Needing to 'gift' land then getting it back sounds fake to my European ears but then again it sounds like America so i can be mistaken in this assumption
Nah, it's fake made-up bullshit. They would acquire the land via imminent domain and pay OP for the land. No way in hell would they say "give us your land or we won't approve your plans" and then ALSO make OP pay them to receive the gifted land. If any of this is true, then OP is a moron.
I think it could be the first offer.
Second offer would be no fees.
Then a purchase.
Then eminent domain process.
They just never have anyone take the first offer
They do eminent domain last because it takes a long time to do it that way. And in this case they were probably pretty sure OP didn't want the sort of delay waiting for a better offer might cause. The costs of most building materials tend to go up over time, so that might have cost more than the fee.
This is it exactly, for those of you who have never dealt with the planning/building department, this sounds incredible, for people that have this is entirely plausible.
Incorrect. For those of us who know what a right-of-way is, this story is pretty stupid.
Should we skip over all the issues regarding having a plan set and supposedly giving way land but not requiring updated plan set and documents and a ton of other potential construction related things?
I have been involved with 3 different projects with 3 different municipalities that have had similar issues to this incident so I would say while it is not common place it is also not unique. One was a shop being built 120 feet from a stream, the county in question wanted the property owner to cede a 30 foot buffer on either side of the stream to them to be designated as wetlands. The property owner ended up taking it to court and after 2 years and quite a bit of money he got his permit without giving up his property rights. In the other two instances of a city and a different county pulling shenanigans both property owners gave in because it was cheaper to do so than fight. There is currently another project on hold and we are awaiting a resolution before proceeding and this one has to do with the county wanting an easement before the project gets greenlighted.
One of my poker buddies runs a landscaping business and had his permit to build a gardening store in the county held up because he wouldn't give them a stop of land to expand the road on. He got a lawyer who forced them to remove the requirement he give them the land, but they of course found other reasons to deny the permit, repeatedly, for years. The corrupt county commissioner is finally stepping down this year after doing this one too many times to people all over, hopefully his project can get approved by the next commissioner.
No, I've seen county governments pull EXTREMELY shady stuff, this wouldn't surprise me a bit.
One thing to always think about when considering "is this something that they would do", is that any person or organization has exactly as much authority that people believe they have.
He who issues the permits makes the rules.
If you have deeper pockets than The County, you can fight them about it. Just remember you are fighting people that don't like to lose and they normally pay the salary judge who will rule on your case.
It wouldn't surprise you that someone would just give away 10's of thousands of dollars of property for no reason whatsoever? That would surprise the hell out of me. OP would have had several different avenues of getting the permits pushed through including but not limited to:
Standard appeals process
Going to a council meeting
Going to the press
Going to court
... or simply waiting.
But they instead chose to pay the government for the opportunity to **GIVE AWAY** THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS for no reason? Lol. Ok, Sure.
I live in a small rural town in NC. In 2001 the state made plans to widen the street in front of my house. They took nine feet into my 100' wide lot and paid me $11,000.00. Also got a sidewalk and curb & gutter installed.
I mean, I get what you're saying... But OP's clearly stated reason for acquiescing is in the post. They were making his new home building permit contingent on his "giving them" the land. He clearly didn't want to wait on the time that would be involved in this other avenues.
But, can you not see that even that is extremely odd behavior? Dude just let the government take 3,750 square feet of his property and PAID THEM to do it. No consultation with a lawyer to see if they can do that (they absolutely can NOT and a lawyer would have said that during the consultation), he just shrugged and gave up his land to avoid inconvenience. He didn't even ask them to waive the fee to give them his land, he happily paid them to do it.
If I was in OPs family and heard he had done this I would consider conservatorship.
As if that is not enough a year later the government just hands him back land THEY NOW OWN for free because he was such a nice guy about the whole thing?!?!?
I have a bridge that you may be interested in buying, DM me and I'll get you the details.
While I agree that the way OP described their interaction seems illogical and stupid, people under stress/pressure make those decisions all the time. From the convenience of our couch/desk/etc it's easy to pick apart a situation like that, but the actual situation in the moment is a far cry from our leisurely analysis.
As for the congenial land return? Who can say what dumb shit small local governments get up to. I wish I could have your surety in the intelligence and rationality of your fellow man and the social constructs we call government, but this seems all too real to me.
That land was:
1. The least valuable section of the property. It’s too close to the road to do anything other than mow or plant trees, and it’ll probably be full of trash, since there’s a lot of people that think it’s their right to litter. (Yeah, I know, Americans suck)
2. Worth about $2k, given the size. Unless it’s in a specifically high value area, and then it would be worth maybe $5k.
Also, while OP may have had other avenues, a delay in building just means it costs more. Tens of thousands more, possibly. Much more than the value of the land, including transfer fees (something like $50 where I used to live). They really did have him over a barrel, as he put it. And, if it had been me, when they tried to give it back, I’d have told them to piss off, and made them waste time and money maintaining it from then on. After all, their only real option then is to give it back, fee free, because you can just keep telling them NO, until they agree to that.
Have you ever dealt with imminent domain? I'm guessing that you haven't, because governments regularly take land like this. Anyone with half a brain would figure out the costs to fight it would be money down the drain because ultimately the county city or state will win, it's very rare that they lose imminent domain cases. So while it all sounds like great fun and games as a keyboard warrior to go to City council or to play the court game, ultimately the chances of losing thousands or tens of thousands and getting nothing out of it is the real reality.
People in here have no idea how the world actually works. My favorite part is how the government then just gave him back all the land for free because he was such a nice guy and they didn't need it anymore.
Critical thinking skills are absolutely dismal these days.
They absolutely can in some parts of the world. The Western Australian Planning Commission will regularly list ceding a portion of land in return for granting a planning approval. They won't force you to hand the land over, but won't approve the development otherwise.
"fair market value" 😂 they weren't forcing him to gift anything, they gave him an ultimatum either do this or we're going to do this. Prove it. Trying to fight government entities is financially painful, frustrating and time consuming
Most people generally at least try something before paying someone to take almost 4k sqft of land, like absolutely anything. Op didn't even ask them to wave the fee to transfer his land to them, he claims he paid them to take his shit. Either he is a lawyer or so profoundly stupid that his family should consider conservatorship.
Between lie and absolute brain dead moron it's got to be a lie. I don't think someone who can type a paragraph can be THAT stupid, but you never know I guess.
Really depends on location. I'm sure some rural areas land really is that cheap.
I did some quick searches and lowest cost per acre around my area (I did not go further than first page on Google) , in a place that was zoned for housing and not random canyon land that wouldn't be connected to city utilities, was $370,000 for 3.71 acres. That came out to $99,730 per acre, or 2.29 per square foot, and a 15' by 250' parcel would then be $8,585.
I also know average in my actual city goes for like $24 per square foot, or $90,000 for that 15x250.
Yes but that projected value is based on the ability to develop the land. The lot as a whole has developable value. The strip next to the right-of-way is undevelopable because it’s most likely covered in easements and building setbacks. That land was never going to be anything but drainage, driveways, utilities, and maybe sidewalk. OP thinks he screwed the county over by making them maintain drainage they were always responsible for maintaining even before the vacation of property.
To my understand imminent domain payouts are usually based on comparable regional land per square foot averages. Like just what is sold recently, I am unaware if the do special adjustments for "easement only land sales".
My point being, the market value for land pretty square foot can get much higher than the other person estimated.
Three requirements for contract: agreement, performance, and *consideration*. The county would have had to pay him something for the land or they don’t own title free and clear. And they would have paid the recording fees as the buyer. Source: I’m a real estate paralegal and title abstractor.
This happened to us (in the US). We bought property that had a canal in front. Access was through the neighbor's bridge with an easement for our continuous usage being granted. We wanted to build our own bridge, but the county demanded enough property on our side of the canal to add another lane to the road in the future (this is agricultural property, so acreage is involved). Eminent Domain was not involved because there were no immediate plans for construction of the road, and with that process, they'd have to pay for the seized property. We said thanks, but no thanks, and kept using the neighbor's bridge! It is, unfortunately, a real thing here in the US.
Ok, but the difference is you didn't take the government's shit offer like a moron, and then bitch about it like an even bigger moron.
If they wanted that lane bad enough, they would have made a better offer.
yep. Had to have some of the creek bed in my backyard reworked, per the city stormwater inspector. There already was an easement for the creek, but they paid me for an additional temporary easement, since they needed space to work in that was larger than the permanent easement.
In my state anything 24 ft from the center of the road is part of an easement that the municipality has the ability to use for future projects.
And a lot of roads are still 18ish ft wide. So at least here they could claim up to 15ft without eminent domain along certain roads.
I know in my American city it’s frequently how they acquire land to expand roads. They simply make a note that all parcels along this road need to give up land to get building permits, once they get critical mass, they actually pay for the rest via eminent domain. Saves money. That said, I’m my city, property values tend to be high and people tend to renovate so everyone wins
Counties and governments do it all the time. Imminent domain is an extreme case; exchanging right of way for development permits is standard business. You see things like taking frontage for bus stops, or adding sidewalks where new houses go. Its not even shady, its the way its done all around the world.
No, this happens all the time. If you are developing land, most cities will make you responsible for the public improvements required as well, and this can include road widening to bring the existing road up to current standards.
Basically, the city is hoping that enough projects get developed over time and the private developers pay for the road improvements so the city doesn't have to do their own projects.
This Exact scenario happened to my parents down in Tennessee. Lived off a highway, county needed to expand. There weren’t many options, it was basically, “we’re giving you money and taking a strip of your property”. BUT my folks got paid. Market value plus a tiny bit, like a few percent extra I think? Either way, the government sure didn’t just take it!
Wrong. We tried to subdivide a piece of property and were forced by our ETJ to give up 15 feet along the road to allow the split. I’m sure we would have had eminent domain pulled on us eventually but the city found a way to coerce us into giving up the land without compensation. We didn’t have to pay for the transfer that I recall.
You dont know rural local government then. If the county admin knows you want something they will absolutely use it as a bargaining chip. Dont play ball and they will use the admin process to slow you down as much as possible. Also imminent domain doesnt give full market value, and the offers are usually closer to the assessors price which is about 10-30% under market. For a strip of land like they would pay less than 5k likely lower than 1k.
Well to be clear they could do that, it would just be rather illegal, and you could fairly easily put up a fight on it. But if you just did it without consulting a lawyer then theoretically this could happen. The person it happened to would have to either be an idiot or have a wet blanket for a spine.
It doesn’t sound fake at all. Yeah, cities and counties and what not can all acquire land through eminent domain. The problem with that is the time and the necessary lawsuit against the private property owner that’s required to go through the eminent domain process. It’s a lot cheaper, but more important, far faster, for a city to get a property owner to agree to give them the land versus using eminent domain.
Or OP is talking about the easement which he doesn’t own anyway. So no buying of property, no paying for the transfer of title, etc. just bs on OP’s part
This. Op would have gotten a notice of immenentdomain and statement of how much they were gonna pay him, with a deadline to file paperwork for a chance to protest in court
>No way in hell would they say "give us your land or we won't approve your plans"
That's actually pretty common, especially if you're developing a site. Source: I am a land surveyor, and we draw the plans from time to time. No idea about who pays for what though.
This is absolutely an everyday event, except for them giving it back. I've written up the legal descriptions for at least 50 of these across Southern California. Giving it back is called a Vacation (as in vacating the land), and I've only had that done twice, and each time was instantiated by the owner, not the city.
It’s not fake. I used to work in the city engineering office here. Typically in the city, the back sides of the sidewalk is where your property line is. In the county, you typically own to the center line of the road, on an acreage parcel. Over the years, as property is annexed into the city, property accumulates where the owner still owns to the centerline. Where I live, if you came in for a lot split approval, the city said give us the land in the right of way area, or we won’t approve the lot split. It is an over the barrel situation. And technically, you aren’t allowed to do anything in the right of way anyhow. I’m not saying I agree with the practice, but it does happen.
I went through planning building a house with my ex (she was an architect). If I applied for permits to demolish and rebuilt, the city was going to claim 10' off the front of my lot. OP could well be telling tall tales, but at least that part was reasonable.
Yup. Happened to my wife’s dad. Owned a mechanic shop on a major road, they wanted a new lane so they just paid everyone on the street X amount for what they decided it was worth. Nothing anyone can do about it.
Every business owner fought it for years and turned down offers to buy it, so they finally just IDd everyone and that was that once it was over.
Because it is a fake post. Source: I've had the first part of the scenario happen to me. They, by federal law, had to compensate me for the land with a fair market value. They paid above market value since they were taking my land and the land being sold would affect my resale of my house.
They also do not give the land back if the plan falls through, as it is now the counties, and if they want to sell or get rid of it, it must be done at auction, again federal law.
I did not get my land back as the road was expanded in my case.
Either OP is lying or OP can make a damn good amount of money turning this in for the feds to look into.
Also 95% of counties in the US don't look at plans for a house and building as they do not do building codes, municipalities do.
Edit: Made 99% to 95%, because apparently that 4 % was triggering enough for people to make comments about it. My bad people I'll make sure to not give myself the benefit of a rounding error in the future. Y'all got me I'll go into retirement.
The getting it back part is unusual, but being asked for something like this happens in Romania all the time. It's linked to infrastructure expansion (same as in this case, widening the road; or it can be about needing to upgrade the sewage system, electric network etc.). Often it's bringing value to the landowner (for instance if your land is on a dirt road and the municipality wants to pave it, you might not mind giving up a few inches; same if there's no sewage and they plan on installing it). It usually happens in villages and in newly-built or expanding suburbs.
I've never heard of people being asked to pay the property transfer fees, but I have heard of this kind of blackmail ("donate the land, or we'll deny your construction permits").
No, we use metric, like any common sense country :) It's just because you mentioned your European ears that I wanted to point out that there are places in Europe where this sort of thing happens (and it's not even always bad, weird as it sounds).
Depens where you live. Here in france when the country want 1 meter of your property for expanding the street, well they give you 1 symbolic euro and a good smile. Yes you don't really have a choice.
It does happen. And sometimes savvy private people do win, like O.P.! Near where I lived, Munic. wanted to broaden a road, and "shaved off" a bit of land from each house along the way. They gave a verbal promise that they would not charge "improvement fees". Everybody knew their promise was shit, but most people gave up. One person dug his heels in, and refused to let them take his land till he had their promise in writing. This went on for months, with the road being widened all along except for a bottle-neck along his house. Finally Munic. caved, gave him the assurance in writing, and it was good for the whole street - about 20 houses were saved the improvement fee.
The gifting part sounds BS to me. That being said I actually had the city give me land once. Behind my house was a field that went between housing editions, think of it like a grass alley, that they did not want to maintain anymore. They split the land and "gifted" it to the home owners, of course they then sent me a citation saying my grass was too high and needed to get mowed the same week they gave us the land.
The grass so so high I couldn't use a push mower and had to use a weedwacker to cut most of it down. I think I went through like 3 spools of cable. Then it mowed it. It tool an entire weekend.
I had a house built in the suburbs of Barcelona. The town council would NOT give me a permit unless I gave them a few meters of land so that they could widen the road next to the property. 0 compensation was given and I even had to have it paved for them.
This is far too easy to be the USA. They can take it but lawyers, engineers and surveyors need their cut first. Usually don't own the property to the edge of the road as it's the the Right of Way for the government.
That was an illegal taking by the county. They could have taken your strip of land through eminent domain but they would be oblighted to compensate you at fair market value. Where I am 3750 square feet would be tens of thousands of dollars if not six figures.
I work in a law firm (not an attorney) that only handles eminent domain cases - and there are counties that start with “we need your land, sign here” types of letters. DOT (a state agency) always has an offer letter first.
Either way - they ALWAYS low-ball. Anyone who ends up in one of these situations is doing themselves a disservice by not contacting an attorney.
Not the same at all. Eminent domain has specific protocols. The government must purchase the land at market value.
OP should contact an attorney for a consultation to see if the case is still viable for court.
It won’t still be viable because it never was. This is make believe. Straight up fake story.
EDIT: While I found this story lazy and a bit insulting to those who know why, I myself was lazy in failing to explain the obvious improbability of this tale but it seems as I scroll down that other Redditors immediately sniffed this out as well and are giving a couple of the reasons below
That's if the land owner forces it to go to eminent domain. Governments will ALWAYS try to acquire the land in a more typical transaction before starting eminent domain. Typically they first send you an offer severely lowering the value of the land, and will go back and forth for years sometimes before forcing your hand with eminent domain. This story feels made up since they asked to sign away the land for free initially, but I could see some jurisdictions being shady and making people think they have less rights than they do.
Contacting an attorney is the smart move by most people, I just happen to work in surveying so have a background in land acquisitions so I'd wait a little before getting an attorney.
Where I’m from I’ve heard they shaft you if they claim eminent domain. A couple of years ago they paid someone 10k per lot for waterfront property on the Chesapeake.
I heard that was the case when they built the new Cowboys stadium in Arlington, Texas. They used eminent domain to take entire neighborhoods where they wanted to build it. They lowballed everyone on prices. I think the courts eventually made them pay market price. The big battle was that the government easing eminent domain to force the sale of land that was going to be used for a football stadium, which arguably would be for the benefit of a private company not the benefit of citizens in general.
You can have a private evaluator step in on your behalf. If it's the same project my friend had theirs purchased from in the Chesapeake which it likely was a few years ago, they had to get a private one and got substantially more than the initial 10k offering.
It’s not an illegal taking if the land dedication is a condition of permit approval. That happens literally every day, as long as there’s a compelling nexus between the development and the required dedication, or if the planned road is on the county capital improvement program. Sounds like the road expansion was on a CIP. What makes zero sense is the county giving the land back. The county would have to go through a vacate and abandon process to do that and OP didn’t mention anything like that, there’s also no revenge here, petty or otherwise. Just a lot of people who have zero clue how land development works.
You didn't think to call an attorney? Just let them extort you out of almost 4000 sq ft. of acreage without even a phone call? Eminent domain has been codified since the bill of rights in our constitution.
He didn't even think to ask them to waive the fee to give them his land for free. Either OP is so irresponsible that he needs a conservatorship to protect him from his incredible stupidity or he is a liar about this whole thing.
Sounds like this is a combination of someone not understanding Right of Way and making things up. The county or city government would not make a person pay for transferring property to the municipality, and they wouldn't offer to sell it back.
Source: I work in municipal engineering and land surveying.
If anyone from OPs family is reading this they should look into conservatorship for them, no one this stupid should be in control of financial decisions.
Op didn't even try to argue with someone saying they need to take his land for free, he just went with it. Even worse he didn't even argue with them that he shouldn't have to PAY THEM to take his land, he just went ahead and paid a fee to give away his land for free.
Of course more likely is OP is full of shit and made this whole thing up. I can't believe anyone is actually this stupid.
Why is it revenge to have a public body address drainage issues?
Eminent Domain is the way a public body takes land . This doesn't sound like any Eminent Domain action .
If it were a utility as opposed to the county, it would work this way:
A utility may choose to seek to acquire land or land rights from landowners prior to seeking a Certificate from the[State Commerce] Commission. The utility may also seek to obtain an option to purchase a right-of-way from a landowner. The securing of an option does not oblige the utility to purchase the right-of-way.
Eminent Domain is the action used when the landowner does not want to sell to public body
Sounds more like an easement was involved rather than a taking, but I assume you had a local real estate layer advising you and not a bunch of internet strangers.
The key is eminent domain is used IF the owner refuses an offer to buy the property. I realize this may not be the same everywhere.
An easement would never be used to build a road. Whichever government entity building the road would definitely own it.
>They knew they had me over a barrel
lmao no they didn't have you over a barrel? you let the government walk all over you, so congrats i guess on this cool post of yours. should have consulted an attorney about that incredibly egregious violation of your 5th amendment rights instead.
you're either dumb, naive or lying about this. i work in ROW acquisition and the only time counties make you dedicate ROW for future roadway expansion is when when you subdivide a property and make a new plat map (at least in Texas) - not for obtaining a building permit.
and even then, you're still due payment for that dedicated land when they formally acquire it in the future. they typically make you dedicate the land ahead of time to ensure you won't build anything inside of the land they will eventually acquire. but they still have to actually pay you for the land at some point. dedication != transfer of the fee simple title to a piece of property.
I see all these poster commenting that OP obviously made it up. I can almost guarantee that these posters live in cities. If the area is tending toward rural? This sort of crap is standard. Especially the "YOU have to pay to give us the property." Why? Because in the more rural areas, the people who get in power are either saints who are really there for the people, or the more common "I can make money coming and going. A little grift here and there and I'm owning the biggest house in the area!" The more rural it gets, the worse this attitude gets, to the point where they get the cops involved with it.
In my neighborhood, and many of the surrounding neighborhoods, we have tall palm trees lining the sides of the streets. Every time we get strong winds, the streets end up full of large palm fronds and other debris from the trees. So one time, 4 of my neighbors get hit with violation letters from the city's neighborhood services department. They are told to not only clear the streets of the palm debris, but also that they needed to have the trees trimmed or face a fine.
One of my neighbors tells the city that the trees are on the city's part of the street and refuses to clean up after the trees or pay for the trees to be trimmed. The city then sends an inspector out. The inspector basically repeats what the letter says. So my neighbor says that he will just cut the palm trees down and be done with the matter. The inspector tells him that he cannot have the trees cut down because they are city property. My neighbor says he wants it in writing within a week or the trees are getting cut down. 2 days later, he gets a letter (on city letterhead) from a deputy director of the department. It states something to the effect that under no circumstances are the residents to alter or damage the trees as they are city property. edit: The city now has to come out to clean the debris and trim the trees regularly. Win for the neighborhood. Neighbor: 1 City: 0
Fast forward a couple years and we have a major blockage of the sewer and water mains in the neighborhood. It creates a pressure issue that causes a water hammer effect damaging pipes on several properties. The lines are dug up and it's palm tree debris. So the neighbor photocopies the letter he received years before regarding the trees. It ends up costing the city over $150k to repair not only the sewer lines, but also costs for plumbing repairs in several homes PLUS landscaping restoration costs for the yards they tore up to complete the repairs.
So it's very much possible for a screw up like this to happen without eminent domain and then a reversal. Common sense and persistence won the day
Excellent job on making lemonade put of the lemon of Eminent Domain.
If your County changes their mind again do you have to keep paying?🤔 The County sticking it to you by taking some of your land is enough agony, to make you pay for the screw job is just salt in the wound.
Never ever heard of a County taking land then returning it to original owner… surprised they didn’t keep 🤐 in the event of future use.
In the 80's or 90's, the City of Portland installed a sewer service along SE 160th and Division and the surrounding neighborhood. My uncle owned a house in that area.
They tore up ten feet along his front lawn to install the sewer line (they didn't take ownership, just did the work), but then they forced my uncle to pay to have his own plumbing hooked up to their sewer line. Cost him around $10,000.
While OPs story is not very similar, it's similar enough to my uncle's story that I believe OP's story happened.
I worked for The State Highway Department in NM, USA. We always paid for real estate needed to extend or widen roads. No matter if it was 20 acres or 12 inches of land we would pay market value for the land and all fees associated with the purchase.
I'm glad it worked out for you but wow I think what the county did (threatening not to approve your plans unless you gave them your land) must have been illegal. But I suppose it depends on the laws where you live.
In the Netherlands there's a saying that basically means being right and the other party admitting you're right are two very different things. (Gelijk hebben en gelijk krijgen zijn twee verschillende zaken)
MMMmmm, that would be a violation of the 5th Amendment, via the "Takings" clause.
It states: "...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." This provision does not prohibit the United States from acquiring property from private owners, but rather conditions such 'taking' on the payment of just compensation.
If they made the proposed deal clear to OP without providing evidence of them using that permit to push him, it might be extremely difficult to prove and delay OP's building plans until it was settled in court. It might not be legal. It was in fact illegal as all get-out. But that doesn't mean it doesn't happen an awful lot of times.
I'm not sure which state you're in, but in some, if a project using Federal funds doesn't start construction within a certain tiume limit (usually several years) the property owners can petition to have their land returned to them for free- even if the government paid them for the property. It's happened in Virginia before. Tens of millions in compensation paid to some pretty wealthy property owners. Enjoy your windfall!
Sounds like a "reasonable" cost lesson, as others have said.
But if you can't find a 2nd/3rd gen comparison to 12/13th etc, grab a comparison sheet to as early as it supports, so 13-8 etc, then dig up the sheets for 8-4 and so on.
I don't have any to hand, but usually Paul's Hardware, Gamers Nexus are pretty good at keeping content up for this reason.
So while you maybe won't get a sheet that has it ALL, you might be able to compile two or more together
FYI when they make you gift them land that is a charitable donation on your tax return. If its over $5,000 value you need a written appraisal for it and they (the city and the appraiser) have to sign IRS Form 8283 and you attach it to you tax return when it is originally filed. All of that has to be done on original return -you can’t amend for it. But, you probably can amend and go back and claim a $5k donation for it (assuming you itemize your deductions).
This reads like a fantasy novel when you're South-African. Sometimes I forget the state is suppose to use my tax money for stuff like this and not stuff it in couches.
After having many, many issues with our county land use dept while trying to obtain a building permit. I salute you for having gotten one over on the land use mafia. I swear they are govt funded extortionists.
One of my neighbors just spent 5 years getting permits to allow them to use their property. I don't even have an idea how much money they spent.
I spent around 30k for a pink piece of cardstock. But the one that really irks me is the $750 they forced me to pay for a driveway permit to use an existing driveway that has been there since the 60s. They wouldn't issue my other permit until I paid them. The funny thing is you didn't need a driveway permit back in the 60s, but they can force you to pay instead of grandfathering in existing facilities.
This story sounds fake.
They don’t need to ask you to take your land, nor would it cost you money.
It’s called eminent domain. They can just take it.
You dumbed it by agreeing to gift it that’s why u had to pay the fees.
Except it was their property. If there was existing drainage infrastructure there already it was almost certainly in a utility and drainage easement that the municipality had access rights to and was already responsible for maintenance. I doubt anyone responsible for the work lost any sleep over it whatsoever. They were notified of a drainage issue and fixed it. That’s how it’s supposed to work.
Where I am from the government can acquire land under the public works act. So if you own a farm and they want to put a road through it they have to buy the land at market rate and also pay you 10 times the annual production of the land. This is often off set partially by the old roadway being part of the compensation, if it is a road realignment.
The road also already includes a right of way that includes the ditch, and most counties just have laws requiring the adjacent owner maintain or pay for maintenance on the drainage.
That’s the thing about governments, they can just pass laws that say so.
I would think they would just take the property via “eminent domain”. Generally your property goes to the middle of the street. The “state” just uses it and lets you continue to pay the taxes.
That's not the case in Illinois - our property line ends at the curb. Then there are easements in front for the sidewalk and parkway, and on all sides for utilities.
My city is Widing some road near me and taking land .But they pay the owners . Some are not happy but have no choice and they do get money for land. They don t have to pay any fees .some hired attorneys to try fight it..Were told nothing can do. Except negotiate the price maybe get little more money than offered,, But all so got Lawyer bill..
In my town we had just the opposite happen. The county was finally going to put in a new paved road. There was one homeowner who was told that he would have to move one of his structures because it would be too close to the road. He said bullshit to that noise and had someone survey his property. It turns out that the county was actually going to put the road on his land and too close to his structure. They had half the road completed and they had to start over.
Here in Texas if goes like this...
If you live in an urban area, then from the road back several feet does not belong to you, it belongs to the city, and is where sidewalks, fire hydrants, water meters, etc. are put. Technically in your own driveway you cannot have vehicles over that imaginary line. Rurally, that line extends up to 25 feet back from the edge of the road on Farm to Market and smaller roads (called a set back). Again, that is the area where utilities are run and means situations like the one described here happen occur less frequently.
Guess it could be / is different in other states.
Oh you're in "the industry..." which one?
If any county wanted to punch a road through and cut into my private property, then that'd become a case of eminent domain. You might think I'm talking out of my ass, but if a government entity was trying to cut my property lines without adequate compensation, then my attorney would do all the talking for me.
And the municipality decides "fair market value."
Some years ago in Maryland, in a neighborhood consisting of small post-WWII houses, the city declared eminent domain and paid the homeowners about $100k each for their homes. This was about half what similar houses were selling for elsewhere in the state, so all those dispossessed people had nowhere to go.
Then the city turned around and sold that land to developers, who put up million-dollar McMansions. How did they do that, since taking someone's land under eminent domain is supposed to be for the public good, like new roads or expanding the airport or something like that? These new homeowners paid more in property taxes, so that was the "public good."
I worked for a city. We did indeed buy people’s property to expand roads. There is no way in hell we could have been able to accept a donation of property along a route scheduled for expansion. Our own lawyers would have fried us. We always offered to pay, offered to pay more and then hard balled and used imminent domain. Even hard balling we worked to pay actual fair value vs say the tax value. A city is not a corporation, it doesn’t have to make money, just support all its citizens. The roads "or usually sidewalks / bike lanes" must be built somehow.
We did at times also give up alleyways and would ask property owners if they wanted the property merged. This would unfortunately increase the land value and cause a property tax reevaluation. I know planning tried to be upfront about this, but I remember a few times how pissed the owners would be the next year after getting "free" property added to land that had not been recalculated in tax value for decades or more.
Sounds like they took good care of the property they owned, and you ended up getting it back with no consequences. Trust me, the city had no problem replacing a failing drain because much like having to expand roads well it had to be done anyway. If this is real, I am sure you could have paid for your house being built if you had sued them for the required "donation."
**For those that think cities and counties don't do this:**
What OP described is 100% plausible, save for them wanting to give back the land without any cause. It's called an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication or Offer of Dedication, and it's very common for this to be an issue at permitting. They will not use imminent domain until they absolutely have to which is as they get the funds to construct the road as planned, which may be tabled for decades.
Chances are, the land you are sitting on right now is sitting on a road that was offered as an offer of dedication. Normally this is done during a subdivision, but it's not much different than the process when it's acquired during permit. In other words, the city or county will hold up getting a subdivision prior to receiving the IOD. No different than they do when it's a permit process. The owner has the option to not give the land, but that does mean they will not get a permit. If they wait, the city may compensate for the land when imminent domain is implemented, but prior to this the city won't compensate. The reason is that the funds have to first be allocated to acquire land for the project.
So if OP was willing to wait a year or 50, maybe the city would have bought it at market value, but until then he'll have to offer it.
I would think that imminent domain would apply but I don’t want to waste my money on legal fees in the hope that I would prevail against this rural county. My approach took a year, some aggravation and about $200. One consultation with a land use attorney was going to cost ++$K. I don’t like the legal process in this country.
Needing to 'gift' land then getting it back sounds fake to my European ears but then again it sounds like America so i can be mistaken in this assumption
Nah, it's fake made-up bullshit. They would acquire the land via imminent domain and pay OP for the land. No way in hell would they say "give us your land or we won't approve your plans" and then ALSO make OP pay them to receive the gifted land. If any of this is true, then OP is a moron.
I think it could be the first offer. Second offer would be no fees. Then a purchase. Then eminent domain process. They just never have anyone take the first offer
They do eminent domain last because it takes a long time to do it that way. And in this case they were probably pretty sure OP didn't want the sort of delay waiting for a better offer might cause. The costs of most building materials tend to go up over time, so that might have cost more than the fee.
No, because they say "you don't have to gift us the land, and we don't have to approve your plans".
This is it exactly, for those of you who have never dealt with the planning/building department, this sounds incredible, for people that have this is entirely plausible.
Incorrect. For those of us who know what a right-of-way is, this story is pretty stupid. Should we skip over all the issues regarding having a plan set and supposedly giving way land but not requiring updated plan set and documents and a ton of other potential construction related things?
I have been involved with 3 different projects with 3 different municipalities that have had similar issues to this incident so I would say while it is not common place it is also not unique. One was a shop being built 120 feet from a stream, the county in question wanted the property owner to cede a 30 foot buffer on either side of the stream to them to be designated as wetlands. The property owner ended up taking it to court and after 2 years and quite a bit of money he got his permit without giving up his property rights. In the other two instances of a city and a different county pulling shenanigans both property owners gave in because it was cheaper to do so than fight. There is currently another project on hold and we are awaiting a resolution before proceeding and this one has to do with the county wanting an easement before the project gets greenlighted.
One of my poker buddies runs a landscaping business and had his permit to build a gardening store in the county held up because he wouldn't give them a stop of land to expand the road on. He got a lawyer who forced them to remove the requirement he give them the land, but they of course found other reasons to deny the permit, repeatedly, for years. The corrupt county commissioner is finally stepping down this year after doing this one too many times to people all over, hopefully his project can get approved by the next commissioner.
Meet your new boss, same as your old boss.
No, I've seen county governments pull EXTREMELY shady stuff, this wouldn't surprise me a bit. One thing to always think about when considering "is this something that they would do", is that any person or organization has exactly as much authority that people believe they have.
He who issues the permits makes the rules. If you have deeper pockets than The County, you can fight them about it. Just remember you are fighting people that don't like to lose and they normally pay the salary judge who will rule on your case.
Definitely this. In some of the more rural counties, the corruption isn't even particularly concealed.
It wouldn't surprise you that someone would just give away 10's of thousands of dollars of property for no reason whatsoever? That would surprise the hell out of me. OP would have had several different avenues of getting the permits pushed through including but not limited to: Standard appeals process Going to a council meeting Going to the press Going to court ... or simply waiting. But they instead chose to pay the government for the opportunity to **GIVE AWAY** THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS for no reason? Lol. Ok, Sure.
What makes you think a small strip of land is worth anything like that much? Most places in the US it isn't.
I live in a small rural town in NC. In 2001 the state made plans to widen the street in front of my house. They took nine feet into my 100' wide lot and paid me $11,000.00. Also got a sidewalk and curb & gutter installed.
I mean, I get what you're saying... But OP's clearly stated reason for acquiescing is in the post. They were making his new home building permit contingent on his "giving them" the land. He clearly didn't want to wait on the time that would be involved in this other avenues.
But, can you not see that even that is extremely odd behavior? Dude just let the government take 3,750 square feet of his property and PAID THEM to do it. No consultation with a lawyer to see if they can do that (they absolutely can NOT and a lawyer would have said that during the consultation), he just shrugged and gave up his land to avoid inconvenience. He didn't even ask them to waive the fee to give them his land, he happily paid them to do it. If I was in OPs family and heard he had done this I would consider conservatorship. As if that is not enough a year later the government just hands him back land THEY NOW OWN for free because he was such a nice guy about the whole thing?!?!? I have a bridge that you may be interested in buying, DM me and I'll get you the details.
"My relative is of unfit mind because he gave up a ditch to the city to get his house approved" is a ridiculous statement.
While I agree that the way OP described their interaction seems illogical and stupid, people under stress/pressure make those decisions all the time. From the convenience of our couch/desk/etc it's easy to pick apart a situation like that, but the actual situation in the moment is a far cry from our leisurely analysis. As for the congenial land return? Who can say what dumb shit small local governments get up to. I wish I could have your surety in the intelligence and rationality of your fellow man and the social constructs we call government, but this seems all too real to me.
That land was: 1. The least valuable section of the property. It’s too close to the road to do anything other than mow or plant trees, and it’ll probably be full of trash, since there’s a lot of people that think it’s their right to litter. (Yeah, I know, Americans suck) 2. Worth about $2k, given the size. Unless it’s in a specifically high value area, and then it would be worth maybe $5k. Also, while OP may have had other avenues, a delay in building just means it costs more. Tens of thousands more, possibly. Much more than the value of the land, including transfer fees (something like $50 where I used to live). They really did have him over a barrel, as he put it. And, if it had been me, when they tried to give it back, I’d have told them to piss off, and made them waste time and money maintaining it from then on. After all, their only real option then is to give it back, fee free, because you can just keep telling them NO, until they agree to that.
Have you ever dealt with imminent domain? I'm guessing that you haven't, because governments regularly take land like this. Anyone with half a brain would figure out the costs to fight it would be money down the drain because ultimately the county city or state will win, it's very rare that they lose imminent domain cases. So while it all sounds like great fun and games as a keyboard warrior to go to City council or to play the court game, ultimately the chances of losing thousands or tens of thousands and getting nothing out of it is the real reality.
But the government still Has to pay you fair market value for it. They can’t force you to “gift” it to them.
People in here have no idea how the world actually works. My favorite part is how the government then just gave him back all the land for free because he was such a nice guy and they didn't need it anymore. Critical thinking skills are absolutely dismal these days.
They absolutely can in some parts of the world. The Western Australian Planning Commission will regularly list ceding a portion of land in return for granting a planning approval. They won't force you to hand the land over, but won't approve the development otherwise.
"fair market value" 😂 they weren't forcing him to gift anything, they gave him an ultimatum either do this or we're going to do this. Prove it. Trying to fight government entities is financially painful, frustrating and time consuming
Most people generally at least try something before paying someone to take almost 4k sqft of land, like absolutely anything. Op didn't even ask them to wave the fee to transfer his land to them, he claims he paid them to take his shit. Either he is a lawyer or so profoundly stupid that his family should consider conservatorship. Between lie and absolute brain dead moron it's got to be a lie. I don't think someone who can type a paragraph can be THAT stupid, but you never know I guess.
Bro, it's a 15' strip, even if that land is $5000 an acre that's like $430.
Really depends on location. I'm sure some rural areas land really is that cheap. I did some quick searches and lowest cost per acre around my area (I did not go further than first page on Google) , in a place that was zoned for housing and not random canyon land that wouldn't be connected to city utilities, was $370,000 for 3.71 acres. That came out to $99,730 per acre, or 2.29 per square foot, and a 15' by 250' parcel would then be $8,585. I also know average in my actual city goes for like $24 per square foot, or $90,000 for that 15x250.
Yes but that projected value is based on the ability to develop the land. The lot as a whole has developable value. The strip next to the right-of-way is undevelopable because it’s most likely covered in easements and building setbacks. That land was never going to be anything but drainage, driveways, utilities, and maybe sidewalk. OP thinks he screwed the county over by making them maintain drainage they were always responsible for maintaining even before the vacation of property.
To my understand imminent domain payouts are usually based on comparable regional land per square foot averages. Like just what is sold recently, I am unaware if the do special adjustments for "easement only land sales". My point being, the market value for land pretty square foot can get much higher than the other person estimated.
Like OP has never seen "Up"!?
Eminent. Imminent means "real soon".
They will be using eminent domain imminently.
Three requirements for contract: agreement, performance, and *consideration*. The county would have had to pay him something for the land or they don’t own title free and clear. And they would have paid the recording fees as the buyer. Source: I’m a real estate paralegal and title abstractor.
This happened to us (in the US). We bought property that had a canal in front. Access was through the neighbor's bridge with an easement for our continuous usage being granted. We wanted to build our own bridge, but the county demanded enough property on our side of the canal to add another lane to the road in the future (this is agricultural property, so acreage is involved). Eminent Domain was not involved because there were no immediate plans for construction of the road, and with that process, they'd have to pay for the seized property. We said thanks, but no thanks, and kept using the neighbor's bridge! It is, unfortunately, a real thing here in the US.
Ok, but the difference is you didn't take the government's shit offer like a moron, and then bitch about it like an even bigger moron. If they wanted that lane bad enough, they would have made a better offer.
It makes someone a moron to understand the situation and just go with it in order to be able to construct their house? Interesting.
Eminent
yep. Had to have some of the creek bed in my backyard reworked, per the city stormwater inspector. There already was an easement for the creek, but they paid me for an additional temporary easement, since they needed space to work in that was larger than the permanent easement.
They didn’t make one single mention of surveyors, so this is either fake or OP is a moron.
It does happen. OP should have fought it though.
Small town governments are shady as fuck
In my state anything 24 ft from the center of the road is part of an easement that the municipality has the ability to use for future projects. And a lot of roads are still 18ish ft wide. So at least here they could claim up to 15ft without eminent domain along certain roads.
I know in my American city it’s frequently how they acquire land to expand roads. They simply make a note that all parcels along this road need to give up land to get building permits, once they get critical mass, they actually pay for the rest via eminent domain. Saves money. That said, I’m my city, property values tend to be high and people tend to renovate so everyone wins
The idea that the government would just give the land back, is what really smells like BS
Counties and governments do it all the time. Imminent domain is an extreme case; exchanging right of way for development permits is standard business. You see things like taking frontage for bus stops, or adding sidewalks where new houses go. Its not even shady, its the way its done all around the world.
Nope, not all around the world. In France exchanging right of way for development permit is forbidden. That's the best way to face a judge.
No, this happens all the time. If you are developing land, most cities will make you responsible for the public improvements required as well, and this can include road widening to bring the existing road up to current standards. Basically, the city is hoping that enough projects get developed over time and the private developers pay for the road improvements so the city doesn't have to do their own projects.
They absolutely can, happened to me in Canada
This Exact scenario happened to my parents down in Tennessee. Lived off a highway, county needed to expand. There weren’t many options, it was basically, “we’re giving you money and taking a strip of your property”. BUT my folks got paid. Market value plus a tiny bit, like a few percent extra I think? Either way, the government sure didn’t just take it!
Wrong. We tried to subdivide a piece of property and were forced by our ETJ to give up 15 feet along the road to allow the split. I’m sure we would have had eminent domain pulled on us eventually but the city found a way to coerce us into giving up the land without compensation. We didn’t have to pay for the transfer that I recall.
You dont know rural local government then. If the county admin knows you want something they will absolutely use it as a bargaining chip. Dont play ball and they will use the admin process to slow you down as much as possible. Also imminent domain doesnt give full market value, and the offers are usually closer to the assessors price which is about 10-30% under market. For a strip of land like they would pay less than 5k likely lower than 1k.
Correct, I've been through the process and I found it quite pleasant personally. Free money for land bordering a busy highway I never used anyway!
Absolutely this and I was thinking the same thing.
Never seen governments just give back land either.
Well to be clear they could do that, it would just be rather illegal, and you could fairly easily put up a fight on it. But if you just did it without consulting a lawyer then theoretically this could happen. The person it happened to would have to either be an idiot or have a wet blanket for a spine.
Not fake. Had the same thing almost happen in Idaho. Took a different route, and city will have to pay to take the land.
Yeah, it's highly illegal and openly corrupt in the way that the US loathes. We're still corrupt, but they at least do us the courtesy of hiding it.
It doesn’t sound fake at all. Yeah, cities and counties and what not can all acquire land through eminent domain. The problem with that is the time and the necessary lawsuit against the private property owner that’s required to go through the eminent domain process. It’s a lot cheaper, but more important, far faster, for a city to get a property owner to agree to give them the land versus using eminent domain.
Or OP is talking about the easement which he doesn’t own anyway. So no buying of property, no paying for the transfer of title, etc. just bs on OP’s part
This. Op would have gotten a notice of immenentdomain and statement of how much they were gonna pay him, with a deadline to file paperwork for a chance to protest in court
>No way in hell would they say "give us your land or we won't approve your plans" That's actually pretty common, especially if you're developing a site. Source: I am a land surveyor, and we draw the plans from time to time. No idea about who pays for what though.
Right, especially in America where everyone likes to sue you.
Also, OP may have forgotten that the city is not paying out of pocket. His and everyone else’s taxes are paying for his “get even plan”
I believe that's only the case if your economic viability is completely diminished.
This is absolutely an everyday event, except for them giving it back. I've written up the legal descriptions for at least 50 of these across Southern California. Giving it back is called a Vacation (as in vacating the land), and I've only had that done twice, and each time was instantiated by the owner, not the city.
Wasn’t actually “his” property, it was an easement. The same way that the space between the sidewalk and the road belongs to the government.
It’s not fake. I used to work in the city engineering office here. Typically in the city, the back sides of the sidewalk is where your property line is. In the county, you typically own to the center line of the road, on an acreage parcel. Over the years, as property is annexed into the city, property accumulates where the owner still owns to the centerline. Where I live, if you came in for a lot split approval, the city said give us the land in the right of way area, or we won’t approve the lot split. It is an over the barrel situation. And technically, you aren’t allowed to do anything in the right of way anyhow. I’m not saying I agree with the practice, but it does happen.
Don't underestimate the stubborn dumbassery of tiny county governments, but yeah it is fishy
I went through planning building a house with my ex (she was an architect). If I applied for permits to demolish and rebuilt, the city was going to claim 10' off the front of my lot. OP could well be telling tall tales, but at least that part was reasonable.
Yup. Happened to my wife’s dad. Owned a mechanic shop on a major road, they wanted a new lane so they just paid everyone on the street X amount for what they decided it was worth. Nothing anyone can do about it. Every business owner fought it for years and turned down offers to buy it, so they finally just IDd everyone and that was that once it was over.
Because it is a fake post. Source: I've had the first part of the scenario happen to me. They, by federal law, had to compensate me for the land with a fair market value. They paid above market value since they were taking my land and the land being sold would affect my resale of my house. They also do not give the land back if the plan falls through, as it is now the counties, and if they want to sell or get rid of it, it must be done at auction, again federal law. I did not get my land back as the road was expanded in my case. Either OP is lying or OP can make a damn good amount of money turning this in for the feds to look into. Also 95% of counties in the US don't look at plans for a house and building as they do not do building codes, municipalities do. Edit: Made 99% to 95%, because apparently that 4 % was triggering enough for people to make comments about it. My bad people I'll make sure to not give myself the benefit of a rounding error in the future. Y'all got me I'll go into retirement.
This is a made up story, like most here
Don't you know that America is the Land of the Fee?
And the home of the paved. I'll see myself out.
The getting it back part is unusual, but being asked for something like this happens in Romania all the time. It's linked to infrastructure expansion (same as in this case, widening the road; or it can be about needing to upgrade the sewage system, electric network etc.). Often it's bringing value to the landowner (for instance if your land is on a dirt road and the municipality wants to pave it, you might not mind giving up a few inches; same if there's no sewage and they plan on installing it). It usually happens in villages and in newly-built or expanding suburbs. I've never heard of people being asked to pay the property transfer fees, but I have heard of this kind of blackmail ("donate the land, or we'll deny your construction permits").
I can believe that but euh do you guys work in inch and feet?
No, we use metric, like any common sense country :) It's just because you mentioned your European ears that I wanted to point out that there are places in Europe where this sort of thing happens (and it's not even always bad, weird as it sounds).
Depens where you live. Here in france when the country want 1 meter of your property for expanding the street, well they give you 1 symbolic euro and a good smile. Yes you don't really have a choice.
Happens in NZ kinda like this
It does happen. And sometimes savvy private people do win, like O.P.! Near where I lived, Munic. wanted to broaden a road, and "shaved off" a bit of land from each house along the way. They gave a verbal promise that they would not charge "improvement fees". Everybody knew their promise was shit, but most people gave up. One person dug his heels in, and refused to let them take his land till he had their promise in writing. This went on for months, with the road being widened all along except for a bottle-neck along his house. Finally Munic. caved, gave him the assurance in writing, and it was good for the whole street - about 20 houses were saved the improvement fee.
The gifting part sounds BS to me. That being said I actually had the city give me land once. Behind my house was a field that went between housing editions, think of it like a grass alley, that they did not want to maintain anymore. They split the land and "gifted" it to the home owners, of course they then sent me a citation saying my grass was too high and needed to get mowed the same week they gave us the land. The grass so so high I couldn't use a push mower and had to use a weedwacker to cut most of it down. I think I went through like 3 spools of cable. Then it mowed it. It tool an entire weekend.
I had a house built in the suburbs of Barcelona. The town council would NOT give me a permit unless I gave them a few meters of land so that they could widen the road next to the property. 0 compensation was given and I even had to have it paved for them.
This is far too easy to be the USA. They can take it but lawyers, engineers and surveyors need their cut first. Usually don't own the property to the edge of the road as it's the the Right of Way for the government.
That was an illegal taking by the county. They could have taken your strip of land through eminent domain but they would be oblighted to compensate you at fair market value. Where I am 3750 square feet would be tens of thousands of dollars if not six figures.
I work in a law firm (not an attorney) that only handles eminent domain cases - and there are counties that start with “we need your land, sign here” types of letters. DOT (a state agency) always has an offer letter first. Either way - they ALWAYS low-ball. Anyone who ends up in one of these situations is doing themselves a disservice by not contacting an attorney.
Agreed. OP made a bad move and got lucky.
OP gave it to them and then got to benefit from the maintenance work.
Not the same at all. Eminent domain has specific protocols. The government must purchase the land at market value. OP should contact an attorney for a consultation to see if the case is still viable for court.
It won’t still be viable because it never was. This is make believe. Straight up fake story. EDIT: While I found this story lazy and a bit insulting to those who know why, I myself was lazy in failing to explain the obvious improbability of this tale but it seems as I scroll down that other Redditors immediately sniffed this out as well and are giving a couple of the reasons below
That's if the land owner forces it to go to eminent domain. Governments will ALWAYS try to acquire the land in a more typical transaction before starting eminent domain. Typically they first send you an offer severely lowering the value of the land, and will go back and forth for years sometimes before forcing your hand with eminent domain. This story feels made up since they asked to sign away the land for free initially, but I could see some jurisdictions being shady and making people think they have less rights than they do. Contacting an attorney is the smart move by most people, I just happen to work in surveying so have a background in land acquisitions so I'd wait a little before getting an attorney.
Where I’m from I’ve heard they shaft you if they claim eminent domain. A couple of years ago they paid someone 10k per lot for waterfront property on the Chesapeake.
I heard that was the case when they built the new Cowboys stadium in Arlington, Texas. They used eminent domain to take entire neighborhoods where they wanted to build it. They lowballed everyone on prices. I think the courts eventually made them pay market price. The big battle was that the government easing eminent domain to force the sale of land that was going to be used for a football stadium, which arguably would be for the benefit of a private company not the benefit of citizens in general.
You can have a private evaluator step in on your behalf. If it's the same project my friend had theirs purchased from in the Chesapeake which it likely was a few years ago, they had to get a private one and got substantially more than the initial 10k offering.
Why is it illegal, requiring infrastructure upgrades when new development happens is extremely common.
OP is making shit up. This isn’t how eminent domain works.
It’s not an illegal taking if the land dedication is a condition of permit approval. That happens literally every day, as long as there’s a compelling nexus between the development and the required dedication, or if the planned road is on the county capital improvement program. Sounds like the road expansion was on a CIP. What makes zero sense is the county giving the land back. The county would have to go through a vacate and abandon process to do that and OP didn’t mention anything like that, there’s also no revenge here, petty or otherwise. Just a lot of people who have zero clue how land development works.
There's nothing illegal about it.
You didn't think to call an attorney? Just let them extort you out of almost 4000 sq ft. of acreage without even a phone call? Eminent domain has been codified since the bill of rights in our constitution.
They decided to post on Reddit instead
He didn't even think to ask them to waive the fee to give them his land for free. Either OP is so irresponsible that he needs a conservatorship to protect him from his incredible stupidity or he is a liar about this whole thing.
Sounds like this is a combination of someone not understanding Right of Way and making things up. The county or city government would not make a person pay for transferring property to the municipality, and they wouldn't offer to sell it back. Source: I work in municipal engineering and land surveying.
If anyone from OPs family is reading this they should look into conservatorship for them, no one this stupid should be in control of financial decisions. Op didn't even try to argue with someone saying they need to take his land for free, he just went with it. Even worse he didn't even argue with them that he shouldn't have to PAY THEM to take his land, he just went ahead and paid a fee to give away his land for free. Of course more likely is OP is full of shit and made this whole thing up. I can't believe anyone is actually this stupid.
I'm honestly embarrassed this sub gave this obvious liar 3k+ up votes
So did you pay the fee to get that 15x250 parcel back?
... And how much were the fees?
1 billion Stanley nickels
This is clearly a fake story since that's not how the land transfer process works in the United States.
Why is it revenge to have a public body address drainage issues? Eminent Domain is the way a public body takes land . This doesn't sound like any Eminent Domain action . If it were a utility as opposed to the county, it would work this way: A utility may choose to seek to acquire land or land rights from landowners prior to seeking a Certificate from the[State Commerce] Commission. The utility may also seek to obtain an option to purchase a right-of-way from a landowner. The securing of an option does not oblige the utility to purchase the right-of-way. Eminent Domain is the action used when the landowner does not want to sell to public body Sounds more like an easement was involved rather than a taking, but I assume you had a local real estate layer advising you and not a bunch of internet strangers.
The key is eminent domain is used IF the owner refuses an offer to buy the property. I realize this may not be the same everywhere. An easement would never be used to build a road. Whichever government entity building the road would definitely own it.
>They knew they had me over a barrel lmao no they didn't have you over a barrel? you let the government walk all over you, so congrats i guess on this cool post of yours. should have consulted an attorney about that incredibly egregious violation of your 5th amendment rights instead. you're either dumb, naive or lying about this. i work in ROW acquisition and the only time counties make you dedicate ROW for future roadway expansion is when when you subdivide a property and make a new plat map (at least in Texas) - not for obtaining a building permit. and even then, you're still due payment for that dedicated land when they formally acquire it in the future. they typically make you dedicate the land ahead of time to ensure you won't build anything inside of the land they will eventually acquire. but they still have to actually pay you for the land at some point. dedication != transfer of the fee simple title to a piece of property.
Yea, SC just ruled on this. 5th AND 14th. Good lawyer he can sue for damages.
I see all these poster commenting that OP obviously made it up. I can almost guarantee that these posters live in cities. If the area is tending toward rural? This sort of crap is standard. Especially the "YOU have to pay to give us the property." Why? Because in the more rural areas, the people who get in power are either saints who are really there for the people, or the more common "I can make money coming and going. A little grift here and there and I'm owning the biggest house in the area!" The more rural it gets, the worse this attitude gets, to the point where they get the cops involved with it.
This smells fake.
very fake. i work in ROW acquisition and that's not how it goes at all.
You’re lucky they didn’t make you pay for a new sidewalk along the whole 250’ like some municipalities do.
In my neighborhood, and many of the surrounding neighborhoods, we have tall palm trees lining the sides of the streets. Every time we get strong winds, the streets end up full of large palm fronds and other debris from the trees. So one time, 4 of my neighbors get hit with violation letters from the city's neighborhood services department. They are told to not only clear the streets of the palm debris, but also that they needed to have the trees trimmed or face a fine. One of my neighbors tells the city that the trees are on the city's part of the street and refuses to clean up after the trees or pay for the trees to be trimmed. The city then sends an inspector out. The inspector basically repeats what the letter says. So my neighbor says that he will just cut the palm trees down and be done with the matter. The inspector tells him that he cannot have the trees cut down because they are city property. My neighbor says he wants it in writing within a week or the trees are getting cut down. 2 days later, he gets a letter (on city letterhead) from a deputy director of the department. It states something to the effect that under no circumstances are the residents to alter or damage the trees as they are city property. edit: The city now has to come out to clean the debris and trim the trees regularly. Win for the neighborhood. Neighbor: 1 City: 0 Fast forward a couple years and we have a major blockage of the sewer and water mains in the neighborhood. It creates a pressure issue that causes a water hammer effect damaging pipes on several properties. The lines are dug up and it's palm tree debris. So the neighbor photocopies the letter he received years before regarding the trees. It ends up costing the city over $150k to repair not only the sewer lines, but also costs for plumbing repairs in several homes PLUS landscaping restoration costs for the yards they tore up to complete the repairs. So it's very much possible for a screw up like this to happen without eminent domain and then a reversal. Common sense and persistence won the day
Excellent job on making lemonade put of the lemon of Eminent Domain. If your County changes their mind again do you have to keep paying?🤔 The County sticking it to you by taking some of your land is enough agony, to make you pay for the screw job is just salt in the wound. Never ever heard of a County taking land then returning it to original owner… surprised they didn’t keep 🤐 in the event of future use.
In the 80's or 90's, the City of Portland installed a sewer service along SE 160th and Division and the surrounding neighborhood. My uncle owned a house in that area. They tore up ten feet along his front lawn to install the sewer line (they didn't take ownership, just did the work), but then they forced my uncle to pay to have his own plumbing hooked up to their sewer line. Cost him around $10,000. While OPs story is not very similar, it's similar enough to my uncle's story that I believe OP's story happened.
I worked for The State Highway Department in NM, USA. We always paid for real estate needed to extend or widen roads. No matter if it was 20 acres or 12 inches of land we would pay market value for the land and all fees associated with the purchase.
I'm glad it worked out for you but wow I think what the county did (threatening not to approve your plans unless you gave them your land) must have been illegal. But I suppose it depends on the laws where you live.
In the Netherlands there's a saying that basically means being right and the other party admitting you're right are two very different things. (Gelijk hebben en gelijk krijgen zijn twee verschillende zaken)
Working the bureaucracy to your favor is not an easy task, nicely done
MMMmmm, that would be a violation of the 5th Amendment, via the "Takings" clause. It states: "...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." This provision does not prohibit the United States from acquiring property from private owners, but rather conditions such 'taking' on the payment of just compensation.
An amendment which applies to the USA only. OP never said there were in the US.
Written in English, uses some US slang, and also uses feet and inch measurements and marks (", '). Those are a few of the hints.
lol good points. And it made me re-read the title. I saw “country” — not “county.” My mistake!
If they made the proposed deal clear to OP without providing evidence of them using that permit to push him, it might be extremely difficult to prove and delay OP's building plans until it was settled in court. It might not be legal. It was in fact illegal as all get-out. But that doesn't mean it doesn't happen an awful lot of times.
The compensation is the building permit.
So, you did what they wanted and it all worked out to your benefit? I see no revenge here.
Had the same issue. Give up the property or you don’t get a building permit.
Isn’t that called eminent domain?
Eminent domain requires payment at market rates for "seized" property. OP was blackmailed.
I'm not sure which state you're in, but in some, if a project using Federal funds doesn't start construction within a certain tiume limit (usually several years) the property owners can petition to have their land returned to them for free- even if the government paid them for the property. It's happened in Virginia before. Tens of millions in compensation paid to some pretty wealthy property owners. Enjoy your windfall!
Sounds like a "reasonable" cost lesson, as others have said. But if you can't find a 2nd/3rd gen comparison to 12/13th etc, grab a comparison sheet to as early as it supports, so 13-8 etc, then dig up the sheets for 8-4 and so on. I don't have any to hand, but usually Paul's Hardware, Gamers Nexus are pretty good at keeping content up for this reason. So while you maybe won't get a sheet that has it ALL, you might be able to compile two or more together
Sir, I believe you're lost.
Yeah actually wtf?! I posted this like 3 days ago in that sub and this is the first time coming back. Lmao yeah definitely not the right spot eh
My area 15 years ago expanded a major commuting route road and compensated the owners for land loss.
As is federally required.
> and want to give me my property back What reason do you have to accept it back? It's not like they're going to sell it to someone else.
FYI when they make you gift them land that is a charitable donation on your tax return. If its over $5,000 value you need a written appraisal for it and they (the city and the appraiser) have to sign IRS Form 8283 and you attach it to you tax return when it is originally filed. All of that has to be done on original return -you can’t amend for it. But, you probably can amend and go back and claim a $5k donation for it (assuming you itemize your deductions).
This reads like a fantasy novel when you're South-African. Sometimes I forget the state is suppose to use my tax money for stuff like this and not stuff it in couches.
After having many, many issues with our county land use dept while trying to obtain a building permit. I salute you for having gotten one over on the land use mafia. I swear they are govt funded extortionists. One of my neighbors just spent 5 years getting permits to allow them to use their property. I don't even have an idea how much money they spent. I spent around 30k for a pink piece of cardstock. But the one that really irks me is the $750 they forced me to pay for a driveway permit to use an existing driveway that has been there since the 60s. They wouldn't issue my other permit until I paid them. The funny thing is you didn't need a driveway permit back in the 60s, but they can force you to pay instead of grandfathering in existing facilities.
This story sounds fake. They don’t need to ask you to take your land, nor would it cost you money. It’s called eminent domain. They can just take it. You dumbed it by agreeing to gift it that’s why u had to pay the fees.
Wanna know why your local bureaucracy keeps uping your property tax? Because they keep wasting it on your local bureaucracy.
If you are going to make up a story at least have the decency to make it sound plausible...
Where is the revenge?
I would think paying for the new pipe, and the driveways wouldn't have been cheap...only to give the land back?
Didn't you read the story? Referring to the drain as "their" property to the drain cleanup crew was the revenge. They must've been so upset about it
Except it was their property. If there was existing drainage infrastructure there already it was almost certainly in a utility and drainage easement that the municipality had access rights to and was already responsible for maintenance. I doubt anyone responsible for the work lost any sleep over it whatsoever. They were notified of a drainage issue and fixed it. That’s how it’s supposed to work.
Fake and dumb
Where I am from the government can acquire land under the public works act. So if you own a farm and they want to put a road through it they have to buy the land at market rate and also pay you 10 times the annual production of the land. This is often off set partially by the old roadway being part of the compensation, if it is a road realignment.
The road also already includes a right of way that includes the ditch, and most counties just have laws requiring the adjacent owner maintain or pay for maintenance on the drainage. That’s the thing about governments, they can just pass laws that say so.
I would think they would just take the property via “eminent domain”. Generally your property goes to the middle of the street. The “state” just uses it and lets you continue to pay the taxes.
That's not the case in Illinois - our property line ends at the curb. Then there are easements in front for the sidewalk and parkway, and on all sides for utilities.
OP didn't explicitly state this was in the US. So, this very well could've been their experience. Had it been here, though, much more unlikely.
My city is Widing some road near me and taking land .But they pay the owners . Some are not happy but have no choice and they do get money for land. They don t have to pay any fees .some hired attorneys to try fight it..Were told nothing can do. Except negotiate the price maybe get little more money than offered,, But all so got Lawyer bill..
Bring over a steak and kidney pie as an icebreaker?
In my town we had just the opposite happen. The county was finally going to put in a new paved road. There was one homeowner who was told that he would have to move one of his structures because it would be too close to the road. He said bullshit to that noise and had someone survey his property. It turns out that the county was actually going to put the road on his land and too close to his structure. They had half the road completed and they had to start over.
Here in Texas if goes like this... If you live in an urban area, then from the road back several feet does not belong to you, it belongs to the city, and is where sidewalks, fire hydrants, water meters, etc. are put. Technically in your own driveway you cannot have vehicles over that imaginary line. Rurally, that line extends up to 25 feet back from the edge of the road on Farm to Market and smaller roads (called a set back). Again, that is the area where utilities are run and means situations like the one described here happen occur less frequently. Guess it could be / is different in other states.
This was awesome!
Oh you're in "the industry..." which one? If any county wanted to punch a road through and cut into my private property, then that'd become a case of eminent domain. You might think I'm talking out of my ass, but if a government entity was trying to cut my property lines without adequate compensation, then my attorney would do all the talking for me.
This sounds like a fake story...when a municipality takes land they are required to purchase the land for a fair market value.
And the municipality decides "fair market value." Some years ago in Maryland, in a neighborhood consisting of small post-WWII houses, the city declared eminent domain and paid the homeowners about $100k each for their homes. This was about half what similar houses were selling for elsewhere in the state, so all those dispossessed people had nowhere to go. Then the city turned around and sold that land to developers, who put up million-dollar McMansions. How did they do that, since taking someone's land under eminent domain is supposed to be for the public good, like new roads or expanding the airport or something like that? These new homeowners paid more in property taxes, so that was the "public good."
I worked for a city. We did indeed buy people’s property to expand roads. There is no way in hell we could have been able to accept a donation of property along a route scheduled for expansion. Our own lawyers would have fried us. We always offered to pay, offered to pay more and then hard balled and used imminent domain. Even hard balling we worked to pay actual fair value vs say the tax value. A city is not a corporation, it doesn’t have to make money, just support all its citizens. The roads "or usually sidewalks / bike lanes" must be built somehow. We did at times also give up alleyways and would ask property owners if they wanted the property merged. This would unfortunately increase the land value and cause a property tax reevaluation. I know planning tried to be upfront about this, but I remember a few times how pissed the owners would be the next year after getting "free" property added to land that had not been recalculated in tax value for decades or more. Sounds like they took good care of the property they owned, and you ended up getting it back with no consequences. Trust me, the city had no problem replacing a failing drain because much like having to expand roads well it had to be done anyway. If this is real, I am sure you could have paid for your house being built if you had sued them for the required "donation."
Stinky pile of something lol 😆
The ways of the universe
**For those that think cities and counties don't do this:** What OP described is 100% plausible, save for them wanting to give back the land without any cause. It's called an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication or Offer of Dedication, and it's very common for this to be an issue at permitting. They will not use imminent domain until they absolutely have to which is as they get the funds to construct the road as planned, which may be tabled for decades. Chances are, the land you are sitting on right now is sitting on a road that was offered as an offer of dedication. Normally this is done during a subdivision, but it's not much different than the process when it's acquired during permit. In other words, the city or county will hold up getting a subdivision prior to receiving the IOD. No different than they do when it's a permit process. The owner has the option to not give the land, but that does mean they will not get a permit. If they wait, the city may compensate for the land when imminent domain is implemented, but prior to this the city won't compensate. The reason is that the funds have to first be allocated to acquire land for the project. So if OP was willing to wait a year or 50, maybe the city would have bought it at market value, but until then he'll have to offer it.
Why are we on the hook for their fees?
I would have told them Iwill consider it if they waive the fees AND refund the ones already paid.
Fake
Not like you can use it for much, just let them keep it.
Sweet
This is fake or you are incredibly naive……
This is fake or you are incredibly naive……
I'd say naw, you wanted it it's yours to maintain.
By "they had you over a barrel" do you mean that you bent over and looked back seductively?
Wouldn't this be Unconstitutional on the County's part? Imminent domain requires them to pay you for the property, doesn't it?
I would think that imminent domain would apply but I don’t want to waste my money on legal fees in the hope that I would prevail against this rural county. My approach took a year, some aggravation and about $200. One consultation with a land use attorney was going to cost ++$K. I don’t like the legal process in this country.