such current use. 5. WhAt is the probability of future use of the rights of way for access, utilities or other public use? The rights of way apparently serve only three parcels: a) These lots 1-10, already combined as one tax parcel: Access from the lake would not be affected by vacation. b) The Faus parcel to the west: This parcel has direct access to the lake. c) The Erickson parcel to the north: This parcel has direct access to the lake (channel) without requiring access through wetlands. the parcel is connected to other Erickson parcels to the north which also have direct access. These rights of way are the only Erickson access to this shore of the island but Erickson is on record as favoring vacation. 6. If the rights of way were vacated in return for consolidation into one parcel of equal land area, what purpose would or could be served? This could include maintenance of access rights and/or maintenance of public property rights. 7. Is the property buildable without vacation? Perhaps a house could be located in one area (lots 9 & 10 for instance) with a lot area/width variance in return for open space easements over remaining lots. Net effect same as vacation with relocation of rights of way. 8. What public benefit is served by vacation? a) Public (Park Reserve) gain by furthering the District's land trade and consequent consolidation of holdings. b) Pro-jides buildable site (as in 7 above) without rights of way restrictions: Building site increases by X amount the taxable valuation. c) Transfers ownership and caretaking responsibilities to private sector thereby reducing city liability for future maintenance. November 16, 1978 11 Hennepin County Park Reserve District Big Island - Road Vacations Page 4 9. Is the Park Reserve District's current acquisition plan in conformance with the policy intentions of the City of Orono as established by Resolution 446? After the fact finding, the Planning Commission must recommend a policy finding to the Council. Do the facts sufficiently support vacation as requested by the Park Reserve? If no, the reasons must be stated and the recommendation will be for denial. If yes, the recommendation will be for approval in one of two ways. In bot1- cases, the following findings must be made: 1. The vacation does not affect access to or use of any affected or adjoining property. 2. The City has not and doe^ not intend to develop, improve or use the property in any ;say. 3. The property as it exists serves no public purpose. 4. The vacation is in the PUBLIC INTEREST, by: a) furthering the Flans of the Park Reserve District; b) reducing city liability for maintenance, or c) increasing taxable valuation. If the recommendation is for vacation in return for relocation of right of way, the following findings should be made: 1. The Minnesota Supreme Court in E31dwin et al (see attached) prohibits vacation of public access to the lakeshore without suitable replacement. 2. Public Right of Way is necessary to maintain access to affected properties. 3. Relocation and consolidation of the access would serve the public better than does the existing configuration (because of topography, or the existing lot divisions, or the configuration of the existing streets). 4. The City policy established by Resolution 446 precludes any relinquishing of public aerty on Big Island. /r November 16, 1978 Hennepin County Park Reserve District . Big Island - Street Vacations Page 5 If the recommendation is for vacation without relocation of the right of way, the following findings should be made: 1. The Supreme Court ruling applies to accese TO the lake which is not applicable in this factual case. The only members of the public needing access are the three affected property owners who each have independent access available. 2. Public right of way is not necessary to maintain access to affected properties. 3. The public interest in a given amount of land area will be maintained by means of the Park Reserve's acquisitions on the east island. The Park Reserve's acquisition plan is in keeping with Orono policy as established in Resolution 446. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - DECFM9ER 11, 1978 Planning Commission recommended approval of the vacations of undeveloped roads on Big Island, legally described as follows: All of Linden Street, all of Elm Street, and all of Maple Place located within Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision of Lot 2 of Kitchel's Subdivision of Government Lots 5 and 6. Such vacation to be approved without relocation of the public right of way based on the following findings: 1. The vacation does not affect access to or use of any affected or adjoining property. 2. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve or use the property in any way. 3. The property as it exists serves no public purpose. 4. The vacation is in the public interest by: a) furthering the plans of the Park Reserve District; b) reducing city liability for maintei :e, and c) increasing taxable valuation. 5. The Supreme Court ruling applies to a,-cess TO the lake which is not applicable in this factual case. 'Ii►e only members of the public needing access are the three affected property owners who each have independent access available. 6. Public right of way is not necessary to maintain access to affected properties. 7. The p,iblic interest in a given amoant of land area will be maintained by means of the Park Reserve's acquisitions on the east island. The Park Reserve's acquisition plan is in keeping with Orono policy as established in Resolution 446. MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 27, 1978 Planning Commission met on the above date. The following members were present: Chairman Hassel, Hurr, McDonald, Hannah, Frahm and Hammerel. Mabusth represented the City staff. Mayor Van Nest was also present. ATTENDANCE 7:30 P.M. Mabusth stated that she had the Affidavit of zNNEPIN COUNTY Publication and Certificate of Mailing. Gregg PARK RESERVE DISTRICT Mack represented the Park Reserve District. Street Vacations He presented a map on the Park Reserve's plan Big Island for parks on Big Island and their recent decision PUBLIC HEARING as to park boundary locations. He stated that 7:37 P.M. - 7:50 P.M. the purpose of the street vacations was to create (#444) a buildable lot to use in exchange for another niece of property which the Park Reserve wants to obtain. This property, located on the east island next to the veteran's camp, is a connecting link between two pieces of park property. Denny Kilbane, part owner of this parcel, was present. Discussion ensued regarding replatting that would put all of the public right-of-way into a strip along the west edge of the lot rather than vacating any right-of-way. Hurr moved to table this item pending further direction and rationale on public benefits derived by vacating public right of way. They also requested calculation of area of public land within the platted lots and suggested that this be submitted as a replatting. Motion seconded by Hammerel. Vote: Ayes (6), Nays (0). Motion passed unanimously. The Nobles were represented by Robert Hoffman. Mr. JOHN NOBLE and Mrs. Noble and Mr. Charles Alexander were present. 1185 Ferndale Two revised plans were presented. Mr. Hoffman stated CONDITIONAL USE that the driveway to the east of the lot was formerly VARIANCES County Road 15 (this was also verified by a neighbor (#429) to the west of Noble). Previous variance applications (McDonald #361 & Rovick #77) were also discussed. Mr. Hoffman stated that the pond was originally wetland and was then filled because it was unstable. He also stated that neighbors on both sides would rather have the house closer to the lake so they would not have to look into their pool. PERMI' POPHAM, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH, KAUFMAN 6 DOTY, LTD. WAYNE G. POPHAM RAYMOND A. HAIK ROGER W. SCHNOBRICH DENVER KAUFMAN DAVID S. DOTY ROBERT A. MINISH ROLFIE A. WORDEN G. MARC WHITEHEAD BRUCE D. WILLIS FREDERICK S. RICHARDS RONALD C. ELMOUIST G. ROBERT JOHNSON GARY R. MACOMBER ROBERT S. BURK FREDERICK C. BROWN BRUCE D. MALKF.RSON JAMES R. STEILEN JAMLS B. LOCKHART ALLEN W. HINDERAKER CLIFFORD M. GREENE D. WI LLIAM KAUFMAN DESYL L. PETER SON LARRY D. ESPEL DAVID A. JONES SALLY A. JOHN SON 4344 IDS CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 1 A I Alan P. Olson, City Planner City of Orono P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, 107 55323 Dear Mr. Olson: December 5, 1978 (612) 335-9331 TELECOPIER (612) 330-56' RE"k-�1 U OEC ti 19TB CITY OF ORONO Pursuant to your request, enclosed please find two copies of Application of Baldwin, et al. Very truly yours, G . Linda C. Bortz Legal Assistant LCB/mcr Enclosures lgg Minn. 15 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES and any interference with this flow to their injury is a wrong for which they are en- titled to an appropriate remedy. To pre- vc :t such a wrong, inju.,ction is an ap- propriate remedy." Morrill v. ' int An- thony Falls Water -Power Co., 26 Minn. 222, 229, 2 N.W. 842, 847, 37 Am.Rep. 399; Sanborn v. People's Ice Co., 82 Minn. 43, 84 N.W. 641, 51 L.R.A. 829, 83 Am.St.Rep. 401, and Schaefer v. Marthaler, 34 Minn. 487, 26 N.W. 726, 57 Am.Rep. 73, supra. Yourgstown's plan contemplates the tak- in- of property without just compensation and without condemnation proceedings as pi cscrtbed by the lease and statute. This is a violation of plaintiffs' private rights which they will suffer not in common with the public generally but as a damage sole- 1), to their own private property. Youngstown objects that plaintiffs' dam- age, if any, has not been shown to be ir- reparable. In cases of this nature, the rule has been modified as expressed in Bilsbor- row v. Pierce, 101 Minn. 271, 276, 112 N. W. 274, 276, which involved damage re- sulting from a drainage project: #'* • * The relaxation of the rule re- quiring a prima facie case of irreparable damage as a condition of granting an in- junction in such a case as this, and a modi- fication of the enforced standard of such damage obvious in such decisions gen- erally, has been expressly recognized by this court." in Whittaker v. Stangvick, 100 Minn. 3.56, 392, 111 N.W. 295, 297, 10 L.R.A., N.S., 921, 117 Am.St.Rep. 703, 10 Ann.Cas. 528, it was stated: "There has been a material modification in such cases of the requirements that the injury should be ir- rep: rable and the legal remedy inade- qume." (21] We are of the opinion that the complaint sufficiently alleges the injuries wit ch will result if ioungstown's pro- posed plans are put into operation, and that the evidence sustains the court's find- ing that such operations, if permitted, will constitute a trespass upon plaintiffs' ripari- an rights and that the nature of these threatened injuries is such as to entitle plaintiffs to injunctive relief. Affirmed. LORING, C. J., and THOMAS GAL- LAGIiER, J., took no part in the con- sideration or decision of this case. Application of BALDWIN at al. No. 33721. Supreme Court of Minnesota. June 23, 1944. 1. Dedication 4=41 A street having been located by a plat on the shore of a lake, its dedication to the use of the public will be presumed to have been intended to enable the public to have access to the water for all proper public purposes. Minn.St.1941, § 505.14. 2. Municipal corporations 4=557(1) Where it is proposed to vacate a street which is located upon a lake shore, the final test is whether the public interest will be best served by discontinuing the way. 3. Evidence 4=10(5) Judicial notice will be taken of the ex- tensive public use being made of Lake Minnetonka for recreational purposes. 4. Municipal corporations 4-857(1) The word "useless", as used in statute permitting vacation of a street when it has become useless for the purpose for which it was laid out, should not be given any re- stricted meaning, but should be given the meaning of the term as commonly defined as being of no use, unserviceable, and an- swering no desired purpose. Minn.St.1941, 505.14. See Words and Phrases, Permanent Edition, for all other definitions o! "Useless". 5. Municipal corporations 4=34W(S) In the absence of any show:ng that a portion of street leading to the lake shore had become "useless", within meaning of statute permitting vacation of street when it becomes useless for the purpose for which it was laid out, refusing to set aside timely motion to reopen proceedings in which decree vacating street was entered was an abuse of discretion. Minn.St.1941, 1 505.14. Syllabus by the Court. 1. A dedication by plat of a street upon the shore of a meandered lake will be pre- sumed to have been intended to enable the public to have access to the lake for all proper public purposes. 2. The final test in determining wheth- er a street located upon the shore of a APPLICATION OF BALDWIN 15 N.wsd tat meandered lake may be vacated tition of an int -rested property whether the public interest will served by such vacation. Minn. 185 upon pe- is owned by Albert Jacoby, who consented owner is in writing to the partial vacation of the bt best street. 3. Judicial notice will be taken of the character of Lake Minnetonka and the ex- tensive public use made of the lake for recreational purposes. 4. The word "useless" in Atinn.St.1941, § 505.14 (?Mason St.1927, § 8244), permit- ting vacation of a street when it is "use- less for the purpose for which it was laid out," mast be given its full and unrestricted meaning. 5. Refusal to set aside a decree vacat- ing a public street located upon the shores of Lake Minnetonka upon petition of an ad- joining owner not personally served with notice of the vacation proceedings held erroneous. Appeal from District Court, Hennepin County; Levi DI. Hall, Judge. Proceeding in the matter of th,; applica- tion of Edward H. Baldwin and Hazel 11aldwin to vacate a portion of Lake Street located on the north shore of St. Albans Bay of Lake :Minnetonka, Hennepin Coun- tv,%%herein a decree was entered as prayed. Arne Bergren and another subsequently filed a motion to set aside the decree. From an order denying the motion Arne Bergren and another appeal. Reversed. 'Thomas Tallakson, of Minneapolis, for appellants. O. J. Grathwol, of Excelsior, and John- son, Sands & Brumfield, of Minneapolis, for respondents. STREISSGUTH, Justice. This is a proceeding under Minn.St.1941, § 505.14, Mason St.1927, § 8244, for the vacation of a short stretch of Lake Street (abmit 150 feet) located on the north shore of St. Albans Bay of Lake Minnetonka in Vrcelsior township, Hennepin county, de- scribed as "All that part of Lake Street ly- ing hetween the southeasterly line of Coun- ty Road No. 82 and the southwesterly line of \\-cst Street extended to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, Bennett's Addition to Covington." The petitioners, Edward H. Baldwin and Hazel Baldwin, who are re- spondents here, own two lots, with a front- age of 50 and 51 feet respectively, abutting on Lake Street, while a third abutting lot 15 N.W.2d-12% Appellants are the owners of a lake -shore lot abutting on the same street and lying im- mediately east of the portion sought to be vacated. They occupy their property only daring the summer months of each year but, during such period, have occasion to use the portion of Lake Street sought to he vacated as their most direct connection with county road No. 82, leading to Minne- apolis and Excelsior. They can, how- ever, by a more circuitous route, via West Street, also reach the county road. Lake Street was de licated to public use in 1883 by the plat of Bcrinett's Addition to Covington, filed in that year. However, the portion of the street here involved Las never been graded or otherwise improved by the township, and its use as a thorough- fare by the public generally h.is not been extensive. On August 14, 1942, on application of the Baldwins, the district court made an order fixing September 8 as the date of hearing on their petition to vacate the portion of Lake Street which has been describes. Pursuant to directions contained in the or- der for hearing, it was duly publishtd and posted and a copy served upon the chair- man of the township of Excelsior. The order did not direct service upon appellants, and they were not personally served, nor did they have actual notice of the proceed- ings until after a decree of vacation was entered. When the matter came on to be heard in d;- •t court no opposition appeared. The t irc, after hearing the petitioners, propriate findings, including one g the language of the petition, viz.: "'That the portion of said Lake Street so describer) is useless for the purposes for which said street was laid out; that all of the property owners abutting on said por- tion of said street are desirous of having it vacated, and that said portion of said street is now of no use to your petitioners or to any other person for the purposes for which said street was laid out." A decree vacating the described portion of Lake Street was accordingly entered. on September 14, 1942. All was well until the following spring. when the Bergrens moved back to the lake for the summer. Witb apparent innocence, they began using the vacated portion of 186 Mium 15 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES Lake Street as a means of access to their cottage. But, about June 1, Arne Bergren received a telephone call from the attorney for the Baldwins warning him to discon- tinue the use of the vacated street "or else he would be subject to legal process for doing so." Bergren immediately engaged h:s present attorney to investigate what had happened. With proper diligence, notice of a motion to set aside the 1942 decree and to permit the Bergrens to appear in op- position to the vacation of the street was served upon the Baldwins, as well as upon the occupant and record owner of other abutting property, and upon the chairman of the town board. A copy of notice of mo- tion was also posted in three public places in the township. setting aside the decree does not appear from these affidavits and must remain a mystery. Notwithstanding the timely motion made by appellants, the district court, by order dated September 23, 1943, refused to set aside its former decree so as to permit ap- pellants to be heard in opposition to the application to vacate the street. The ap- peal is from that order. [1] 1. Throughout the proceedings be- low, the abutting owners have emphasized the nonuse of the vacated portion of Lake Street as a street or thoroughfare and the fact that appellants have another street as a means of access to their property. Ap- pellants, on the other hand, have stressed the claim of damage to their own property Only the Baldwins appeared in formal caused by the vacation. Apllrently lost opposition to the motion to reopen the pro- in the shuffle were the rights of the public ceedings. They -d mainly upon the in the lake itself, for neither party seems claims (1) that t, ergrens had not been to have given much consideration to the deprived of access to their premises, bc- value of Lake Street, located as it is on the cause West Street was available to them; shores of St. Albans Bay, in providing 12) that Lake Street had not been used as a lake frontage and shore line for the use of street or thoroughfare until 1940, when the the public for recreational purposes. Lake Baldwins filled in a portion of Lake Street Street having been located by the plat of adjacent to the county road and commenced Bennett's Addition on the shore of the bay, improvements on their own property; and its dedication to the use of the public will (3) that the vacated part of Lake Street( be presumed to have been intended "to "is useless to the public for the purposes enable the public to have access to the wat- for which it was laic: out, has never !wen er for all proper public purposes." In re used by the public or by anyone for pur- Petition of Schaller, 193 Minn. 604, 259 N. poses as a street, and the public interests W. 529, 530 headnotc are best served by not using said platted street, in view of the location of said street and the complete accessibility of the public to the shores of Lake Minnetonka at the southerly end of West Street." Supporting the Baldwins in their efforts to prevent a reopening of the proceedings were the three town supervisors, who by affidavit asserted that, upon being served with notice of the original hearing in 1942, they had made a complete investigation and had conchided that the portion of Lake Street here involved "was no good for the purpose for which it was laid out and that there would be a benefit accruing to the public by the proposed vacation." The supervisors further deposed "that no use- ful purpose would be served and that the interest of the public would be prejudiced by 9rder of this court setting aside the de- cree." Just what benefit the public would derive from the vacation o` the street, other than being saved the minor expense of maintaining 150 feet of it, or what prejudice would result to the public from [2] 2. The contest here is not a mere bout between private individuals with mem- bers of the public acting merely in the role of spectators. The public has a rea', and substt _itial interest in the outcome. "The ,public rights in these lakes, with which this state abounds, are of great value and importance," Witty v. Board of County Com'rs of Nicollet County, 76 Minn. 286, V9, 79 N.W. 112, 113, and this court has always been zealous in protecting them. Lamprey v. State, 52 Minn. 181, 53 N.W. 1139, 18 L.R.A. 670, 38 Am.St.Rep. 541; Madsen v. Larson, 117 Minn. 369, 135 N. W. 1003; State v. Korrer, 127 Minn. 60, 148 N.W. 617, 1095, L.R.A.1916C, 139; Erickschen v. County of Sibley, 142 Minn. 37, 170 N.W. 883; In re Petition of Schal- ler, supra ; In re Petition of Krebs, 213 Minn. 344, 6 N.W2d 803; Petraborg v. Zontelli, Minn., 15 N.W2d 174, decided June 9, 1944. And where, as here, it is proposed to vacate a street which is lo- cated upon a lake shore, the matter should receive "our most careful consideration APPLICATION OF BALDWIN 115 IN.W.ttd I" • • * 'the final test is whether the public interests will or will not be best served by discontinuing the way."' In re Petition of Schaller, 193 :Minn. 614, 259 N. W. 534. The situation is not unlike that which existed in Erickschen v. County of Sibley, supra, involving the drainage of Wash,'ng- ton Lake in Sibley county. There the pe- titioners stressed the benefits to their land which might result from the drainage of the lake, while the objectors in turn dwelt mainly upon the damage to their own lands. But the court (142 Minn. 41, 42, 170 N.W. 884, 885), referring to the "set- tled policy designed to preserve inland waters which afford recreation to the pub- lic," said: " • • t We have observed that in contested drainage proceedings the petition- ers are chiefly interested in adding to their holdings of arable land, while their oppon- ents arc concerned over possib!c damage to their lands as a result of the dra:nage of those of their neighbors. In the clash of rurlflicting privwe interests, those of the public arc r:pt to drop art of sight. Yet the state, though not a putty to nor repre- t^nted in the proceedings, has real and sio- slantial rights to protect. * * • It should be the concern of the county board and Lf the courts to guard the rights of the public, and to preserve fur the enjoyment of this and future generations all bodies of water which have present or potential pub- lic value." (Italics supplied.) [3] 3. This court requires no proof that Lake Minnetonka is a priceless heritage of t'ne people of Minnesota to be preserved and passed on to posterity. Tudicial notice Mill be taken of the fact that it is one of the most precious pearls in the string of 7 Icn Thousand Lakes o' which Minnesota is so justly proud. Its natural beauty has be- come the theme of both legend and song. Because of its wide expanse and proximity to our metropolitan areas, it is much fre- quenter, and used for boating, fishing, picnick.ng, and bathing —perhaps more than any other lake in the state. Its shore lisle of nearly 100 miles is dotted with Permanent homes and summer cottages, not only at its water's edge, but extending far back from the shore. But the use of the lake is not confined to dwellers on its shore or nearby. During the summer season es- pecially, it is the mecca for thousands upon thousands of urbanites, not so fortunate as Minn. 187 to possess a lake home, who —young and old alike —seek its shores and waters for div- ers recreational purposes. To those who do not indulge in active recreation, it af- fords the opportunity of communing with nature at its best. With the increase in the permanent lake population, however, the extent of lake shore available to the public generally and the means of public access to the lake have diminished and, therefore, become increasingly valuable from year to year. All these facts are so commonly known that this court must take them into consideration in disposing of the appeal. • ' • we must not forget that the public includes persons other than those in4" the immediate vicinity. Th, general pub- lic has a true concern in the recreational facilities offered by the lakes which nature has so freely given us in this state. Their gencrou; sharing by all will make for a healthier and happier people. The many not fortunate enough to be able to acquire the advantages of ownership of lake shore properties should not be deprived of these benefits. This we would do if we permitted streets leading to the lake shore to be va- cated as here proposed." In re Petitien of Krebs, 213 Minn. 344, 347, 6 N.W.2d 803, 805. (4] 4. Keeping in mind the value to the public of free access to and use of the lake shore, we are at a loss to ;,now how any part of Lake Street has become "useless" within the meaning of that term as com- monly defined. The word "useless," which appears in Minn.St.1941, § 505.14, Mason St.1927, f 8244, permitting vacation of a street when it is "useless for the purpose for which it was laid out," should not be given any restricted meaning. Courn . should ascribe to it the well -accepted con- notation: "not serving or not capable of serving any valuable purpose; being of no use; having or being of no use; un- serviceable; producing no good end; an- swering no desired purpose." Funk dt %Vagnalls New Standard Dictionary, 1932; Webster's New International Dictionary (2d Ed.) 1938. [5] 5. The loss to the public of 150 feet of shore line out of a total of approxi- mately 100 miles may to the Baldwins seem inconsequential or even infinitesimal and nothing to be disturbed about. But, of this 100 miles of precious shore line, only a small fraction has been reserved for the public; and if the courts should create a 188 Minn. 15.NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES precedent by permitting a single inroad, however small, upon the public's share of the shore line, other inroads will inevitably follow, until the aggregate becomes a -eat threat to the public's free access :.o the lake. To avoid any possibility of such a re- sult, the courts should with equal vigor re- pulse the first, the second, and every other assault upon the public domain. If eternal vigilance is the price of pre- serving the full benefit of Minnesota's lakes for all members of the public —as it is of liberty —public officials must gladly pay that price. They must not stand by, wholly unconcerned, like Nero, who fiddled while Rome burned, and p<•rmit public access to our lakes to be cut off or reduced for sel- fish private purposes. Yet here town supervisors appear to have been entirely ob- livious to the full import of the petition, cf the filing of which they received notice. Not only did they fail to protest, but they actually gave aid and comfort to the pe- titioners in their raid upon the public's con- servation chest. be supported by clear proof that the street has in fact become "useless" to the public in the full and unrestricted meaning of that term. Reversed. The obvious purpose of providing notice to t;,- town supervisors of proceedings to vacate a street or highway is to put these officers on guard, so that the interests of it.. public may be amply protected. The supervisors of Excelsior township having failed in their duty in this respect and having permitted a default to be entered, it is at least understandable why the petition was originally granted by the lower court. But when the court's decree vacating the street was promptly attacked by appellants upon their receiving notice of the proceed- ing, the trial court should have been alert to the public interest and, unhesitatingly, should have reopened it; and this, not- withstanding that appellants' motion to re- open was motivated principally by the an- ticipated damage to their own property. Not to reopen the proceeding in the public interest was a clear abuse of discretion, and the order denying appellants' motion must be reversed. If, in view of the importance we have attached to the preservation of our lakes sud full access thereto for the public and for posterity, respondents still desire to urge that the portion of Lake Street be- tween their property and St. Albans Bay has become "useless for the purpose for which it was laid out," they will be ac- corded that privilege. We may not have all the facts. But respondents should un- derstand that any decree of vacation must M c i an �wa� mm� T In re LIPSCOMB. No. 33759. Supreme Court of Minnesota. June 2, 1944. 1. Attorney and client C;39 Conviction of a felony or a misde- meanor involving moral turpitude results in disbarment as a matter of course, even though sentence is suspended. Minn.St. 1941, § 481.15, subd. 1(l ). 2. Attorney and client C=39 The record of conviction of a felony or a misdemeanor involving moral turpi- tude is conclusive in disbarment proceed- ing and cannot be gie�tioned by proof al,unde. 1\linn.St.1941, § 481.15, subd. 1(1). 3. Attorney and client 4=154 That money which client owed attor- ney but refused to pay would have been more than enough to take care of another client's claim did not constitute such ex tenuating circumstances as would justify a reference of proceeding to disbar attor- ney for embezzlement of second client's money. Minn.St.1941, § 481.15, subd. l(1). Proceeding on order to show cause why Allen H. Lipscomb should not be dis- barred. Respondent disbarred. Philip Neville, Sec'y, State Board of Law Examiners, of Minneapolis, for peti- tioner. Henry G. Young, of Minneapolis, fol respondent. PER CURIAM. On October 27, 1943, respondent, an at- torney ataw duly licensed to prar•ice in our state, pleaded guilty to an infortna l tra 184 Minn, 15 NORTH WESTERN REPORTE #sERIES and any interference with this flow to their injury is a wrong for which they are en- titled to an appropriate remedy. To pre- vent such a wrong, injunction is an ap- propriate remedy." Morrill v. Saint An- thony Falls Water -Power Co., 26 Minn. 222, 229, 2 N.W. 842, 847, 37 Am.Rep. 399; Sanborn v. People's Ice Co., 82 Minn. 43, 8.1 N.W. 641, 51 L.R.A. 829,83 Am.St.Rep. 401, and Schaefer v. Marthaler, 34 Minn. 487, 26 N.W. 726, 57 Am.Rep. 73, supra. Youngstown's plan contemplates the tak- in- of property without just compensation and without condemnation proceedings as prescribed by the le,.se and statitte. This is a violation of plaintiffs' private rights which they will suffer not in cocit c:m with the public generally but as a damage sole- ly to their own private property. Youngstown objects that plaintiffs' dam- r,rc, if any, has not be n shown to be ir- reparable. In cases of this nature, the rule has been modified as expressed in Bilsbor- row v. Pierce, 101 Minn. 271, 276, 112 N. W. 274, 276, which involved damage re- sulting from a drainage project: "+ + • The relaxation of the rule re- quiring a prima facie case of irreparable damage as a condition of granting an in- junction in such a case as this, and a modi- fication of the enforced standard of such damage obvious in such decisions gen- erally, has been expressly recognized by this court." in Whittaker v. Stangvick, 100 Minn. 3.96, 392, 111 N.W. 295, 297, 10 L.R.A., N.S., 921, 117 Am.St.Rep. 703, 10 Ann.Cas. 328, it vas stated: "There has been a material modification in such cases of the regtiiren.ents that the injury should be ir- reparabie and the legal remedy inade- quate [211 We are of the opinion that the complaint sufficiently alleges the injuries w;,teh will result if Youngstown's pro- f, >sed plans are put into operation, and tnat the evidence sustains the court's find- ing that such operations, if permitted, will constitute a trespass upon plaintiffs' ripari- an rights and that the nature of these threatened injuries is such as to entitle plaintiffs to injunctive relief. Affirmed. LORING, C. J., and THOMAS GAL- LAGiiER, J., took no part in the con- sideration or decisien of this case. Application of BALDWIN st al. No. 33721. Supreme Court of rtlnnes0s.. June 23, 1944. 1. Dedication (8-41 `A, street having been located by it plat on the shore of a lake, its dedication to the use of the public will be presumed to have been intended to enable the put lic to have access to the water for all 1:roper public purposes. Minn.St.1941, § 505,14. 2. Municipal corporations t t6570) Where it is proposed to vacate a street which is located upon a lake shore, the final test is wheth!r the public interest will be best served by discontinuing the way. 3. Evidence 4-10(5) Judicial notice will be taken of the ex- tensive public use being made of Lake Minnetonka for recreational purposes. 4. Municipal corporations 4-657(I) The word "useless", as used in !tatute permitting vacation of a street Anen it has become useless for the purpose for which it was laid out, should not be given any re- stricted meaning, but should be given the meaning of the term as commonly defined as being of no use, unserviceable, and an- swering no desired purpose. Minn.St.1941, 5 505.14. See Words and Phrases. Permanent Edition, for all other definitions of "Useless". 5. Municipal corporations 4=3857(5) In the absence of any showing that a portion of street leading to the lake shorn had become "useless", within meaning of statute nermitting vacation of street when it becomes useless for the purpose for which it was laid out, refusing to set aside timely motion to reopen proceedings in which decree vacating street was entered was an abuse of discretion. Minn.St.1941, 4 505.14. yllabus by the Court. 1. A dedication by plat of a street upon the shore of a meandered lake will be pre- sumed to have been intended to enable the public to have access to the lake for all proper public purposes. 2. The final test in determining wheth- er a street located upon the shore of a APPLICATION OF BALDWIN 16 N.W.ld 101 meandered lake may be vacated upon pe- tition of an interested property owner is whether the public interest will be best served by such vacation. 3. Judicial notice will be taken of the character of Lake Minnetonka and the ex- tensive public use made of the lake for recreational purposes. 4. The word "useless" in Afinn.St.1941, 505.14 (Mason St.1927, § 8244), permit- ting vacation of a street when it is "use- less for the purpose for which it was laid out," must be given its full and unrestricted meaning. 5. Refusal to set aside a decree vacat- ing a public street located upon the shores of hake Minnetonka upon petition of an ad- joining owner no! personally served with notice of the vacation proceedings held erroneous. Appeal from District Court, Hennepin County; Levi M. Hall, Judge. Proceeding in the matter of the applica- tion of Edward H. Baldwin and Hazel Baldwin to vacate a portion of I_.ake Street located on the north shore of St. Albans Bay of Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin Coun- t•,%%herein a decree was entered as prayed. Arne Bergren and another subsequently filed a motion to set aside the decree. From an order denying the motion Arne Bergren and another appeal. Reversed. Thomas Tallakson, of Minneapolis, for appellants. O. J. Grathwol, of Excelsior, and John- son, Sands & Brumfield, of Minneapolis, for respondents. STREISSGUTH, Justice. This is a proceeding under Minn.St.1941, 1 505.14, Alason St.1927, § 8244, for the vacation of a short stretch of Lake Street (about 150 feet) located on the north shore of St. Albans Bay of Lake Minnetonka in 1:xcclsior township, Hennepin county, de- scribed as "All that part of Lake Street ly- ing between the southeasterly line of Coun- t, Road No. 82 and the southwesterly line of \Vest Street extended to the shore of Lake 'tlinnetonka, Bennett's Addition to Coy ington." The petitioners, Edward H. I1ald\%in and Hazel Baldwin, who are re- spondents here, own two lots, with a front- age of 50 and 51 feet respectively, abutting on Lake Street, while a third abutting lot 15 N.W,24--12% Minn. 185 is owned by Albert Jacoby, who consented in writing to the partial vacation of the street. Appellants are the owners of a lake -shore lot abutting on the same street and lying im- mediately east of the portion sought to be vacated. They occupy their property only during the summer months of each year but, during such period, have occasion to use the portion of Lake Street sought to be vacated as their most direct connection with county road No. 82, leading to Minne- apolis and Excelsior. They can, how- ever, by a more circuitous route, via West Street, also reach the county roar. Lake Street was dedicated to public use in 1983 by the plat of Bennett's Addition to' Covington, filed in that year. However, the portion of the street here involved has never been graded or otherwise improved by the township, and it-; use as a thorough- fare by the public generally has not been extensive. On August 14, 19t in application of the Baldwins, the district court made an order fixing September 8 as the date of hearing on their petition to vacate the portion of Lake Street which has been described. Pursuant to directions contained in the or- der for hearing, it was duly published and posted and a copy served upon the chair- man of the township of Excelsior. The order did not direct service upon appellants, and they were not personally served, nor did they have actual notice of the proceed- ings until after a decree of vacation was entered. When the matter came on to be heard in district court no opposition appeared. The trial court, after hearing the petitioners, made appropriate findings, including one following the languaee of the petition, viz.: "That the portion .,f said Like Street so described is useless for the purposes fur which said street was laid out; that all of the prol—rty owners abutting on said por- tion of s.tid street are desirous of having it vacated, and that said portion of said street is now of no use to your petitioners or to any other person for the purposes for which said street was laid out." A decree vacating the described portion of Lake Street was accordingly ertered.on September 14, 1942. All was well until the following spring. when the Bergrens moved back to the lake for the summer. With apparent innocence, they began using the vacated portion of 186 MlnsL 15 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES Lake Street as a means of access to their cottage. But, about June 1, Arne Bergren received a telephone call from the attorney for the Baldwins warning him to discon- tinue the use of ti„ varl,;cd street "or else he would be subject to legal process for doing so." Bergren immediately engaged his present attorney to investigate what had happened. With proper diligence, notice of a motion to set aside the 1942 decree and to permit the Bergrens to appear in op- position to the vacation of the street was served upon the Ealdwins, as well as upon the occupant and record owner of other abutting property, and upon the chairman of the town board. A copy of notice of mo- tion was also posted in three ?ublic places in the township. setting aside the decree does not appear from these affidavits and must remain a mystery. Notwithstanding the timely motion made by appellants, the district court, by order dated September 23, 1943, refused to set aside its former decree so as to permit ap- pellants to be heard in opposition to the application to vacate the street. The ap- peal is from that order. (1] 1. Throughout the proceedings be- low, the abutting owners have emphasized the nonuse of the vacated portion of Lake Street as a street or thoroughfare and the fact that appellants have another street as a means of access to their property. Ap- pellants, on the other hand, have stressed the claim of damagr_ to their own property Only the Baldwins appeared in formal caused by the vacation. Apparently lost opposition to the motion to reopen the pro in the sh tffle were the rights of the public ceedings. They relied mainly upon the in the lake itself, for neither party seems claims (1) that the Bergrens had not been to have given much consideration to the deprived of access to their premises, be- value of Lake Street, located as it is oil the cause West Street was available to them; shores of St. Albans Bay, in providing (2) that Lake Street hzd not been used as a lake frontage and shore line for the use of street or thoroughfare until 1940, when the the public for recreational purposes. Lake Baldwins filled in a portion of Lake Street Street having been located by the plat of adjacent to the county road and commenced Bennett's Addition on the shore of the bay, improvements on their own property; and its dedication to the use of the public will (3) that the vacated part of Lake Street(,be presrmed to have been intended "to "is useless to the public for the purposes enable the public to have access to the wat- for which it was laid out, has never been er for all proper public purposes." In re used by the public or Ly anyone for pur- Petition of Schaller, 193 Minn. 604, 259 N. poses as a street, and the public interests W. 529, 530 headnote. A. b— served by not using said platted street, in view of the location of said street and the complete accessibility of the public to the shores of Lake Minnetonka at the southerly end of West Street." Supporting the Baldwins in their efforts to prevent a reopening of the proceedings were the three town supervisors, who by affidavit asserted that, upon being served with notice of the original hearing in 1942, they had made a complete investigation and had concluded that the portion of Lake Street here involved "was no good for the purpose for which it was laid out and that there would be a 6eri.cjit accruing to the public by the proposed vacation." The supervisors further deposed "that no use- ful purpose would be served and that the interest of the public would be prejwdiced by order of this court setting aside the de- cree." Just what benefit the public would derive from the vac ,ion of the street, other than being saved the minor expense of maintaining 150 feet of it, or what pr4Zjudice would result to the public from [2] 2. The contest here is not a mere bout between private individuals with mem- bers of the public acting merely in the role of spec-tators. The public has a real and substantial interest in the outcome. "The yublic rights in these lakes, with which this state abounds, are of great value and importance," Witty v. Board of County Com'rs of Nicollet County, 76 Minn. 286, 289, 79 N.W. 112, 113, and this court has always been zealous in protecting them. Lamprey v. State, 52 Minn. 181, 53 N.W. 1139, 18 L.R.A. 670, 38 Am.St.Rep. 541; Madsen v. Larson, 117 Minn. 369, 135 N. W. 1003 ; State Y. Korrer, 127 Minn. 60, 148 N.W. 617, 1095, L.R.A.1916C, 139; Erieksehen v. County of Sibley, 14? Minn. 37, 170 N.W. 883; In re Petition of Schal- ler, supra ; In re Petition of Krebs, 213 Minn. 344, 6 N.W2d 803; Petraborg v. Zontelli, Minn., 15 N.W.2d 174, decided June 9, 1944. And where, as here, it is proposed to vacate a street which is lo- cated upon a lake shore, the matter should receive "our most careful consideration. APPLICATION OF BALDNVNI 15 N.W.sd lk * * * 'the final r. st is whether the public interests will or will not be best served by discontinuing the way."' In re Petition of Schaller, 193 Minn. 614, 259 N. W. 534. The situation is not unlike that which existed in Erickschcn v. County of Sibley, supra, involving the drainage of Washing- ton Lake in Sibley county. There the pe- titioners stressed the benefits to their land which might result from the drainage of the lake, while the objectors in turn dwelt mainly upon the damage to their own lands. But the court (142 Minn. 41, 42, 170 N.W. 884, 885), referring to the "set- tled policy designed to preserve inland waters which afford recreation to the pub- lic," said: to * * * We have observed that in contested drainage proceedings the petition- ers are chiefly interested in adding to their holdings of arable land, while their oppon- ents are concerned over possible damage to their lands as a result of the drainage of those of their neighbors. Its the clash of conflicting private interests, those of the public are apt to drop out of sight. Yet the state, thorsgls not a party to nor repre- sented in the proceedings, has real and sub- stantial rights to protect. * * * It should be the concern of the county board and of the courts to guard the rights of the public, and to preserve for the enjoyment of this and future generations all bodies of %%atcr which have present or potential pub. Gc value." (Italics supplied.) [3) 3. This court requires no proof that Lake Minnetonka is a priceless heritage of the people of Minnesota, to be preserved and passed on to posterity. Judicial notice wiil be taken of the fact that it is one of the most precious pearls in the string of Ten Thousand Lakes of which Minnesota is so justly proud. Its natural beauty has be- come the theme of both legend and song. Because of its wide expanse and proximity to our metropolitan areas, it is much fi-e- livented and used for boating, fishing, picnicking, and bathing— -perhaps more than any other lake in the state. Its shore line of nearly 100 miles is dotted with permanent homes and summer cottages, not only at its water's edge, but extending far back from the shore. But the use of the lake is not confined to dwtllers on its shore or nearby. During the summer season es- pecially, it is she mecca fo, thousands upon thousands of urbanites, not so fortunate as Minn. 187 to possess a lake home, who —young and old alike —seek its shores and waters for div- ers recreational purposes. To those who do not indulge in active recreation, it af- fords the opportunity of communing with nature at its best. With the increase in the permanent lake population, however, the extent nf lake shore available to the public generally and the means of public access to the lake have diminished and, therefore, become increasingly valuable from yerr to year. All these facts are so commonly known that this court must take them into consideration in dis} rig of the appeal. " * * * we must plot forget that the public includes persons other than those in A" the immediate vicinity. The general pub- lic has a true concern in the recreational facilities offered by the lakes which nature has so freely given us in this state. Their generous sharing by all will make for a healthier and happier people. The many not fortunate enough to be able to acquire the advantages of ownership of lake shore properties should not be deprived of these benefits. This we would do if we permitted streets leading to the lake shore to be va- cated as here proposed." In re Petition of Krebs, 213 Minn. 344, 347, 6 N.W.2d 803, 805. [4] 4. Keeping in mind the value to the public of free access to and use of the lake shore, we are at a loss to know how any part of Lake Street has become "useless" within the meaning of that term as com- monly defined. The word "useless," which appears in Minn.St.1941, ¢ 505.14, Mason St.1927, § 8244, permitting vacation of a street when it is "useless for the purpose for which it was laid out," should not be given any restricted meaning. Court should ascribe to it the well -accepted con- notation - "not ser, ;ng or not capable of serving any valuahi- purpose; being of no use; having or being of no use; un- serviceable; producing no good end; an- swering no desired purpose." Funk dt Wagnalls New Standard Dictionary, 1932; Webster's New Twernational Dictionary (2d Ed.) 1938. [ ,] 5. The loss to the public of 150 feet of shore line out of a total of approxi- maiely 100 miles may to the Baldwins seem inconsequential or even infinitesimal and nothing to be disturbed s,bout. F,;t, of this 100 miles of precious shore line, only a small fraction has been reserved for the public; and if the courts should create a igg Mattis. 15.NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES precedent by permitting a single inroad, however small, upon the public's share of the shore line, other inroads will inevitably follow, unti; the aggregate becomes a real threat to the public's free access to the lake. To avoid any possibility of such a re- sult, the courts should with equal vigor re- pulse the first, the second, and rvery other assault upon the public domain. If eternal vigilance is the price of pre- serving the full benefit of Minnesota's lakes for all members of the public —as it is of liberty —public officials must gladly pay that price. They must not stand by, wholly unconcerned, like Nero, who fiddled white Rome burned, and permit public access to our lakes to be cut off or reduced for sel- fish private purposes. Yet here town supervisors appear to have been entirely ob- livious to the full import of the petition, of the filing of which they received notice. Not only did they fail to protest, but they actually Rave aid and comfort to the pe- titioners in their raid upon the public's con- servation chest. The obvious purpose of providing notice to the town supervisors of proceedings to vacate a street or highway is to put tl.ese officers on guard, so that the interests of the public may be amply protected. The supervisors of Excelsior township having failed in their duty in this respect and having permitted a default to be entered, it is at least understandable why the petition was originally granted by the lower court. But when the court's decree vacating the street was promptly attacked by appellants upon their receiving notice of the proceed- ing, the trial court should have been idert to the public interest and, unhesitatingly, should have reopened it; and this, not- withstanding that appellants' motion to re- open was motivated principally by the an- ticipated damage to their own property. Not to reopen the proceeding in the public interest was a clear abuse of discretion, and the order denying appellants' motion must be reversed. If, in view o: the importance we have attached to the preservation of our lakes and full access thereto for the public and for posterity, respondents still deeire to urge that the portion of Lake Street be- tween their property and St. Albans Bay has become "useless for the purpose for which it was laid out," they will be ac- corded that privilege. We may not have all the facts. But respondents should un- deistand that any decree of vacation must be supported by clear proof that the street has in fact become "useless" to the public in the full and unrestricted meaning of that term. Reversed. r o �a mows mir0 r In re LIPSCOMB. No. 33759. Supreme Court of Minnesota. June 2, 1944. 1. Attorney and client 0:039 Conviction of a felony or a misde- meanor involving moral turpitude restilts in disbarment as a matter of course, even though sentence is suspended. Minn.St. 1941, § 481.15, subd. 1(1). 2. Attorney and client e-39 The record of conviction of a felony or a misdemeanor involving moral turpi- tude is conclusive in disbarment proceed- ing and cannot be questioned by proof ..1"Inde. Minn.St.1941, § 481.15, subd. 1(1). S. Attorney anu • 4}54 That money w ient owed attor- ney but refused to y. A have been more than enough to tag -if another client's claim did not con:. 11ch ex- tenuating circumstances as w., stify a reference of proceeding to dir,b., 1r. ney for embezzlement of and clit money. Minn.St.19.11, § 4r 1.15, subd. 1(i Proceeding on order to show cause why Allen 1.1. Lipscomb should not be dis- barred. Respondent disbarred. Philip Neville, Sec'y, State Board of Law Examiners, of Minneapolis, for peti- tioner. Henry G. Young, of Minneapolis, foe respondent. PER CVRIAM. On October 27, 1943, respondent, an at- torney at law duly licensed to practice in our state, pleaded guilty to an informs- HENNEPIN COUNTY PARK RESERVE DISTRICT P.O. BOX 296 MAPLE PLAIN, MINNESOTA 55359 • TELEPHONE 473-4693 December 6, 1978 � F P ,� I ? F BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Mr. Alan P. Olson CITY OF ORI, JUDITHS ANDERSON CityPlanner- City of Orono V CHAIRMAN BOX O BLOOMINGTON Prystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 • CHARLES R PHL VICE CHAIRMAN Re: Request for Vacation of Platted Roads - Kate B. Plummer ORONO Subdivision, Big Island WILLIAM BARBEAU ST LOUIS PARK Dear Alan: SHIRLEY A BONINE MAPLE.PLALN The following is supplemental information pertaining to the above request for road vacation initiated by the Hent,epin A SE MINNEAPOLIS County Park Reserve District and reviewed by the City of Orono's Planning Commission in November 27, 1978. DAVID DURENBCRGER MINNEAPOLIS In early 1978, the Park Reserve District and the City of ALANK GREENE Orono held a joint public information meeting to discuss and MOUND hear comment from the general public with respect to a pro- posed park on Big Island. Following that meeting and several LAWRENCEF HAEG ROBBINSDALE informal discussions with area property owners, the District's Board of Commissioners, on March 8, 1978, established boundaries JUNE HEGBTROM MINNEAPOLIS for Big Island Regional Park. The proposed park will be located entirely on the east island. Attached is a map delineating LISA HOLLENDER the property acquired to date and property to be acquired within MINNEAPOLIS the boundaries of the proposed park. RA V MOND N SE ACRE N MINNE APOLIS Having established the boundaries for Big Island Regional Park ••• entirely on the east Island, the District's Board of Commissioners declared the property owned by the District on the west island CLs P�N E DENT (identified as "subject property" on the attached map) as sLirplus and authorized its Superintendent to petition the District Court for approval to sell this property. In addition, the Board at that time directed that upon District Court approval, this property be used in trade for the Fc.luisition of pr-perty located within the approved park b^un.i�, izs. Subsequently, a trade was negotiated i _ l-,ndi located within *,he approved boundaries and District Court approval of the Crans�7_.'on was granted. However, the trade is contingent upon the City Orono vacating the platted roads within the Kate B. Plummer Subdivision. Mr. Alan P. Olson Page 2 December 6, 1978 CurrenrIv, the platted roads (platted in 1885) are undeveloped and of no apparent benefit to the public. These roadways were originally platted to provide access to lots that have now been declared by the City of Orono to be undevelopable and terminate at the boundaries of the plat. Essentially, the granting of this request for vacation will help further the effort to assemble contiguuus properties into a viable park for the use and enjoyment of the public we serve. I hope this provides sufficient background information with respect to this request for road vacation. If you have any questions or if you would like additional information, kindly give me a call. Sincerely, C� Gregor Administrativ Assistant GAM:gbl 78:483 Enclosures MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 11, 1978 Page 4 Gregg Mack was present. Hurr moved to recommend approval of the vacations on Big Island, legally described as: All of Linden Street, all of Elm Street, and all of Maple Place located within Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision of Lot k of Kitchel s Subdivision of Government Lots 5 and 6. Such vacation to be approved without relocation of the public right-of-way based on the following findings: �, !MPIN COUNTY PARK RESERVE DISTRICT Big Island STREET VACATIONS (#444) 1. The vacation does not affect access to or use of any affected or adjoining property. 2. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve or use the property in any way. 3. The property as it exists serves no public purpose. 4. The vacation is in the PUBLIC INTEREST, by: a) furthering plans of the Park Reserve District, b) reducing city liability for maintenance, and c) increasing taxable valuation. 5. The Supreme Court ruling applies to access TO the lake which is not applicable in this factual case. The only members of the public needing access are the three affected property owners who each have independent access available. 6. Public right-of-way is not necessary to maintain access to affected properties. 7. The public interest in a given amount of land area will be maintained by means of the Park Reserve's acquisitions on the east island. The Park Reserve's acquisition plan is in keeping with Orono policy as established in Resolution 446. Mo�:ion seconded by Hannah. Vote: Ayes (7), Nays (0). Motion passed unanimously. The applicant was represented by Mr. Jerry Uzzell an elder of the Jesus People Church. The following neighbors were present: CULL Christensen, Mrs. Don Keesling and Jim Keesling. It was stated that the request was for a 10' front yard variance and a 10' side yard variance. The height of the proposed building is 17-1/2' with nothing proposed for the upstairs at this time. Discussion was hindered because the representative was not familiar with the proposal. The main concern was the septic system which is not functioning properly. JOHN WORRE 1270 .Arbor Street VARIANCE (#446) RESOLUTION NO.__gj&_ A RESOLUTION VACATING ALL OF LINDEN STREET, ALL OF ELM STREET AND ALL OF MAPLE PLACE LOCATED WITHIN KATE B. PLUMMER'S SUBDIVISION OF LOT 2 OF KITCHEL'S SUBDIVISION OF GOVERNMENT LOTS 5 & 6, SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 117N, RANGE 23 W, IN THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on August 24, 1978, the owners of all the land within Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision of Lot 2 of Kitchel's Subdivision of Government Lots 5 & 6, Section 22, T117N, R23W, hereinafter "Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision", petitioned the City Council for vacation of all the platted streets within said subdivision; and WHEREAS, the only affected adjoining property owner has on August 21, 1978 submitted a petition in favor of said vacation; and WHEREAS, after due published ,end posted notice, a public hearing was held before the City Planning Commission on November 27, 1918 regarding said vacation and all persons interested were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHERE -AS, after due study and consideration, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested vacati.LL.., and the Ciry Council of the City of Orono finds that it will be for the best public interest to approve such vacation, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that such Petition is hereby granted and that all of Linden Street, all of Elm Street and all of Maple Place within the plat of Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision are hereby vacated pursuant to the fol.l.owiig findings of fact: 1. The vacation does not affect access to or use of any affected or adjoining property. ' 2. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve or use the property in any way. 3. The property as it exists serv(s no public purpose. Resolution No. 976 .e ? 4. The vacation is in the public interest by: a) furthering the plans of the Hennepin County Park Reserve District; b) reducing city liability for maintenance, and c) increasing taxable valuation. 5. The Minnesota Supreme Court ruling applicable to lakeshore access vacations are not applicable in this factual case. The only members of the public needing access are the three affected property owners who each have independent access available. 6. Public right of way is not necessary to maintain access to affected properties. 7. The public interest in a given amount of land area will be maintained by means of the Park Reserve's acquisitions on the eastern part of Big Island. The Park Reserve's acquisition plan is in keaping with City policy as established in Resolution No. 446. 8. Lots 1-10 in Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision are currently combined as one tax parcel known as 38-42980-1100. It is the intent of the City Council that these lots 1-10 remain combined as one tax parcel after the street vacation and thet the appropriate portions of the vacated streets be included in this same parcel. This resolution w-s passed by a vote of 4 ayes and 0 nays on the Ninth day of January, 1979. Walter B. Massenga e, A ting Mayor Falter Renson, Clerk/Administrator STATE OF MIN!" ESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF ORONO The undersigned duly qualified and acting City Clerk/ Administrator of the City of Orono hereby certifies that attached hereto is a true and correct copy of the original Resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Orono on January 9 , 1979 approving the vacating of all of Linden Street, all of Elm Street, and all of Maple Place located within Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision of Lot 2 of Kitchel's Subdivision of Government Lots S & 6, Section 22, Township 117N, Range 23W, in the City of Orono, Minnecota, on file in the office of the City Clerk/Administrator, City of Orono. Walter Benson, Clerk/AcG nistrator Dated this Tenth day of January 1979 REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, JANUARY 9, 1979 Page 7 Mr. Paul r. Clabo was present and presented the VARIANCE City Council with a letter dated January 9, 1979 1388 Park Drive concerning his request- for a variance at 1388 Parr #438 Drive. Paul C. Clabo After discussion, *'aurus moved, Butler seconded, to table the request ^f Paul Clabo for a variance at 1388 Park Drive until staff and the City Attorney have reviewed the letter presented by Mr. Clabo. Motion, Ayes (4) - Nays (0) . Mr. Alan Olson, City Planner, informed the City STREET VACATIONS Council the request bky the Hennepin County Park Big Island Reserve District for street vacations on Big Island. #444 Henn. County Park This application is made to vacate all of the public roads in an area of the west island which is now owned by the Park Reserve. The area is platted into ten separated lots which are divided by the subject roads. The Park Reserve's intentions are to have the roads vacated to permit combination of the lots into one buildable/3aleable lot. Planning Commission Meeting - December 11, 1978 Planning Commission recommended approval of the vacations of undeveloped roads on Big Island, legally described as follows: All of Linden Street, all of Elm Street, and all of Maple Place located within Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision of Lot 2 of Kitchel's Subdivision of Government Lots 5 & 6. Such vacation to be approved without relocation of the public right of way based on the following findings: 1. The vacation does not affect access to or use of any affected or adjoining property. 2. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve or use the property in any way. 3. The property as it exists serves no public purpose. 4� The vacation is in the public interest by: a. furthering the pens of the Park Reserve District b. reducing City liability for r.tintenance C. increasing taxable valuation 5. The Supreme Court ruling applies to access to the lake which is not applicable in this factual case. The only members of the public needing access are the three affected property owners who each have independent access available. (Continued) Reseii . REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, JAIMARY 9, 1979 Page 8 6. Public right of way is not necessary to maintain access to affected properties. 7. The public interest in a given amount of land area will be maintained by means of the Park Reserve's acquisitions on the east island. The Park Reserve's acquisition plan is in keep- ing with Orono policy as established in Resolution #446. Council Meeting - January 9, 1979 Butler moved, Pesek seconded, to adopt Resolution 1976, A Resolution Vacating All Of Linden Street, All Of Elm Street And All Of Maple Place Located Within Kate B. Plummer's Subdivision Of Lot 2 Of Kitchel's Subdivision Of Government Lots 5 & 6, Section 22, Township 117 11, Range 23 W, In The City Of Orono, Minnesota, amended to include the condition that Lots 1-10 are combined and that they remain one parcel. Motion, Ayes (4) - Nays (0). STREET VACATIONS Biq Island (Continued) RESOLUTION #976 Street Vacations Big Island A memorandum by Councilmember C. Paul Pesek concern- STUBBS BAY 14ARINA ing the Stubbs Bay Marina property dated January 3, 1979, was presented to the City Council. Stubbs Bay Marina Property Study - Pages 9-13 A memorandum by Gunnar Isberg, Planning Consultant, concerning Possible Stubbs Bay Marina Rezoning, dated January 8, 1979, was presented to the City Council. Possible Stubbs Bay Marina Rezoning - Pages 14-21 Council Meeting - January 9, 1979 Discussion was held concerning the above reports. Acting Mayor Massengale stated that we know present status of the property but where do we go from there to determine the best use of the property. Alan Olson, City Planner, stated that a moratorium should be placed on the area to provide time to make decisions and resolve issues. Some points brought up were the effects of rezoning from B-2 to residential, sewers, flood plain, and the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. George Johnson and Mrs. Keiran, present fee owner of the property, were present. Mrs. Keiran stated that she does not want any change in the zoning. She stated that she bought the property in 1956 and wants it tb remain a marina due to the value of the property. (Continued, Page 22) z�,�YCITY of OROT 1) Box 66• Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55M • Municipal Officer Teleohone 473-7357 Mr. Clifton French Hennepin County Park Reserve District P.O. Box 296 Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359 NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date of Meeting: Jan•iary 9, 1979 Control No. 444 Variance Conditional Use Permit Subdivision, Prelim. Subdivision, Final XX Street Vacation Date of Notice1-11-79 Votes: 4 _ For 0 Against Abstention Action: Approval: As submitted subject to applicable ordinance requirements Approval: Subject to conditions noted Deferral: Pending receipt of information noted — Referral: Review by others, as noted Denial: For reasons noted NOTES & SPECIAL CONDI'iTONS: Council approved attached Resolution No. 976 vacating the streets as requested. The City has sent notice to Hennepin County for proper recording Deadlines:_. Variance approval expires one year after the meeting date. Contact building inspector for required permits. — Conditional Use Approval Must be renewed annually. Expires on Must be renewed upon chan,.. in ownership or use. — Preliminary Subdivision approval expires after one year of meeting date. Contact Zoning Administration for final plat requirements. Final Subdivision approval expires 6 months after meeting date. Contact Zoning Administration for filing requirements and document approval. Deferred items may be declared formally withdrawn if applicant fails to provide information within one month of meeting date, or by date specified by Council. If you desire certified copies of the official City Council Minutes, they are available from the Deputy City Clerk upon review and approval by the Council. Telephone 473.7357 CITY of ORONO Post Office Pox 66 • Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 • Municipal Offices On the North Shore. of Lake Minnetonka January 11, 1919 County Recorder & Registrar of Titles Finance and Records Department Hennepin County Courthouse Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 Gentlemen: Enclosed is a certified copy of Orono City Council Resolution No. 976 vacating the public streets described therein. Please note these descriptions and record the vacations as official actions of the City. The affected streets are shown on the attached drawing for your reference. Sincerely, ean] Olson, Village Planner A PO: kh Enc. Original copy of Resolution Map cc: County Auditor, Finance & Records Department, Hennepin County /0 o 0 LDT 4 ti 14 0 01"'a •..O �rt --y E , � j bw 4— (n 0 e e Of Ck dLll. ' \ ion: —(3 4— uDd r 5' o ;-�, N Pl.11 Sion ,c • . LOT 3 .on all Of vision of L,ot - _ � C tchels Subdivlsl c 0 s t 5 10,Y t .oke Minnetonka Misc.393)--- A U-) L t 1 1 05 U. ►. L Pktted Shoe LIM LJ For dttoll of Kate S. mummer's 1 A� twet *to iocord plat. M+" I Village of ORONO ` H EN M . 60 . PARK R VF. `.4e.trfp , APPFOX. 2 .S AC I JCI • RaIDS �ISot. 97G goo or