LRB-1783/1
MES:kmg:jlb
1995 - 1996 LEGISLATURE
January 19, 1995 - Introduced by Senator Andrea, cosponsored by
Representatives Kreuser, Wirch and Porter, by request of Kathy Dahl of
Kenosha, Wisconsin. Referred to Committee on Transportation, Agriculture
and Local Affairs.
SB21,1,3
1An Act to amend 66.296 (2) (c); and
to create 66.296 (2) (d) of the statutes;
2relating to: the authority of villages, towns and cities other than 1st class cities
3to vacate streets, roads or alleys.
Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau
Under current law, the governing body of any 2nd, 3rd or 4th class city (every
city in the state other than Milwaukee), any village and, as of January 1, 1995, any
town, may adopt a resolution that vacates, or discontinues, the whole or any part of
a road, street, slip, pier, lane or alley (highway). A county may also discontinue a
street, slip or alley in any town within the county. The city, village, town or county
is required to hold a public hearing on the proposed resolution. Also under current
law, no highway may be discontinued if a written objection to the proposed
discontinuance is filed with the city, village, town or county clerk by any of the owners
of land abutting on the portion of the highway to be discontinued.
This bill changes current law by providing that a proposed discontinuance of
an alley may not be halted by the written objection of the owner of one parcel of land
abutting the portion of the alley to be discontinued unless the alley provides the only
access to off-street parking for that parcel of land.
For further information see the local fiscal estimate, which will be printed as
an appendix to this bill.
The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do
enact as follows:
SB21, s. 1
4Section
1. 66.296 (2) (c) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB21,2,75
66.296
(2) (c)
No Except as provided in par. (d), no discontinuance shall be
6ordered if a written objection to the proposed discontinuance is filed with the city,
1village or town clerk by any of the owners abutting on the portion sought to be
2discontinued or by the owners of more than one-third of the frontage of the lots and
3lands abutting on that portion of the remainder thereof which lies within 2,650 feet
4from the ends of the portion proposed to be discontinued; or which lies within so much
5of said 2,650 feet as shall be within the corporate limits of the city, village or town.
6The beginning and ending of an alley shall be considered to be within the block in
7which it is located.
SB21, s. 2
8Section
2. 66.296 (2) (d) of the statutes is created to read:
SB21,2,149
66.296
(2) (d) A written objection to a proposed discontinuance or vacation of
10an alley, under par. (c), by the owner of one parcel of land that abuts the portion of
11the alley to be discontinued or vacated may not halt common council or village or
12town board action under par. (a) to discontinue or vacate that alley unless the alley
13provides the only access to off-street parking for the parcel of land owned by the
14objector.
