First, picture three lots with common boundaries resembling an upside down Y. There is an easement centered on the vertical boundary of the Y, say 10' to either side. The lot directly below this needs to be serviced by this easement. How would you draw the easement portion that is in that bottom lot?
A: Stop the easement at the lot line as there is really no need to extend it any further since the lot now abuts the easement area?
B: Extend it a specific distance, defined as being so far South of the corner common to all three lots?
C: Extend it a specific distance, defined as being so far South of the junction of a leg of the inverted Y and one side or the other of the easement as it extends?
D: Make it a pie-shaped easement area with a radius equal to half the total width of the other portion of the easement?
E: Something better than any of the above?
This question arises from a new subdivision plat that I was reviewing. None of the above possibilities were used on that plat.
A: Stop the easement at the lot line as there is really no need to extend it any further since the lot now abuts the easement area.
Let the lawyers/owners draw up the necessary language that would include all dominant/serviant estates and intent. Work with them to insure the plat refers to the such and that the local jurisdiction (if needed) approve.
I read A then stopped.
Esmt for Bottom lot only encumbers that which it doesn't own.
Why go any further, your over thinking. Easement law will tell you that you can't have an easement over your ownership in favor of you. You can write some overlap if it suits you but it wouldn't extend any Right of Esmt. Of course this is very general but still basic principles.
I've platted them using both the A and B method. And now that you've brought it up and I think about, it's never mattered or came up as a question afterward no matter which way I platted it. I guess it depends?
to be different, I vote for E
I vote for E. Put the easement where it best fits on the ground, or centered around whatever it is your easement-ing.
Here is why I asked
The plat I was reviewing showed an easement area extending into the bottom lot. There was no dimensioning at all to tell you when it stopped. I suppose someone could scale a number off. But, it should be imperative to show the true dimensions so that any future owner of said lot could determine how to NOT build in the easement area.
This was a general utility easement to get main lines of any utilities to each lot in the subdivision. Something that is common to a high percentage of new subdivisions where the main lines of the utilities cannot be limited to street areas.
Here is why I asked
The surveyor can draw a general utility easement however he wants, but it is important to label all the distances when it's not clear. The easements doesn't nessasarily have to stop at the lot lines to properly serve the lot. Perhaps the utility company wants to install a pole on the south lot with drop lines that serve the other two.
Here is why I asked
Perhaps the utility company wants to install a pole on the south lot with drop lines that serve the other two.
Based upon the original post, poles, and or any surface features would essentially be for an easement with different rights? IE, "and Easement in favor of Utility company X or Public over all three lots as shown on the plat of"....., rather than "an easement in favor of Lot A over Lots B & C as shown on"....
The end benefactor is key in the wording and so is the party which is being encumbered by the easement. A private easement could be much different than a public easement.
No matter the wording, dimensions should be shown.
> First, picture three lots with common boundaries resembling an upside down Y. There is an easement centered on the vertical boundary of the Y, say 10' to either side. The lot directly below this needs to be serviced by this easement. How would you draw the easement portion that is in that bottom lot?
>
> A: Stop the easement at the lot line as there is really no need to extend it any further since the lot now abuts the easement area?
>
> B: Extend it a specific distance, defined as being so far South of the corner common to all three lots?
>
> C: Extend it a specific distance, defined as being so far South of the junction of a leg of the inverted Y and one side or the other of the easement as it extends?
>
> D: Make it a pie-shaped easement area with a radius equal to half the total width of the other portion of the easement?
>
> E: Something better than any of the above?
>
> This question arises from a new subdivision plat that I was reviewing. None of the above possibilities were used on that plat.
Insufficient information! If the easement is for access to the lot "below"(?) it must terminate at the "upper" boundary of the lot "below" (you can't grant yourself an easement). If the easement is for a utility company they may want it to protrude some number of feet into the lot "below" to install their appurtenances.
I think you meant to say "each" instead of "either"...
The reason for your question is that you haven't identified (1) the purpose of the easement (is it only to provide utility service to the lower lot, or is it to provide utility service to all lots it crosses, including the lower lot?)
>
> A: Stop the easement at the lot line as there is really no need to extend it any further since the lot now abuts the easement area?
>
If the purpose is to serve only the lower lot, then the lower lot is the dominant parcel and is not subject to or servient to the other lots, then A is proper.
>
> B: Extend it a specific distance, defined as being so far South of the corner common to all three lots?
>
If the purpose is to serve the lower lot along with other lots and there is a need for the other lots to have an interest in some portion of the lower lot (such as a turn-around area or service manhole, etc.), then B is proper.
>
> C: Extend it a specific distance, defined as being so far South of the junction of a leg of the inverted Y and one side or the other of the easement as it extends?
>
If it's necessary to extend the easement into the lower lot, then there is a need which creates the reason. Extend the easement to provide for the need (such as extending the easement to provide access to a service manhole).
>
> D: Make it a pie-shaped easement area with a radius equal to half the total width of the other portion of the easement?
>
A bit odd, but if that serves some purpose, it could be done that way. I'd be hesitant to do it unless there was an overriding need.
>
> E: Something better than any of the above?
>
Determine the (1) purpose, (2) beneficiaries, (3) owners of the facility, (4) location of the facility, and (5) width necessary to provide for facility operation and maintenance, and then provide an easement that provides for the need.
>
> This question arises from a new subdivision plat that I was reviewing. None of the above possibilities were used on that plat.
>
If you're reviewing the plat, you need to know what the need is for the easement, then you can know if the way it's depicted provides for the need. Make sure the plat depicts what is necessary.
JBS