7.a Staff Report - Proposed Vacation of segement of 2nd Street in the Visa Plot
Memorandum
Date: January 15, 2021
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Ken Cammilleri, City Administrator
Re: Should the City vacate this limited portion of 2nd Street in the Visa Plot?
Background
On December 20, 2020, the City received a petition from Mr. Charles Eginton and his neighbors to
vacate a portion of an unimproved right-of-way of Second Street in the Visa Plot located at the Copas
neighborhood off of 197th Street North. For those unfamiliar with the area, the area in question is
near where 197th Street makes a sharp turn north near the St. Croix River. Please see the picture in
the map.
Recommendation
From a staff standpoint, we are unable to determine an existing or potential future public use for
right-of-way beyond the need to have adequate turning radius for emergency apparatus. Second Street
has been vacated to the south of Mr. Eginton’s garage, which diminishes any likelihood of buildout
any further southward. Also, the properties to the south are currently served by a private road.
The right-of-way in question has two issues that can be resolved by vacating.
First, Ms. Malinda Maher’s property recently required a new septic system as there was no room for
on her principal property east of the right-of-way. (The cabin, until recently, was previously served
by an outhouse.) As a result, the system was installed on the west side of the right-of-way with a pipe
going through the right-of-way. It is in Ms. Maher’s interest to have this vacated so that she has
ownership rights to the entirety of her system that can be transferable with the sale of her property. If
this is not approved, the City would grant her an encroachment license that is non -transferable at
point of sale. Although the City would likely grant such a license to a new owner by application, this
is still problematic as there is no 100% assurance that a future City Council would approve such an
arrangement. In addition Mr. Eginton’s property may also experience similar circumstances in this
future should he need to replace his system.
The other issue is Mr. Eginton’s garage. This structure was constructed in the City’s right-of-way. As
the City has legal control of this right-of-way, and no adverse possession can be taken against the
dedicated right-of-way under the statutes; it is possible that the City may be in the position to order
the structure’s removal. The Town Board did inform Mr. Eignton of this issue when it was first
discovered. A vacation would effectively eliminate this issue and in the process eliminate an issue that
could hinder a future transfer of property, as well.
What happens if the vacation is approved?
According to the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) guide on vacating streets, “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.”
Option Summary:
1) Recommended - Approve the vacation request maintaining 10 feet from the corner to
have turning radius. A successful approval under statutes requires that the City Council adopt
findings of fact as part of their decision that supports vacating this right-of-way segment is in
the interest of the public. This vacation request was commenced by petition of a majority of
abutting landowners and only requires a simple majority of the quorum present at the meeting
to pass a favorable resolution. Please see the draft resolution in your packets that was drafted
by City Attorney Chris Nelson.
2) Table the matter for a future meeting in order to obtain further information and/or
identify additional findings of fact. 60 days from the date of submission and the payment of
fees would be Thursday, February 18th. This means there are at least two scheduled City
Council meetings before the Council would need to act.
3) Should the Council decide to deny this petition request, the City Council will need to
adopt a resolution that layout findings of fact in support of a decision to deny.
Please let me know if you have any questions.