Council holds public hearing on Erie Street alley vacation; action continued to next meeting

The Valparaiso Common Council held a public hearing on Ordinance 16-20-25, a petition to vacate a platted alley between Erie Street and Chestnut Street adjacent to 254 and 256 Erie Street. After the hearing, the council voted 7-0 to carry the item over to the next meeting for final action.

Planning Department staff presented the petition, filed by Lee Lane and Jerry and Patricia Deutsch, and said state law (Indiana Code 36-7-3-12, as cited at the hearing) requires a council public hearing within 30 days of filing. Staff said they reviewed historic plats and records back to c.1900, and found no record that the alley had been formally vacated. Two surveys were submitted by petitioners: a 1941 survey that noted an assumption the alley had not been vacated and a 1976 mortgage-inspection survey showing a house at 254 Erie encroaching roughly 1.5 feet into the alley. Staff also reported that Valparaiso City Utilities and NIPSCO had no buried utilities recorded in that alley.

Planning staff noted the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 22 and recommended the vacation by a 3-0 vote; staff said the Board of Works also reviewed and forwarded the matter. The petitioner supplied a letter of support from Robert and Rita Smith of 250 Erie Street; public commenters Eric Taylor (306 Napoleon Street) and Sean Barnes (258 Erie Street) spoke in favor of vacating the alley. Taylor told the council, "There's never been an alley," and Barnes described the block as "very unique" and said the alley historically provided access that no longer exists.

Council members and staff discussed the practical effects: an alley or public way currently shown on plat maps would, if vacated, be divided equally between adjacent landowners (half to each), and encroachment issues are sometimes handled by encroachment agreements. Staff said a prior house had stood 1.5 feet into the alley and was demolished; a prospective replacement house's compliance with setback requirements was cited as a reason to request vacation so the new lot line could be used as the property boundary without a variance.

Staff answered council questions about utilities, saying they could not guarantee a utility would "never" need the space in the future but that no utilities were currently located in the alley. The actual platted alley width shown in the hearing materials is 16.5 feet; if vacated each adjacent owner would receive half the width.

Because one council member participated virtually, the council used a roll-call/voice process and agreed to revisit the ordinance at the next meeting. The roll call recorded all present members voting to carry the item to the next meeting, 7-0.

Next steps: the item will return to council after completion of any outstanding administrative steps required by the Unified Development Ordinance and related board recommendations. The council did not enact a final vacation ordinance at this meeting.