Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Alley Vacation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mount Vernon planning commission declines to recommend alley vacation over utility-easement concerns
Summary
The Municipal Planning Commission voted Jan. 9 not to recommend that city council vacate a 16-by-150-foot portion of a platted alley north of Kirk Street, citing multiple utility easements and the need to preserve access to a 12-inch sewer main. The petitioner said he had paid a survey fee and plans to present his case to council.
The Mount Vernon Municipal Planning Commission on Jan. 9 voted not to recommend that city council vacate a 16-foot-by-150-foot portion of a platted alley north of Kirk Street between East Street and South McKenzie Street, citing multiple utility easements and a need to preserve access to a 12-inch sewer main.
The item, filed as 2025 MPC 1, would have transferred the alley footprint to adjoining property owners. Applicant Shane Philhart, of 201 Kirk Street, told the commission he and two neighbors maintain the strip and that utilities appear to use a different route now. Philhart said he paid about $900 for a survey to support the petition and that he does not intend to place permanent structures on the area. "I've, pardon my French, pissed away $900," Philhart said after the commission voted against recommending the vacation.
City engineering staff and legal counsel raised concerns during the review. Engineering staff said the alley contains a 12-inch sewer main that requires continued access and warned that no structures, gates or buildings should be placed over the city's easements. Legal counsel cited Ohio Revised Code section 723 0.041 and told the commission that public-utility companies and other easement holders generally retain rights to maintain, operate or remove infrastructure located in a vacated area unless those rights are explicitly relinquished by agreement.
Commissioners also noted uncertainty about other buried infrastructure in the alley (telephone, electric and potential buried conduits) and said the city does not keep complete records of all utility locations in that strip. Planning staff and commissioners emphasized caution because future property owners sometimes erect fences or other improvements that can impede utility access.
A motion was made and seconded to send a recommendation to city council to vacate the alley, but on a roll-call vote the commission did not recommend the vacation. The clerk recorded no votes in favor; recorded no votes by Mayor Starr, Commissioner Salyers, Commissioner Ellsworth, Commissioner Swallow and Commissioner Diehl, and the motion failed.
Because the commission did not recommend the vacation, Philhart was told he may take the matter to city council, which will schedule a public hearing. Commission staff explained the statutory process: the hearing must be advertised for 30 days, the ordinance will be read twice and council will act after the required notice period — likely with readings in February and a possible council vote at an early March meeting, depending on council's calendar.
Commissioners also discussed internal process changes to reduce applicants' costs and confusion, agreeing that petitioners should be directed to coordinate with engineering and utility companies earlier in the process so that surveys and filings occur after utility checks. Planning staff said it will work to clarify the filing path so applicants consult engineering before spending for a survey.
The commission closed the item after the vote; the petition will appear on a future city council agenda for a public hearing and final decision.
