Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Right Of Way Vacation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
LaPorte County Planning Commission approves petition to vacate section of North Cedar Lane
Summary
The LaPorte County Planning Commission voted to accept a petition to vacate an unimproved portion of North Cedar Lane adjacent to property owned by Katrina Kathleen Zinn; the petition’s representative said the road had been used as a private driveway and discussed an easement with an adjacent owner’s representative.
The LaPorte County Planning Commission voted Sept. 23 to accept a petition asking the county to vacate an unimproved portion of North Cedar Lane adjacent to property at 8456 East Aspen Lane in Hudson Township. Petitioner Katrina Kathleen Zinn was represented by David Ambers of David Ambers and Associates, PC.
Ambers told the commission the area is an undeveloped roadway that has long been used as a driveway by members of the Zinn family and that fences and an existing driveway prompted the request to vacate the right of way so the property could be sold. "We have an undeveloped roadway," Ambers said, adding the driveway has been used by Zinn’s family for years.
Commissioners asked whether vacating the roadway would landlock neighboring parcels and how ownership of the vacated strip would be distributed. One commissioner summarized the legal rule that each adjacent side receives half of the vacated right of way. Ambers said he has discussed an easement with Eric Glaze’s mother—Eric Glaze was described in the record as currently incarcerated—so the driveway’s use would be preserved for the adjacent homeowners.
A motion to accept the petition was made and seconded; the commission took a voice vote and the chair announced the motion carries. The audio record records participants saying "aye" and no opposed voice was recorded. No roll-call vote tally was recorded in the meeting transcript provided.
The petitioner’s representative read parcel identifiers into the record for the affected parcels and asked the commission to proceed with the vacation. The commission did not record additional conditions or amendments to the petition on the audio record; the chair said the petition would be accepted and thanked the representative.
Next steps were not specified on the audio record. The transcript does not record a formal, itemized roll-call tally or any remonstrator statements opposing the petition.
