Council opens public hearing on petition to vacate platted alley between Erie and Chestnut; case carried to next meeting

The Valparaiso Common Council on July 28 opened a public hearing and heard presentations on Ordinance No. 16-20-25, a petition to vacate a platted alley between Erie Street and Chestnut Street adjacent to 254 and 256 Erie Street. Staff said the petition was filed with the plan commission by Lehi Lane and Jerry and Patricia Deutsch under Indiana Code §36-7-3-12 and that the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) requires planning commission and Board of Works review before council action.

City planning staff presented two surveys submitted by petitioners: a 1941 mortgage/plat survey by Guy Stanchfield that noted the alley and stated an assumption that it had been vacated for 40 years, and a 1976 mortgage inspection survey showing a house at 254 Erie encroaching 1.5 feet into the platted alley. Staff reported no record of a prior formal vacation in city records back to circa 1900 and said the Porter County auditor’s parcel records showed no vacation. Utilities research returned that Valparaiso City Utilities and NIPSCO have no utilities running through the platted alley, although staff said a water and gas service currently provide service only to 256 and run through the alley location.

Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 22 and forwarded a recommendation to the Board of Public Works. The Board of Public Works met July 25 and recommended vacation to the council by a 3-0 vote. Residents who spoke at the council hearing, including Eric Taylor (306 Napoleon Street) and Sean Barnes (258 Erie Street), said they had lived on the block for decades and described the alley as unimproved and unused for access; Barnes said the alley likely served historic access to outbuildings and that a demolished house had sat 1.5 feet into the alley.

Staff described the platted alley as 16.5 feet wide; if vacated, ownership would be divided equally between the adjacent property owners. Staff also said historically the city has sometimes granted encroachment agreements where structures occupy public right-of-way rather than vacating. Councilmembers raised questions about potential utility access in the future and whether vacating would create issues; staff said there are presently no buried utilities in the alley and that the alley is atypical but that vacating would clean up public records. The council carried Ordinance No. 16-20-25 over to its next meeting by voice roll call, recorded 7-0.