Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Easement Right Of Way topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Property owner told to survey and plat to record 24-foot right-of-way for storage units and duplex access
Summary
A property owner seeking to formalize an existing gravel access was advised to obtain a survey and a recorded right-of-way or easement; council members said 24 feet is the typical minimum width and recommended consulting a title company and recording a plat to protect access rights.
A property owner asked the council for guidance on creating a recorded right-of-way through one of their parcels to preserve access to storage units, a duplex and a separate building; council members advised surveying, platting, and working with a title company to record a minimum 24-foot right-of-way or easement.
Why it matters: The owner said the access is currently a gravel driveway used by renters and a neighboring storage-unit operator under a verbal agreement; without a recorded right-of-way or easement, future property sales could remove access for tenants or the storage operator.
At the meeting the owner presented parcel maps and said the existing gravel drive connects lots about 250–255 feet from the street to rear buildings. Council members and attendees discussed the technical difference between a right-of-way (access) and an easement (often used for utilities), and advised the owner to have the access surveyed and platted so the legal lines are recorded with the county. A council member said 24 feet is generally the minimum width for a private access lane and that utilities usually have separate recorded easements. The owner was told existing driveway use would likely be grandfathered but that the paperwork — a survey and recorded plat/easement — is needed to protect access in future transactions.
Council members recommended the owner consult a title company or an engineer/surveyor to prepare the easement/right-of-way and to bring the plat back to the council for review if needed. They cautioned that a recorded, general right-of-way should be described by the parcels and permitted uses (for example, access to the duplex, garage and storage units) rather than by individual names so future ownership changes do not create conflicts.
No formal council action was taken at the meeting on the right-of-way request; attendees were advised to return with a recorded plat and survey for any formal variance or frontage questions.
