Old Sidewalks

[tabdog]

That may be true.

Except for the part about the "side walk strip of land".

That could have several meanings.

A Right of Way is an Easement, but an easement is
not necessarily a Right of Way.

As I said, there are different laws pertaining to land
in every state. There are several different kinds of
easements.

In some states permanent easements are used that
do relinquish property to the public.

Those states tend to be the ones that were surveyed
earlier in history. But that's not always the case.

The myth I was calling attention to, and I'll say it again.

A public ROW does not belong to the city.

It's a matter of definition.

Laymen's opinions will not likely change the definitions
of Legal Dictionaries.

So that's where it stands.

A myth is a myth.

Boy, do old myths die hard.

People just believe what they want.

I suggest they read up on land law.

That's if they want to discuss it.

Happy Hunting,

Tabdog

 

[tabdog]

Hay Jmaryt,

Are you talking to me. Sounds like it, but wrong spot.

You said:

the sidewalk easement is not a right of way!..

As I said sidewalk easements are very rare. But it depends on
what kind of easement you are talking about.

There are several kinds of legal easements.

Which kind are you talking about?

!..that's bull @#$%&!...

Discriptive but immature.

the 'walkway" to the owners house IS the right of way,and is also on his property!

So now you say it is on his property. Plus you are putting a ROW on the
guy's walkway to his house.

Very interesting............

Oh Well

Happy Hunting,

Tabdog

 

[tabdog]

It is nice that they said you could hunt the areas in question.

If the city does in fact own the public streets and sidwalks,

then it is an easement.

If it is a ROW the mayor's office is just giving you an easy
answer or more likely, they are affected by the same myth.

Happy Hunting,

Tabdog

 

[tabdog]

Hay Bill,

I liked your long post.

You gave an answer much like engineers I have worked with.

I have been doing Engineering Services for 30 years.

I've also been doing boundary surveys for that long also.

I have studied land law under some of the formost athorities
on land law in this country.

I've been hearing people say on these forums that the city
owns the property in a ROW for a long time.

But, that is wrong by definition.

ROW means the use of someone's land. Not the ownership.

The public has the right of way on the owner's property.

It's not rocket science, but it is land law.

I sure am having a problem convencing folks though.

But it does make for an active thread.

Happy Hunting,

Tabdog

 

[Steve(MS)]

If the sidewalk runs parallel with the street then it is a public sidewalk as I can't imagine a landowner paying for a sidewalk in front of their home. That is if someone walks down the sidewalk, they are not trespassing.
Now the grass between the sidewalk and the street is a gray matter in that since the owner keeps it mowed then they could be offended if someone were digging up the lawn. If they were to call the police on someone digging there then the police may ask them to leave simply to keep the owner happy.
After all, the owner may think of someone with a detector as a vagrant.
It may be wise just to ask the owner if they mind, if they don't then go for it. If they do mind then try the next house.

 

[dahut]

If the sidewalk runs parallel with the street then it is a public sidewalk as I can't imagine a landowner paying for a sidewalk in front of their home. That is if someone walks down the sidewalk, they are not trespassing.
Now the grass between the sidewalk and the street is a gray matter in that since the owner keeps it mowed then they could be offended if someone were digging up the lawn. If they were to call the police on someone digging there then the police may ask them to leave simply to keep the owner happy.
After all, the owner may think of someone with a detector as a vagrant.
It may be wise just to ask the owner if they mind, if they don't then go for it. If they do mind then try the next house.

Thank you. "Grey area," is right. Typically parking strips are municipal property, at least under the municipal auspices. Normally it is the homeowners responsibility to maintan the vegetation and condition of the area between the sidewalk and the street. Don't mow the grass for a season and see who sends you a letter!
But most cities will push off any other responsibilites or liabilities for that strip of grass and turf if they can.

---

My city won't even repair the paving in the street itself, claiming its the states problem. Guess who the state says it belongs to.... yep, they say the city has to do it. However, neither will allow me to hire a contractor to do it myself.

---

Note the liberal use of vague words like "typically," "most" and "normally" and the contradictory nature of municipal jurisdictions in general.

The point is, you can be certain of nothing until you find out for yourself. There are two ways to do this:

1. Contact your own municipal Nazi's where you live, and ask (I might suggest you do so anonymously).
2. Or... find out from experience.

Me, I'm more of a, "Just do it" type of person. Detecting a parking strip is not 'trespassing with malicious intent' on private property, which is what constitutes genuine trespass. Just being there is not legal trespass...
However, I would recommend you be expert at target removal in grass, before hitting the parking medians. Leaving turf damage behind you is negligence. You CAN be clapped in irons and hauled before the bar for that offense.

Otherwise, about all that can happen is the homeowner can run you off, or call the municipal strongarms to come do it for them. Either way, you leave and have a nice day

 

[jmaryt]

as it should be!..no one cares if you detect them,and would bothet you anyway!..the city and towns own them here too in the northeast!....happy hunting!

(h.h!)
j.t.

 

[jmaryt]

all easements here are owned by the city and no right of way in existance..no problem with detecting them!..they are NOT considered right of ways here in the northeast!,and never will be!..as stated the right of way IS the walkway leading to the front door of the respective houses!.easements and sidewalk strips are NOT right of ways!

(h.h!)
j.t.

 

[jmaryt]

as has been already stated on a previous post!..if you get one that is kept nice just move on to the next adjacent part of that strip..no problem!..be courteous as there are no shortage of them!..plenty of them to hunt!

 

[jmaryt]

nice pic of yourself tab!..easements are not right of ways!.they are property owned by the city or town period!..nothing else,and you don't need permission to hunt them! period!..end of story!. next topic!....your nose is a little large!,and looks bent!..should have used a horse!

(h.h!)
j.t.

 

[jmaryt]

they dont care to discuss it tab because all they are concerned about is hunting them and NOT getting booted off by some as**** who doesn't know the law!..that's all!..understand?..NOT a big deal!...as long as they know that no on can lay claim to them ,then that is ALL they care about!..they want to hunt them tab!..not OWN them!..get it?

(h.h!)
j.t.

 

[jmaryt]

thanks for pointing out that this pertains to towns in the mid west!,,appreciate it!

(h.h!)
j.t.

 

[jmaryt]

here in the northeast they are not considred right of ways so therefore the city owns them,and you can detect them!..no problem!

 

[jmaryt]

in the final analysis just detect 'em and dont worry about it!..cover your holes like anywhere else,and have fun!

(h.h!)
j.t.

 

[Tseeker]

...If in any doubt wherever one lives in any part of the country would'nt it simply be easier to study the property deed descriptions?

 

[Mirco]

Or better take a lawyer with you to each metal hunt (trying to respond fast in time before this thread is also democraticaly deleted like one on MD and Recession)

I want to see finally a government who won`t delete people`s views and expressions even if it does not like them.

 

[mitto]

I guess I'll add my 2 cents --

In my mind, it doesn't matter who owns it. I would always error on the side of caution. I would ask permission, or at least let the homeowner know your intentions.

Even if the local municipality does own the property, there is one rule that goes deeper than any ordinance. The rule of thumb I am refering to is simply that "perception is reality".

It does not matter that the city may own the sidewalk or boulevard, in that homeowners mind someone MD'ing there is tearing up his yard. Even if you can not tell that you were there, he will tell ten people how you "barged" onto his property, before he tells one person that you were on the city owned boulevard and how nicely you cleaned up after yourself.

In my mind, I would not want to take the responsibility of giving our hobby a black eye, when all you need to do is let the homeowner know what your inteentions are.

HH

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Hi Mitto, I'll respond to your .02c with .02c from me

I understand your "better safe than sorry" stance. On the surface, it seems reasonable. But if you look at the implications of doing that everywhere "just to be sure", before you know it, you/we seem to be cowering where we had no reason to. Simply precluding yourself out of hunt sites, where no one really would have cared or noticed. It seems to be entering into a self-fulfilling prophesy, that will only come true. For example, I have a parking strip in front of my house, which is directly across from a park. As such, we get the "soccer moms" parking there, preparing to take their toddlers and kids down to play in the park. Getting in and out of their cars/vans, they tarry there getting their picnic lunches out, organizing the stuff, shake out their beach blanket, put kid-seats in and out while (gasp) temporarily resting it on MY parking strip, etc.... None of them has ever asked me "permission" to do such things. I suppose if they asked if they could tarry there awhile, potentially gouging my grass with their baby stroller wheels, I might say "no you can't". Or if I wasn't home (or refused to answer my door or whatever), I suppose they'd have to be "safe rather than sorry" and park in front my neighbor's house instead? I mean, where does it end?

Do you see? The mere fact that you feel you have to ask (parks, schools, parking strips, etc...) merely implies that something is inherently evil enough with you, or your hobby, that you had to ask, to begin with! And once you do that, what do you think people's easy answer is? Mind you, I'm talking people who probably don't even care (weren't home, or certainly weren't/aren't peaking out their blinds at you waiting to be offended and thus gripe).

I suppose someone will answer this and say that "metal detecting is not a normal use of parks, schools, parking strips, etc... so therefore, it's in a different class than using the swingsets, flying a kite, etc... (things where no one would think they need to "ask"). But my answer to that is, "so what?" If I wanted to spread peanut butter on my head and whistle dixie, that would be a very "un-ordinary" use of the park, right? Am I to think that I must therefore ask at city hall before doing such an event?

You say: "In my mind, I would not want to take the responsibility of giving our hobby a black eye" Once again, this pre-supposes that anyone cares less. It assumes that somehow metal detecting is offensible, hated, something that needs sanction, etc... Where are all these people who sit around and wait to faint in horror at the sight of a metal detector? And to the extent that someone can give an example of getting yelled at for hunting some public park or parking strip, well I guess the next time you get yelled at in traffic, you should hang up driving? There's always someone, somewhere, to gripe at anything someone else does, no matter how allowed or legal it may be. Why do we let those exceptions rule us, and make us think those kill-joys set the rules? Let THEM be the exception, and METAL DETECTING be normal.

 

[tabdog]

n/t

 

[tabdog]

n/t