Carr v. District of Columbia, Civ. A. No. 2449-69.

• Decision Date: 06 April 1970
• Docket Number: Civ. A. No. 2449-69.
• Citation: 312 F. Supp. 283
• Parties: Oliver T. CARR, Jr., et al., Plaintiffs, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Columbia

312 F. Supp. 283

Oliver T. CARR, Jr., et al., Plaintiffs, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al., Defendants.

Civ. A. No. 2449-69.

United States District Court, District of Columbia.

April 6, 1970.

William Joseph H. Smith, Washington, D. C., for plaintiffs.

Thomas C. Bell, Asst. Corp. Counsel for the District of Columbia, Washington, D. C., for defendants.

MEMORANDUM

SIRICA, District Judge.

This is an action for a declaratory judgment interpreting the Street Adjustment Act of the District of Columbia, D.C.Code § 7-401 et seq. (1967). This Act provides for the closing of unnecessary streets and alleys in the District of Columbia. The Act grants the closing function to the District of Columbia Commissioners, and this function was transferred to the City Council in the 1967 reorganization of the District of Columbia government.

The procedures established by the Act for the closing of a street or alley are not complex and the relevant sections may be summarized as follows. D.C. Code § 7-401 grants the Commissioners the power to close any street or alley in the District of Columbia which in their judgment has become useless or unnecessary. It further provides that the title to the land which had been used as the public way shall

revert to the owners of the abutting property subject to such compensation therefor in money, land, or structures as the commissioners of the District of Columbia, in their judgment, may find just and equitable, in view of all the circumstances of the case affecting near-by property of abutters and/or nonabutters.

Section 7-402 provides that a public hearing should be held on all applications for a closing, and that notice of this hearing should be published and also mailed to all owners of property abutting the public way to be closed. Objections to the closing may be presented at this hearing. Section 7-404 provides that if after the hearing the Commissioners are of the opinion that the request for a closing should be granted, they are to prepare an order of closing. There are provisions for the publication of this proposed order and for its service on the owners of all abutting property. The section further provides:

That if no objection in writing be made to the commissioners by any party interested within thirty days after the service of such order, then the said order shall immediately become effective * * * * The final relevant section is 7-405, which provides that if any objection is filed to the closing, the Commissioners may institute an in rem proceeding in the District Court for the closing, the ascertainment of damages, and the assessment of benefits resulting from the closing.

The factual background for the present action is not in controversy. The defendants are the District of Columbia, its Mayor-Commissioner, and the City Council. The plaintiffs hold legal title as trustees for a joint venture in five parcels of land in the vicinity of 20th and M Streets in Northwest Washington. The alley which is the subject of this action runs parallel to M Street. The plaintiffs own all of the property abutting the alley. Pursuant to the Street Adjustment Act, the plaintiffs filed an application on March 21, 1967, with the Surveyor of the District of Columbia for the closing of the alley. The Commissioners held a public hearing on the application on March 24, 1967. No objections to the closing were presented at the hearing, nor were there any objections filed within the allotted thirty day period in response to the publication of the order of closing. In fact no objection to the closing has ever been raised.

The closing order was published on April 18, 1967. The Commissioners did not approve the closing of the alley until September 7, 1967, and at that time made the order contingent on the payment to the District of Columbia by the plaintiffs of the fair market value of the alley property, which has been set at Sixty-nine Thousand Six Hundred Forty-three Dollars ($69,643.00). On November 2, 1967, the Commissioners ordered that the fair market value of the street or alley to be closed should be assessed to the abutting property owners as a condition to all further closings. The plaintiffs protested this assessment, but the government of the District of Columbia has continued to require as a condition to the closing of the alley the payment of the fair market value of the property in the amount indicated above. It is also undisputed that from the enactment of the Street Adjustment Act in 1932 to the fall of 1967, the District of Columbia government made an assessment for the closing of a street or alley only in those cases in which it was determined that neighboring property might be adversely affected by the closing. This has been the consistent policy of the District of Columbia under the Act except for an eighteen month period in the 1940's.

This case came before this Court for hearing on the defendants' motion to dismiss and the plaintiffs' cross-motion for summary judgment. On their motion the defendants take the position that assessing the plaintiffs the fair market value of the alley property as a condition to the closing of the alley is within the discretion of the Commissioners as granted by D.C.Code § 7-401. The plaintiffs assert three principal arguments to support their ...