Access to the Water from a Public Road in Michigan

By: William L. Carey

Michigan is defined by water. From the Great Lakes to thousands of inland lakes, rivers, and streams, waterfront access is part of life in this state. But access to the water is not always as simple as walking down a road that appears to end at a lake.

Many Michigan lakefront communities were platted more than a century ago. Those plats often include public streets, road ends, lakeside boulevards, and other dedicated areas near the water. Over time, disputes commonly arise over what the public may do at those locations: walk to the lake, swim, fish, launch a boat, place a dock, moor a boat overnight, picnic, sunbathe, or use the area like a public park.

Michigan law draws important distinctions between different types of public roads near the water. In general, a public road that ends at a navigable body of water may provide the public with access to the water. But that does not mean the road end may be used as a marina, park, campground, or private docking area. Likewise, a public road or boulevard that runs parallel to the shoreline usually does not give the public general access to the water.

These distinctions matter for riparian owners, backlot owners, local governments, road commissions, lake associations, and members of the public.

Michigan Plats, Public Roads, and Lake Access

Many older Michigan lake communities were created through recorded subdivision plats. A developer would divide land into lots, blocks, streets, and sometimes parks or common areas. In many lakefront plats, streets were dedicated to the public so lot owners and the public could travel through the subdivision.

Some of those roads run perpendicular to the shoreline and stop at the water’s edge. These are commonly called “road ends” or “down roads.” Others run parallel to the shoreline, often between the front row of lots and the lake. These are commonly called “lateral roads” or lakeside boulevards.

The legal consequences are very different.

A public road end may provide access to the surface of a navigable lake or stream. A lateral road, by contrast, generally provides the public with travel and scenic-view rights, not the right to use the adjacent shoreline or water.

Public Road Ends: Access Does Not Mean Unlimited Use

Michigan courts have long recognized that public ways terminating at the edge of navigable waters generally allow the public to reach the water. Once lawfully on the water, members of the public may use the water for ordinary lawful activities such as boating, fishing, and swimming, consistent with the public’s right to use navigable waters.

But the road-end right is limited. A public road end is not automatically a public park, marina, boat-storage area, or private docking site.

The Michigan Supreme Court has addressed these issues in cases such as Thies v Howland, 424 Mich 282 (1985), and McCardel v Smolen, 404 Mich 89 (1978). Those cases explain that the scope of permissible public use depends on the intent behind the dedication. Where a platted road was dedicated for road purposes and terminates at the water, the public may generally use it to reach the water. But unless the dedication shows a broader intent, the public may not use the road end for general recreational activities such as lounging, sunbathing, picnicking, permanent boat mooring, or marina-style use.

That distinction remains critical. A road end may be used to reach the water. It does not follow that the road end can be converted into a public beach club.

Michigan’s Public Road-End Statute

Michigan also has a specific statute governing public road ends at inland lakes and streams: MCL 324.30111b.

Unless a recorded deed, easement, or other recorded dedication expressly provides otherwise, the statute prohibits a public road end from being used for:

• the construction, installation, maintenance, or use of boat hoists or boat anchorage devices,
• mooring or docking a vessel between midnight and sunrise, and
• any activity that obstructs ingress to or egress from the inland lake or stream

The statute also provides that a public road end may not be used for a dock or wharf other than a single seasonal public dock or wharf authorized by the local unit of government, subject to any required permit. Even then, a public dock cannot exceed the uses allowed by the applicable recorded deed, recorded easement, recorded dedication, or court order.

In practical terms, the statute reinforces what Michigan courts had already recognized: public road ends may provide access, but they are not available for unlimited private docking, boat storage, or obstruction of the public’s ability to enter and leave the water.

The Difference Between Road Ends and Lateral Roads

A separate set of issues arises when a public road or boulevard runs parallel to the shoreline. Many older plats include a lakeside boulevard between private lots and the water. Owners of lots across the road from the lake are often referred to as “front-tier” owners because their lots face the water even though a public road separates them from the shoreline.

The Michigan Supreme Court addressed this issue in 2000 Baum Family Trust v Babel, 488 Mich 136 (2010).

In Baum, the Court held that the dedication of a public road running parallel to Lake Charlevoix did not transfer riparian rights to the road commission or the public. Instead, the front-tier owners retained the riparian rights associated with the adjacent shoreline. The Court emphasized that Michigan law had never treated the dedication of a public lateral road as conveying riparian rights to the governmental entity.

That rule is important. A public road running along the lake may allow members of the public to travel along the road and enjoy a view of the water, but it generally does not authorize the public to cross the road and use the shoreline for swimming, docking, lounging, or other riparian activities. The front-tier owners may still hold the riparian rights, even though a public road separates their lots from the water.

Why the Dedication Language Matters

In road-end and lateral-road disputes, the language of the plat, deed, easement, dedication, or court order is often decisive.

The central question is usually: what rights were actually dedicated, granted, or reserved?

A dedication for “streets,” “roads,” or “highways” generally suggests travel and access rights. It does not necessarily include broad recreational rights, riparian rights, docking rights, or marina rights. By contrast, language dedicating an area as a “park,” “beach,” “common area,” or other recreational space may support broader use, depending on the wording and surrounding circumstances.

Because many Michigan plats are old, the analysis often requires careful review of:

• the original recorded plat
• the dedication language
• subdivision restrictions
• deeds in the chain of title
• historical use
• road commission records
• township or municipal records
• prior court orders
• surveys
• bottomland ownership
• any applicable statutes or ordinances

Small wording differences can change the outcome.

Common Disputes at Public Road Ends

Public road-end disputes often involve recurring fact patterns.

A backlot owner may install a dock at the end of a public road and treat it as a private lake-access site. A group of residents may leave boats, hoists, kayaks, lifts, trailers, or other personal property at the road end. Members of the public may use the road end for picnicking, sunbathing, swimming, or gathering in a way that interferes with neighboring owners. A township may attempt to authorize broader recreational use than the dedication allows. A road commission may take the position that it controls the road but not the shoreline or riparian rights.

These disputes can quickly become contentious because they involve property value, access to the lake, neighborhood expectations, and long-standing habits.

The law generally tries to balance lawful public access with the private property rights of riparian owners. Public access to the water is important, but access is not the same as ownership. The public may have the right to reach navigable water through a lawful road end, but that right must be exercised within the limits of the dedication, applicable statutes, local ordinances, and court decisions.

What Property Owners Should Do

Property owners facing a road-end or lake-access dispute should avoid relying on assumptions. The fact that people have used an area for years does not necessarily mean the use is lawful. Likewise, the fact that a road appears on a plat does not answer whether it provides water access, docking rights, or riparian rights.

A careful legal review should start with the recorded documents. From there, the analysis should consider the type of road, the language of the dedication, the nature of the water body, historical use, local-government involvement, and any statutory restrictions.

For lakefront owners, early action can be important when unauthorized use begins to expand. For backlot owners or members of the public, understanding the limits of road-end access can prevent disputes and potential liability. For local governments, clarity is important because municipalities and road commissions may be asked to regulate, enforce, or remove unlawful structures and uses.

Key Takeaways

Michigan law generally recognizes public access to navigable water at qualifying public road ends, but that access is limited.

A public road end usually allows the public to reach the water. It does not automatically allow docks, hoists, overnight mooring, boat storage, picnicking, sunbathing, lounging, or marina-style use.

Michigan’s public road-end statute, MCL 324.30111b, restricts certain uses at public road ends, including boat hoists, anchorage devices, overnight mooring, obstruction of access, and unauthorized docks.

Lateral roads or lakeside boulevards that run parallel to the shoreline are different. They generally do not give the public the right to access or use the adjacent water. In many cases, front-tier owners separated from the water by a public road retain riparian rights.

The specific language of the plat, dedication, deed, easement, or court order matters. Each case turns on its facts and documents.

Michigan Riparian and Road-End Disputes

Carey Jaskowski PLC represents property owners, lakefront owners, associations, businesses, and local stakeholders in disputes involving riparian rights, public road ends, private roads, easements, lake access, docks, plats, and waterfront property throughout Michigan.

If you are dealing with a dispute over access to the water from a public road, road end, private easement, subdivision plat, or lakeside boulevard, the first step is determining what rights were actually created, and what uses Michigan law allows.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Property rights and riparian disputes are fact-specific, and anyone facing a specific issue should consult qualified counsel.