What is the test for establishing a right of access on a public street?

Although the evidentiary facts were received by stipulation, the trial judge acted as a fact-finder in drawing inferences to arrive at the ultimate facts upon which the judgment rests. The trial court's findings, where based upon permissible inferences, are binding on appeal. (Crisman v. Lanterman, 149 Cal. 647, 655, 87 P. 89.)

Page 130

[205 Cal.App.2d 590] Before discussing the contentions of the parties it is helpful to consider the nature of the property interest here involved. The owner of property which abuts on a public street has, as an incident of such ownership, a right or easement of access. It is separate and distinct from the right of the general public in and to the street. 'The right of access has been defined as extending to a use of the road for purposes of ingress and egress to his property by such modes of conveyance and travel as are appropriate to the highway and in such manner as is customary or reasonable. [Citation.] It is more extensive than a mere opportunity to go into the street immediately in front of one's property.' (People ex rel. Dept. of Public Works v. Russell, 48 Cal.2d 189, 195, 309 P.2d 10, 14.) At the same time the state, its subdivisions and municipalities, exercising governmental powers, may limit or regulate access to streets and highways, but such regulation may not go so far as to destroy the property right. (See People ex rel. Dept. of Public Works v. Murray, 172 Cal.App.2d 219, 225-227, 342 P.2d 485; Genazzi v. County of Marin, 88 Cal.App. 545, 263 P. 825.)