California Surveyors Forums

A LLA can be applied to 4 or less existing adjoining parcels by adjusting the property lines in a manner that the land taken from one parcel is added to an adjoining parcel and "a greater number of parcels than originally existed is not thereby created". - Can the final number of parcels be less than the original? Wouldn't this be a merger?
Thank you all in advance.

Yes, and yes.

Some jurisdictions require lot mergers to be done by LLA, some allow owner initiated lot mergers by deed. The question of whether or not this is the correct procedure should probably be directed to the local planning director, but certainly not to counter staff.

In Humboldt County you can start with as many legal parcels as you want as long as you end up with 4 or fewer in the end.

Pete Jackson
PLS 8153/RPF 2761

IMO, unless there is specific planning procedures for a merger of parcels with the same ownership, a LLA will suffice. I would also have the local agency perpare a Certificate of Compliance, acknowledging that they recognize the resultant parcel as a legal parcel for finance, development, and or sale

Woodcutter noted an incident where "Their braintrust conjured up the remarkable revelation that when the boundary line moves, a portion of a parcel is split off of a parent parcel and which then needs to be merged with the recipient parcel." This doesn't strike me as too far fetched especially since the standard certificate of compliance (which is often one of the documents required by agencies as part of the LLA process) is not a merger document, unless words of merger are included. Developers and their agents (surveyors) are often interested in "legalizing" as many parcels as they can get, and I have seen cases where that portion deeded to an adjoner as part of a lot line adjustment (for instance) was later claimed by an owner as a separate parcel, just because of the deed conveying it.

Unless and until there is legislation micro-managing the process, each agency gets to make it up, some doing a better job than others. I don't propose legislating procedures, but we could use something better than the current law: "The lot line adjustment shall be reflected in a deed, which shall be recorded". That's it. Kind of nonsensical isn't it?

Dave Ryan
Humboldt County

When you have this "Being as the state statute regarding LLA's is silent on this and several other items, what remains are that 58 counties and 482 incorporated cities have a grand total of 540 different interpretations on what a LLA does or does not do. " And probably more variations depending on the mood of the various planners that might be involved. As such there needs to be a set of legal guidelines adopted by the State.
Govt is always ready to regulate the private sector but hates to be regulated themselves.

ARTICLE 1. Reversion to Acreage [66499.11. - 66499.20.3.] ( Article 1 added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. )

66499.20.3. A city or county may, by ordinance, authorize the merger of contiguous parcels under common ownership without reverting to acreage. The ordinance shall require the recordation of an instrument evidencing the merger.

Simplified "merger" - if ordinance exists. Good luck.

Phil - Sonoma

Aren't mergers for joining non-conforming, "sub standard" (problem) lots to adjoining lots thus creating a larger but conforming lot? SMA 66451.11

LLA's are for just that - adjusting lot lines between conforming, legal lots.

Plumb Bob wrote:Aren't mergers for joining non-conforming, "sub standard" (problem) lots to adjoining lots thus creating a larger but conforming lot? SMA 66451.11

LLA's are for just that - adjusting lot lines between conforming, legal lots.

Without looking I think both are correct and also for solving encrochments. A company I worked for had a developer that would hardscape and landscape his models to look good without regard to PLs, so we were always doing topos of the models and making LLAs when the units were sold out. Some of those model homes have some real interest sidelines between them.