In 1992 the state highway did an expansion and there was a waterline running along the right of way that needed moved. The city being the owner of the pipe acquired a 10 foot easement along the new ROW line and the water line was shifted almost to the edge of the easement about 8-8.5' south of the new ROW.
In 2005 a subdivision was designed with 5' utility easements along the lot lines including south of the ROW line. In the new subdivision the water line easement was not shown and the city accepted and signed the plat.
A contractor hired us to replat some lots, basically creating 2 lots out of three and we discovered the mistake on the plat that neglected to show the existing water line easement. A building had already been designed and before the replat a building permit issued by the city.
Of course it is sitting on the pipeline and isn't going to work being in the easement and everything kinda hit the fan.
The contractor wants to know if the city lost their easement when they signed the plat, I immediately said "I don't think so, but I'm not a lawyer."
I just can't see how they could have, the easement predates the plat and just because the other surveyor missed it doesn't vacate it. But the city did sign the plat and should have caught the mistake, they do spend a bunch of time reviewing these and require us to show utilities and it is their pipe. Not sure what their liability is.
I would say the easement still exists but them I'm the one of the attorneys who will be fighting this one out. Bottom line is the contractor should have pulled a title report prior to design. I my neck of the woods, the county requires a current title report when you submit a plat.
I did a job last year in which an individual sunk his retirement investment into a spec house out in the country. Somehow he acquired title without the benefit of a title report. Turns out he built his little nest egg on a 100' wide easement for a future water transmission line (we are talking in the 10 ft dia pipe). The investor's attorney had the eggs to call the city and ask how long it would take them the relinquish the easement so they could close on a pending sale. The city replied with the question 'when you going to move you house of of our easement?'. They worked out a deal that if the investor could acquire the required easement to re-rout the future line, he would not have to move the house. It took over a year but he was able to get four of his neighbors to buy in to the deal.
> .....Not sure what their liability is.
:good:
Ha ha ha ha....good one!
I have no idea how they did a subdivision without a title report, or doing the research themselves, or how it got through the city review, it's not like the pipe is some old never used abandoned one. But stuff happens. At least the contractor only has plans and we didn't do the subdivision. I'm sure redesign is going to cost, but they did find out about it before digging.
As an aside we were the ones that did the easement in 1992 so we had all the info on file.
Is there a swimming pool in the proposed building?
Do they want one?
Ha!! No doubt they would have had one!
Contractor isn't happy, but at least he isn't watching a fountain sprouting out of his trench for his footers.
The city's 10' easement still exists but the property owner and/or builder may have some recourse to recover costs / damages from the surveyor who signed the erroneous plat.
damages from the surveyor who signed the erroneous plat.
He passed a few years ago so.......
That company is defunct now also.
> That company is defunct now also.
That company's E&O insurer will still exist.
If there was a title report at the time of platting which missed the 10' easement they may get their hooks into the title company.
