12-09-91 Zoning & Vacation - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Bullock informed the Council that it was his belief that the. petitioners were not interest in causing problems to their neighbors. Councilperson Luecke then addressed the question of the legal sufficiency of the petition, noting that the Board of Works, at the advice of its counsel, questioned whether the petition was sufficient to vacate those alleys where neither adjoining property owner had signed the. petition. Mr. Luecke noted, as had the Board of Public Works, that most of the interest in vacating the alleys came from the property owners fronting Forest Street. Mr. Luecke recognized the concerns of a Mrs. Gromkowski, who resides at the intersection of Portage and the north-south alley running between Leland and Forest Streets, and pointed out that, in her case, if the petitioned alleys were vacated she would be forced either to back her car onto Portage Avenue, which she felt was a dangerous maneuver, or to drive all the way north up the north-south alley to Riverside, which she felt equally dangerous.. Councilperson Ladewski proposed vacating alternate Leland and. Forest fronting the alleys. Mr. Luecke responded, again, that most. of the interest in vacating the alleys came from those residing on the Forest side of the North-South alley. He did point out, however, that Mr. Scott Mainwaring, who lives at Lot 29, would not be happy with the decision to vacate only those alleys between the North-South alley and Forest Street. Mr. Mainwaring' s house faces Forest Street.. He has a garage at the back of his lot and will have to enter that garage off of Leland Street.. Mr. Niezgodski questioned. which homes had garages which might be affected by the vacation. It was pointed out that the houses at Lots No. 35 and 30 had garages that were in use, and that the houses at. Lots No. 23 and 22 had garages which were not in use. Report from Area Plan Commission: A representative of the Area Plan Commission expressed. the Commission' s concern about the lack of support of the petition of all property owners abutting the alleys petition to be vacated. Public Portion: Mr. Tom Brademas, Jr. , who resides at 750 Leland (Lots 6 and 7) spoke in opposition to the petition. Mr. Brademas noted that he and his family enter and exit their home through the garage which they would no longer be able to do if the alleys in question were vacated. Mr. Brademas also indicated his concern about closing on some of the alleys in question. He agreed that to do so would result in traffic being diverted to those alleys not closed. Emily , who resides at 728 Leland (Lot No 1) , spoke in opposition to the petition. 728 Leland is a three-apartment rental. property. If the alleys in question were vacated, residents of that. property would have to back their cars out of the North-South alley onto Portage or pull out of that alley onto Riverside Drive, neither of which she considered safe options.