3 ms·
I haven’t read the article, and maybe there is an answer there, but my immediate theory are easements. That is, the land is theirs but the owner of an adjacent
by runarberg 4y ago
I haven’t read the article, and maybe there is an answer there, but my immediate theory are easements. That is, the land is theirs but the owner of an adjacent property has the right to access their property through a defined corridor. Here in Washington state I know of some properties that even have public easements on them. Meaning that if their property blocks access to a public land, the public has the right to access that public land through a defined corridor.
- kube-system 4y agoAnd sometimes the answer is that the land is just landlocked. These properties are often… not very desirable.
- nine_k 4y agoThe article explains how the explicit lack of such easements and corridors is causing problems. Corridors and easements exist somewhere, and are discussed as a way out of the trap.
- pc86 4y agoIt's possible for an easement to exist for the owner of a private corner-locked parcel, but not for the public. Which would allow private owners legal access to their land, but still prohibit public access to the public land.