Facts:7710110313 is different from the other easements surrounding 196th in many ways.
It uses the term "quit claim"; other agreements do not.
It burdens a very specific section of 196th; 682’ from 67th west and only the north 30’. The other easements all use fractions of sections which match parcel divisions.
Viewing the survey document, Rec. # 77121602259, the 682’ begins in the middle of 67th and goes ~20 feet into 6421 which ~aligns with the west side of 65th.
The other easements have a matching burdened property on the opposite side of the street. ‘313’s opposite doesn’t quite match. (Rec. 7808300247, discussed later)
‘313 is the only easement involved that has a special assessment for the benefited property of 20% rather than the “share equally” language used in the other easements.
It is the only of the easements that shares property with an existing easement with differing conditions.
The benefited property is the 1/4 of the quarter section forming the south 8 parcels on 65th.
Opinion:
Feel free to have a differing opinion, that's what this forum is for. However, if you do,
please post it.
Various terms are used interchangeably; for consistency with the graphics I will try to use the terms Grantor and Recipient.
'313 is poorly written as are the rest of the easement agreements. '313 is the worst of the bunch.
'313 raises many questions:
What is the definition of "quit claim"?
Does the Grantor (burdened) property have the right to give someone a special easement that adversely effects a previous recipient (benefited) property?
When the 1/4 of the quarter section is subdivided and the easement is granted to each what is their assessment?
Is it a fraction of the 20% or as the document suggests each grantee is assessed 20%?
I offer that "quitclaim" was what was meant by "quit claim".
"A quitclaim deed in Washington state is used to transfer property from an existing owner (“Grantor”) to a new owner (“Grantee”) without any promises or guarantees about the property’s title. Quitclaim deeds are a quick way to transfer property but offer the lowest security among real estate deeds in Washington."
ipropertymanagement.com/"A Quitclaim Deed is a type of deed that conveys any ownership interest the grantor has in the property without warranties or obligations regarding title clearness."
landtitleco.net/understanding-key-terms-in-title-and-escrow/The Grantor's property came with '278's terms and conditions. Although additional terms may be added they cannot have an adverse effect on previous recipients. Applying the terms of '313 would have an adverse effect on recipients of '278.
Conclusion:
Recipients of '313 are bound by the terms of '278.
Although I feel the remaining questions are mute I will give my response to them anyway.
The owner of a Grantor property does not have the right to change the conditions of an already existing easement if it adversely affects the other recipient properties. The existing easement ‘278 requires all parties share equally. Giving a special easement to a different party violates this term as it increases the assessment of the other recipients.
It has been stated that it is possible the grantor had an ulterior motive in the wording of ‘313. Since “all grantees” pay 20% and knowing that the parcel could be subdivided into 8 lots the grantor would make a profit on any maintenance performed on this section. ‘278 states that all expenses shall be shared by the parties subject to it. If recipients of '313 are not party to '278 and the recipients of '278 pay all the costs of maintenance what happens to the 20% (now possibly 160%). Do the grantors (now 2 parcels) get to keep the extra 20% or 160% because the south section of 65th is not a party to ‘278?
Then why '313? I believe '313 was written in a hurry to allow the recipient access to 196th while 196th and 65th were under construction. Parties were aware that eventually some easement document would need to be written for the creation of 65th. (7808300247 and '248 were signed in August, 1978.) Compared to other documents, '313 was written and recorded relatively fast.
