Loading...
6.a) Staff Report-Hearing to Vacate Waxstad Columbus 3rd 4th streetsSCANDIA Staff Repovt Date of Meeting: February 17, 2015 To: City Council From: Kristina Handt, Administrator Re: Public Hearing to Vacate sections of Waxstad, Columbus, 3rd and 4th streets in the Revision of Vasa Plat Background: At the January 20, 2015 meeting, the Council received a petition from abutting landowners to vacate sections of Waxstad, Columbus, Yd and 4th streets in the Revision of Vasa Plat. These are unopened streets. Property owners can access their parcels over a private road. Since the vacation process was commenced by a petition of property owners, only a majority of the Council is needed to approve the vacation. 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. After a resolution granting a vacation is adopted, the city clerk must prepare a notice of completion of the proceedings containing the following: • The name of the city. • Identification of the street vacated. • A statement of the time of completion of the vacation. • A description of the real estate and lands affected thereby. Issue: Should the City Council vacate sections of Waxstad, Columbus, 3rd and 4th streets in the Revision of Vasa Plat? Proposal Details: After the public hearing, the Council, in its sole discretion, can decide whether or not to vacate the roads. Per the League of Minnesota Cities' memo, state statute allows a city council to vacate a street only upon a finding that the vacation is "in the interest of the public." The public includes persons other than those in the immediate vicinity of the vacation. In addition to publishing the notice twice in the Country Messenger, staff mailed notice to each property owner in the Revision of Vasa Plat. Mere long-term, non-use of a street ground does not necessarily equate with a finding that the vacation is in the best interest of the public. Staff has received some calls from the public concerned Mr. McGinley will later try and develop is property more if the streets are vacated. A portion of his property is under a scenic easement with the national Park Service. As we have seen with other applications in the area, setbacks would need to be met from bluff lines, minimum lot sizes met, etc or a variance pursued. Mr. McGinley has not inquired about development with staff but has merely expressed an interest in combining all of his parcels. Fiscal Impact: Recording fee with the County, $46. Options: 1) Approve Resolution 2-17-15-01 2) Amend and then Approve Resolution 2-17-15-01 3) Table Resolution 2-17-15-01 4) Direct Staff to Prepare a Resolution Denying the Vacation, include reasons for denial. Recommendation: Option 1.