Morning,
Could you guys please take a look at this....Owner C owns land on south,west and north sides of the cities right of way. The city is abandoning the street. Parcel A and B owners are staying. I believe that Parcel A and B have rights to the centerline drawn from property corners perpendicular to the south right of way line.
Does Parcel A have any rights to the west being adjacent to the cul de sac?
As always your help would be appreciated....
Thanks, Paul
You've got a two-pronged question there. The first question is one of reversionary fee title to half the road width. The area of the right of way between the sidelines (the frontage) extended to the middle of the street would define the ownership of the vacated portion which is appurtenant to the adjoining property. In other words, half of the right of way fronting on A is owned by A; the half fronting on B is owned by B. The sidelines may be determined by the perpendicular method (preferred), the extension method (when justified as more equitable), or the proportionate frontage method (when the other two methods are inequitable). Of course, if the sidelines are originally designed properly, they will be perpendicular to the frontage, so all three methods essentially have the same result.
The second part of the question deals with the rights of use of the former street. When the city abandons/vacates the right of way, they are only relinquishing the public's right to use the right of way as a public thoroughfare. The private right of use still remains with the adjacent owners who utilize the right of way for access to their properties. It is common for a private easement benefiting all of the adjacent properties to remain in effect for the full width of the former street (including the cul-de-sac). Other easement rights for utilities in place at the time of vacation may also remain for the full width. Each of the remaining private easements may be renegotiated to reduce their impact. Each one would be dealt with individually.
JBS
What JB said presumes simultaneous creation of all the parcels, such as via a tract map with a r/w easement dedication. If that's not the case, what are the facts? If the corner of Parcel A falls in the curve, does that affect the location of the side line of Parcel A in the former R/W?
Thanks JB,
I was just reviewing Ron Platts " Arizona Boundary Law" and Wattles which talks about the same as your reply...Owner C is creating an access easement to provide the original use of the road to Owners A and B. Thank you for taking the time and your comprehensive explanation.
Paul
BajaOR, post: 378610, member: 9139 wrote: What JB said presumes simultaneous creation of all the parcels, such as via a tract map with a r/w easement dedication. If that's not the case, what are the facts? If the corner of Parcel A falls in the curve, does that affect the location of the side line of Parcel A in the former R/W?
Hello Baja,
It is as JB presumes...."simultaneous creation of all the parcels, such as via a tract map with a r/w easement dedication". The geometry clearly shows that Parcel A fronts on the tangent away from the return leading to the cul de sac.
Thanks, Paul
