Land Locked

[Frank Bertrand]

whats the value of an easement? value of parcel BEFORE the taking (easement) minus the value AFTER the taking.

I disagree that landlocked parcels are 'complex'. It's up to where the comps are. I do about 3-4 landlocks a year, and the county calls them 'rear land sales' with no front, so comps are not that hard to find as the county can pull up all rear sales at will. Thus the data is easily obtainable (at least here)

Besides, there is a whole genere of easement, right of way, landlocked appraising. Residential business drying up?... they will always build roads, condemn land, and need a value on a forced easement. Try the International Right of Way Association (IRWA) via Google.

Courts will assign an easement here in pa. Value of easement comes from the federal condemantion rule in the most part, as stated above.

Alan, I suggest that you see if your courthouse records rear land sales. Absent that, look at bare land sales in the county and match them to the plat maps. Perhaps you can determine rear land sales from the maps and sales. It's time consuming, but that's how I do it. Much, if not all depends on your info sources.

 

[Fred]

whats the value of an easement? value of parcel BEFORE the taking (easement) minus the value AFTER the taking.

That's not the value of an easement. That's the contributory value of an easement. The value of the easement is what someone will pay for it. Just kidding.

 

[xm39hnu]

Originally posted by Frank Bertrand@Aug 7 2003, 08:23 PM
I disagree that landlocked parcels are 'complex'. It's up to where the comps are.

They can be very simple, or extremely complex.

First, from the facts presented, you'd need to do a comprehensive H&BU analysis. You've got property through which a "large creek" runs. If that creek is navigable by boat, you have waterfront property. Can it be developed? One side of the creek, or both? Can you bridge the creek, or is a bridge impractical? If it's not practical, then you'll need two easements.

Woops! Stop right there. We're back to the easement thing. Will the adjoining land owners grant an access easement without a fight? Can you get that in writing? What's the cost?

What if the adjoining land owners won't grant an easement at any price? Now you have to get into condemnation appraising. Do you need one easement, or two? In each case, define the larger parcel. Does Alabama use the Federal rule, or the State rule? Will there be damages associated with the "taking" of these easements? How are they determined, and what is their dollar value? Does Alabama's condemnation law allow them to be considered?

Once that issue of easements is settled, you can get back to your H&BU analysis. Is the H&BU as vacant to leave it vacant, or to improve it? If it is to improve the property, what is the ideal improvement? The typical improvement? And so on...

I agree with the first couple of respondents to your post. If there are condemnation issues, get help and charge a lot, or decline the assignment. If you can get voluntary easements, charge enough to make up for the H&BU analysis you'll have to do.

Be careful with any landlocked comps. You'll have to interview the parties to determine whether the sales occurred at arms length.

Like I said, this can be relatively simple, or hugely complex.

 

[Joe Gomberg]

I think each state and local laws regarding this need to be researched but my understanding (and I could be wrong) in my area is that an access easement MUST be granted however a "reasonable" fee maybe charged to the grantee. Clearly, reasonable is not defined and I'm sure can end up being an astronomical sum of money. Personally I would take the road of less liability as mentioned in previous posts. :rofl:

 

[Fred]

I am intruiged by that Alabama law posted by rtubbs that says someone has to give up an easement. I thought eminent domain was taking for public good, not private gain.

 

[Mike Garrett RAA]

In Colorado it isn't eminent domain, it's an appurtenant easement enforceable by the courts.

 

[xm39hnu]

This here's guesswork by a layman--usual disclaimers apply:

Tennessee has the same type of law: if you're landlocked, you must be given access to the "nearest public road."

Eminent domain is the taking of property for public use. It can only be done by a government or government agency or a public utility. And property may be taken only for public use, not for private purposes. (Real Estate Valuation in Litigation, 2nd Ed. Eaton, J.D., MAI, SRA; Appriasal Institute, Chicago:1995.)

I suppose there's a different line of reasoning which attaches to someone denying you the use of your landlocked property. If that were to occur, you would be deprived of your right to enjoy your property without due process of law. When you petition the government to redress that grievance, something's got to be done to restore your rights. The process of doing so may fall under the eminent domain statutes, but I think the legal theory by which it is accomplished has to lie somewhere else. Eminent Domain won't attach unless the taking's for public use, or (stretching it a little) "in furtherance of a public project."

 

[Fred]

Jim,
Apparently these statutes are more common than I thought. They provide the court an easy solution to a thorny problem, but they don't seem quite Constitutional. Problem is it cost to much to go to federal court and fight these little takes.

Mike's post reminds me of the gimmick of calling an appraisal an evaluations to get around the rules. Call it enforcing an easement instead of calling it a taking - which is what it obviously is.

Just wodnering, under these laws, who pays for the taking: the benefitting owner or the state. Also, the top post raised the issue that the "locking" goes back to 1880. A lot of these laws guranteeing access are more modern and went to preventing the creation of parcels without access. Is the law intended to be applied retrospectively. because that would again raise Constitutional question, ie ex post facto laws.

 

[Ben Vukicevich SRA]

Hey Mel

Your friend doesn't need a bridge..Get one of these....What the hell is it????? The guys in the back seem too happy :blink:

Ben

 

[Mountain Man]

Is that the..... no way!..... is it??........ the new Senate Subway??
Man, the budget cuts HAVE hit the gobment hard.