Laserfiche WebLink
<br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br /> <br />DATE: 03-22-93 <br />ITEM NO.: (2 - 2- <br /> <br /> <br />oval: . <br /> <br />Manager Reviewed: <br /> <br />Agenda section: <br />Hearings <br /> <br />Item <br /> <br />John and Diana Farrell's request for,vacation <br />of a portion of the Richmond (Chatsworth) <br />Street right-of-way, between County Road C-2 <br />and Millwood st. <br /> <br />Backaround: <br /> <br />1. The Farrell's have requested vacation only of the portion of <br />the right-of-way adjacent to their property. <br /> <br />2. The City Council, in 1977, vacated a portion of the right-of- <br />way adjacent to the neighbor to the north of Farrell's <br />property. The Ci ty did, however, reserve a easement for <br />roadway purposes on the property vacated. <br /> <br />3. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of <br />vacating the total. street wi th the condition that a 30 foot <br />utility easement be reserVed in the center of the right-of- <br />way to be vacated. <br /> <br />4. Subsequent to the Planning Commission, city staff met with <br />the four property owners whose property abuts the portion of <br />the right-of-way to be vacated. ' They expressed concerns <br />about the necessity for keeping the 30 foot utility easement <br />and over the additional assessments required. Staff has <br />determined that the 30 foot utility easement will not be <br />necessary. <br /> <br />Alternatives: <br /> <br />1. Deny the vacation based on the finding that the right-of-way <br />would be needed for future roadway purposes. <br /> <br />2. Approve the vacation based on the finding that the right-of- <br />way is not needed for street purposes. <br /> <br />policv Ob;ectives: <br /> <br />1. To vacate street right-of-way which is no longer necessary <br />for street purposes. <br /> <br />staff Recommendation: <br />