Adjoiners if seperated by Hwy?

[Scott]

Would parcels be considered "adjoining" if separated by a State Highway?

I have Lot 1 from a Subd. Map on one side of the Highway and Lots 15-16 from the same Map on the other side of the Highway.

I am trying to see if a LLA would be possible using the 3 Lots as being "adjoiners" per 66412(d)

Would it make any difference if the 3 Lots have always been transferred together since the Map created them?

Is contiguous the same as adjoining?

66424.
“Subdivision” means the division, by any subdivider, of any unit or units of improved or unimproved land, or any portion thereof, shown on the latest equalized county assessment roll as a unit or as contiguous units, for the purpose of sale, lease, or financing, whether immediate or future. Property shall be considered as contiguous units, even if it is separated by roads, streets, utility easement, or railroad rights-of-way. “Subdivision” includes a condominium project, as defined in Section 4125 or 6542 of the Civil Code, a community apartment project, as defined in Section 4105 of the Civil Code, or the conversion of five or more existing dwelling units to a stock cooperative, as defined in of Section 4190 or 6566 of the Civil Code.

[steffan]

The attached case touches on some of the concepts you are exploring:

[mpallamary]

Good luck!

[Jon Olin]

It may come down to what the local agency determines. I had a similar situation where our client wanted to do a LLA between two parcels separated by a railroad. I posted about this here:

http://clsaforum.californiasurveyors.or ... ular+logic

As it turned out, the local agency involved had a contract firm review. The contract firm did not have any issues with it and the LLA was ultimately approved.

Good luck!

Jon

[Ian Wilson]

We just had an application here to adjust two parcels, one on each side of a canal, to span the canal.

My first thought was this is a prelude to a subdivision. But, after much thought, I am comfortable with it. The project is just a bit odd is not fundamentally different that the situation in Mount Diablo v Contra Costa County.