Notifications
Clear all

Landlocked parcel

41 Posts
14 Users
0 Reactions
143 Views
john-hamilton
(@john-hamilton)
Posts: 3349
Member
Topic starter
 

Today I was the successful bidder at a sheriff's sale on a 1.5 acre vacant parcel adjacent to mine that is landlocked. I have about 500 foot of common line, but on all other sides there are about 12 or 13 1/4 acre subdivision lots with houses. Realistically, the only access is through my property although one of the adjoiners could get it and use it as a much larger back yard, although they would not have enough access for a street or driveway.

Property was left over from late 60's subdivision and no taxes paid since 1970, which added up to $86K with interest and penalties. I convinced the school district to put it up for sale since that would put it back on the tax rolls. The law firm for the school district was very helpful, although the process to get it to sale took about 18 months.

So there was a court order to offer it for sale free and clear (all liens extinguished) for a minimum bid of $10K. But, to my surprise, someone started to bid against me. I finally got it for $25K, Even the law firm was totally surprised that there was a bidding war. It was on zoom, with only an ID number showing up when bidding, so I have no idea who the other bidder was. Or if they knew it was landlocked. I found a vacant lot in a nearby subdivision that is 0.25 acres for $100,000. But is is on a street, with utilities, etc. In any case the 1.5 acres adds a lot of value to my 8.5 acres because it gives me room so that I can design more than just a simple cul-de-sac, which is limited to 600 feet by regs.

For many years I was worried that someone would get it and try to obtain access through my property. Supposedly there is a remedy for landlocked parcels in PA, but I think the way it has been working is that you cannot SELL someone a landlocked parcel, you must give them access. But, if someone buys it with that knowledge, it would be difficult to get access.

https://www.mette.com/2017/02/20/access-to-landlocked-property/

Here is the situation, I own 667-K-50 and 667-K-65. The landlocked parcel I just got is 667-K-106.

There is no existing deed, it was just a leftover parcel when they developed the subdivision. It will be interesting to see how they handle creating a new deed.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 4:28 am
holy-cow
(@holy-cow)
Posts: 25310
Supporter
 

Congratulations. You have handled the situation well.

Question. There are many tracts adjoining this tract. Why could they not bid on it and add it to what they already own?

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 4:39 am
holy-cow
(@holy-cow)
Posts: 25310
Supporter
 

I reviewed a survey last week for a landlocked tract of more than 40 acres. The survey had a note that an ingress/egress easement was in process. That might not fly everywhere.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 4:41 am
john-hamilton
(@john-hamilton)
Posts: 3349
Member
Topic starter
 

Yes, I was worried about that. I don't believe any of the adjoiners knew about the sale, though. I have met a few when I was walking the boundary looking for corners, but no one asked what was going on.

A guy last year came to my house and wanted access through my property to hunt in there, which is ridiculous since it is only 1.5 acres. He told me he got permission from the owner, and when I asked who that was (I knew the situation), he said it was the water company. I called him on that, then he began to offer me money to let him access it. There are some nice size deer in the area, I guess he was going to archery hunt (no discharge of firearms in the boro), but that still seems very dangerous to me.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 4:45 am
MightyMoe
(@mightymoe)
Posts: 9937
Supporter
 

It's good you picked it up. Since you're an adjacent owner you are the perfect person to buy it. Sherriff's deeds sometimes can't be usefully transferred to the buyer. At least one Supreme Court case in my state precluded the buyer of a Sherriff's deed from taking possession. This tract doesn't look like that's an issue.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 5:00 am

john-hamilton
(@john-hamilton)
Posts: 3349
Member
Topic starter
 

Here is a related question...since there is no deed, I am assuming I am junior to the subdivision lots surrounding it. Interestingly, the tract to the north that I own is senior to the subdivision, but the subdivision encroaches by a few feet onto my property. It also encroaches by 5' onto the railroad (now a rail-to-trail). I believe there was some sloppy work done in the 1960's.

This is an area with no monumentation requirements and no recording requirements. I believe that these lots originally had hub and tack at the corners (at most), and a few got rebars and pipes set over the next 55 years. Most new property surveys I have seen in this immediate area are just a hub and tack with guard stake, seems like the local mortgage surveyors don't want to set anything more permanent.

I did a careful search for lot corners, and found some. Some of them were right on, others were up to 2' ' off in the direction of the side lot lines. My computed positions are based on locating all of the roads in the subdivision and some front lot corners on the street.

Not even the outer corners of the subdivision were monumented at the beginning. I did find a few substantial mons (2" pipes) and a couple of rebars that fit very well. The ones that didn't fit were solid 3" steel pipes on one property that stuck up about 30", so I am just assuming they were set by the property owner for whatever reason.

My question is, would you show on the new deed what was on the subdivision plan, or slightly zig zag through the found corners that fit reasonably well? I have no idea who will prepare the deed, this all just happened this afternoon and I need to go down to the sheriffs office to pay and see what the process is. The forms say I need to pay 1 $181.75 recording fee, and that "they" will prepare the deed. But maybe this situation is a bit different since it is vacant land with no deed prior to this sale

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 5:55 am
(@chris-bouffard)
Posts: 1440
Member
 

It is interesting that the situation even exists. One would think that creating an access easement through some location within the subdivision would be required to access K106 while obtaining the final subdivision approval.

I have surveyed some "land locked" parcels in NJ over the years, but, there was always either access easements or pre existing agreements between the owner of the parcel and another owner allowing unrecorded access. In the cases where the means of access existed through lands of others, the title companies always required that the unrecorded access be formalized and recorded prior to insuring title.

I don't know what your future plans are with this newly acquired parcel, but you might want to consider consolidating K106 with K50 so that the common line between the two parcels is eliminated to avoid future problems.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 6:06 am
(@ashton)
Posts: 562
Member
 

I suggest investigating how property taxes are computed. In my state, the value may be based on a recent arms-length sale (a distressed sale or tax auction probably wouldn't be considered). If there is no recent sale, a formula is applied by a computer that assigns a higher value to the acre closest to the house, and a lower per-acre value for the rest of the area. If either the parcel without a house that you already owned, or the new parcel are considered buildable lots, you may be paying higher property taxes than if they were all combined for tax purposes. It may be possible to have the three considered one property for tax purposes while still being three parcels in the land records.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 6:24 am
john-hamilton
(@john-hamilton)
Posts: 3349
Member
Topic starter
 

This was from a different parent parcel (farm) than mine, but the subdivision used land from both parent parcels. I don't want to merge them because then I would need to do a subdivision if I wanted to, for example, build a house for my daughter on it. In this area, one house/parcel. Otherwise you need to do a formal subdivision. At this point I am planning on nothing, but in the future (maybe before I pass on or maybe after) I would want to make a subdivision here. I put my house at the far corner of my parcel so that it would not interfere with future development.

After this situation was created, no one ever used the land for anything, so no possibility of a prescriptive easement.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 6:27 am
MightyMoe
(@mightymoe)
Posts: 9937
Supporter
 

The new deed should follow the enclosing parcels. Unless monuments were disturbed they should be held since they are probably originals. I would also be very interested in occupation for this one.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 6:41 am

(@chris-bouffard)
Posts: 1440
Member
 

I am operation under two assumptions, 1) the builder of the subdivision owned both the subdivided land and the lot you just bought and 2) The subdivision was built sometime in the 60's.

If assumption 1) is correct and the developer's subdivision common line between the two parcels overlap, the default would be that you have to honor the subdivision line as the buyers are entitled to the lands in accordance with the subdivision plan, even if that means shorting the parcel that you just purchased, but that would not apply to any other lands not under common ownership.

If assumption 1) is not correct it becomes a different ball game where not only Junior and Senior rights exist but long standing lines of occupation come into play as well and that's when you would have to consider either honoring lines of occupation or cheating headaches down the road by rejecting them because everybody wants what they assumed that they bought and some might be willing to take disputes into a costly court battle.

I find it difficult to believe that a deed for the parcel that you purchased does not exist for a couple of reasons. However, if as you said, it is just a leftover piece of the subdivision, the subdivision lines must be held based on the fact the resulting lot was a part of the parent tract of the subdivision. If that was the case, it very well could explain the lack of the deed as just an overlooked part of the final paperwork. If it is, in fact, a leftover part of the subdivision, the original boundary filed with the subdivision plans will detail what was left over.

In the end, as the buyer and want title insurance, you will have to foot the bill to determine what the property actually consists of and have a proper metes and bounds deeds recorded. It's in your best interest to do that and have corners set as well.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 7:27 am
(@chris-bouffard)
Posts: 1440
Member
 

He describes this parcel as a left over portion of the original subdivision. The line between the adjoining subdivision and the and the left over parcel created will control, however, we both agree that after some 60 years, a hard look needs to be taken at the lines of possession.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 7:32 am
(@chris-bouffard)
Posts: 1440
Member
 

My original thoughts about consolidating the lots were pretty much the same as yours but the author stated somewhere in the thread that he did not want to do that because he is thinking of building a house for his daughter and didn't want to have re subdivide because two dwellings on a single lot are not allowed.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 7:38 am
GaryG
(@gary_g)
Posts: 593
Supporter
 

1. I would think the deed to be prepared conveying you the parcel would be something like:

"All of deed xxx/yyy containing X acres, saving and excepting A , B, C, etc."

2. As for access, "Boundary Retracement Principles and Procedures for Pennsylvania” Knud E. Hermansen, 2024 states in section 4.6.2:

The Legislature has permitted the petition for and subsequent condemnation of easements for private roads. However, the road must be necessary (severe hardship but not always absolute necessity required) for the enjoyment of the property.

The several courts of quarter sessions shall... upon the petition of one or more persons, associations, partnerships, ... for a road from their respective lands or  leaseholds to a highway or place of necessary public  resort, or to any private way leading to highway... shall direct a view to bad of the place where such road is requested, and report thereof to be made, in the same manner as is directed by the said act of 13 June 1836 (36 P.S. § 1961). (Proceedings to Open Private Roads, 36 P.S. § 2731 (1927).)

This statute is meant to ensure that no private property is landlocked or prevented access to public roads. If a parcel cannot gain access by an amicable grant, the statute can be used. In fact, the courts will provide a private road even though the owner bought the property knowing access did not exist.

Fact that owner of property requesting private road knew his property was landlocked at time of purchase did not preclude right to petition for private road. (In re Private Road in Monroeville Boro., 204 Pa.Super. 552, 205 A.2d 885 (1965).)

All That being said, I would think once you own the tract in question it's no longer landlocked for you. You adjoin the parcel, and you currently have road access. So, if you decide to sell it, just grant an easement for access in the new conveyance.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 9:53 am
OleManRiver
(@olemanriver)
Posts: 2459
Member
 

Nice work. We just signed the agreement today on a 40 acre parcel that we are purchasing. It had an old road many years ago early 1900’s. Around mi 1930’s dot abandoned the old dirt road and stopped it. No longer apart of the row precriptive easement back then. Now the old farm was split via wils during this time hence a 40 acre parcel being land locked. In 1996 an ingress egress easement was granted of 12 ft wide along the old dirt road for our parcel. About 1000 ft. Had to purchase an additional 13’ from the current owner we are. Crossing so we can 1. Get a navigable driveway correctly built without causing issues for that owner and to get utilities aka power and fiber. We will be on a well and septic. Now if gravel prices would drop lol.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 10:39 am

(@chris-bouffard)
Posts: 1440
Member
 

While I agree with the theory that, in essence, there is no such thing as a land locked parcel, there are two distinct differences to case law in what has been said about this transaction. The first distinction is that the land was the remainder of lands not used by the developer and was a part of the development parent tract and secondly, when the subdivision was approved and recorded, it was a simultaneous conveyance, ensuring that every lot buyer against the unconveyed remainder gets their due, based on what was platted and paid for. Add to that that the lots contiguous to the undeveloped land are seemingly dense in the distance between one another and the improvements go back 60 years or more on lines of occupation. The case law that you quoted regarding this situation are not addressed, however, junior and senior rights do exist between the unimproved parcel and the subdivided lots, who, in this case, would have senior rights to what they paid for, with the complication of long term occupation along the common line. Playing the Devil's advocate, where should this access be provided across the number of densely improved lots? Does a Judge throw a dart at the subdivision plan that have two adjoining lots granting a half of the access easement between the two lots and impacting their resale values, versus the lots where the dart did not land? Going by case law, the easement would have to be purchased and improved and there is no ruling as to which property owners would have to accept the financial offer.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 11:23 am
GaryG
(@gary_g)
Posts: 593
Supporter
 

I took this verbatim from the reference. I would read this as using the statute to gain access to a road. The case law was provided by the author where the statute was used. I would not think that the only option for location of access is limited to the parent tract.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 12:02 pm
(@chris-bouffard)
Posts: 1440
Member
 

That's where things get fuzzy and the case law presented does not address the situation at hand, with long term occupation coming into play.

I love engaging in conversations like this and hearing the thoughts of others, sometimes they are educating and add great value to the topic, with open minded people like myself and others walking away from the conversations and learning something. The conversation and debate, no matter what the issue at hand is, make us better at what we do if we are willing to understand the points made by others.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 12:33 pm
GaryG
(@gary_g)
Posts: 593
Supporter
 

There is a case in MD that is realative on a tangent . Deals with a right of way and the location thereof. I have to find the case and I will post it.

 
Posted : April 1, 2024 2:02 pm
GaryG
(@gary_g)
Posts: 593
Supporter

Page 1 / 3