jshuberg wrote:I own the sidewalk in front of my house, and the boulevard out to the street. The sidewalk *is* considered a public right of way, but I actually own it and am required to maintain it. I had to replace a large section of it a couple years ago, and had to pay for it. It is in fact my property, located on land that I own, but it is also a public right of way. It may be different in other cities, but in Minneapolis the "public" sidewalks are in fact all privately owned.
IANAL, but an LSIT (Land Surveyor in Training) and testing for licensure next month, I find your statement far from the norm. There are various types of right-of-way, and with some of them, the adjacent land owner does own the land underneath the ROW.
That being said, most of MPLS has been divided into subdivision plats. These plats dedicate ROW to the public, which the city, county or state will maintain and improve. The adjacent owners do not own this ROW, although there is more to this which is beyond the scope here.
Most ROW's in MPLS are of sufficient width to accommodate the roadway, Boulevard and sidewalk. I'm not saying that your property isn't as you say, just that IME surveying, your case is very much the rarity, but I have seen it. (I've never heard of having to pay for replacement of the sidewalk on their own dollar though, shovel and sweep is common ordinance though.)
The underlying owner basically has no control what so ever for areas covered by ROW. They can't control the speed limit, traffic control apparatuses, build on it, alter any designed drainage, etc. They also shouldn't be assessed taxes on that portion, as like above, they can't have any meaningful use of that portion covered. Since one can not control that portion, I don't see how the area could be considered a restricted area. The thing to watch out for though, is if the school has roadside pick up/drop off with a widened roadway for bus parking, the sidewalk may veer off the ROW onto the school property. I've seen this a number of times.
ROW's, whether owned by the adjacent owner or not, are PUBLIC. Anything legal you can do in any other public place, should be legal there as well.
Here's a senario to ponder. We did a survey for a school expansion years back. The school bought out the whole block across the street, and the city vacated the ROW between them. This put the ROW into school ownership. The funding was slow, so the project sat for 2 years. In that time the street and sidewalks were still in place and very much being used by everyone. That "street" was not public anymore, and was school property. Only the school, our company, the city and any residents that were at the council meeting knew that the street wasn't public anymore. So would an average person carrying down the sidewalk be in violation? By the letter of the law, probably. I think the "knowingly" portion of 609.66 is the key to most of this.
IANAL.
