Full Text
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MISSOULA PETITION for VACATING PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY Dated this 30 111 day of March J 2010. COME NOW the undersigned and respectfully petition the City Council of the City of Missoula to consider vacating the herein described public right-of-way. The petitioner(s) requesting the vacation of the public right-of-way hereby agree to comply with any conditions of the vacation described in any resolution vacating or closing the public right-of-way and recognize the face that non-compliance will result in the vacation becoming null and void and reverting to public right-of-way and public usage. Petitioner(s) have prepared a submittal package describing the particulars of the request to vacate the herein described right-of-way according to Missoula Municipal Code Chapter 12.04. The proposal is attached to this petition for City Council reviews. DESCRIPTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY SUBJECT TO THIS PETITION: The alley portion that exists between lot 8, Block P and lot 12 (E ~ of Lot 12, all of Lot 13), Block P of the CP Higgins Addition - the center of which is 10 feet from the southern edge (right of way boundary) of lot 8, Block P and 10 feet from the northern edge (right of way boundary) of lot 12 (E ~ of Lot 12, all of lot 13), CP Higgins Addition, Section 22, Township 13 North, Range 19 West, Missoula, Montana as shown on the attached map and site plan exhibits (the vacation being requested is shown as a hatch-mar1(ed area). This area is located between East Alder and East Spruce streets and adjacent to Washington, where the alley originates. PETITIONER'S SIGNATU~ CJl~JJ·{~ . Name: lauren S. Caldwell Address: 305 E. Alder St.. Missoula Name: William Dicus Address: 310 E. Spruce St., Missoula ---PAGE BREAK--- Vacation Proposal Narrative April 1,2010 Location: Platted alley portion located in Block P ofthe CP Higgins Addition situated between East Spruce Street and East Alder Street and adjacent to Washington Avenue, where the alley originates. The portion being proposed for vacation exists between Lot 8, Block P and Lot 12 (E Y:z of Lot 12, all ofLot 13), Block P ofthe CP Higgins Addition - the center ofwhich is 10 feet from the southern edge (right ofway boundary) of Lot 8, Block P and 10 feet from the northern edge (right of way boundary) ofLot 12 (E 12 ofLot 12, all ofLot 13), CP Higgins Addition, Section 22, Township 13 North, Range 19 West, Missoula, Montana as shown on the attached map (the vacation being requested is shown as hatch-marked). Condition of Alley: This alley is unusable for through traffic as it currently terminates (via an earlier vacation) at the eastern edge ofLots 8 and 13. The alley is not used for parking, trash pickup, or mail delivery, and rarely, ifever, for property access (though, under this proposed vacation, all current uses, including property access would continue unabated). Current uses in the portion ofthe alley right-of-way being proposed for vacation (including structures, trees, fences, and power lines- all pre-dating the current owners) have existed for more than 30 years without objection by the city, neighborhood, or utility personnel. Uses likely date back to the early 1900's when the east portion ofthe alley on this block was vacated. The portion of the alley being proposed for vacation has never been paved or improved in any way and is currently unused by the neighborhood. In addition, it may be important to note that, in practice, the western portion of the alley only been used as a 1O-foot wide alley, though city records have it platted as a 20-foot wide right-of-way. There are power lines that run above the alley and a man-hole outside the proposed vacation area for underground utilities. Current Situation: Long-standing, removable encroachments on the alley, dating back decades, are likely the result ofwork done by previous owners of305 E. Alder Street and 310 E. Spruce Street (including fences, gates, trees, patios, sheds, and outbuildings). Neither ofthe current owners of these properties is originally responsible for these improvements, but they do make use ofthem. These uses have not been previously challenged by any public or private entities or neighbors and have not inhibited access to utilities. The owners ofthese properties recently received a letter from the city engineering department, which had become aware ofthe encroachments when another homeowner on the block requested a curb-cut for parking on E. Alder Street (which they still want, per phone and in-person conversations). The city engineering department letter asked the homeowners of 305 E. Alder Street and 310 E. Spruce Street to remove any encroachments to clear the 20-foot alley right-of-way in the original plats. This is what prompted the property owners to seek another remedy that would continue the traditional uses of the alley, including existing structures, trees, fences, and power lines, without imposing any additional taxes or hindrances on other neighbors along the alley right-or-way or the general neighborhood and community. ---PAGE BREAK--- Purpose of Closing this Portion of the Alley: To continue the traditional uses of the alley, including existing structures, trees, fences, and power lines, without affecting other property owners adjacent to the more western portion ofthe alley or their current use ofthe alley, and to help clear up age-old confusion about property lines, the dimensions of the alley, and long-standing encroachments. Closing this portion ofan already cut-off alley would allow the adjacent property owners to better maintain the structures that have been there for decades, add taxable value to their property, and allow them to improve upon the soil, vegetation, and use of that land without inhibiting any traditional uses or utility access. The adjacent property owners that would be acquiring part ofthe alley right-of-way do not intend to add any additional structures on the property - the sole objective is to maintain traditional uses. Alternatives Investigation Results: When the property owners originally received the Engineering Department letter ordering the removal of structures in the alley right-of-way, they met with neighbors and city officials to see what alternatives and options they had beyond removal ofthe structures and intensive restoration ofan alley portion that has not existed in a usable way for decades. They considered easements, full-alley vacation, partial-alley vacation, and other alternatives. In consultation with the engineering department, the mayor's office, city council members, and the Office of Planning and Grants, the neighbors decided that the best course ofaction was to ask for a vacation ofthe portion of the alley that currently had long-standing encroachments and did not appear usable - to maintain all current and traditional uses without adding any tax burden onto other landowners along the more western portion ofthe alley. Preliminary Research Results: Tax impacts: The tax impacts were researched on March 30, 2010 by calling the Montana Department of Revenue. Glenda Tillotson, a residential and agricultural appraiser, quoted that the taxes ofthe 305 E. Alder Street property (Ms. Caldwell's) would increase by $12 in 2010 as a result ofthis vacation, if approved, and the taxes ofthe 310 E. Spruce Street property (Mr. Dicus') would increase by $18 in 20 I0 as a result ofthe vacation, if approved. Both these property owners are aware ofthis potential change and are in agreement with it. No other property owners would have their taxes affected by the vacation of this portion ofthe alley. Contacts and Responses to Proposal: Property owners adjacent to the portion of the alley being proposed for vacation include the following (both ofwhom are making this petition for vacation): 1. Lauren S. Caldwell, Lot 8, Block P, CP Higgins Addition 2. William and Winifred Dicus, Lot 12 (E ~ ofLot 12, all of Lot 13), CP Higgins Addition Property owners adjacent to the western portion ofthe alley (the portion not included in the vacation) include the following: I. June Collins Ford (Trustee), Lot 9, Block P, CP Higgins Addition 2. Datsopoulos Family Investments, Lot 11 and W ~ ofLot 12, Block P, CP Higgins Addition 3. Wallace Roberts, Lot 10, Block P, CP Higgins Addition ---PAGE BREAK--- All three ofthese property owners were sent letters and maps informing them about the vacation proposal. When the mail for Wallace Roberts was returned to sender, he was called (by William Dicus, late March 2010) and Mr. Roberts expressed his support for the vacation. William Dicus also left a phone message for Mr. Datsopoulos. As ofApril I, 2010, no response was received from Mr. Datsopoulos or June Collins Ford. In addition, one in-person meeting (February 25,2010 at 305 E. Alder Street) and multiple phone calls have been held with the neighbors directly to the east ofthe Alley right-of-way (no Alley on their property) - Anne Hobbs and Marc Hauger (Lots 6 and 14, Block P, CP Higgins Addition). They have repeatedly expressed their desire for a curb-cut offof Alder Street for parking. They have not expressed objection to this vacation request, but have asked us to expedite it ifwe can (via phone call with Anne Hobbs - March 16th, 4pm). The following local utility companies and service providers were contacted by letter and/or email on March 17, 2010 and given two weeks to respond to the proposal with any questions or concerns. In addition, the Missoula Neighborhood Network, Neighborhood Council, and Homeowner's Association were contacted as well to assure good communication in the general neighborhood area. Responses were as follows: I. Mountain Water Company. No response. 2. Allied Waste Systems. Has no problem with the vacation (via email received from Max Bauer March 19,2010). 3. City Utility Coordinator. Raised an issue with sewer in the alley (via email received from Dennis Murphy March 18,2010). Being addressed by utility easement as condition ofvacation. 4. Bresnan Communications. Raised an issue with overhead telephone I cable lines (via phone call with Benny Murphy on April I, 2010). Being addressed by utility easement as condition of vacation. If such an easement is included, Bresnan stated there is no problem with the vacation. 5. Blackfoot Telephone. Has no utilities in this block. No objection (via email from Dan Patterson March 31, 2010). 6. AT&T Broadband. No response. 7. Northwestern Energy. Have underground gas lines in area, but fine with vacation as long as a utility easement is included (via phone call with Elroy Brunner on April 1, 2010). 8. Owest. Wants utility easement to remain as part ofvacation (via letter from Loree Dark March 22,2010). 9. Postmaster. No response (but no mail is delivered through the alley). 10. Neighborhood Council and Homeowner's Association. No response (emails sent to Bill Flanery, Lynn redding, and Kim Brown Campbell). 11. Neighborhood Network. No response (letter sent to Jim Meagher). 12. Department of Highways. No problem with vacation proposal (via email from Jack May March 29,2010). City departmental responses to proposal were as follows: 1. Office of Planning & Grants. No adverse comments regarding this proposal (via email from Denise Alexander March 26,2010 and email from Dave Prescott March 25, 2010). 2. Public Works Administration. No response. 3. Traffic Services. Has no problem with the vacation (via email from Wayne Gravatt March 24, 2010). 4. Police Department. No response. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Ci!y Engineering. Supportive ofthe vacation (via email from Doug HarbyMarch 18,2010). Do not recommend any conditions beyond utility easement as part of vacation, but want to ensure any utility easement includes access to sewer lines (via email from Kevin Slovarp March 25, 2010). 6. Fire Department. No response. 7. Parks and Recreation. The Parks Department has no problem with this vacation request (via email from Jacquelyn Corday March 18,2010). 8. Parks and Trails. No response. 9. Street Maintenance. Supportive ofproposal in relation to street maintenance activities (via email from Brian Hensel March 19, 2010). Carla Krause, Special Services Administrator was contacted early on and kept in the loop as the initial letter on this proposal was sent to interested entities and neighbors, responses have been received, and any issues have been raised. Utilities Occupying the Alley: Both underground (sewer) and above ground (telephone / cable) utilities are present in the portion ofthe alley proposed for vacation. Those proposing this vacation are supportive ofa utility easement as a condition of this vacation to allow access to these utilities. According to Allied Waste, trash services will continue uninterrupted by the vacation of the alley if approved. Use ofalley ROW after Vacation: If vacation ofthis portion of the alley is approved, use of the alley ROW space will continue as it has for decades. Neither property owner that would acquire portions ofthe alley has any development plans. Proposed Conditions for Alley Vacation: Letters sent to all neighbors, city officials, non-governmental entities, and utilities asked for suggestions of conditions they saw as necessary for vacation to proceed. The result was one singular proposed condition in the event the alley closure is approved (to which the petitioning landowners have no objection): 1. That a general utility easement accompany vacation of the alley to allow sewer, gas, and telephone line access in perpetuity. Attachments: Map - black hatch-marked area shows the area ofthe alley that is proposed for vacation. The Northern 10 feet ofthis vacation would go to the property owner of305 E. Alder Street (Lot 8- Lauren Caldwell) and the Southern 10 feet would go to the property owner of 31 0 E. Spruce Street (Lot 12 - William Dicus). ---PAGE BREAK---