California Surveyors Forums

I just did a boundary survey in a well monumented subdivision from 1953 with no material discrepancies and found the fences to be all over the place. This lot is in a hillside area and many of the lots have the building pads terraced. I've seen
similar instances where the retaining walls were placed close to the property lines and fences were more for convenience. Have others here seen similar cases?

Convenience is the key word here Mike. Seen it before. Here is another fine case of a fence line verses a property line.

Yes I have seen this in a 1960's era subdivision. The uphill lots had their patios fenced, for patio screens and the downhill lots fence up to the patio screens.

Quite common to see this in areas of Burlingame and Millbrae. People are constantly landscaping over property lines in those areas.

This was in San Mateo, unincorporated area near Hwy. 92. Baywood Park.

A couple of things stand out:

- Subdivision is well-monumented.

- Fences appear to be set for convenience due to the placement of terracing retaining walls.

This isn't a "fence vs. property line" issue because the fences do not seem to have been placed in an attempt to be on the true lines, either because it was not physically practical, or a different placement served the landowners needs better.

I see no conflict because there is no reason to believe that the fences may have weight as marking the property lines. They're just fences.


Edit: I've seen this situation several times in similar conditions.

Thanks for your responses.

Evan, I know fences are just fences, but it's the challenge of trying to tell the architect and the client that the fence they assumed is the property line is nowhere near it.