Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Right Of Way Vacation Drainage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors ask council to delay vacating Ardsen alley; drainage dispute cited
Summary
The City of East Lansing held a public hearing July 15 on whether to vacate the platted public right-of-way between 533 and 535 Ardsen Road; adjacent owners urged delay until a private easement and clear maintenance plan for a drain can be finalized.
The City of East Lansing held a public hearing July 15 on whether to vacate the platted public right-of-way between 533 and 535 Ardsen (sometimes transcribed as Artisan) Road, following a staff request citing lack of public-purpose use.
Public Works staff told council the historic 15-foot alley now primarily functions as a shared driveway between the two adjacent parcels and that a drainage inlet exists at the alley’s west end. Engineers reported they found no record that the inlet or the piping was permitted or constructed by the city; staff characterizes the installation as a private basin placed decades ago.
Several nearby residents and the two property owners spoke at the hearing. Christopher Van Wyke, an owner of 533 Ardsen Road, asked the city to perform routine maintenance on the drain and expressed concern about the city’s plans to abandon the right-of-way while the inlet remains on the property. Laura Van Wyke, the co-owner, later corrected staff remarks: she said staff had once “snake[d] that drain” and that the city previously performed maintenance.
Owner Amy Nuttall of 535 Ardsen requested that the council delay any vacation until her attorney and the neighboring owner finalize a written easement outlining access, parking, garage access and maintenance responsibilities. Nuttall told the council an easement agreement was drafted and under review and said vacating without an easement could damage her property value and future saleability.
City staff and the city attorney advised council that vacating a right-of-way would rejoin the dedicated strip to the adjacent parcels, rather than vest permanent city ownership. The city attorney said there was no clear record that the city had exercised control or maintenance of the inlet and that, absent evidence of acceptance and continuous maintenance, the city is unlikely to be deemed responsible for trespassing onto private property to perform ongoing repairs.
Council did not vote on the vacation July 15. The mayor suggested staff and the owners’ attorneys coordinate, and council indicated the item would return to the agenda in mid‑August to allow time for an easement to be negotiated. The public hearing was closed.
