• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Does the dominant or servient decide how the road is built on an easement?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Mellasont

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Minnesota

I have a family member I'm trying to help. He (the Grantee/dominant) owns a piece of property which is land-locked except by way of a 66' wide access easement for the purpose of constructing a roadway which crosses an adjacent property (the Grantor/servient). Both parcels are currently undeveloped but the servient is in the planning stages of developing his parcel. The servient wishes to construct various roadways, sidewalks, drainage, and embankments etc. upon the easement parcel in order to facilitate the use of his development. The dominant wishes to be able to construct in the future a 2 lane street (approx 36' wide).

A few of my concerns:

If the servient builds as planned, can the dominant alter it later to better fit his needs? The easement seems to indicate this is the case in this paragraph (emphasis added in bold), "The Access easement is perpetual in nature and includes the right of the Grantee, its contractors, agents, and employees to enter the Roadway Property at all reasonable times for the purpose of locating, constructing, reconstructing, maintaining, inspecting, altering and repairing within the described easement area an access road." It also states, "The Access Agreement shall benefit and be appurtenant to the Grantee's Property." I find no wording anywhere to indicate that the roadway is to the benefit of the servient, but I understand that servient probably has the right to use whatever roadway is constructed.

Would dominant be liable for damaging the things interfering and obstructing the construction of a 2 lane street that servient places there?

If the servient's construction is there for 10+ years, could they then claim any kind of grandfathering or adverse possession and prohibit dominant from altering it?

Or can the dominant consider this an obstruction/interference even though he has no road constructed yet and require the servient to change his plans?

Another paragraph states, "The Grantee shall at all times have the right to keep the Roadway Property clear of all buildings, structures, fences, trees, shrubbery, and other obstructions that may interfere with or endanger the access easement." (Dominant has already used this to get servient to move a planned building off the easement). Could dominant require servient to move his roadways off the easement entirely? Construction of a 2 lane street using ditches instead of gutters and storm drains seems like it would pretty much use up the entire 66'.

Another issue is servient wishes to flatten his lot. To do this, he plans to change the grading on a large portion of the easement such that instead of close to no lateral slope cutting across the 66', there would be up to a 2:1 slope. This would make constructing a 2 lane street entirely withing the easement very difficult and would seem to me that some pretty heavy-duty retaining walls would be needed. Therefore, I interpret this as an interference. Is is this correct or can servient really do this?

Thank you for any help you can offer!
 
Last edited:


FarmerJ

Senior Member
What does the county this land is in say is needed for road width especially for emergency vehicle use ? Last does the easement say it is for the exclusive use of the property that was to benefit from it ? That's more important because if it is written into the easement that its for the exclusive use of the property that needed the access then any attempt by the person who owns the land it is on to alter the use of it would have to be settled thru the courts.
 

Mellasont

Junior Member
What does the county this land is in say is needed for road width especially for emergency vehicle use ?
Since it will be a private road, I don't believe there are really any requirements. The servient is putting in at a minimum a continuous 15' lane, so emergency access isn't an issue. The issue is that they're creating places where there are 2 lanes of one-way traffic for ingress and not leaving room to later add a lane in the egress direction. Also, due to a cul-de-sac with a center island curb, egress would be off the easement to the servient's land, then back onto the easement for example. There's also the question of traffic. Due to the nature of servient's development, there could be times when traffic is stop and go on the paved areas he wants to put on the easement, creating a bit of a hassle to drive through if dominant's land were also developed into something creating high traffic. The servient seems to think that providing room for 1 lane is sufficient to meet their obligations (and it would if it were a driveway), but the dominant's land has been platted for a possible future housing development of about 40 lots. One lane isn't enough for that.

The city is willing to take over part or all of the roadway if it meets their specifications (36' wide including 1.5' of gutters on each side), the construction is paid for, and the land turned over to the city.

Last does the easement say it is for the exclusive use of the property that was to benefit from it ?
Unfortunately the easement uses neither the term "exclusive" or "non-exclusive", which I believe means it would default to non-exclusive. All it says is the previously mentioned part about it being to the Grantee's benefit. I find this a bit surprising, since it was supposed to be a pretty standard easement agreement.

Thank you for taking a look at my problem!
 
Last edited:

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top