RE: Molalla Aquatic

From: Tony Brooks

Sent: Fri Apr 13 13:39:21 2018

To: gfisher@cityofmolalla.com; ARodriguez@cityofmolalla.com

Cc: rick.gill@molallariv.k12.or.us; neal@nwtransplants.com

Subject: RE: Molalla Aquatic

Importance: Normal

Gerald,

Summary of response from County Surveyor with key to me being #4. #1 is a good insight for all of us.

1. First off, a street dedication is an easement. That’s where a lot of people seem to have it wrong. Just because a deed says Bargain and Sale, Warranty Deed, or say I hereby convey to the City of Molalla doesn’t mean the City owns the property, it’s the property owner giving up his right to use the land. Especially when it states it’s for road purposes or for public use. The City is merely accepting the use of the property on behalf of the public. When a deed specific a use (roads for example) the courts have always considered that an easement in case law.

2. In this case if the City vacated the road it would go back to the original grantors parent tract and not the City. If the road went down a property line and was split on both sides then both sides would get part of the vacated road.

3. It’s also shown as tax lot 500 on both sides of the Frances street on tax map 5 E 2 9.

4. Read ORS 92.010 (D) it states “However, any property sold or granted for state highway, county road, city streets or other right-of-way purposes shall continue to be considered a single unit of land until the property is further subdivided or partitioned” The under lying fee of the road is still owned by the original grantor or successors and the street dedication is merely a temporary use by the public until the road ceases to exist. The State of Oregon is the only agency that purchases the property by fee simple, with a few exceptions out there. I will admit I haven’t looked at the statues back in 1976.

Looking at SN29485 it clearly states that the surveyor is only surveying that portion of Book 663, Page 330 south of Frances St, so I would agree. I don’t believe it was two units of land.

As noted I also checked with the Cartographer, but he might be like some others at County and working 4 – 10 hours days? Hoping to hear back from him on Monday.

Thanks,

Tony Brooks, PLS

President

Land Surveyor & GIS Tech

Ag Geospatial NW, LLC

Molalla, OR

503.329.8008 cell & text

Tony.Brooks@aggeonw.com

From: Tony Brooks

Sent: Friday, April 13, 2018 9:54 AM

To: gfisher@cityofmolalla.com; ARodriguez@cityofmolalla.com

Cc: rick.gill@molallariv.k12.or.us; 'neal@nwtransplants.com' <neal@nwtransplants.com>

Subject: Molalla Aquatic

Gerald and Aldo,

I obtained the documents noted on the Streets of survey SN29485 by Pumphrey in 2002 for probably a pool related project. As Gerald expected the documents dedicated Street to the City. SN 28174 by Davis Jr also referenced two of the same documents being the ones for Frances Street and Cole Street.

SN 28174 by Davis Jr notes that Molalla River School District obtained property in Book 633, Page 330 by contract and later in Book 665, Page 15 by Deed. These documents describe the whole Tax Lot 500 which Frances Street crosses.

SN 29485 by Pumphrey notes in his narrative “The purpose of this survey was to monument the corners of the land described in Book 633, Page 330, Clackamas County Deed Records, Except the portion North of the South line of Frances St, and as modified by fee No’s 76-41874 (Frances St), 76-41875 (Cole St), and 79-30163 (Debra St).”. This “except the portion” shows that there was no intent to divide the land and that they were only defining the borders of that portion of property South of Frances Street and not the whole property noted in said deed.

I know weird things have happened, so I have reached out to Clackamas County Surveyor and Cartographer for a double check. I am still waiting to hear back from them.