Council declines to adopt ordinance to vacate alleyway after utility access concerns

The Milford City Council debated a petition to vacate the north end of a platted alleyway in a residential block during its Aug. 19 meeting. The petition was initiated after property owners had already installed fencing that encroached into the alley. Planning and zoning had recommended approval, but the council heard multiple concerns from utility provider South Central and from neighboring property owners.

City staff outlined the petition's history: a petition was filed June 25, 2025; planning zoning recommended acceptance on July 9; the council held a public hearing July 15 and requested further verification of utility locations. South Central later advised the city it would survey the area and indicated it did not favor vacating alleyways it relies on for access. City staff told the council South Central's lines may be on private property adjacent to the alley and that the utility preferred retaining the alley for equipment access even if their facilities do not sit directly in the platted alley.

Several residents and property owners described practical access challenges and differing views on whether the alley was ever established as a usable road. Council members raised legal and operational questions, including liability if utilities must cross private property following a vacation, whether a franchise agreement and prior utility placements would be affected, and the need for written commitments from utilities before vacating any portion of the alley.

After extended discussion, a motion was made and seconded "not to adopt Ordinance 4-2025 vacating alley." The council held a roll-call vote. According to the meeting record, the motion to not adopt the ordinance carried; the mayor announced "motion carried." Meeting remarks recorded summary vote counts as "3 for the motion and 2 abstentions." The council did not adopt the ordinance; the petition was therefore denied at this meeting.

Council members said they preferred more coordination with South Central (including a formal survey and a written agreement preserving utility access if the city were to vacate any portion of the alley) and indicated the city may reopen the matter only after clearer written commitments and a plan to provide physical access to the properties affected.

Ending

The council declined to adopt Ordinance 4-2025 at the Aug. 19 meeting, citing unresolved utility access and easement questions. Staff were instructed to seek clearer surveys and written commitments from South Central if petitioners wish to pursue the matter further.