03-27-2013 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

RELEVANT LINKS: Church of Sts. Peter and Pad of Lake George v. Lake George Tp., 89 N.W.2d 708 (Minn. 1958). M re Verbiek, 607 N.W.2d 148 (Minn. Ct. App. 2000). McCuen v. McCarvCI, 263 N.W.2d 64, (Minn. 1978). In re Robbins, 24 N.W. 356 (Minn. 1885). Edgewater Cottage Assn, Inc. v. Watson, 387 NW 2d 216 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). A.G. Op. 396 -G -16 (Sept. 9. 1965). AG. Op. 396 -G -16 (Apr. IQ 1947). The standard of uselessness is a more stringent standard than the public benefit standard for a vacation by resolution of a city council. A petitioner must prove that the land to be vacated has no present or future use consistent with the land's original purpose as a public way or ground. IV. Property interests after a vacation A. Reversion and ownership When a street is lawfully vacated, the easement granting the public the right to travel the street ceases to exist, and the title to the land under the street reverts to the underlying fee owners of the property for their exclusive use and enjoyment. The reversion occurs by operation of law, and the city is not able to direct or convey ownership of the fee title upon vacation. The law presumes property owners along the vacated street each hold a grant of soil to the center of the street where their property abuts the street. As a result, upon vacation, title to half of the street usually reverts to each abutting property owner. The one -half ownership rule is based on the presumption that adjoining landowners equally furnished land for the roadway use. However, this rule does not apply where evidence shows the street was laid out wholly on one of the abutting owner's land. In this instance, where one owner furnished all of the land for the street, that landowner (or the landowner's successor in interest) will receive all of the land back upon vacation. In a few rare instances, the city may actually own the underlying fee title to the vacated public way or grounds. In these instances, upon vacation the city becomes the fee owner and may keep or dispose of the property as it deems in the best interests of the city. B. Compensation to the city for Toss of the street to be vacated As a general rule, a municipality has no proprietary interest in a public street. Rather the city holds an easement in favor of the public granting a right to travel the street. As a result, the city does not hold a fee interest in the street and cannot ask a petitioner to pay compensation for the loss of the street to the city as a condition to granting a vacation. League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 7/9/2010 Vacation of City Streets 2 7 Page 10