HomeMy WebLinkAbout86-175 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1986/10/201
RESOLUTION NO. 86-175
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING LAND FOR DEDICATION OF
EASEMENT FOR ALLEY PURPOSES
LOTS 29 AND 30, BLOCK 3, PARK MANOR
WHEREAS, Clinton J. Asche and Clarene R. Asche, as a condition to vacate a
portion of public alley, agreed to donate to the City certain property to realign
the alley for public use; and
WHEREAS, the City attorney has advised the City Council that Clinton J. Asche
and Clarene R. Asche do, in fact, have good title to the subject property, which
is legally described as;
Lots 29 and 30, Block 3, Park Manor
WHEREAS, the dedication and easement over the above described parcel is
described as follows;
A permanent easement for alley purposes over that part of Lots
29 and 30, Park Manor, Hennepin County, according to the plat
thereof on file and of record in the office of the Registrar of
Titles which lies east of the following described line:
Beginning at a point on the South line of said Lot 29
distant 18 feet West of the Southeast corner thereof;
thence Northwesterly to a point on the North line of said
Lot 30 distant 31 feet West of the Northeast corner of
said Lot 30 and there terminating.
WHEREAS, a deed has been presented to the City of St. Louis Park conveying
the alley easement to the City;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the deed of said above described
property is hereby accepted, and the City Clerk is authorized and directed to file
the deed in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Title.
Adopted by the City Council October 20, 1986
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Reviewed for Administration:
•
Lv.
/City Manager 1 City Attorney
Approved as to form and legality:
4
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Attorney
FROM City Manager
DATE: October 24, 1986
RE: Error in Alley Vacation Resolution
vosie
In a resolution pertaining to the alley vacation
relating to 2701 Brunswick Avenue, City Staff apparently
misrepresented prior approval of this office. Because of the
illness of a colleague, and, frankly, the unequivocal reference
in the resolution to our prior approval, I did not discovezdi
this fact until after the Council approved the resolution. We
are commencing work on the matter to determine if there are any
problems. More importantly, we must insure that these
circumstances do not arise again, particularly since this is
apparently not the first instance of such a problem.
We have discussed a mechanism to insure timely review of
matters requiring City Attorney approval prior to Council
action. Through this mechanism, we should receive the vast
majority of resolutions, ordinances, and other documents on the
Wednesday prior to a Council meeting. This mechanism should
urther our efficient and timely review of legal matters which
will benefit all interested persons. (This and other
procedures will be outlined in a memorandum which you should
receive within a week.) Exceptions to this procedure should be
brought expressly to my attention by City Staff.
Finally, if problems such as those evidenced in the
alley vacation matter discussed above should continue to arise,
we may need to discuss a procedure in which City Staff obtains
written confirmation of our approval prior to any
representation that documents have received such approval.
Such a process would be cumbersome and require more time and
expense, so I am not recommending it at this time. However, I
will recommend it if we continue to be faced with the
circumstances evidenced above. Please let me know if you have
any questions.
1885U/3
svf
v