Laserfiche WebLink
R-80-16 <br />RESOLUTION <br />CITY OF LAKE ELMO <br />WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA <br />A RESOLUTION VACATING A PUBLIC STREET - A PORTION OF <br />RIDGEWAY DRIVE - IN TABLYN PARK <br />WHEREAS, at a .regular meeting of the City Council of <br />the City of Lake Elmo, Washington County, Minnesota, held <br />July 5, 1978, a Petition was presented to the City Council <br />praying for the vacation of that certain public street in <br />the plat of Tablyn Park described as follows: <br />Ridgeway Drive, as described and dedicated in <br />the plat of Tablyn Park which plat is on file <br />and of record in the office of the County <br />Recorder in and for Washington County, Minnesota. <br />WHEREAS, said Petition came on for hearing before said <br />City Council at a regular meeting thereof held at 7:30 p.m. <br />on Tuesday, August 1.5, 1978, in the City Hall pursuant to <br />notice thereof published and posted as required by law; and <br />WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has <br />conducted several additional meetings and discussions relating <br />to said vacation with the owners of the abutting property and <br />has heard all the evidence presented for and against said Petition <br />and after due consideration thereof has determined it is in the <br />best interests of the public of the City of Lake Elmo to vacate <br />a portion of said street for the following reasons: <br />1. The said street is unimproved and has never been <br />used for any public purpose. <br />2. It appears that as a result of the approval of the <br />plat of Tablyn Park Second Addition immediately adjacent to <br />said Ridgeway Drive that: no public purpose would be served by <br />improving or opening said street. In fact, the said street <br />would be inconsistent with the newly approved plat. <br />3. The said Ridgeway Drive is small and located so close <br />to residential developments that it could not reasonably be <br />used for any public purpose without a high probability of a <br />nuisance resulting. <br />4. The City would benefit by having said property <br />returned to private use and maintained as part of•the adjacent <br />private holdings. <br />