I am surveying a lot in an old section of Charlotte.
The record plat from 1912 is a bunch of 50'x150' lots. No alleyways are shown between the lots.
The lot as described in a deed from the developer in 1912 is for "all of lot 7, block 51 of map book 230, page 60, fronting 50 on the road and 150 deep, Reserving however an alleyway 10'
in width extending across the rear of said lot for the use of all owners in block 51.
Subsequent deeds up to 2003 call for a lot 50'x140 to an alleyway. This is also how the lots appear on our awesome GIS.
The deed into my owner calls for all of lot 7 block 51 as shown on plat 230, page 60 (we're back to 50' x 150')
There is no conveyance in the chain of title that would have taken the 10' for the alleyway away from the original 50'x150' lot.
Old, possibly original, monuments are found which very nicely fit a 50'x150' lot.
My inclination is to map the lot as 50'x150' with a 10' alley crossing the rear of the lot as an easement. I think the intervening deeds mistakenly took 10' off the back of the lot for the alley.
What weight might the deeds for a 50' x 140' have on the lot?
I think your inclination is correct.
I equate this to my subdivision lot which shows the street r/w as a heavy line although my fee goes to the center of the street
There was a recent case in the state of Washington bearing on whether an alley dedicated on an old plat was a fee or an easement. I'll get you a link when I'm near my material.
I feel your pain
One nearby city has an entire section of town that was laid out in blocks having only four lots, quartering the block, and no alleys. Today, alleys run east to west through all of these blocks. I have never found any document of record justifying the creation of the alleys. This section of town was created in the 1870's, only a few years after the creation of the original town.
Everyone, and I do mean everyone, assumes that the existing tracts, which are all something like the east half of the east half of Lot 2 do not include the 10 feet for half the alley. I have never found a survey monument of any kind along the centerline of an alley. This becomes fun when you have adjoining deeds for an end-of-the-block parcel that are the north 40 feet and the south 100 feet. By strict definition, the north 40 feet tract would include 10 feet of alley and only 30 feet of what everyone assumes to be the true tract. This would create a 10-foot wide strip of no-man's-land between the two parcels.
JB
Are there any other deeds in the block that have made similar alley reservations? Do adjacent deeds include an easement over your lot for ingress and egress via the alley?
If not, you may want to map and label it as an alley reservation per the document it first appeared on in the chain of title.
Just my thoughts...
I'm inclined to agree with you that you treat the 10' as an easement. But I'm with dhunter to suggest that you will want to check several other lots (if not all the lots) in the block to see what they have to say.
Is there a physical alley?
I would show the lot to the 150 mark and show the Alley with references indicating the source .
I also would think there would been a public dedication or it shown on the plat if the Alley were to be subtracted from the rear of lots. Now is that 10' from the rear lot or 5' both side of the rear lot.
FWIW, I agree with your interpretation.
The adverse possession claimant could not possess against the public, so if the alley was a fee to the city the adverse possession clock didn't start until the city relinquished it's rights. But if the alley was an easement, the AP clock had been running all along against the adjoining owner.
The original deed out conveys the entire lot 50x150 and then reserves a 10 foot ROW. I don’t see a problem with your inclination.
The next question is: Do you make a note on the plan explaining the different deed dimensions?
I think that you have a very good case for prescription, if you have an alley that actually exists. If it exists, there MAY be an alley by prescription, I would show any such physical improvements and note it per the deeds, if no physical improvements, note it as alley as per deeds.xxxx-xxxx
The alleys could have been created by a city ordinance and also subsequently closed by a city ordinance.
These documents will not show up in your typical title search of county records unless some one diligently noted the ordinance in a trsnsfer of title.
Anyway, that is how it works here in certain places like my home town..
Thanks for the thoughts. Nice for us solo guys to have a sounding board.
I mapped it as 50'x150' with the alley crossing the rear of the lot. The 1912 deed calling for the alley is cited. The alley is being used by the adjoiner to the rear and the buyer has plans for a garage back there and to use the alley as well. The city never had any interest in the alley. It also had occurred to me that if the alley had ever reverted, it would more than likely have been to the centerline, making the lot 145'. If you chase the other lots in the area back to 1912 they all have the same wording on the deeds, they just change the lot and block number and the grantee's name. I didn't mention the other deeds which had the 50' x 140' dimensions. Do you think a note, something to the effect of "also described as a 50' x 140' lot in previous deeds" would be in order? I think it could be confusing personally.
Thanks again,
JB
JB did the abutting parcel(s) to the rear of locus also cite the alley? If so, it could affect the outcome when considering the alley as a monument and the distances only as a reference to get to the monument.
I try to use the notes section on plans to explain difference I found; notice I didn’t use the word “always”.
Good points. The alley is referenced in all the deeds
In my city we have a road closure and alley closure book kept in the city planning office. Not too many people know it exist.
