Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on April 23, 2015 at 1:39pm

Don't know if it's true or not but, a question comes to mind being why would the State do that I wonder ?

Maybe the State thinks that they would be better off being paid taxes by the recipient landowner (especially if the land is leased to Oil & Gas development) instead of having to pay the expense of maintaining it ?

Then, I guess later, they could take it back again if they thought it made financial sense to them, couldn't they ?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by rmc on April 23, 2015 at 2:02pm

Which state?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on April 23, 2015 at 2:19pm

I take it as Ohio since Lance follows Ohio (from his Profile Page).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by lance on April 23, 2015 at 2:20pm

Ohio

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on April 23, 2015 at 2:26pm

Thanks Lance.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bob Shaw on April 23, 2015 at 3:09pm

I believe there has been some discussion or legal action that takes the position the highway easement was for the surface and did not specifically include mineral rights. This was not interesting until the possibility of mineral development without disrupting the surface, i.e. strip-mining vs horizontal drilling.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on April 23, 2015 at 3:34pm

I also remember reading of a horizontal well scheduled to be installed within / under O.D.O.T. land and with O.D.O.T. refusing the lease.

But, doesn't 'eminent domain' involve purchasing the land for a fair market value and doesn't that differ from 'easements' / 'right of way' in that regard ?

Are not 'easements' normally for passage of utilities ?

Are 'easements' also normally purchases ?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kathi Albertson on April 23, 2015 at 4:03pm

An attorney told me that some of the land on which the interstates sit is by easement so that if for some reason the route is changed, the land reverts back to the use of the previous owner. In a related situation, I own land with frontage on both sides of a county road and the deed states that I own to the center of the road from both sides. Thus I own the land on which the road sits and the county has an easement for the road. At least this is my understanding.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on April 24, 2015 at 12:07am

I've always understood all roads to be built on / occupying 'rights of way' myself with the property owner owning the land to the road's centerline.

Personally, I never thought about whether or not any or all roads were at some point in time 'eminent domain' purchases; however, I can understand larger swaths of land (for Interstate Highways for instance) may very well have been.

Guessing here that maybe the O.D.O.T. owned land refusing the lease (that I think we both recall reading about Bob) was perhaps an 'eminent domain' purchase by the State. And, for instance if it is, and if it's 'ownership, is being returned to the original landowner or the landowner's estate (gratis), and if an E & P / O & G developer wants to 'lease' the land to develop a well; the reason may be to enable levying taxes on the landowner. I don't know, but, the scenario comes to mind anyway.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bob Shaw on April 23, 2015 at 3:57pm

If a pipeline crosses your property and they gain it through the court on the weight of a FERC permit, they do not get title to the land nor control of the mineral rights, but they do have control of the easement in perpetuity, failing abandonment. I don't know if a Highway is different.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on April 25, 2015 at 1:57am

Perhaps all 'easements' / 'rights of way' (or the vast majority of them / the ones pertaining to this discussion anyway) are (or once were) 'eminent domain' purchases after all.

Don't mean to make things more complicated than they are but I probably am.

Sorry about that.

• ▶ Reply