Philadelphia v. Hafer

Citations

• 38 Pa. Super. 382
• 1909 Pa. Super. LEXIS 146

Syllabus

<p>Road law — Paving—Original pavement — Municipal action.</p> <p>1. A first pavement in the legal sense, which exempts the abutting property owner from liability for any subsequent improvement, may be defined generally as one that is put down originally or adopted or acquiesced in subsequently, by the municipal authority, for the purpose and with the intent of changing an ordinary road into a street. It may be of macadam or anything else. This is a matter of evidence only. If the purpose and intent be wanting, a mere surfacing of the road, however carefully or expensively done, will not be a paving, but if the intent and purpose are present, or to be fairly inferred, then there is a paving whatever the material may be.</p> <p>2. When a city acquires the property of a plank road or turnpike company the duty which it assumes is to keep the highway in repair. The character of the highway is not changed from a road into a city street merely because- the city has acquired the possession and assumed the duty of maintaining the highway. The city may keep the road in repair, as such, until the proper time has arrived for the change into a city street, and the city authorities are sole judges as to when that time has arrived. The city may adopt such road as a street sufficiently well paved for all the requirements of present or future use, as a city street. And if this course is adopted as to any road or portion thereof, no matter how or with what material it was paved, then it becomes a street as the result of such action. The entire absence of formal municipal action is strong presumptive evidence of lack of municipal intent to adopt the road as a street.</p> <p>3. The action of the city which will give rise to an -implication of the adoption of a road as a paved street, and exempt an owner from assessment for future improvement, must involve a recognition of it as a paved street; mere recognition of it as a highway is not sufficient. No such recognition can be inferred f