California Surveyors Forums

Has anyone had experience with describing condominium units as "the floor, ceiling, and walls as they exist now or in the future" and omitting the metes and bounds or condominium plan specific dimensions of each unit?
My client doesn't yet know where the unit boundaries will be because it is a commercial condominium project for retail shops, and the location of the demising walls between the units won't be known until after the condominium plan is recorded and those demising walls will be subject to multiple changes in the future.

One method, I am familiar with is to define the limit of the entire commercial parcel and the place a grid over that, so that a unit would be,for example,A1-B1, A1-A4 , B1-B4, A4-B4.

Or cubes if the ceiling height changes. "As they exist now or in the future" sounds terribly ambiguous and could lead to abuse by the tenant.

Yes, this method could be ambiguous and I understand from an attorney involved on this project that it would be unlikely a title company would insure title if the unit boundaries can't be depicted sufficiently on an ALTA survey.

This idea came from the client's reading of CA CODE Section 1351(f)(2) where the code allows a unit boundary to be described by "physical boundaries, either in existence, or to be constructed, such as walls, floors, and ceilings of a structure or any portion thereof," .
I like the grid/cube idea and will explore that more.
-chris

Can anyone provide an example of such a description (legal and plat) ? Just Curious. Sounds like an interesting problem.