A potential client called me yesterday and said that he was thinking about putting his property on the market. This lot has had a recombination survey performed (Recorded 2008) and is situated adjacent the intracoastal waterway. His ask was simple: How much water frontage does his lot have, so he can definitively use that linear footage as a selling point. Seems simple enough. But when I look at his lot, his property line does not stop at the water’s edge but pushes out 100+ feet into the water. Now, is the "water frontage of the property" considered the portion where the actual property line is in the water? (That would be the most literal interpretation) Or, is the “water frontage of the property” the portion where the land meets the water on the property? I've attached an image with parcel lines overlaid to give an idea of what I'm looking at.
Also, there is the survey that was performed in 2008. And as much as I want the work, does he really need another survey to determine the water frontage when he has a "to scale" map that depicts his property line as well as the shoreline?
I don't know what state you're in but I've been studying for the Washington state exam off and on for the past almost year and they address this situation a couple different ways, so I think you should be careful about how you handle it. For example, in certain cases the landowner might get exactly what is deeded to them and in others the water frontage is proportioned.
As far as what the water frontage is when it comes to marketing the property I think it would be whatever approximate linear footage of shore the guy has after you locate the boundary of the property.
It seems that you have platted? boundaries and erosion of the shore of a navigable waterway. Around here (Oregon) that means that the actual high water mark is the boundary. But there would be special cases involving things like avulsion and transfer of title before statehood. The rules in your state will vary.
He wants to market his property with this selling point. Simply scale the line where the water meets the land and sell it as x linear feet of shoreline. You avoid whatever messy situations you might get involved in by using a misinterpreted definition of frontage.The length of frontage may be different depending on how it is defined, but the shoreline will be the shoreline until the water level changes.
As has been mentioned, State law is going to drive the answer. If you wing it you are likely to get a definitive (and expensive) answer at district court...
His ask was simple: How much water frontage does his lot have, so he can definitively use that linear footage as a selling point. Seems simple enough.
This could very well be a state specific real estate marketing question as opposed to a surveying question. For example, not every bedroom is a bedroom...
Doesn't the realtor make up a number and then walk away with their bag o'cash, leaving us to be the bearer of bad news down the road?
Whole lot of 'it depends' going on here. Lake is navigable, title below OHW likely belongs to the state. What thebionicman said.
Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get me.
Like others have said, it's up in the air until you figure out what your state says about the littoral rights. Not sure why the realtor just doesn't take a wheel out there at high tide and guesstimate. Looks like there has been some erosion, so I wouldn't put any faith in those lines shown on your photo.
Doesn't the realtor make up a number and then walk away with their bag o'cash, leaving us to be the bearer of bad news down the road?
So, the "realtor remark" hit the mark. I went to see potential client Friday afternoon. A very cordial 77 year old Vietnam Army veteran who retired as a chemist. (A good logical thinking guy) As it turns out, his quarrel was with the realtor that sold him the home on the ICWW in coastal NC. He bought the home in 2018 and was given the survey (a recombination survey) that showed the boundary change. Unfortunately, he didn't fully digest why the recombination survey was done in the first place and had difficulty making sense of it's dimensions and layout since the home was not located on the survey. He later found out that the home was built off center of the lot and too close to the boundary. This was remedied by the recombination which extended a "bump out" of the boundary to the bare minimum around the home to meet the building setback ordinance. However, when he was shown the property back in 2018, he says the realtor pointed out the old corners which looked more favorable for the realtor and none of the corners that were very close to the home. He retained a lawyer and approached the NC Real Estate Commission. It was a stale mate for 2 years or so and now he's afraid that no one will purchase his 1.1 million dollar home because of the property line. After our conversation I offered him 2 options. Ask his neighbors if they are willing to sell some of their property to allow him a little buffer boundary room. (This would, of course, facilitate another recombination survey) Or, simply put it on the market as is. The home is gorgeous, on the water, and I suspect that his fears of not being able to sell it is irrational.
He agreed, said that our conversation had given him peace of mind that he hasn't had in over a year, and asked me how much he owed me.
I told him that I enjoyed our conversation, he didn't owe me anything other than passing my business card around to his friends.
Crisis averted.
Also, I'm beginning to place realtors in the same category as Lawyers and used Car Salesmen.
Firestix
Glad it ended well. Communication is much more difficult and more important than most folks realize. I've run into similar issues when locating the regulatory top of a stream bank. After having to spend way too much time explaining that the regulatory top of bank is not typically the topographic top of bank, I now define it in a report or a note on the plat. If I had a request to measure water frontage, I'd simply describe how and what was measured instead of relying on ambiguous realtor terms.
Our state is a good example of evolving definitions. Prior to the 2018 NC v Alcoa case, navigable waterway meant any body of water that a human could float down by any means. Post 2018, it means whatever someone could have floated down on November 21, 1789 when NC ratified the Constitution. A diligent professional knows that definitions have a temporal component, but the audience of my work products don't often understand this, so I head them off with concise definitions. Even if you've used the wrong word or the right word incorrectly, providing your own definition will make it difficult for others to prove gross negligence.
Murphy
Just call it "waterfront" quantifying it would be risky.
This looks like a case where the difference between the meander line and the OHW would be a significant reduction in Lot area, this would probably hurt more than it would help if that's really the case.