Davenport staff opens public hearing on vacation of Locust–Dougalby alley; decision deferred to Feb. 4

Davenport City staff opened a public hearing Tuesday on case R0W2501, a city-initiated request to vacate a roughly 20-foot-wide strip of unimproved alley north of Locust Street between Bell Avenue and Dougalby Street in Ward 5. The commission did not vote; the matter returns Feb. 4 for a formal recommendation and possible action.

Staff described the portion proposed for vacation as about three-quarters of the block, roughly 440 feet in length and about 8,800 square feet in area, and showed photographs and maps of the unimproved alley. Staff said a storm sewer runs south from Pleasant Street through the western center portion of the block and that the block’s bowl-shaped topography — higher grades at Pleasant Street and lower grades near Locust Street — has left the alley never constructed for public access. “A public hearing was also published in the Quad City Times,” staff said, and staff reported written statements in opposition received over the weekend had been added to the packet.

Why it matters: neighbors and speakers at the hearing argued the alley provides an existing access route used by some properties in the block and said removing the public right of way would harm safety and access. Attorney Michael Malloy, representing an adjacent property owner, said the alley has “been here for over 60 years” and that the city’s statute cited in the staff packet directs that a right of way needed for a public purpose should not be vacated. Multiple residents and a former city code enforcement officer told the commission they regularly found the alley to be used for parking, access, and as an informal drainage/maintenance corridor; several speakers cited a retaining wall on Locust Street that limits sight lines when pulling onto Locust.

Public testimony: a property manager who identified herself as the manager of 2342 stated she “do[es] not feel safe pulling out” from the property and opposed the vacation for safety reasons. A resident who said she lives one block away urged the commission to view the site in person rather than decide from photographs. A former city code enforcement officer described the area as “a garbage catch all” where staff had repeatedly sent notices to clean debris. Attorney Michael Malloy said the petition would principally benefit a single private property owner and urged the commission to recommend denial.

Staff and city engineer responses: City Engineer Bridal Shadd said the city did not install the gravel driveway that exists in the alley area and that city services are not currently provided within the alley. When asked whether the city would be liable if an accident occurred after a vacation, Shadd said the city would be liable only if the city were negligent in a way that caused the accident. Staff also said prior attempts to vacate the full alley in 2023 were withdrawn by the city after public hearing; the current petition is a partial vacation recommended by the city’s legal department to exclude a small portion of the alley.

Next steps and process details: Staff explained that vacating a right of way is a two-step process: first a determination whether the right of way is needed for a public purpose, and second negotiation of conveyance terms if vacated. Those conveyance terms are handled by the city legal department; staff said city practice sometimes splits vacated land among abutting owners but that legal will consider who benefits most for access and safety. Staff recommended only that the commission hold the hearing; the commission will receive a staff recommendation and is expected to vote on the request at its Feb. 4 meeting at 5 p.m. in City Hall council chambers.

Public hearing status: Chair reminded the public this was a hearing only and that “no position will be taken tonight.” The commission closed the hearing and scheduled the item for the Feb. 4 agenda, when the commission will vote and forward a recommendation to city council.