My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CCP 06162025
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2025
>
CCP 06162025
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/8/2025 12:28:19 PM
Creation date
7/8/2025 12:27:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Meeting Date
6/16/2025
Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
353
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
________________________________________ <br />3. Background <br />Aldine Street right-of-way is an unimproved right-of-way that extends from Ryan Avenue W to <br />Roselawn Avenue W. The right-of-way was initially identified for vacation by the City on April 11, <br />2022, as there are no plans to construct a road through the area. Additionally, the 2021 Pathway <br />Master Plan had not identified this corridor as a pathway connection as both Fairview Avenue and <br />Snelling Drive have existing north-south pathways that meet the goals and intent of the plan. This, <br />along with numerous other rights-of-way identified by staff as no longer necessary for public benefit <br />were brought before the Council over five (5) phases since 2022, with a sixth and final phase still <br />planned to be presented to Council at a future date. <br />The Aldine Street corridor, presented for vacation with the fifth phase of vacations on April 21, 2025, <br />is generally wooded and features a well-worn path, used by local residents for walking, but not <br />officially designated or maintained as a public pathway. During the public hearing regarding the <br />Aldine Street vacation, residents expressed concerns about the loss of this informal pathway and <br />requested that portions of the right-of-way be preserved as a pathway easement. <br />While some residents support the idea of keeping the right-of-way intact and converting it to an <br />improved pathway (concrete or bituminous), others <br />unpaved, while others, particularly those with properties abutting the proposed vacation area, <br />expressed opposition to any public access, preferring to retain the property rights that would be <br />granted if the right-of-way was vacated. As a result of these differing viewpoints, the City Council <br />tabled the resolution to vacate the right-of-way and directed staff to prepare this feasibility memo. <br /> ________________________________________ <br />4. Right-of-Way Overview and Constraints <br />The Aldine Street right-of-way corridor extends approximately 590 feet in a northsouth alignment <br />between Ryan Avenue W and Roselawn Avenue W. The corridor lies between 1705 Roselawn <br />Avenue W, 1706 Ryan Avenue W, and the rear lots of 77, 85, 87, 89, 91, and 93 Mid Oaks Lane. <br />Historically, the corridor has remained unimproved and is primarily wooded, with a well-worn <br />informal footpath that has developed over time through use. <br />Initially, the right-of-way was understood to include a 30-foot easterly portion, dedicated through the <br />Mid Oaks plat in 1938, and a 20-foot westerly portion that appeared to have been established through <br />condemnation proceedings in 1951. Because there was no clear record of the condemnation being <br />formally recorded, the proposed vacation resolution presented to the City Council included language <br />to vacate the 20-foot westerly portion out of an abundance of caution, essentially functioning as a <br />quit-claim action to release any potential interest the City may have had. <br />Following the public hearing, further investigation was conducted by staff and the adjacent property <br />owners in coordination with the Ramsey <br />right-of-way or easement over the western 20 feet was ever recorded, and as such, the City does not <br />legally hold right-of-way over that portion of land and it is considered private property. Consequently, <br />only the 30-foot easterly portion of the corridor is public right-of-way. County/City GIS data has been <br />updated to reflect this clarified status. <br />!Qbhf!3! <br />Qbhf!54!pg!464 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.