When a landowner owns a parcel of land that is landlocked, the landowner can access the property by the nearest feasible route. Iowa courts have typically refused to examine the impact on the servient estate (the land that is being crossed) when determining the location of the nearest feasible route, and that’s what happened here.
In this case, an LLC purchased a landlocked parcel and used it for recreational purposes and occasional logging. The LLC knew the parcel was landlocked upon its purchase and soon thereafter instituted condemnation proceedings under Iowa Code §6A.4(2) for a dirt lane that crossed the plaintiff’s tract. In 2007, the plaintiffs filed suit, arguing that the route the LLC was seeking to condemn was not the nearest feasible route to an existing public road as required by the Iowa Code. The plaintiffs argued that an alternate route should be used, an old Class B road that was supposedly used by the public. However, the trial court allowed the condemnation and the plaintiffs appealed. The appellate court cited an earlier Iowa Supreme Court ruling, dealing with eminent domain, in its discussion of this case. While the plaintiffs argued that the court should consider the value of the property to be condemned before and after the creation of the public way, the court disagreed. Under Iowa law, property values may be considered, but only when the landowner has a way to the landlocked parcel through his own land. Since that was not the set of facts here, the appellate court was not willing to examine the affect on property values. The court reminded the plaintiffs that if they were not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the county condemnation board, they could appeal that finding at a later time.
The plaintiffs also argue that the lane in question had never been a public road, thus it was not the most feasible route. Evidence did indicate that though the lane was designated as a county Class B road, but it was never used as a public way and according to the county engineer was never maintained by the county. The plaintiffs further contended that the court was relying on mere hearsay evidence (out of court statements) to establish the nearest feasible route in favor of the LLC. The appellate court found that this evidence was allowable because it was offered to illuminate the issue of whether the condemnation proceeding would solve the LLC’s inability to access their property. Thus, the evidence fell under a hearsay exception and was admissible.
Further, the appellate court went along with the district court’s determination that the LLC’s route was the nearest feasible route to an existing public road. Based upon testimony that the LLC’s route would be less costly to build and offer fewer terrain and maintenance challenges, the court allowed the condemnation of the LLC’s favored route. Green v. Wilderness Ridge, L.L.C., No. 9-157/08-1009, 2009 Iowa App. LEXIS 440 (Iowa Ct. App., May 29, 2009).
Note: A dissenting judge argued that the court should have considered the impact of the road’s placement on the servient estate. The dissent indicated that the plaintiff’s proposed route straddled the edge of the farm and went through undeveloped land. Indeed, the LLC’s route cut through the middle of the plaintiff’s dairy farm, which they had owned and operated for 27 years. According to the dissent, the court’s choice of route would do more harm than benefit to the parties, and the most practical route should have been chosen.