Notes:Jarvis Way
1830: Source:Barbeau: "Alley"
1844-06-27: E. Trovillo, "Sheriff's sales," Pittsburgh Morning Post, [p. 2] (Newspapers.com 86483781): "ALSO, ¶ 21st. All the right, title, interest and claim of M B Miltenberger, deceased, in the hands of his administrator, James S Craft, with notice &c, in and to the following piece of property situate in Pittsburgh, in said county, beginning on the west side of Wayne street, at the distance of 367 feet from Penn street, thence westwardly by a line parallel with Penn street 90 feet, thence southwardly by a line parallel with Wayne street 67½ feet to Jackson alley, thence along said alley westwardly 150 feet, thence northwardly by lot No 62, Pittsburgh, to the Allegheny river, thence up the same to Wayne street 240 feet more or less, and by Wayne street to the place of beginning, on which is erected a Rolling Mill, warehouse, and other buildings."
1855: Source:Colton: "Jackson Al"
1872: Source:Hopkins-1872: "Jackson's Al."
1912-05-21: Source:Municipal-record-1915, p. 313: "Mr. Wilkins moved ¶ To amend the bill in Section 1, line 16, by striking out the word 'Bevanille' and by inserting in lieu thereof the word 'Birtley;' line 33 by striking out the word 'Doucette' and by inserting in lieu thereof the word 'Dousman;' line 43 by striking out the word 'Jacques' and by inserting in lieu thereof the word 'Jarvis,' and line 75 by striking out the word 'Zolium' and by inserting in lieu thereof the word 'Delano.' ¶ Which motion prevailed. ¶ And the bill as read a second time and amended was agreed to."
1912-05-31: Source:Ordinance-1912-318: "Jackson alley, from Tenth to unnamed alley, Second ward, changed to Jarvis alley."
1925-12-07: Source:Municipal-record-1925, p. 778:
City of Pittsburgh, Penna.,
November 30, 1925.Committee on Public Service and Surveys,
Gentlemen:
On Bill No. 3666, being an Ordinance for the vacation of Jarvis way, and which was under consideration by you and referred to this Department for a further report on the history of possible public uses, matter of assessment and my recommendation:
It appears that a number of years ago there were certain houses facing on French (formerly Fayette) street, the property lines of which extended to Jackson alley or Jarvis way so-called. The lots on which these houses were constructed were part of the original lots in this plan, and therefore the owners of the lots would have a contract right to use the alley as shown on the original plan. This contract right, however, is not the public right which is involved in the phrase "public use of a dedicated way," which makes it a public way.
A thorough search of the records of the Bureau of Surveys' street history fails to disclose any data as to a public user of the Alley at any time or any control exercised over it by the City such as might even imply an acceptance of the original dedication, and we have no other information at hand and know of no way of getting any further information to show that the public has used this property as a public way. As a matter of fact, I am informed that part of one of Brown & Company's buildings was on the way extending from Tenth street back ninety feet, approximately on the middle of the alley, and the rear one hundred and forty feet of alley was covered for many years by a building used by Brown & Company.
The City Assessor's Office in its recent report to you states that the alley has not been included in the owner's property assessment. An examination of the assessment books shows the various parcels, being all of the property now contiguous to the alley, as assessed against members of the late John H. Brown's family in lump square frontage [sic] for the respective parcels. It is impossible for us to determine whether the square footage assessed contains any portion, and hence an assessment of any portion, of the alley. It would seem that the rear one hundred and forty feet of the alley has been included in past assessments, as the City Plan Books show the alley to exist only to a depth of one hundred feet from Tenth street and the remaining one hundred and forty feet of depth to be included in contiguous private property, which fact the assessors most likely took into consideration in making their assessments.
It seems perfectly clear to me that the City has no claim to this so-called Jarvis Way at all.
Yours truly,
Thos. M. Renner,
City Solicitor.
1925-12-10: Source:Ordinance-1925-514 vacated Jarvis Way, "as laid out in the Rev. Francis Herron's Plan or Sub-division of Lots in Pittsburgh, recorded December 8, 1829, in the Office of Recorder of Deeds, etc., of Allegheny County in Deed Book Volume 39, page 189."
