In this quiet title action, Charles Stanley Turner and Tim W. Turner brought suit against the City of Tallapoosa, Philip Eidson, the City Manager, Donald Ridley, and Ronald Ridley, contending that they owned certain unused roadbeds running through the Ridleys’ property. The trial court determined that the Turners did not own the property in question, and this appeal ensued. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the findings of the trial court. The record shows that, prior to 2001, the City owned two undeveloped public streets, Grant Street and Mays Street, traversing two separate tracts of land, the “Hicks Estate” and the “Owensby Estate.” By May of 2001, it became apparent that the City was not going to develop the roads, and the owners of the Hicks Estate at that time filed a petition with the City asking that the streets be closed. In this petition for closure, the legal description of the streets is set forth as follows: That portion of Mays Street as it runs from the south line of Land Lot 130 to the southwesterly right of way of Georgia Highway 100; that portion of Grant Street as it runs from the south line of Land Lot 130 to the southwesterly right of way of Georgia Highway 100 . . . , all as more fully shown on a plat attached hereto and incorporated by reference, are open streets in the City of Tallapoosa, Georgia, which run through or touches petitioner’s property. This legal description appears to refer to the entire length of Mays Street and Grant Street as they run through both the Hicks Estate and the Owensby Estate. The petition goes on to state, however, that “said portions of Mays Street and Grant Street are of no use or benefit to the City of Tallapoosa as same is platted to run through Petitioner’s property Hicks Estate, and it would be of benefit to the City and Citizens thereof if said streets were closed as it runs through or touches Petitioner’s property , as it could thereafter develop the same.” Emphasis supplied. Based on the emphasized language, it becomes clear that the petitioners were requesting closure and transfer of only the roadbed property contained within the Hicks Estate.
On May 14, 2001, the City granted the closure petition by resolution. In this resolution, the City states that Mays Street and Grant Street “may extend onto or touch portions of the property of Petitioner , the Hicks Estate.” The City then determined that there was “no need for those portions” of the streets and that these “same” portions should be closed. The resolution then closes the roads with the following language: That portion of Mays Street as it runs from the south line of Land Lot 130 to the southwesterly right of way of Georgia Highway 100; that portion of Grant Street as it runs from the south line of Land Lot 130 to the southwesterly right of way of Georgia Highway 100 . . . , all as more fully shown on a plat attached hereto and incorporated by reference and as touches the property of Petitioner are hereby closed, and hereafter shall not and do not constitute a public street in said City. Emphasis supplied. The resolution then states that the closed portions of the streets could be conveyed to the owners of the Hicks Estate at the time. Therefore, it is evident that the City closed only those portions of the streets touching the Hicks property, not the portions running through the Owensby Estate. Likewise, the City only authorized transfer of the roads within the Hicks Estate to the owners thereof.
