Toledo board recommends vacating portion of Whitmer Drive; waives fees

The City of Toledo Board of Revision of Assessments voted 3-0 on July 24, 2025, to recommend that City Council approve Resolution No. 58-25, declaring the intent to vacate a portion of Whitmer Drive between West Alexis Road and Liceom and waiving associated fees.

Paul Searing, representing the director of law and serving as chair of the board, opened the single-item hearing in Council Chambers and said the board would hear from a city representative and the applicant before taking questions and a vote.

Andy Sweeney, engineering and construction management with the City of Toledo, told the board the project will relocate Whitmer Drive westward "to relieve some of the congestion" and to move parking so students no longer must cross the roadway to reach the school. "Students don't have to cross the road anymore to get to the school," Sweeney said. He described existing sanitary and stormwater lines and a large culvert running through the current Whitmer alignment and said the city will maintain easements to preserve access to those utilities unless the utilities are later relocated.

Sweeney and board members discussed timing relative to the school calendar; Sweeney deferred timeline questions to the project engineer, Tim Grosjean. A board member noted the city had worked with utility companies and intergovernmental partners to sequence work so contractors and utilities could be on site earlier in the schedule.

The record includes references to a previously vacated Edgar Street containing utilities, and to an effort to align the relocated Whitmer intersection with Hurst to reduce the number of intersections. The city is sponsoring the reconstruction and Sweeney said the work was already in process.

Applicant counsel (identified in the hearing as Mr. Sellhorst) offered no additional public opposition; no members of the public asked to speak. Director of Public Service Megan Robeson moved to approve the resolution with a waiver of fees; Commissioner of Accounts Tom Buckley seconded. The board then took a roll call vote: Robeson — yes; Buckley — yes; Searing — yes. The board recorded the tally as three in favor, zero opposed, and the matter was recommended to City Council for approval with the waiver of fees.

The board’s action was procedural: it recommended that council vacate the specified right-of-way while preserving easements for existing utilities. The project’s construction schedule and any future utility relocations were not specified in the record and will be handled through the city’s project-management process and any required permitting or utility agreements. The item will next appear before City Council for final action.