Homewood planners debate options after survey shows house built 11 feet onto city-owned land in Rosedale

A real-estate agent representing the seller told the Planning and Development Committee on April 7 that a house at 1832 (reported in discussion as 1832/18320 Fifth Court South) was built 11 feet onto city-owned property adjacent to the lease center (park property) in the Rosedale neighborhood.

The agent said the encroachment was discovered during a buyer-ordered survey while the property was under contract; the buyer could not close because the survey showed the home intruded on city land. The buyer is a first-time homebuyer with a restricted budget; the seller had paid cash for the lot after a prior buyer abandoned a rehab project.

Committee members and staff discussed options raised by the city attorney’s office: grant a permanent easement limited to the life of the structure (terminating if the house is demolished), sell the city land to the owner, or pursue other property-rights remedies. Several members warned that selling park-dedicated land could require an election and that approving a sale or easement for a single lot could set a precedent because other encroachments may exist in the neighborhood.

City staff said it is unclear exactly where the formal property line is relative to the fence and retaining wall and that the city must obtain an accurate legal survey before deciding. Staff recommended either locating an existing survey or commissioning a new survey to determine what portion of city-owned land (if any) could be conveyed without violating park dedications. Committee members also raised title and mortgage issues: a mortgage lender will not fund a purchase with an unresolved encumbrance, and an easement alone would not produce marketable title for a buyer seeking a mortgage.

Given the number of open questions, the committee agreed to carry the item over. Staff said they will search for any existing surveys and, if none exist, order a survey so the council can later determine whether an easement, sale or other remedy is legally permissible. The agent said the prospective buyer faces imminent housing need and that the seller has been working to make the property marketable.

No final disposition was approved; council and staff instructed the clerk and city attorney to locate existing legal descriptions and to return with a survey and recommendations. Committee members emphasized the need to determine whether any portion of the parcel is truly park-dedicated (which would trigger additional legal constraints) before approving any conveyance.