City Dedicating Land to Itself

Sorry, no answers here but some issues to consider. Property taking and conveyance differs so much from state to state there is no black and white answer, it could depend on a number of factors. I’m licensed in Massachusetts. Dedication was abolished in the 1800s. Water departments operate under an enterprise account system. This essentially means any funds generated by the delivery of water must be used for the water department’s needs. The enterprise account is outside the reach of the municipality. If land was purchased for water purposes it will have to remain for that use. Enterprise account aside if the funding that paid for the purchase came from a dedicated use fund, that could prevent a change of use or sale. Additionally, if the land was taken for a specific purpose named in the taking it would require some action by either the taking authority or the legislature to change the use. If the city was conveyed the property by deed, it is just real estate. The current owner could do what they like, zoning issues not included here. Could the layout of a road be placed through and over the property, most probably. If public convenience and necessity dictated so. Just some thoughts.

There are many pumping stations/POD's/wells/treatment plants that fall outside the city limits yet are still owned by the city. In that case the road dedication might be to a different entity. If whoever "gets" the road doesn't mind getting the responsibility for the road, and if the water board or whoever regulates the system feel it's a good idea then it's probably a go.

In my state dedicated roads are fee simple determinable ownership. A fee ownership for road purposes. Limited to a depth needed for roads, utilities, bridges, ect. "Underneath" that ownership the dedicator and assigns continue to retain ownership also called reversionary rights. So, if the site gets sold that buyer will have an ownership in the dedicated road which automatically converts to fee simple when the road is vacated.

I am surveyor for a mid-sized city. One particular street corner right of way in my fair city (the SW corner of 5th St. and Western Ave., Beaverton, Oregon for those scoring at home) was originally squared off. In the late 1970's the city acquired a fillet with a 25' radius at the corner in fee. The county assessor created a new tax lot for that little eyelash of property and showed it as such on the tax map.

I don't know why the city acquired in fee at that time. It seems to have been the fashion, as they did so in all over town during that period. Doing so today - and thus creating new tax lots - would be a subdivision of land and thus would require a land use application, complete with planning commission review, plat mapping, etc., etc. Back to the story.

In 2020 the city acquired additional right of way from the adjacent property owner, this time by right of way dedication. This left the fee titled eyelash marooned out in the intersection. Not really a big deal. It just looked stupid on the tax map. And the consultant surveyor handling the street redevelopment would have to spend a lot of time detailing the boundary on the survey map to be recorded.

So I whipped up a deed that dedicated the city owned eyelash to the public for right of way. Recorded it, and problem solved. So yes, a city can do that.

Another case: the city had long owned a largish property which contained a community center. In the 1940's a street was dedicated across part of it, marooning a triangle of land, roughly 100' on a side at the southwest corner (this is the intersection of Hall Blvd and Watson Street, Beaverton, if you care to see it). The triangle is maintained as a patch of grass and trees by the city but really gets no other use. Last year the city sold the community center to another local government agency, and that agency dedicated the triangle to the public as right of way, so the city will continue to maintain it.

So... long story short ... a city can dedicate land it owns in fee to the public...and then, acting as the servants of the public, develop and maintain it as intended for the public benefit. This, by the way, has consequences for franchise utilities that use the public rights of way for their facilities and pay the public for the privilege.

While it depends on your states right of way laws, generally this is acceptable. The city, (acting as private enterprise) would either dedicate or deed to the public (represented by the city), the right of way.

In almost all cases, the actual action of vacating and accepting the right of way would need to be done by an elected official, as they are the representatives for the public.

As has been said before it depends on your State Laws.

In my state (New Jersey), in this case, the city owns the fee simple in the lands the well is on. In the case of a dedicated road the city holds the easement for the Right of Way in trust for the public.

You need to check in your state laws how different government subdivisions own property and how roads are created.

As has been pointing out, local practices vary, but in general this is perfectly acceptable. Municipalities own land, and they also manage land in behalf of the public. These are two distinct title statuses.

It sounds like in your case, the dedication would convey the title frommthe city to the public. The city would then have the authority and responsibility to manage it for the public for right of way purposes.

This is very common. If the parcel were conveyed it would be conveyed without the dedicated portion, or with the dedicated portion but subject to a public easement, depending on the language of the dedication and/or local law.