Access denial
-
dedkad
- Posts: 437
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 3:55 pm
Access denial
I came across a 1960 map where instead of a typical access denial strip offered and accepted on the map, there was a 1' wide fee parcel granted to the City and accepted on the map. So instead of a 30' wide street easement, the City was offered a 29' wide street easement and an additonal 1' wide fee parcel for a total of 30'. Of course, I'm only assuming that is what the intent of the 1' fee parcel was, since there was no explanation of the purpose on the map and there were no conditions for the project. Has anybody seen a fee offer for access denial before?
-
dedkad
- Posts: 437
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 3:55 pm
Sounds like a different configuration than my situation (lateral strip versus longitudinal strip), but legally the same premise I guess. When they eventually extended the street in LA, did the County do anything special with that 1'x30' strip or did they just keep it as a fee parcel?LS 4722 wrote:Yes. In LA County they would be shown as 1' x 30' Future Street'.
-
goodgps
- Posts: 644
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:32 pm
- Location: Modesto, Ca
Yes,
We call them "spite" strips. They are designed to keep neighbors from developing their property w/o paying into the area of benefits fund or reimbursing the previous developer (or city) for main line utilities brought to the site.
Many times its simply an "non-access" strip but they are dedicated to the public agency and must be released prior to development of surrounding properties.
We call them "spite" strips. They are designed to keep neighbors from developing their property w/o paying into the area of benefits fund or reimbursing the previous developer (or city) for main line utilities brought to the site.
Many times its simply an "non-access" strip but they are dedicated to the public agency and must be released prior to development of surrounding properties.
-
LS 4722
- Posts: 479
- Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 8:42 am
Dedkad
I never really paid attention if the strip was in fee or just reserved, but when the street was continued the strip was just absorbed. I never did research out why the city required those strips.dedkad wrote:Sounds like a different configuration than my situation (lateral strip versus longitudinal strip), but legally the same premise I guess. When they eventually extended the street in LA, did the County do anything special with that 1'x30' strip or did they just keep it as a fee parcel?