My father purchased a property 50+ years ago.?ÿ He is now since passed away and I was reading the deed to get a grip on the features of the property.?ÿ One clause stood out to me, at the end, which stated:
"Excepting right of public in and to centerline of road".
Imagine a triangular shaped piece of property with two sides bordering other properties and one side facing the public town road.?ÿ There is a long-since abandoned trail leading from that road into the property, which, among other things, is of a grade that is exceeding the allowable limits for issuing a building permit.
I'm wondering if, based on the phrase above, this property is, indeed, land-locked since my read of that clause means the property-owner has no rights to gain entry into the property from the public road way.
Is this a correct assumption?
Thank you.
Is this a correct assumption?
Thank you.
No, if I understand you correctly. The County may dictate where a curb cut (driveway) is located. The roadway is most likely described somewhere in the county records and,?ÿ for example would be described as a 50 foot Right-of -Way which means the county owns 25 feet on each side of the centerline. The strip of your land the county took probably came from the original parcel. Unless it is a limited access highway (Interstate, Turnpike, etc) you do have access. ???? ?ÿ
Thanks for the succinct reply.?ÿ I get it now.?ÿ Strange, to a non-surveyor like myself, the language is completely opposite of what it seems.?ÿ?ÿ But that's how professional trades go.
Actually, I'm looking for a reason for there to be no access because the actual dirt driveway that currently enters the property is of such a grade (>19%) that the local township will not issue a building permit and in general the side of the property that fronts on the main town road is sheer cliffs.?ÿ That would leave somehow getting access from the adjoining property owners who do have level access into my land.?ÿ The town, in fact has an adjoining property, but have been unresponsive to requests for an easement or ROW as have all the other neighbors.
It's my understanding that earlier property deeds (from which this parcel was carved out of) may have had easement or ROW clauses that may have been dropped or otherwise not passed on.?ÿ I'm guessing to track down those older deeds I would need to do what is called a "boundary survey".?ÿ Does that sound correct??ÿ
Most of the deeds are online and searchable and I have access to that.
1) Can anyone provide some pointers on what I should be on the lookout for when and if I can reverse trace my parcel of land to the original parcel it was carved out of and 2) what is the general method to back-tracing such information?
Thank you.?ÿ This is all very useful and helpful.?ÿ Glad I found this forum.
Reading that (or any other) clause in a vacuum is a recipe for disaster. Even reading the deed by itself won't give you the entire story. If you give a little more information we should be able to mislead you with more certainty...
Serioisly, the entire description may help ????
Sure thing, I've attached the deed with some redacted portions to protect the innocent. . .
You may have to download and enlarge to read.?ÿ On line it shows in small print but offline it can be read just fine.
I would get with a local title company, they can run title and show any easements for the tract, however some only go back 50 years so, tell them what you are looking for.
"Excepting right of public in and to centerline of road", means that all the rights thay go with owning the land were transfered to your father except the right to exclude the public from using the part of the road that is on your land. You, as a member of the public, and as the land owner have the right to access the rest of your property from the road.
To research the title history you will have to use the name of the person who sold the land to your father. Your county should have a way to search by grantor and by grantee. You will need to search by name backwards until you get to a larger parcel, looking for easements?ÿ granted by the neighbors along the way.
Whatever rights the public has to use the road is excepted from the Grant. It's an odd way to say "subject to" the rights of the public in the road.
In the context of the description language I think they meant subject to, not excepting from but I'm not an expert in New York practice.
Roads are funny. Depending on the road and how your property was created, you have a right to the centerline as the land owner even though your property line is the right of way.
The public can traverse that area, but they cannot linger there. There was a case in New Jersey in Newark. A man set up a newspaper stand on the sidewalk thinking he had a right to do so because he was not on private property. The Court ruled against him cutting that the property owner has a right to the centerline. The newspaper stand therefore was not covered by 'rights of the public' and had to leave.
It's interesting when you get in to the title end of surveying.
Roads are funny. Depending on the road and how your property was created, you have a right to the centerline as the land owner even though your property line is the right of way.
?ÿ
But that's just it, and what causes so much confusion. The property line is not usually the right of way.?ÿ Land owners usually own to the center line (depending in the history of the right of way), but their rights are severely limited by the public easement. Land owners don't have some sort of extraterritorial jurisidiction over the road, they either own it and have some rights, or don't own it, and have the same rights as any of the public.
Fee ownership of the right of way by the goverment is rare, but it does happen. This, and the situation where an adjoiner owns the entire road are the only time the right of way line and the property line are one in the same despite what all those surveys and deeds seem to say.?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
I've been doing research and going back as far as I can online. Online records only go back as far as 1950's so I'm heading to the county seat to go farther back.
So far the chain of deeds leading up to mine are absent that clause "Excepting right of public in and to center-line of road".?ÿ Only mine has that.?ÿ I'm curious why.
I'm wondering if it has to do with the fact that the existing dirt road driveway into the land - the only road that grants me any kind of access and which the town has said it's grade percentage is too steep to issue a building permit - was made during the ownership of the former owner.?ÿ The town road it connects with has been in existence for I'd guess about a hundred years or so.
See, I'm trying to find out if the land is land-locked as a result of the current access road that is too steep for vehicular traffic and actually also unsafe as it snakes along a very steep cliff.
In the rural parts of my area nearly all deeds extend to the section line which is generally about the same as the centerline of the road, except State highways which are fee simple to the State. The owner has very little control over the area in the road right-of-way, but like the newspaper stand story, the use of the right-of-way is normally limited to transportation-related issues. Fortunately, property taxes are not assessed on that area within the right-of-way. If the road is ever vacated full usage by the landowner MAY be reestablished.
I don't think that's what it means. I think the lawyer that wrote that was being sure the grantee is on notice of the rights of the public in the road, an encumbrance. He was protecting the Grantor by including that clause.
"Section line"?
The parcel is in a Colonial State. Very often common law says all lots own the fee under the road and despite the language used, the road is an easement. To say the road is owned in fee by a municipality gives the municipality to sell that fee to someone else, hence making a lot land locked.
Limited access highways are owned in fee by agencies and just because you front it, you do not have access. Again common law makes it so, despite language that says otherwise. Did you ever really think about why limited access highways are fenced?
Paul in PA
Around here the main reason highways are fenced is to coerce deer to go under bridges instead of across the highway.
That's the norm in Iowa also.
Strangely, the road past my sister's house appears to all be taken from the parcel on the other side, so the road is all on the north side of the section line. That is somehow related to the fact that she is adjacent to a town.
That is the only example I've seen of that.
Have a job right now where the road along the north section line is entirely taken out of the section to the north. I have only encountered such a situation a few times.
About 20 years ago we had a job that involved a road where at the south end of that one mile-long road the centerline was 20 feet west of the section line. At the north end, the centerline was 20 feet east of the section line. That is exactly how the road record stated the road was to be constructed. There must have been a very important reason to do that at the time, say, miss a well or something, but nothing was evident to us.
Sounds like you will need an attorney to look into a private condemnation for access; you will also need a thorough survey that searches all adjoining chains of title and maps elevations in order to determine/show/prove which lands might be subject to the private condemnation.?ÿ
?ÿ
That's what I thought could be in the works.?ÿ In New York I think it's called easement by necessity.?ÿ This is getting very interesting.?ÿ Thanks all for the great recommendations and insight.?ÿ Much appreciated.
Trying to establish an easment by necessity is an option, but it should be your last option. That requires going to court, and going to court gets very expensive and causes a lot of ill will between neighbors.?ÿ?ÿ
It is also unpredictable. Since you have frontage on a public road, and there is an existing driveway, you will have to satisfy your judges personal opinion of what is truly a neccisity. Many courts won't care much that you would have to spend what to you is an unthinkable amount of money to build access.
Another thing to consider, is that your easment of necessity may not be able to cross the most convinent adjoiner. It will probably have to cross the lands once owned by the person who created your parcel.
?ÿ
