Aurora, Illinois

File #: 18-0635    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Ordinance Status: Passed
File created: 7/19/2018 In control: City Council
On agenda: 8/14/2018 Final action: 8/14/2018
Title: An Ordinance vacating a 10' x 100' easement between lot 5 (1022 S Pleasure Ct) and lot 6 (1016 S Pleasure Ct) Block 1 in the Roy A Martins subdivision in Ward 4 of the City of Aurora.
Attachments: 1. Exhibit A
cover
TO: Mayor Richard C. Irvin and the City Council

FROM: The Law Department

DATE: July 23, 2018

SUBJECT:
An Ordinance vacating a 10' x 100' easement between lot 5 (1022 S Pleasure Ct) and lot 6 (1016 S Pleasure Ct) Block 1 in the Roy A Martins subdivision in Ward 4 of the City of Aurora.

PURPOSE:
To vacate the City's interest in the aforementioned easement in order to allow the property subject to the easement to be transferred in equal parts to the adjacent homeowners.

BACKGROUND:
The Roy A. Martins subdivision was developed in the 1950s. The original plat of subdivision called for called for the developer to construct three walkways between homes in the subdivision, but only two were improved. Since the subdivision developed, the City has regarded each of the walkway as public rights-of-way, though the Recorder's office only reflects the dedication of walkway easements rather than fee simple ownership. Nevertheless, the County has apparently never extended property taxes against any of the three walkways reflecting a consensus that the City owns the property, in-fact.

While the two improved paths in the subdivision provide access to nearby McCleery Elementary School and Jefferson Middle School which lie to the subdivision's north and west, respectively, the unimproved path does not provide access to either location that is not otherwise available from Fordham Ave, approximately 300' to the west of the path. Moreover, Fordham Ave is improved with sidewalks on both sides and a marked crosswalk at its intersection with Plum St, and would not extend the distance any person would need to walk to access either school.

The City has no use for the property constituting the unimproved right-of-way and both neighboring property owners are amenable to assuming responsibility for the parcel.

DISCUSSION:
The City has long had a practice of vacating surplus rights-of-way and allowing neighboring property owners to assume responsibility for the maintenance of the...

Click here for full text