Lake easement

[yanasina]

State: MS

The city owns a lake and a 100 foot easement from the lake line out. My property sits on a finger into the lake, so it is essentially surrounded on three sides by the easement. Hypothetically, if the established lake line is measured out 100 feet and then it is still 20 feet or even 50 feet from the end of that measurement to my property line, who owns that 20 or 50 feet, or can it even be determined or owned? The platted land shows the lake easement and my property, but still the land is larger then the easement. This is important because the city is planning a walking trail around the lake and the opportunity to extend my property line out might mean a great deal to my privacy considering the positioning of my house relative to my property line and the potential for the trail to be very close to the house. Any ideas?

 

[justalayman]

an easement is not a claim of ownership but one of use of the land. Whoever owns the land owns the land. In your situation, you need to refer to your lot description in your deed from when you bought the property. You own whatever is says you own.

 

[154NH773]

if the established lake line is measured out 100 feet and then it is still 20 feet or even 50 feet from the end of that measurement to my property line, who owns that 20 or 50 feet, or can it even be determined or owned?

I don't understand...

As justalay man says; an easement is not land ownership, it a right to use the land. A deed describes what real property is owned, and by whom. Your property deed may say you own to the waterline; but the town holds an easement to a strip 100 feet wide, and it extends into the land from the waterline. If that's the case, then the town is allowed to use 100 feet of your property that abuts the lake for whatever purpose is allowed in the easement grant. Have you read the easement? If not, ask the town for a copy.

What 20-50 feet are you talking about? What makes you think you could "extend your property line out"?

How did the town acquire this easement? Did they hold the easement when you built your house?

 

[yanasina]

Obviously no one can give me the definitive answer here without researching the specifics, but I posted to see if anyone had had a similar experience. Here's the longer explanation:

I bought my land which is surrounded by easement property on three sides. I do not own the easement property. I contacted the state, who owned the lake at the time, and was told by a Parks and Recreation official that this lake was unusual for lakes in MS because the state only owned the actual lake and not the property established as the easement, which is usually held together. I had a title search done by someone recommended by a reputable lawyer, and was told the owner. I contacted the owner who agreed to sell me the easement land around my property, but before things went very far, the dam in the lake had to be breached to avoid it breaking, and then shortly after Hurricane Katrina hit, and all plans for repair went out the window. The land owner said he wanted to wait until the dam was repaired before selling any property around the lake. Fast forward several years and the lake is now repaired and filled up, and has been given by the state to the city, which has decided to build a walking trail on the easement, which now apparently has been settled to actually be the city's and not the person I thought it was. I am not clear on how that got settled even though the title search and land rolls seemed to indicate otherwise. A few months ago I visited the city planning office to discuss the plans for the trail and was shown the plans. I was also told that some easement land came with the lake(later identified by the mayor as 100 feet), but that the city did not own all the property up to my property line. This is part of the confusing part, and I do not really know if this person knew what she was talking about or not. She also said she did not know who owned the rest of the land (the land between the easement and my property). See, I have my deed, and I know where my property line is. However, measuring from my property line to the lake is more than 100 feet. The land rolls, if that's the right word, show my plat, the easement drawn around the lake and the lake, so that is where my question comes from. The city is defining its property as 100 feet from the lake line, and my property is defined on my deed, but the actual land between the edge of my property and the lake is wider than 100 feet. So does the city automatically own that land even though it is wider than the 100 feet easement land that was given to them along with the lake? There are fluctuations in the water line that make measuring the specific lines problematic, but this isn't a matter of a few feet here. So this is a specific case that might have a specific answer based on information I don't have (like maybe the lake boundaries being used to measure are set, and the lake is smaller than the boundaries used to measure the easement so there's more land right now, but that is contradicted by the engineer who said that right now the lake is actually fuller than usual due to unusually heavy rainfall), but I posted to see if anyone had any ideas about this mainly because I seem to be getting conflicting information every time I ask someone involved in this about it.

I do not know when the easement was granted. The Mayor seemed not to know either when he was asked a question during the public meeting announcing the trail, but the land was supposedly transferred to the city when the lake was.

In regards to extending my property, I mean being able to buy the land if in fact it is not designated as easement land to extend my private property since my house at present is at places maybe only ten feet from the easement land and could have trail walkers literally walking outside my window. Obviously, no one can tell me who specifically owns that land, but I was wondering if anyone had experienced this kind of situation before.

 

[154NH773]

That is somewhat clearer.

The section of land between you and the easement is what you are interested in. The most likely owner is either the original owner, or the town. Somewhere along the line, the original owner of the land containing the easement probably sold or conveyed the property to the town. That sale, most likely, would have conveyed all his property, including that which lay outside the easement. If the original owner just conveyed title to the 100 feet surrounding the lake, then he would still own the remaining strip between you and the easement. That is unlikely, but may be the case.

I suggest you have a title company research the title to the neighbor's property, and determine the actual ownership and current configuration of his property. Without such a search, there is no way we can answer any of your questions.

If the land ownership is in question, or the neighbor thinks he sold it to the town, but the deed doesn't reflect that, have him convey the land to you via a quit claim deed. Have a lawyer advise you on this.

If he never conveyed the land to the town (as it seems the town doesn't really know), then maybe all the town owns are the easement rights, and really doesn't own the land. If you can buy it, it would be your land, and the town could only utilize it for the purposes allowed in the easement language, and you could use it for any purpose not prohibited by, or interfearing with, the easement language.

I would not depend on what town officials tell you, get your own independant title search.

 

[Terminus]

Lake Boundaries

First let's discuss Lake Boundaries. Very rarely have I come across a water boundary (especially lakes) that do not have a specific boundary location based upon something. Water courses are defined by riparian boundary law which is usually very state specific (being in MS it may be defined by the bureau of land management). The boundary can be defined as a contour (elevation) line, mean high water, high water, mean low water, low water, or some variation. Very, very, very, rarely is it based purely on the amount of water in the lake at any given time which would mean the boundary is always moving and that isn't in the public's best interest. So what that means for you is that until you find out where the Lake boundary is....you will not know the limits of the 100 foot easement. I have seen where the boundaries were actually 30-40 into a lake under water...so weird things can happen with riparian boundaries especially since they might have changed the dam crest elevation.

As for the strip of land between your house and the easement......that is very common with man made lakes. What happens is the land basically becomes useless and so the owners just forget about it. What you need is a survey, not of your property but of the land between your property and the lake. This survey should show your boundaries, the lake boundary, the easement limits, and this extra piece of land (if it does exist). I have done these surveys and they are expensive and time consuming...so be prepared for that.

As for the trail....it needs to be within the 100 foot easement. There is nothing you can really do about it other than proving the easement isn't worded to support the creation of a trail. Even if you do that though, the current owner can still grant the city an easement for the trail. Now if you find the city doesn't own all of the fee title in the land encumbered by the easement......you could try purchasing it and then if the easement wording doesn't support the trail.....but a stop to it. Which ironically probably wouldn't work anyways because if the trail is already designed and ready to go....the city would probably have a good case to take the property under eminent domain.

I think the best route would be to go to the city project manager for the trail. Voice your concerns about how close the trail might be to your house (and they might have concerns also because who wants to walk a trail 10 feet from houses) and see if they can show you the trail location in regards to your house. Maybe ask them to place flags or stakes along the trail centerline near your property so it can be reviewed in the field....and if it is too close ask them nicely to redesign that area to give your house more room. If the city does in fact have a 100 foot swath to build a trail.....there should be plenty of room to move it farther from your house and still have the trail available for public use.

 

[yanasina]

Thank you. This about answers my questions. The city is surveying the land, so I hope I can get answers as to if there is any extra land out here. As far as the trail goes, I would think they would be taking land owners into account as far as placement goes, but not having any control over placement ultimately puts us at their mercy and until we know exactly where things will go in relation to our land, we will be uneasy. The city is planning on letting the landowners know this when the plans are made, so it's just fingers crossed until then.