Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Right Of Way Vacation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County to refer petition to vacate 252-foot strip of private subdivision road to planning and zoning
Summary
Property owner asked the Franklin County Commission to vacate a 252-foot portion of a private subdivision road adjacent to his lot; commissioners agreed to have Planning & Zoning review the petition and took no formal action today.
A Franklin County property owner asked the Franklin County Commission to vacate a 252-foot portion of a private subdivision road that runs from the southeast corner of his lot to its southwest corner. County officials said they will refer the petition to the county Planning and Zoning (PNZ) office for review and took no formal action at the meeting.
Tim (staff member) presented a color Franklin County GIS map showing the outline of “Mr. Fogelback’s lot” and described the parcel that petitioners want vacated. “The area that we would like to have vacated begins at the southeast corner of his lot and runs to the southwest corner of his lot of distance of 252 feet,” Tim said. He said a neighboring landowner who owns several lots immediately south of the property has joined the petition.
County counsel or the petitioner’s representative told commissioners the roadway in question is a private subdivision road and not a public street, citing Missouri case law: “It’s a private subdivision road. And under Missouri law, and I’ll throw a case out there to you, Winslow versus Sour Line says that a joining property owner has no interest whatsoever in a subdivision street even though they abut it.”
Commissioners asked whether adjacent property owners had concerns and whether the petition would limit future development. A commissioner asked whether the petitioner on Lager Lane intended to develop the property; Tim replied he was not aware of any development plans and that the property has access to the county road network via Lager Lane.
The commission agreed to have PNZ review the petition and declined to take action at the meeting. “We will take this communication and then, visit with PNZ on this to… Table it,” a commissioner said. The county said it will contact the petitioner if further public hearings or a return to the commission are needed.
Because the petition concerns a private subdivision road, the county said it did not provide notice to certain adjoining property owners who, under the cited court decision, do not have a legal interest in the subdivision street. Commissioners recommended confirming PNZ’s review before scheduling further action.
The commission did not vote on the vacation at this meeting; no ordinance or formal vacation was adopted.
