Property Question

[dstig1]

Well, ask yourself the question "What could I do with it (the extra piece of land)?" It doesn't give you the buffer of being on 10 ac, since you are on 4 ac in the house and it is not contiguous. Can you hunt on it (if you want to )? Can it be split off and sold (doesn't sound like it)? Come up with any more of your own questions and in the end if you can't find one answer that gives it value, then I'd put the value at basically nothing. A very unusual setup to my eyes...

 

[5030]

My last offer was contingent on survey...

Learned a lot from survey and for me well spent even not buying because of issues discovered.

10' here would be a problem even for a driveway... not even addressing slopes and obstacles.

Does it make sense just the home and the lower part has no value?

All land, vacant or otherwise has value, especially if you own the mineral rights. problem is, that value (real or imagined) is entirely up to the seller and buyer to negotiate. The other issue (at least here in this state) is, whatever the value and selling price is finally agreed upon, the taxable value will be determined on that dollar figure. In our case, that parcel is in PA116 which means the bulk of the RE taxes are not applicable. However (and here is the stickler here), if we were to ever sell it or sub divide it, the RE taxes at that point would become due and payable at the current rate.

 

[paulsharvey]

I 'think' what the 'intent' is with the slivers, is instead of a 4 way easement trail to the semi orphaned pieces, is each upland part as it's own, included, connection to their orphan. It doesn't appear any of the 4 'trail slivers' are fenced, and in practice, I imagine the 4 property owners just use the 40 ft total trail; but that could get sticky fast.

Another area, kinda similar property types, it's set up different, where each upland parcel just butts upto Sovereign Submerged Lands (owned by state, you can hunt, drive on, SSL, but its not yours). Maybe the State didn't want this lake bottom?

 

[5030]

I imagine it could be used for some stuff, maybe gardening, food plots, live stock, shooting range, ect.

You haver to be careful with that as well because you have landowners adjacent to it that may or may not agree with your intended usage and I have no clue as to if it's zoned or not and if it is, zoning will always take precedent. My wife gets involved in just that here as she's the chairperson of the Township zoning commission and you won't believe the heated arguments that come about when a new owner wants to do something that flies in the face of the zoning ordinance and 99% of the time, the ordinance wins out. If it is zoned, you have another can of worms to deal with.

 

[plowhog]

I 'think' what the 'intent' is with the slivers, is instead of a 4 way easement trail to the semi orphaned pieces, is each upland part as it's own, included, connection to their orphan. It doesn't appear any of the 4 'trail slivers' are fenced, and in practice, I imagine the 4 property owners just use the 40 ft total trail; but that could get sticky fast.

Like when a storm washes it out, and it's time for each party to pony up equal $$ shares for repairs?

 

[paulsharvey]

Like when a storm washes it out, and it's time for each party to pony up equal $$ shares for repairs?

Yeah, Easements are rough. Been dealing with one at work. Guy A separates 5 or 10 acres of road frontage, keeps back 25-30. Sells, front piece to Guy B, but retains an acess easement across the front to his property. Guy B buys it, and has to build a legal residential access/drive. Then Guy A decides to build the 30-35 into an agro tourism venue. Guy B is now mad, because he's worried about 300+ people using the access.

 

[steve tym]

Sounds like it adds no value, but adds liability and taxes. Might be able to buy up surrounding parcels that would add value?

 

[paulsharvey]

You haver to be careful with that as well because you have landowners adjacent to it that may or may not agree with your intended usage and I have no clue as to if it's zoned or not and if it is, zoning will always take precedent. My wife gets involved in just that here as she's the chairperson of the Township zoning commission and you won't believe the heated arguments that come about when a new owner wants to do something that flies in the face of the zoning ordinance and 99% of the time, the ordinance wins out. If it is zoned, you have another can of worms to deal with.

It's all zoned Ag.

 

[paulsharvey]

Sounds like it adds no value, but adds liability and taxes. Might be able to buy up surrounding parcels that would add value?

I was thinking the same thing; 5.5 acres of bottom land might be almost worthless, but if you could pick up some of the other people's worthless pieces of dryish bottom, that's approx 80 acres of lake bottom, that is mostly sand/grass, with several 1-5 acre wet ponds remaining.

 

[Complete Turf Care]

My suggestion is would be...If you like the house, buy all of the 10 acres, and turn around and sell the back 5.5 to one of the adjacent landowners. But I would make that deal, before buying.

Or, maybe you could buy the land between the 4 and the 5.5 acres to give you better access. The 8' easment is not wide enough to build access.

And without access, the 5.5 acres is pretty worthless unless there is oil under it.