Memo - Vacations - Alleys and Goodrich St
Public Warks Department
Memorandum
To:
Copy:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Rick Getschow, City Manager ~
Steven J. Stadler, Public Works Director
From:
Date:
April 1, 2005
Subject:
Proposed Vacations - Goodrich Street and Alley Rights-of-way
On March 15, 2005 City Council held a public hearing on the vacation of several alley
rights-of-way and a portion of the G~odrich Street right-of-way. There was resident
concern with existing alley ROW encroachments, a driveway conflict and a concern with
homeowners having to take on the responsibility for maintenance of additional trees
within what would be a wider boulevard area along Goodrich Street. After discussion,
City Council choose to continue the proceedings until the April 5 City Council meeting.
Since the March 15 City Council meeting, City staff has had a detailed survey of the
Goodrich Street ROW prepared, and is in the process of identifying and describin~
existing encroachments along the profosed unimproved alley ROWs between 19t Ave
N and 21st Ave N and 2nd St Nand 3r St N. In addition, staff has a survey of the
unimproved alley ROWs just south of Excelsior Boulevard between Monroe Ave and
Harrison Ave.
The City Attorney has provided the attached memo regarding the proposed vacations.
Given the outstanding issues on these vacations, staff requests that action on this item
is continued again until the various concerns can be discussed at a City Council
Worksession - the April 12 worksession is available.
MILLER, STEINER & CURTISS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
400 WELLS FARGO BANK BUILDING
JEREMY S. STEINER * 1011 .FIRST STREET SOUTH
WYNN CURTISS HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343
JASON T. HUTCHISON
JERRE A. MILLER (RETIRED)
by the Minnesota State Bar Association
952-938-7635
FAX 952-938-7670
* Real Property Law Specialist, certified
Writer's Direct Dial No. 952-938-6219
MEMORANDUM
DATE:March 16,2005
TO:
Richard Getschow
Steve Stadler
FROM:
Jerry Steiner
RE:
Vacation of Unimproved Alleys and Goodrich Street Right of Way
The purpose of this Memo is to advise you of the following issues I believe should be addressed
before the City Council reconsiders the Resolution and Ordinance vacating certain unimproved
alleys and a portion of the right of way of Goodrich Street.
1. Draft Resolution No. 2005-025 and draft Ordinance No. 2005-946 do not expressly
reserve utility easements in the areas of the vacated street and alleys. One of the Recitals
in draft Resolution No. 2005-025 does state that "any public utility with existing facilities
within the vacated rights of way reserves the right to obtain easements" where existing
utilities are located. However, since these are public street and alley easements granted to
the City of Hopkins, the only way to assure that easements are retained for any public
utilities located within the streets and alleys to be vacated is for the City to expressly
reserve utility easements in the Council Resolution and Ordinance. Therefore, I
recommend that the Resolution and Ordinance be revised to expressly reserve utility
easements in any areas in which utility improvements are presently located or may need
to be located in the future. The best approach may be to simply reserve permanent
easements for public utilities beneath all of the vacated alleys and streets.
2. I recommend you have the legal descriptions of the areas to be vacated reviewed by a
surveyor before the Resolution and Ordinance are resubmitted to the City Council. After
vacation of the alleys and public street has been completed, a certified copy of the
ordinance must be filed in the offices of the Hennepin County Recorder and Registrar of
Titles. It is important that the legal descriptions be accurate and approved by a surveyor
so that the recorded ordinance will accurately describe the vacated areas. This will avoid
potential title problems for adjoining property owners.
3. I think the issue of encroachments should also be addressed before the Council takes
action to vacate the public alleys and Goodrich Street. It appears there may be adjoining
properties maintaining encroaching driveways, retaining walls or other improvements
within the unimproved public alleys that are proposed to be vacated. If these encroaching
improvements are not located entirely within those parts of the vacated alleys that will
accrue to the owners of the encroachments, vacation of the alleys has the potential to
create legal disputes between neighboring property owners. While this may not result in
liability for the City, you need to consider whether it is desirable to vacate the public
alleys or streets if the result may be a property dispute between neighboring property
owners.
4. Finally, there was discussion at the March 15 City Council meeting of vacating either
eight or ten feet on either side of Goodrich Street, with the City retaining permanent
responsibility for removal of any diseased trees within the vacated right-of-way areas.
Before the Council takes such action, it should consider whether it is appropriate to do
this without also assuming the same responsibility for any other public right-of-way areas
that it vacates now or in the future. Giving preferential treatment to the adjoining
property owners on Goodrich Street raises the possibility that adjoining property owners
of public streets that are vacated in the future will expect to be treated in the same
manner.
Please call me if you have questions.
JSS
JSS/drs