06/17/86 Board of Public Works Minutes

Home Browse Search

4.1d REGULAR MEETING JUNE 17, 1986 There being no one else present wishing to speak either for or against the proposed alley vacation, upon a motion made by Mr. Leszczynski, seconded by Ms. Barnard and carried, the Public Hearing on this matter was closed. Mr. Vance stated that there would be approximately a 5% increase to the affected lots. Mr. Vance inquired why the vacation is being requested on both sides of the street to which Mr. Leszczynski stated that that was what the Petitioner requested. Mr. Miller stated that both sides were requested because he was told by the City's Engineering Department that that was necessary. Further, Mr. Vance inquired why three (3) blocks were proposed in the vacation. Mr. Leszczynski stated that that was requested for uniformity. Ms. Barnard stated that she has concerns about this vacation and the negative responses received and heard by the Board. In December of 1985, the Building Commissioner was advised of construction of something different than what is now being constructed by the Order of St. Matthew with the size of the building being changed thereby causing it to occupy more than 40% of the lot. Additionally, there is insufficient parking on -site. She stated that it appears that a better way to handle the issue of the structure occupying more than 40% of the lot would be to have the Board of Zoning Appeals handle the situation. As both issues can be heard by the Board of Zoning Appeals, she and the Building Commissioner recommend that the Order of St. Matthew amend the Petition which they filed with the Board of Zoning Appeals to include the occupancy problem. Mr. Hoover stated that the Vacation Petition is what the Building Commissioner recommended to him. Ms. Barnard stated that the Building Commissioner didn't know about this matter until several weeks ago and advised the Order of St. Matthew at that time that the matter could be heard by the BZA. She reiterated that both the issue of insufficient parking and the 40% occupancy requirement could be heard by the BZA. Mr. Miller stated that the Building Commissioner visited the area in question and indicated that there were several fences that were located on the public right-of-way that would have to be removed should this proposed vacation not be approved. He further stated that the Building Commissioner found out about four (4) months ago that the right-of-way was 8.25 feet and up until that time he did not realize it. Mr. Hoover was advised that should the BZA grant the variance on occupancy problem, there would be no need to vacate the property on St. Peter Street as proposed. As the proposed vacation affects the properties and taxes of approximately thirty (30) properties, it was again recommended to the order of St. Matthew that they amend their Petition with the BZA to include the occupancy problem. Therefore, upon a motion made by Ms. Barnard, seconded by Mr. Vance and carried, the Clerk was instructed to forward an unfavorable recommendation to the Common Council concerning this vacation and the Petitioner was urged to contact the Building Commissioner to amend the Petition which they have submitted to the BZA to include the 40% occupancy problem. In response, Mr. Hoover stated that the Order of St. Matthew has received different recommendations from various departments. He stated that the vacation would bring the neighborhood into conformance with other streets in the area and they just want a resolution of the problem. Ms. Barnard stated that the City also wants a resolution of the problem. Mr. Leszczynski advised Mr. Hoover that the Board of Public Works's role in this matter is to review the situation, hear n