Can I pave my easement?

[lakeview]

What is the name of your state? California
I have a 20' wide non exclusive easement for "ingress/egress for driveway purposes". The existing paved driveway is 12'. I need to pave all 20' to comply with fire codes to build a new home. Do I need the owners permission to pave the extra 8'. It would also require minor grading and removal of some bushes all within the 20' easement.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

What is the name of your state? California
I have a 20' wide non exclusive easement for "ingress/egress for driveway purposes". The existing paved driveway is 12'. I need to pave all 20' to comply with fire codes to build a new home. Do I need the owners permission to pave the extra 8'. It would also require minor grading and removal of some bushes all within the 20' easement.

YOu need the owner's permission since you don't own anything. You only have the right to use another's land.

 

[John Se]

Its polite to ask

I would think they would be pleased, should improve the value of everyones property

 

[jlo_one]

pave driveway easement?

Hello,
Just a word of caustion (having been there), get things in writing. The owner may say it's ok (verbally) and then later he will insist that you maintain it (when perhaps that should be shared...don't know the details).

I am in California and in our county, the ordinance is that both parties share equally in the maintenance of the easement, in case there is an argument as to who pays.

Also, in my situation (California) the improved width for fire code reasons is 17' now what if your neighbor puts trees up and the width becomes "encroached" by these trees. And you start having tree problems, who will trim these?

best to you,
jlo_one

 

[orchardist]

BelizeBreeze argues that you don't own anything. As I understand the laws of my state (which could be different than CA), that isn't right. What I've found is that the easement is referred to legally as the "dominant estate", and the underlying landowner is the "servient estate". The servient estate's use of the land is limited to things which do not impair the dominant estate. And it is seen as a property right.

As BelizeBreeze argues it, the servient estate can offer or withhold permission - perhaps demanding additional payment? In other words, they can block the poster's ability to build their home, by denying permission to bring the driveway up to code. The poster already owns an easement of adequate width; it's not like they want to extend beyond that to unencumbered property.

I didn't like it when rich Texans bought adjacent property, cut down every tree in sight, and built an eyesore of a 4000'+ sq ft house on a 110-ft wide lot. And so on. But at some point, one just has to sigh and realize that the "good old days" are gone. I planted a couple of trees with the eventual goal of blocking out the blinding glare from the gigantic silver pro-panel roof and sometimes have to wear sunglasses while chopping onions in my own kitchen.

Rare indeed is the neighborhood without any squabbles.