Heather Michaels, a long‑time Kirk Street resident, told Munhall Borough Council on March 18 that a landslide and ongoing parking disputes have left her and her family uncertain whether the narrow lane in front of their home at 1046 Kirk Street is private property or a borough road.

Michaels said she and her husband paid for a boundary survey when they bought the house in February 2002 and that the survey, and subsequent county records she has, show the lane in front of her house is on her parcel. She said neighbors and past borough officials had previously told her the lane was private and that residents maintained the surface, including adding gravel out of pocket. Michaels said the confusion resurfaced after recent work, a later grant project and a landslide above the lane.

“I just don’t wanna lose my land,” Michaels said, arguing that if the borough treats the lane as a public road it would affect property value and the family’s responsibility for maintenance. She said vehicles regularly block her driveway, and that police officers have at times told her the lane is public and therefore open to parking, while at other times borough staff said it is private.

Michaels also told the council she watched trucks dump material near a French drain years earlier and believes that work contributed to a slope failure. She said she spent hundreds of dollars repairing the hillside and has body‑cam footage from a police call she said she can provide.

Solicitor Greg (borough solicitor) told Michaels and the council he would investigate and expects to coordinate with the borough engineer and public works director. “Let me look into it,” he said. He told council he would review deeds and other records to determine whether the borough formally accepted the lane by ordinance, which would be required for the lane to be a municipal street.

Council and staff discussion focused on the need for a deed or title search to establish ownership, and on whether any prior borough action (an ordinance accepting the road) exists. The borough’s engineer and council members said a courthouse deed search and a review of historical transfers and easements would be the next step. The solicitor and staff also discussed whether any previous maintenance, salt bin placement or grant acceptance implied borough ownership, but said a legal review is needed to confirm the record.

Council asked staff to investigate and report back. Solicitor Greg said he would review title records, speak with the engineer and public works director, and return with a legal opinion on whether the lane is a borough road and, if so, what the borough’s responsibilities would be.

The council did not take any formal vote on the matter at the March 18 meeting; staff were directed to research the ownership history and to contact Michaels with the findings.

Michaels asked the borough to consider reimbursing maintenance expenses if the council concludes the lane is now or will be treated as public; the solicitor said reimbursement claims would depend on the legal and factual outcome of the records search.

The council indicated staff follow‑up would include deed research at the county courthouse and consultations among the solicitor, engineer and public works director. The borough also agreed to contact Michaels with the results of the review.