Do abutting landowners have reversionary rights when a city vacates a street? Nelson v. Provo City Explained

Background and Facts

In Nelson v. Provo City, property owners challenged Provo City’s vacation and sale of Old 900 South Street, claiming reversionary rights to the center of the former roadway. The street existed before the abutting land was occupied and was originally held by a federal trustee under the Federal Townsite Act of 1867. The trustee later conveyed the abutting parcels to private parties, but the deeds contained metes and bounds descriptions that did not include any portion of the street. When Provo vacated the street in 1989 and sold it to a commercial developer, the landowners sued, asserting that the original conveyances implicitly included title to the center of the roadway.

Key Legal Issues

The primary issue was whether Provo’s interest in Old 900 South was merely a determinable fee, which would cause the property to revert to abutting landowners upon vacation. The landowners relied on Utah Code Section 72-5-103(3) and common law principles that typically grant abutting property owners title to the center of adjacent highways when the public entity holds only an easement or determinable fee.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The Utah Court of Appeals distinguished this case from precedents like Sears v. Ogden and Falula Farms v. Ludlow, which involved private grantors who subdivided larger tracts and dedicated streets through subdivision platting. Here, the street existed before the abutting land was occupied, and crucially, involved a public entity as the grantor under federal townsite legislation. The court held that the common law presumption regarding private conveyances of land abutting highways does not apply when a public trustee makes the original conveyance of property that was never part of a private subdivision.

Practice Implications

This decision emphasizes the importance of analyzing the historical chain of title and the circumstances under which streets were originally created. Practitioners should distinguish between streets created through private subdivision development and those established under federal townsite acts or other public dedications. When challenging municipal street vacations, careful examination of whether the municipality acted as a trustee under federal law, rather than merely accepting a dedication from a private developer, may determine whether abutting landowners have any reversionary interests.