Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council denies petition to vacate 12-foot alley at 909 E. University Street
Summary
After a public hearing and objections from planning staff, utilities and an adjacent property owner, the Bloomington Common Council voted 0–7 on Aug. 6 to deny a petition to vacate a 12-foot alley north of 909 E. University St., citing potential future public use, utilities access and concerns about restricting a neighbor’s garage access.
The Bloomington Common Council on Aug. 6 rejected a request to vacate a 12-foot public alley adjacent to 909 East University Street after planning staff, utilities and an adjoining owner raised objections during a statutorily required public hearing.
Attorney Dan Cyr, representing petitioner Veronica Bartiner, asked the council to transfer full ownership of the roughly 708-square-foot alley to the petitioner, saying the alley had been functionally enclosed and encroached for decades and that private ownership would allow proper maintenance and improvements. "It remains enclosed...we believe, up to 40 years," Cyr said while showing photos of fences and a backyard garage.
Planning and transportation assistant director Jackie Scanlon recommended denial. She said the city has unimproved alleys that serve future pedestrian or utility functions and that a 12-foot right-of-way could support a path or utility access. "The department has recommended that you deny the request," Scanlon told the council, citing potential future use, City of Bloomington Utilities' objection and the common practice of splitting vacated alley rights between adjacent property owners.
An attorney for the adjacent owners, Jim Borer, said granting the entire alley to the petitioner "will restrict my client's access to their garage," and urged the council to deny the petition under Indiana Code 36-7-3-12. Planning staff and counsel noted Duke Energy requested protections for its easements and CenterPoint Energy raised no objection; City of Bloomington Utilities opposed the vacation.
Council members repeatedly raised issues of public benefit, precedent and fairness. Several members said a 50/50 split to adjoining owners is the typical remedy if a vacation is approved, and many expressed concern about gifting city property for what appeared to be a largely private benefit. After deliberation the council voted 0–7 to deny Ordinance 20-25-30.
What this means
- The alley remains public right-of-way and any encroachments can be addressed through existing city processes if necessary. - Planning staff noted the city could require removal of encroachments if a future public need arises.
Sources: Petitioner presentation, planning staff memo and council roll-call vote during the Aug. 6 Bloomington Common Council meeting.
