07-24-17 Public Works and Property Vacation

Home Browse Search

this vacation. They also speak of the fire hydrant distance, as well as an inconvenience to the property at 330 Navarre Street. The first issue is the easiest to address. Certainly Bill Welsheimer's property, specifically where they park his vehicles for his business, will become land-locked with this vacation. Having said that, an easement has been filed with the Recorder's Office that gives Bill Welsheimer access to that property and any of the surrounding property. So,that issue is essentially off the table. To further that point, included in your paperwork is Exhibit B which is a copy of the petition for the vacation of the alley signed by both Frank Linerello and Bill Welsheimer. The other two (2) issues took us by surprise, frankly. I'm embarrassed to say that this is the third time we've presented this petition to the Board of Public Works and we haven't followed through on these other two (2). You have, among your paperwork, Exhibits D and E, which are the letters from the Board of Public Works in 2009 and 2013, both showing the favorable recommendations given to proceed with this work. So we were surprised when it came back unfavorable this time. Exhibit F is a thread of emails between myself and Fire Marshall Rodriguez, asking to better understand the Fire Department's problem. He stated the Fire Department would have to extend the distance to the hydrants if they no longer had use of the alley. My suspicion was that they were not thinking. They were thinking they have use to the alley now,which in fact they don't. There is a fence across the alley and it is heavily overgrown. Pictures of that fence are included in Exhibit G. The bottom line is that they don't have use of that hydrant right now and so by vacating the alley, they wouldn't be disturbed one (1) way or the other because they'll still have the same distance in terms of reaching the fire hydrant. The Board of Public Works had given us an unfavorable recommendation by virtue of the access to Welsheimer's property, and we have cleared that up. They spoke of the distance to the hydrant. We are not shortening the distance they have to the hydrant in any way, shape or form because they already don't have use of the alley as it is. Finally, in terms of inconveniencing 330 or 226 Navarre Street, they have had use of the alley as a private driveway for the past ten(10) years plus. I'm sensing there would be no inconvenience created by vacating the alley, simply recognizing now the reality of the situation. We ask you please present this to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. Committee Chair Voorde opened the floor to Committee and Councilmembers to ask questions of the petitioner. Committeemember Randy Kelly asked, The emails state they are aware of the fence but it can be cut if they ever have to use the alley for water supply. So it is not as though they are not aware. With that knowledge, they still recommended it unfavorably to the Board? Mr. Crowley replied, I interpreted the first sentence of his response to say `We were surprised to learn there is an illegal fence there.' As much as I'm loathed to disagree with the Fire Marshall, the fence is not wire, it is wood. It is heavily overgrown and it cannot simply be cut. Committeemember Jo M. Broden asked, Is the fence that spans to the back property legal? Mr. Crowley replied, I have no knowledge of whether it was permitted or not. The Fire Marshall found no building permit and I understand there may have been some arrangement that allowed for it. 2