Laserfiche WebLink
HI ar-Mar, Incoll Case No�. 21218 <br />KP <br />dra� <br />Considerations <br />IV* I - <br />It has always, been Rosevi"Ile's poticy to vacate p�ub�lic rights-of -way wher <br />it has, been determined that they are no Ionger needed. The only <br />obstacle to making that determination in this, case, is, the cons"deration <br />of future LRT needs that was discusised, above. <br />31* CONCLUSION <br />The land in quest,io n is not, needed for the purpose that it was acquired <br />to serve. The City has discussed this su bject at length with the owners <br />and there is general support for the vacation of this right-of-way. We <br />wou,ld sugigesit that any recommendation forwarded by the Planning <br />Commission on thisAssue include the the f'ollo,wingi conditions: <br />18 The exact west 11-ne o ould be determined by the <br />0 <br />�En�gineering Department folliowin�g the, compiletioin of the survey; <br />a nd <br />2* The issue of' potential futiure LRT corridor easement requiremenL.5 <br />should be explored and the City Council should determine what <br />agreement, 'if any, iis neeided with the benefitting property owners <br />related to this issue. <br />