Laserfiche WebLink
<br />WHEREAS, the Roseville City Council subsequently at its April 12, 1999 meeting adopted <br />an interim ordinance (moratorium) No. 1221 extending and amending Ordinance No. 1220, <br />Temporarily Prohibiting Development Within the "S-C"Zoning District; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the proposed development of Bradley Limited Partnership is affected by the <br />interim ordinance and may be affected by possible changes to official controls arising out of the <br />study currently being undertaken by the City as directed by the City Council at its April 12, 1999 <br />meeting; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the proposed vacation of the drainage and utility easement, the conveyance <br />of a replacement easement, and the proposed relocation or rerouting of utility lines may be <br />unnecessary or wasteful given the potential for possible changes to official controls affecting the <br />parcel; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the utility lines currently located in the easement are not in immediate need <br />of repair and any construction activity increases the potential for disruption of an essential public <br />service and inconvenience to the public; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the property owner is not precluded or limited in its ability to request vacation <br />and relocation of the easement and utility lines in the future, <br /> <br />NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Roseville, <br />Minnesota, hereby determines that the request to vacate and relocate certain utility and drainage <br />easements and utility lines is premature, and otherwise not in the public interest, given the <br />interim ordinances adopted by the City Council and the pendency of the planning study <br />referenced above, and that the request to vacate said easment is hereby denied. <br /> <br />The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council <br />Member Goedeke, and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof: <br />Wiski, Maschka, Mastel, Goedeke and Wall <br />and the following voted against the same: None <br /> <br />WHEREUPON said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. <br />