Maryland State Archives

Request from: "Adam Snyder"
Ed:

I know this is asking way, way too much, but do you recall an issue arising in April 2001 regarding the Indian Queen South subdivision in Prince George's County? The issue involved the ownership of a strip of land lying in between the current mean high water mark and the boundaries of the subdivision. The subdivision developers wanted to ascertain who owned the strip of land and I told them that, as far as the State was concerned, it would come down to what the original patent said. If it called to the water, then the property was patented into private ownership and the State would not have a claim to it, unless, of course, it was subsequently deeded back over to the State by purchase, tax sale, or condmenation. If, however, the original patent called to a landmark and not the water, then the State would own the strip of land channelward of that landmark.

My records show that, on April 11, 2001, I sent you some background information about the subdivision, presumably to see whether you would be able to locate the original patent. Now, that was in the middle of Virginia v. Maryland stuff and I do not recall specifically having followed up with you as whether you would be able to help out, or even if you ever received my letter. I do, however, have a vague recollection of you indicating that the issue was not as simple as I had made it out to be.

The developers are now applying to the MNCPPC to amend the boundaries of their subdivision to include the strip of land at issue and the MNCPPC counsel's office is calling me to see if the State is ok with that, or whether the State has a claim to the strip of land. My question to you is this: Do you remember this issue? If so, do you recall whether you were ever able to locate the patent for the property that was subdivided? Do you remember what the patent called to?

In sum, I'm asking you to help me pick up the trail of an investigation I started some three years ago but, it appears, I abandoned in the midst of the Virginia litigation. I know this is asking a lot, so feel free to tell me to go away.
ads

X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 6.5.1 Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 08:07:21 -0500
From: "Adam Snyder"
To:
Subject: Indian Queen
X-Virus-Scanned: by Anti-Virus/Spam Mail Gateway at mdarchives.state.md.us
X-RCPT-TO:

Ed:

I was able to gain access to the mdag.net site and downloaded the materials that you had made available on this property. After having reviewed the documents, my impression is that Richard Richardson concluded that the entire parcel down to the "shoreline of Broad Creek" was patented into private ownership but that a previous owner had dedicated certain public use easements parallel to the shoreline. (I am basing this principally on Mr. Richardson's May 8, 2001 e-mail to you.) If this is the case, then I do not see that the State would be claiming any ownership rights to the strip of land above the shoreline. It also would appear to me that the developer can include the land down to the shoreline within the subdivision lots, so long as the various easements (sanitary infrastructure, hiker-biker, etc...) are maintained.
Am I missing something?
ads