Laserfiche WebLink
d <br /> u / � <br /> i <br /> INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM filed in ClerK s Office <br /> BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS _ <br /> DATE: January 31, 2022 F- r <br /> AN U� 202I <br /> TO: Matt Longfellow, Public Works — — <br /> DAWN M..1Ur E� <br /> Chris Dressel, Community Investment Cl CLERKZZLLi, sOUTI+BEND,IN <br /> Gerard Ellis, Fire Department - <br /> Brad Rohrscheib, Police Department <br /> FROM: Laura Hensley, Acting Clerk (Ihensley@southbendin.gov) <br /> SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR RECOMMENDATIONS — STREE/ALLEY VACATION <br /> APPLICANT: Maggie VanZalen-Transformation Ministries <br /> LOCATION: 1101 King St. <br /> PLEASE INSERT YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE APPROPRIATE FIELD BELOW, BASED <br /> ON THE FOLLOWING I.C. 36-7-3-13 CRITERIA: <br /> 1. The vacation would/would not hinder the growth or orderly development of the unit or neighborhood <br /> in which it is located or to which it is contiguous. <br /> 2. The vacation would/would not make access to the lands of the aggrieved person by means of public <br /> way difficult or inconvenient. <br /> 3. The vacation would/would not hinder the public's access to a church, school or other public building <br /> or place. <br /> 4. The vacation would/would not hinder the use of a public right-of-way by the neighborhood in which <br /> it is located or to which it is contiguous. <br /> PUBLIC WORKS - No objections for the ALLEY vacation specifically; but, <br /> Unfavorable for the vacation of King Street because it violates Criteria #2, as it would limit <br /> immediate & easy access to a fire hydrant. Per their application description, they propose to vacate <br /> and install a gate across King Street in line with the West edge of their building. If approved, our <br /> hydrant would be located —125' East of their proposed gate, inside the vacated section of King Street. <br /> COMMUNITY INVESTMENT — Favorable recommendation for the alley vacation. Unfavorable <br /> recommendation for King Street vacation due to loss of fire hydrant access. <br /> 1. The vacation would not hinder the growth or orderly development of the unit or neighborhood in <br /> which it is located or to which it is contiguous. <br /> 2. The vacation would make access to the lands of the aggrieved person by means of public way <br /> difficult or inconvenient. <br /> 3. The vacation would not hinder the public's access to a church, school or other public building or <br /> place. <br /> 4. The vacation would hinder the use of a public right-of-way by the neighborhood in which it is <br /> located or to which it is contiguous. <br />