Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Property topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council discusses abandoning alleyway at Parcel 05497-500; staff to return with surveys and costs
Summary
City staff and councilors reviewed the legal and practical implications of abandoning an alley identified as Parcel 05497-500, including how ownership would vest to adjoining property owners and the likely costs and title-search requirements.
The City of Perry City Council discussed whether to pursue an abandonment—and potential sale—of an alley identified as Parcel 05497-500 during its March 11 meeting.
City staff explained that the city does not own the alley in fee simple but holds it as a dedicated access strip. Under the title-search findings described to the council, abandoning the alley would transfer a half interest of the dedicated strip to each adjoining property owner (including a nearby church, which would receive the south half). Staff said the city itself could not sell the alley directly without first completing the abandonment and warned that abandoning the whole alley might not produce sale proceeds for the city because adjoining owners receive interests automatically.
Staff described practical consequences: potential buyers would need separate title searches and surveys; outstanding mortgages could impede transfers; and abandonment carries costs that would likely be borne by any private buyer seeking to consolidate lots. A staff representative noted the strip is roughly 20 feet wide (subject to an accurate survey) and that a partial abandonment may not be permitted under local development regulations, though staff said they would investigate if a smaller portion could be vacated to meet a particular buyer’s request.
Council discussion touched on alternatives including leaving the property in place and asking property owners to negotiate privately, performing a city survey before starting abandonment, and adding temporary use terms (for example, a license or lease) to control future use. Councilmember comments included concern about maintenance responsibilities if no owner accepts the abandoned property; staff said maintenance would continue as today unless ownership is otherwise changed. The council asked staff to obtain cost estimates for survey and abandonment, confirm whether partial abandonment is permitted, and report neighbors’ positions before returning with a recommendation.
No formal motion to abandon the parcel was made; councilors asked staff to gather additional information and to “circle back” on the matter at a future meeting.
