Parcel Validity

[khuerth]

I have a project where the Lots were created on a Tract Map in 1875, the quality of the map is poor and it is hard to tell, but let's assume it was signed by the property owner but not the County. Are these legal lots?

Are there any good sources for Parcel Validity? This is an area where I don't have a lot of experience, so any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Kyle Huerth, PLS

[hellsangle]

Check out the Garnder case (attached).

Seems you need separate deeds or "permits" on the parcels to obtain Certificates of Compliance.

Editorial: Now with SB 9 passed, why have any planning review? The Gardner case cites, among other things: " . . .the Map Act’s salutary purposes to facilitate local regulation of the design and improvement of subdivisions so as to encourage orderly community development . . . "

Good luck.

Phil - Surveyor to Recorder

[David Kendall]

It is a very nuanced topic. This is always a good thing to consider as extra lots can add value to your land with relatively little work. No subdivision map required. Conversely, if you are not careful as a surveyor then you might erase a few legal lot lines and subtract value from the land.

I've been researching this for a while now and to generally name a few (probably not all) there are considerations for the map date, the dates of original transfer, the legal descriptions included in subsequent conveyances, the permit and construction history, historic access, lot occupation, city or county zoning and planning ordinances and historical behavior of owners.

Essentially if the lots were ever conveyed or permitted for construction separately then they are probably legal lots. Unless a formal merger action has occurred.

The first step is a chain of title. Find out when and how the lots have been conveyed and if there was ever any merger. Then go from there. Be advised that many of the planners I encounter know next to nothing about the SMA so don't assume that they know what you are talking about. Spell it out for them in small baby bites and file a request for a Certificate of Compliance.

Be prepared to take legal action if the request fails. It could be less expensive at the end of the day than a subdivision map. Read the Gardner case a few times and see if it applies to your situation. Search the forum for certificates of compliance. Talk to other surveyors and planners (some are very competent and knowledgable)

[Steve Martin]

Check out Cal Surveyor #164 page 20 Article by Anne Hoppe

[Edward M Reading]

What County is this in, Kyle?

[khuerth]

Thank you everyone for all the information, this is exactly the guidance I was looking for.

Ed, this is the City of Lompoc map.

http://surveyor.countyofsb.org/rm_pdfs/ ... 01_045.pdf

Full disclosure, this map was partially recreated and adopted as the Official City Map in the 1940's.

http://surveyor.countyofsb.org/rm_pdfs/ ... 15_284.pdf

[LS_8750]

I had to research one back to 1850 once for a Certificate of Compliance and in addition to Gardner, found the attached helpful.

For anti or non merger issues, look at Civil Code 1093 and Map Act 66451.10 (a).

Good luck.

[mpallamary]

Apply for a COC and force the issue.

[khuerth]

Does anybody have the maps in question for the Gardner v Sonoma County case?

[hellsangle]

Here ya go . . .

Crazy Phil - Surveyor to Recorder