Considered Opinions

~Castor Easement

This half-century-old Easement has been in use, providing access to several properties, since its origination. Recently, I have endeavored to expand its use as an alternative access route for all affected property owners and for access to a Public Utility (San Jose Water Company). The following summarizes that effort, and these links provide quick access to parts of particular interest.

.top of page

Before Claud Castor passed away, he had subdivided most of his 20-plus acre holdings into individual lots, varying in size from less than an acre to more than three acres. One went to his son (Thored), another to his daughter (Thelma), and I eventually acquired five of them. As of this writing, I still own three (APNs 558-08-119 & 095 & 096). An  EASEMENT DEED was created by Castor in 1958^[i]… made available here through Old Republic Title, and for free downloading, which is appurtenant to at least ten of the former Castor properties. This 1960 ROS shows the 1958 Easement Deed identified as “Land of Claud G Castor”, and this 1965 ROS shows it as appurtenant to 558-08-095/6, “Land of Snapp”. In both cases, these Records Of Survey show it having been drafted correctly from the Easement Deed.

~Even though they both seem to have been surveyed correctly and recorded at the time, when the text of those original documents found its way into some of the property titles, there were transcription errors, causing them to be mathematically flawed. The clip on the left shows it correctly, and the one on the right is flawed. This 2019 survey shows it plotted correctly. The only significant effect of the errors is in the interest of the owner of APN 558-08-29 and, to a lesser degree, those owners to the north of that point.

This easement is “deeded”, as opposed to being subject to any claim of “prescription” or “adverse possession”. It is a “non-exclusive” easement, meaning that it “runs with the land” – being passed by sale or inheritance to successive property owners. It specifies that current owners whose property is adjacent to this easement are “appurtenant” to it, meaning they all enjoy the same rights. And finally, it stipulates that it is to be used for, “ingress and egress”, and for the “installation and maintenance of public utilities”. “Ingress and egress” of course meaning that all parties made appurtenant to the Deed are entitled to walk or drive across it at will.

It is not possible to know exactly how the easement will be used in the future. Possibilities include but are not limited to the following.

1. Two 20-gallon/minute domestic water connections to the Montevina pipeline have been approved by San Jose Water Company, which would use it.
2. PG&E will eventually probably be required to put the secondary connection currently serving 558-08-095 & 096 underground, employing that easement.
3. Central Fire District has expressed interest in acquiring the assignment of rights to it as an emergency escape route. ^[ii]There have been occasions when I have used that path to get to Los Gatos after heavy snow events blocked the road and fire is an ever-present danger in this area.
4. Future sewer connections will likely use it, perhaps even natural gas.
5. It will eventually be useful for solar and wind power mesh connections.
6. The increasing proliferation of ADUs in this area will likely add “ingress and egress” to the list of common uses.

 

In the meantime, knowing that every easement has value, for the past 50 years, I have continued to make it clear that it is not being abandoned. At least once per year, I routinely drive across it during the light of day, so everyone can observe. At times I have mowed or sprayed the weeds there, but I have not done that in recent years, nor do I see a need to do that unless a fire hazard develops.

There is currently no intention of abandoning this easement or altering it in any way, with the possible exception of the path revision shown below. It would be possible to make the necessary corrections and avoid future conflicts, while at the same time, rerouting the path to make it less invasive to one of the property owners. One such path revision candidate, which I proposed some years ago, is shown here. My continued cooperation and assistance are available, even though the benefit accrues almost exclusively to the owner of APN 558-08-029.

.top of page

April 5, 2022 Addendum
response to objections by 558-08-029 owner

1. The wording, “for ingress and egress, and for the installation and maintenance of public utilities”, appears in thousands of easements in courthouses around the Country. There is no uncertainty that every judge in the land knows precisely what that means.
2. The “AND” in, “ingress and egress” AND “for the installation …” means exactly what it says; otherwise, it would say “FOR” or “TO ENABLE” or some such wording, which is often found in other agreements of this nature.
3. The word “ACROSS” in this context means “on top of”, “above”, “in connection with”, and “underneath”, as in “buried” or “underground”.
4. The prescribed path is navigable by virtue of the dozens of excursions by me and others across it over the decades with ordinary street-vehicles.
5. The question as to whether public utilities were put underground when this easement was written, and therefore inferred here, we need only recall that the Romans put their lead pipes underground to keep citizens from illegally tapping into them and to keep rodents from falling into open aquifers.
6. The Ryan Water Company maintained buried water lines for many years, using this easement and others. There are mentions of this on this history page, and more recent photos can be seen here.

 

.top of page

May – December 2022 Addendum
relocation of San Jose Water connections

The two water connections to the Montevina pipeline mentioned above are approved by San Jose Water Company to serve parcels 558-08-119 and 558-08-130, using an easement across 558-08-111/112. The terrain at that location is very steep and further obstructed by a retaining wall, erected by Santa Clara County in the 1980s. Construction of the required pipelines at that location would therefore be very difficult and expensive, aggravating an already unstable slide area. A formal request has been submitted to San Jose Water in to have those moved to another location, to resolve that difficulty. Progress on that request has been delayed by several months as a result of objections on the part of one of the affected landowners (Sean Doherty; 558-08-029).

.top of page

January 13, 2023 Addendum
subject revisited^[iii]I confirmed on January 17 that the owner had called my attorney to agitate and misrepresent my standing offer to cooperate on moving the easement.

The graphic on the left reflects the most recent correspondence initiated by the owner of 558-08-029, regarding this easement. My response is being made public here for the benefit of all affected owners.

The subject easement, available here as EASEMENT DEED, is a matter of public record and dates back over 60 years. I have made continuous use of it for much of that time, and I fully intend to continue doing so, including for all its intended purposes. Its wording is precise, thorough, and unambiguous, making its purpose and scope unquestionable – to provide for “ingress”, “egress”, and “utilities” to all those properties subject to it. Furthermore, It is non-exclusive, giving it significant value to all affected property owners, including their heirs, my heirs, and me. That value far outweighs any cost I might incur to protect its integrity.

I have made it clear that I am willing to agree to reroute it to make it more convenient for the owners of 558-08-029, and that offer extends to any of the affected property owners. I will not, however, consider altering it in any way that might affect its future value.

.top of page

March 22, 2023 Addendum
SJWC final approval

The finalized San Jose Water Company documents have been approved and recorded, including two covenants addressing details of pressure, backflow requirements, electrical connections, and the revised locations. Also included in the documentation is one additional Utilities Easement appurtenant to one of the affected properties to address any potential issue arising from the scope of the Santa Clara County Roads and Airports, encroachment permit.

.top of page

April 11, 2023 Addendum
connection locations final approval

SJWC has documented the location of the two valves and meters, near the edge of the County ROW at the corner of the pumping station, where their service ends. They also have submitted the encroachment permit application, which takes 30-45 days for approval. The preliminary design layout shows a covered pad behind the pumping station to house the two pumps and backflow devices. The final engineering report, to be completed in the next 30-60 days, calls for two water lines, an auxiliary power conduit, and a signal-level communication conduit, all in a single 30″ deep trench.

In the absence of any meaningful response to my repeated offers to reroute the subject easement to make it less intrusive to the owners of 558-08-029, the installation will follow the path specified in the original document. In the weeks before construction begins, at least two alternatives remain, should this owner wish to pursue them.

1. I own three of the approximately 12 properties affected by the easement and I remain willing to cooperate in any way possible. It is likely that the other owners would also not object to any sort of revision in its location.
   One difficulty of course, is that abandoning a deeded easement is not a simple matter, and in this case, PG&E is already using a portion of the easement for overhead primary distribution, and their cooperation is less certain.
2. A simpler alternative would be to create a new easement with me as the dominant tenant while leaving the other in place but precluding my use of the original.

 

.top of page

May 12, 2023 Addendum
County Encroachment Permet Approved
SJWC connections scheduled

The one remaining approval was received yesterday from the County. Since the pumps and backflow devices are not required prior to SJWC installing their connections, those connections have been scheduled to be completed by mid-June. The easement will be staked out prior to that time so construction can begin soon after. Any changes to the easement obviously must be completed by that time.

.top of page

July 2023 Addendum
Webb Easement Cleared
Meters & Valves Installed

.

.top of page

230801
August 1, 2023 Addendum
~Easement Location Revision

• Replacing the “181.01 ft” call, and the “80.56 ft” call, in the Castor Easement with a new “162.57 ft” call;
  • Minimizes the potential intrusion of the easement upon APN 558-08-029
  • Reduces the impact on Ingress and Egress for the other affected property owners
• The angle of the 31-4-50 (360 ft) call & the 53-18-10 (80.56 ft) call is currently 84-24 degrees.
• The revised angle becomes approximately zero.
• Variations on the theme of this revision, which avoid acute angles are possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.top of page

August 26, 2023 Addendum
Termination of Relocation Effort

Several years ago, I offered my cooperation should the then-current property owner want to move the easement to a place that would be less intrusive to him and his family. I have continued to renew that offer since then, despite his profound lack of cooperation, and the obstanance of the subsequent new owners.

We will soon be putting multiple water, power, and Comcast lines there in multiple trenches and several large Christy-Box access points, some being above grade, and all requiring routine vehicle access for maintenance. In addition, the Central Fire District has expressed interest in using it as an emergency escape route, and PG&E will likely eventually put underground services there. Yet sadly, the current owners remain recalcitrant in spite of the fact that their front yard could eventually become their neighbors’ driveway.

My efforts have consumed many hours of my time and thousands of dollars, solely to stand behind an exceedingly generous offer, which I had no obligation to put forth in the first place. Reluctantly, it is time to abandon that effort.

.top of page

April 14, 2024 Addendum
Construction (Webb / Beck Joint Effort)

~Phase I of the construction is underway. The Webbs have decided to abandon the prior agreement to share the trench. Therefore, Building Department inspection, backfilling, installation of pumps and tanks, plus plumbing and electrical connections for those two services will be completed under their own contracts.

 

 

 

 

 

.top of page

May 14, 2024 Addendum
Construction (Beck Portion Only)

This account only follows the two Beck property connections, leaving the remaining cooperation items and cost sharing as follows.

1. Trenching from meters to east side of driveway.
2. 8′ x 18′ concrete pad at meters
3. 10′ x 10′ concrete pad at the Webb house

The trench from the driveway to the lower pad is backfilled, and grading is finished with wood chips on-site to finish landscaping. Grading for both concrete pads is finished. Forms are set, steel will be tied in both forms and concrete for both will be mixed on-site to minimize cost and poured during the week of May 13.

Date	Provider	Cost	Beck %	Beck $$$	Webb %	Webb $$$	Description
4/xx/24	Gilbert	9,000.00	15.5%	1,395.00	84.5%	7,605.00	Trenching - Webb 84.5%, Beck 15.5%
4/xx/24	Gilbert	178.72	50.0%	89.36	50.0%	89.36	Pipe Chase
4/13/24	Home Depot	1,111.03	0.0%	0.00	100.0%	1,111.03	Pressure & Elec PVC
4/13/24	Home Depot	89.00	0.0%	0.00	100.0%	89.00	Home Depot Delivery
		0.00		0.00		0.00
		0.00		0.00		0.00
	Total	10,378.75		1,484.36		8,894.39

 

~Phase II   Responding to Daugherty’s threats of litigation, we have engaged a third attorney at considerable expense^[iv]… confirming the positions of Hamerslough and Matteoni because we cannot afford to be delayed by frivolous legal action to respond to those threats when required.

In the meantime, the bid selection process for the Beck portion of the project is nearing completion. Preliminary engineering details can be seen at Page 1, and Page 2. Construction for this phase of the project is expected to commence in mid June.

Any requests for relocation of the easement must be received by the end of May in order to be acted upon. Documentation regarding the location of underground infrastructure (septic, water, electrical, etc.) also need to be received soon to avoid considerable inconvenience to property owners. The existing easement will be cleared of weeds and other obstructions in May to allow construction to start and continue over a span of several weeks, as follows. 

.top of page

May 22, 2024 Addendum
Construction (Beck Portion Only)

The concrete pad at the pump station is finished as of this date.

This rather crude sketch from the property owner, with an overlay of the easement in white added by me, is included here to help contractors avoid hitting underground services. 

It is still unclear what the property owner’s definition of “Grey Water” means in this situation. If it means “Leach Field” from a septic system or unpermitted bypassing of a septic system, that could lead to major County DEH issues. If the contractor hits it, he will be required to report it, and County inspectors will be on the site repeatedly during the construction.

 

 

.top of page

May 31, 2024 Addendum
Construction – continued

1. The project underway uses the subject easement (Easement) in precisely the way it was intended – for the “installation and maintenance of public utilities”. Furthermore, as of this date, to avoid any further misunderstandings, “ingress and egress” is being added to that plan.
2. The project can be accomplished through polite and constructive dialogue with the 558-08-029 owners or with lawyer bills, restraining orders, and other such legal maneuvers, but the end result will be the same.
   
3. No property owner appurtenant to the Easement has the right to obstruct it in any way, and every property owner has the right to use it for its expressed purposes.
   
4. Owners of 558-08-029 should reasonably be expected to have concerns about the financial and privacy implications of the possibility that neighbors might eventually have a 20-foot-wide asphalt driveway across their front yard. I have, therefore, repeatedly pledged my cooperation to help them relocate it to be less intrusive to their interests. The two options of record are still available as late as a few days before trenching commences. The potential cost savings of either are negligible, at no more than a few hundred dollars in a multi-thousand-dollar project.
5. The Upper gate (south end of 558-08-029) was purchased by me from L.A. Hearne of Salinas and installed at my expense shortly after having the Easement surveyed in 2016. A careful plot of the entire 1958 Easement, done at that time, combined with the survey of 2016, shows the existing fence, which had been replaced by Ron Whistler – then owner – in the mid-1980s, to be slightly angled from the 440-foot southern property line of 558-08-029. The error can be seen easily at the eastern end of the property line. I, therefore, installed the gate directly in line with the fence, several inches south of the line, onto parcel 558-08-122, and squarely within the Easement. I could, of course, remove the gate to avoid it being considered an obstruction of the Easement, but as long as it remains in place, it must be quickly and easily opened by any and all affected property owners. During the next several weeks, it will often be left open for workers, perhaps for days at a time. Further tampering with that gate will result in its removal entirely.
6. The lower gate (north end of 558-08-029) must be quickly and easily opened by the other affected property owners for it to remain in place. Otherwise, the contractors will be forced to remove it.

.top of page

~June 20, 2024 Addendum
Recent Easement Survey(s)

 

.top of page

October 10, 2024 Addendum
~Phase I Construction Update

~Phase III of the project, which extends from the “upper gate” to the corner to 558-08-119, will be undertaken at a later date or possibly included in Phase II.

.top of page

January 2025 Addendum
~Past and Present Alternatives

We should be clear that I have absolutely no reason to want to change the easement in any way, being perfectly content with its current form. I simply want to use it as it was originally intended.

I continue to offer my full cooperation to Dougherty or future owners to move the easement, making it less intrusive to the owners of that property.

Understanding that the original deed is perfectly acceptable as written, alternative options might include;

1. Differing interpretations of its exact location are acceptable, as long as they provide reasonable ingress and egress by vehicle types contemplated at the time the easement was created.
2. Should the location be moved, all work must be accomplished within a reasonable time, and all costs must be borne by those initiating the change.
3. All costs incurred in the process of defending the intended use of the easement caused by those initiating the change must be fully compensated.

.top of page

September 2025 Addendum
A Perspective Using AI – Public Utilities

This is very likely the second-to-the-final update on this project historical record because my daughter, Kelley, is assuming responsibility to bring it to a close. This update will address the public utility questions, and the final update to follow will concentrate on the ingress and easement questions and a possible overall strategy to manage the easement. What is presented in both updates is not a recommendation or even an expression of opinion as to how one should proceed. Instead, it is a summary of the best information available at this time.

In light of some skepticism around the probability of successful litigation in the matter, an AI-generated perspective might be useful. Setting aside the DeepSeek, Grok, Claude, and the others for now, I have relied on ChatGPT (Microsoft) and Gemini (Google) for this purpose, which are the ones I use routinely through the aichatapp.

As for the questions around public utilities, I approached each AI model with the same questions, but in three consecutive stages of detail to see how each model would react. The first questions were about public utilities in general, the second described a hypothetical utility easement, and finally, the third involved uploading the actual wording of the Castor easement and detailing the situation. The complete results of each analysis can be seen HERE, and the following three-column brief summary covers the important findings. Additionally, this easy-to-read report, generated by the free version of Gemini, is helpful as a starting place.

.top of page

September 2025 Addendum
A Perspective Using AI – Ingress & Egress

In the event that further resstance is encountered from Doughedies, the following strategy will be used. But first is a brief review of the history of the project.

1. Water availability is particularly difficult in the immediate area around Patchen due to its geology.
   1. 558-08-130 initially depended on a shallow well, identified as xxxx on the map below. That became inadequate in xxxx
   3. 559-09-119 had two water sources at the time I purchased the property in xxxx, both of which were inadaquate for domestic purposses
      1. A xx in diameter, 11 ft deep concrete pipe identified on the map as xxxx, provided ground water in very limited aupply.
      2. A pipeline from the Ryan Water company crosses within an easement shown on the map supplied Themma Vanderpools house, but was not legally available to our parcel. A fauce, presumably connected to the Ryan pipeline was located next to the road as shown on the map.
      3. source.well was drilled in xxx and served

 

.top of page

Cost Recovery
ongoing

~Should it become necessary to resurrect the relocation effort in the future, this table will continue to collect expenses related to that effort, to be recovered from whoever shall seek to alter the easement.

Date	Provider	Jefferies	Daugherty	Note
3/31/17	Hamerslough	. $731.50		Legal re: Castor Easement
4/20	Principal	$2,000.00		Document Preparation - Jefferies meeting
4/18/20	Sullivan	$2,187.50		On site conference
4/5/22	Principal	-	. $750.00	Dougherty meeting
1/13/23	Principal	-	$1,200.00	Document Preparation -Dougherty meeting
1/17/23	Sullivan	-	. $175.00	Dougherty Phone Call
1/31/23	Matteoni	-	. $935.00	Legal re: Castor Easement
1/31/23	Principal	-	. $750.00	Document Preparation -Matteoni meeting
3/5/23	Principal	-	$1,125.00	Document Preparation -Easement
3/11/23	Christopher Tack	-	. . $70.00	Notary
3/13/23	Santa Clara County	-	. $158.00	Recording Fees
3/16/23	Sullivan	-	. . $00.00	Sullivan to ignor property owner communication
5/31/24	Lundell	-	$2,167.50	Preparing for Daugherty litigation
6/30/24	Lundell		$2,210.00	Preparing for Daugherty litigation
7/17/24	San Jose Water	-	$1,250.24	Accumulated connection costs
7/31/24	Lundell		. $255.00	Preparing for Daugherty litigation
8/31/24	Lundell		. $170.00	Preparing for Daugherty litigation
6/9/25	San Jose Water	-	$1,827.10	Accumulated connection costs - July 2024 to June 2025
28	Total	. $4,919.00	$12,292.84

By: Jim
Written: 2016-2020
Published: March 30, 2022
Revised: April 5, 2022
Revised: January 13, 2023
Revised: March 14, 2023
Revised: April 11, 2023
Revised: August 1, 2023
Revised: May 14, 2024
Revised: May 22, 2024
Revised: May 31, 2024
Revised: June 10, 2024
Revised: September 8, 2024
Revised: January 31, 2025
Revised: June 9, 2025
Revised:

.top of page