I am a very large snake and this is my dream home.
Seriously though, that isn’t just someone’s easement? How did it even end up as a separate lot?
In all honesty there are probably some perfectly reasonable official records that somehow got parsed incorrectly to give us this abomination.
My bet is that a developer bought up a huge chunk of land, and built these subdivisions on it. The roads, houses, and strip were all originally part of that property. That tiny strip is an easement owned by the HOA. It is not, nor will ever be, for sale. However Zillow didn’t know what to make of it, so just listed it as a land property and then applied its normal value calculations to the strip.
I went through a Second Life land trading phase quite a few years back. Properties like this were very valuable to advertisers. Because of advertisers, it was possible to be a niche real estate mogul for weird useless little virtual properties like this that could earn you an actual meaningful real-world income. Second Life had (may still have, I’ve not been back in a while) its own advertising industry and multiple adtech networks. A despicable inevitability of having completely free content creation tools and also an economy that can trade with real money. People trying to sell their creations want people to pay in game currency to get their things, so they can extract the value to real money. They want people to know about their products, so they turn to people who will accept in game currency to blast awareness of their products everywhere. Those advertisers want land, which they need to buy. Probably from another player.
So, the first thing I thought of when I saw this plot was “BILLBOARDS!!!” and I hate it.
Never understood how Americans live like this. Probably would be better in an apartment
You never understood how people could live in homes over 2000 sqft with two car garages?
It’s not that. It might be because I grew countryside but amount of garden for a house is extremely small
Oh okay there makes sense. Yeah something that isn’t talked about much is how single family zoning has evolved to require much less yard space.
- Buy
- Build a wall
- Add cameras
- Charge neighbours for taking down the wall and yearly fee for not building it again.
- ???
- Capitalism.
Is this what rent seeking is? I’ve always had a hard time understanding that term.
More or less? Actually it’s more like extortion as written, but generally speaking rent seeking is buying something that you can get others to pay you for regularly. Like “hey, this land has oil, I’ll buy it and lease the oil rights” or “hey, this land has a house on it that people like to live in, I’ll buy it and lease the habitation rights”.
An old municipal right of way that got turned into private property somehow.
People living in those houses should definitely be attempting adverse possession on it.
The perfect property for the zip line/archery enthusiast
How about fencing? (That’s a terrible joke, I’m sorry).
I prefer zipline riflery
If you really hate someone who lives in one of those six houses, this lot affords you many opportunities for mischief.
I can’t imagine any other reason for this to exist.
It looks wide enough for a billboard to me
I bet a real asshole could easily quadruple their money with this.
Just negotiate with the owners of the 6.1 houses to buy all or some of the strip. Tell Bob that if he doesn’t pay $10k for the strip behind his house, that Catherine is willing to buy it, and then her back yard will wrap around his.
In a friendly world where every neighbour trusted each-other, they could split the $25k and each pay a few thousand for a very slightly larger back yard. But, home-owners being the assholes they are, you could probably get them to try to out-bid each other to cause or avoid petty squabbles.
The reality is they’re almost certainly already using that land and buying it would give you nothing because they could claim it under adverse possession. Actually taking possession of that strip would be nearly impossible.
Adverse possession isn’t that simple, and laws regarding it vary by state. In this case, it appears to be Washington state, which requires a number of things that indicate an uphill battle for anyone trying.
Among other requirements, it needs to be uninterrupted (occasional activity doesn’t count), exclusive (the true owner doesn’t use it) for ten entire years, notorious (impossible to miss if you ever are on the property, we’re talking anywhere from fencing it off to building an entire house on it) and hostile (without permission).
So in reality, if I already owned this, avoiding adverse possession on this property is as easy as visiting it once every 5-8 years and telling them to quit the area if they’re trying to elbow their way in (which resets the 10 year clock).
So yeah, not as much a free land grab as one might think.
