Opinion ID: 2177822
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The sovereign power to establish and have dominion over streets, etc., within the municipality's corporate limits is of course delegated by the Code, sections 389.1 and 389.20, I.C.A.

Text: The delegation clothes the city (or town) with sovereign immunity from liability if the power to change the physical level be preceded by a proper legislative determination by ordinance establishing the intended grade. If not so preceded the city is without authority and liable for resulting interference with the lot owner's special interest in the street. Blanden v. City of Ft. Dodge, 102 Iowa 441, 444, 71 N.W. 411. The establishment of a grade means the adoption of a standard level of a street and is not to be confused with the physical process or act of placing the street at the level established. It is legislative in character and must be accomplished by ordinance. Kemp v. City of Des Moines, 125 Iowa 640, 644, 101 N.W. 474; Kepple v. City of Keokuk, 61 Iowa 653, 656, 17 N. W. 140. The city must exercise its power in the manner prescribed by the statutes, and when a street is cut down without so doing (i. e., without prior establishment of grade) it is liable for the injury, if any, resulting to the abutting property owners. Blandon v. City of Ft. Dodge, supra [102 Iowa 441, 71 N.W. 412], citing Trustees of Diocese of Iowa v. City of Anamosa, 76 Iowa 538, 41 N.W. 313, 2 L.R.A. 606. See also: Wilbur v. City of Ft. Dodge, 120 Iowa 555, 95 N.W. 186; Brown v. City of Sigourney, 164 Iowa 184, 145 N.W. 478; Millard v. City of Webster City, 113 Iowa 220, 84 N.W. 1044. It is well settled    that the city is liable for any damages    to an abutting property owner by cutting down the street in front of his premises except for the purpose of bringing the street to an established grade. Markham v. City of Anamosa, 122 Iowa 689, 98 N.W. 493, 494. II. Defendant's error here is in assuming plaintiffs' recovery is sought under Code section 389.22, I.C.A. That statute seems to have originated in 1872 as Chapter 40, Acts of the 14th General Assembly. Its purpose is aptly stated in Farmer v. City of Cedar Rapids, 116 Iowa 322, 324, 89 N.W. 1105, quoting from an earlier case: It was the intention    to distinguish between those cases where the owner had built or made improvements according to the established grade, and where he had not. If the owner had done no act upon the faith of the continuance of the grade as established, there would seem to be no great impropriety in denying him any possible damages consequent upon the change. The opinion in Trustees of the Diocese of Iowa v. City of Anamosa, supra [76 Iowa 538, 41 N.W. 314], does say: Prior to this statute, cities were not liable for injuries resulting from establishing or changing the grade of their streets    in the exercise of their authority as prescribed by law. Creal v. City of Keokuk, 4 G. Greene, 47. The statement is inaccurate to the extent it implies liability under that statute is the only kind of liability the municipality may incur. But the other Code section, 389.20, I.C.A., gives the power to establish grades. So long as the city or town makes physical change in the street only after first establishing the grade desired to be attained, it is immune from liability except there has been some earlier established grade according to which the property owner has improved his premises. When that situation develops, Code section 389.22, I.C. A. may furnish him a right of action if the physical change is such as to damage, injure, or diminish the value of such property. It follows the municipality is protected so long as it acts as a delegate of state sovereignty in establishing a grade. And the property owner is not protected in improving his premises except such improvement be made in reliance upon or according to an already established grade. Of course in any event no liability attaches to it by the mere establishment of grade. The mere passage of the ordinance gives no right of action. Hemstead v. City of Des Moines, 63 Iowa 36, 18 N.W. 676. III. The trial court properly held the right of ingress and egress is a private property right. The measure of damages is the resulting depreciation in value of the premises caused by the change in street level. The fact that it destroys the property owner's access to his premises from the street helps to cause the depreciation in value. As said in Liddick v. City of Council Bluffs, 232 Iowa 197, 219, 5 N.W.2d 361, 373: It is uniformly recognized that an owner of property abutting on a street has every right in the street that any member of the public has, and in addition, by reason of his location, certain special rights, towit, the right of ingress and egress, and the right to light, air and view, followed by citation to and quotation from 3 Dillon, Mun.Corp., 5th Ed., section 1123. See 64 C.J.S. Municipal Corporations § 1703. The subject requires no elaboration here as the loss of access does not create the right of action but is an element to consider in appraising the damage when it is determined a right to recover exists. We are convinced the decision of the trial court was right. It should be and is affirmed. Affirmed.