Central Pacific Research: Altamont Pass Deed
I am working on a project in the vicinity of the wind farms on Altamont Pass (CA) and I am looking for some assistance in tracing the Central Pacific rail lines back to 1875. In researching the encumbrances for our property, the title company turned up a deed that references the following:
A right of way 400 feet in width for railroad purposes lying equally on each side of the railroad, or any branch thereof, then or thereafter constructed across that portion of premises lying within the lines of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, in Section 7, Township 2 South, Range 3 East, MDBM, as reserved in the deed by Central Pacific Railroad Company, a corporation, to Charles McLaughlin, dated September 3, 1875 and recorded September 11, 1875 in book 114 of deeds, page 456. The document is ... mostly illegible.
There is currently no evidence of a railroad or the remnants of a railroad within section 7. The closest rail lines I can find are the mainlines going over Altamont Pass about three miles to the south of our property. My client is not only concerned about the legal encumbrance, but also the potential historical significance of any railroads on the property. Any help you give would be greatly appreciated. If you need additional information, please let me know.
Robert Boehm, PLS
Geospatial Data Solutions
CH2M HILL
720-286-0237
posted from CPRR Discussion Group at 5:52 AM
3 Comments:
From: "Kyle Wyatt" kwyatt@parks.ca.gov
Interesting challenge ... It took a bit to find an on-line topo map that would give me Township and Range info. Based on the topo, it appears that Section 7 of Township 2 South, Range 3 East, MDBM, does not officially exist – it is part of the Canada de los Vaqueros rancho, so would be technically (and legally) outside (and excluded from) the Township-Range system. The adjacent sections, section 8 (to the east) and section 18 (to the south), do exist, so the location of where section 7 would be is quite clear.
That said, I'm not aware of any rail lines actually constructed into that section. My suspicion is that it is a standard reserve inserted in transfer deeds for any land that the railroad sold.
This brings up other interesting issues. If the railroad acquired the land through a land grant, one wonders how this was possible. Railroads could not receive land grants from lands already taken, as all verified California rancho lands were. As mentioned above, in California the US land survey system of Township-Range excluded the rancho lands as already taken, so the ranchos were specifically not surveyed into the system, as shown on USGS topo maps. I have seen a few maps where the Township-Range system was extended to include rancho lands, so perhaps that is the origin of the section 7 designation.
I suppose it is also possible the railroad purchased the land outright (although one wonders why, given where it is). Perhaps there are known or suspected coal or other mineral resources that the railroad was interested in acquiring. There were active coal mines on the north side of Mt Diablo (northwest of you), and in Corral Hollow (southeast of you). In the 1870s the Central Pacific was using Mt Diablo (and perhaps Corral Hollow) coal and so might have anticipated the possibility of building a rail line to other coal deposits in the future. ...
—Kyle
Kyle K. Wyatt
Curator of History & Technology
California State Railroad Museum
111 "I" Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 324-7660
From: "Kyle Wyatt" kwyatt@parks.ca.gov
The best topo maps I found were on Topo-Zone. But first I had to get a set of digital Longitude and Latitude reading in the area. (I looked up Altamont on another topo web site, and took the digital readings to the TopoZone site. Traditional Longitude and Latitude readings require paid premium membership.) ...
—Kyle
From: "Rob Krantz" rmkrantz@pacbell.net
In reviewing the message string, my thought is, based on the reservation language (next below) shown in the deed, that Central Pacific once owned the land and sold it to a Charles McLaughlin, and in that deed reserved a 400' right of way for future railroad purposes.
"A right of way 400 feet in width for railroad purposes lying equally on each side of the railroad, or any branch thereof, then or thereafter constructed across that portion of premises lying within the lines of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, in Section 7, Township 2 South, Range 3 East, MDBM, as reserved in the deed by Central Pacific Railroad Company, a corporation, to Charles McLaughlin, dated September 3, 1875 and recorded September 11, 1875 in book 114 of deeds, page 456."
The July 1, 1862 (as amended) Act of Congress, granted CP a right of way that runs through the Altamont area and down through Livermore and beyond. As part of the Congressional land grants, in addition to the right of way, there were alternating sections of land that were granted to the CP. I do not know the exact location of the property in question (just says is three miles south of the subject property), however, it could be former section lands of the CP that were eventually sold. In that sale, CP likely reserved the 400' right of way referenced for future railroad purposes. There is a possibility that a railroad never was located on the property in question, but CP, in looking to the future and possible rail business opportunities and perhaps considering a branch line in that area, placed the above reservation in the deed at close of escrow.
When I worked for SP, maps existed showing the section lands and those properties sold would have been indicated by cross hatching on the val maps. Where those maps are today, I do not know.....likely back with the UP in Omaha. If the appropriate map is located somehow, it could be shown perhaps that the subject property was former section lands. My conjecture again is this is former section lands owned by the CP and sold to McLaughlin, reserving a 400' right of way for railroad purposes. If the property owner wishes to have this encumbrance removed, he/she will likely need to contact Union Pacific requesting a quitclaim deed from them. If UP has no future plans for a branch line in this area, they may agree to quitclaim their interest in the property for a charge to be determined by them. Considering how busy the UP Real Estate folks are these days, it will likely be a long process.
—Robert M. Krantz
Post a Comment
<< Recent Messages