Thanks for clarifying some of the details that complicate my simple model.
I feel like Eminent Domain might be one recourse - simply pay the land owner for the land that was lost. Though the land prices in California are so high as to make this prohibitively expensive.
Another solution could be to take that 1/2 plot of land the city got, and give 1/4 of that to the squeezed landowner. But that solution wouldn't scale well - I foresee a nightmare scenario where hundreds of people are trying to sell their fractional ownership of a sandlot, except for one disgruntled group member.
I think the answer to this scenario is simpler. Tell them, "Sorry, God just screwed you out of 1/4 of your land. Man that must suck. At least your property taxes will be reduced!"
In the US, eminent domain is only allowed if the government pays a fair price for the land. What is a fair price for a partial plot that no longer exists?
Giving 1/4 of a plot of a different property probably isn't fair either. Different plots of the same size will often have different values, and having a bunch of tiny plots all over the place versus one normal-sized plot is not very useful.
I feel like Eminent Domain might be one recourse - simply pay the land owner for the land that was lost. Though the land prices in California are so high as to make this prohibitively expensive.
Another solution could be to take that 1/2 plot of land the city got, and give 1/4 of that to the squeezed landowner. But that solution wouldn't scale well - I foresee a nightmare scenario where hundreds of people are trying to sell their fractional ownership of a sandlot, except for one disgruntled group member.