California Surveyors Forums

Does anyone know of a state law that requires subdivision maps to have a legal description of the property being subdivided printed on the map?

More specifically, a description that matches the parcel map guarantee exactly? It's literally gotten to the point where the gaurantee says "South, , 12.50 feeft" and your map says "South, 12.50 feet". Or, the the gaurantee says "500' radius vurve" and your map says "500' radius curve".

I didn't know you needed more than "a portion of the NE 1/4 of..." until i got here. Now I'm wondering if there is some rule that half the state is not following.

And even if there is law, is the Recorder allowed to police it?

Thanks

I have not heard of anything like that before, have seen few if any maps containing same, and don’t believe the recorder would be the one to enforce such a requirement in any case. Unless your jurisdiction has an ordinance to this effect, this requirement appears unsupportable. Don’t believe this is required per LS Act or SMA.

If ordinance exists, the County Surveyor would seem the appropriate party to review the map content.

This is in San Francisco Bay Area. Curious to hear how this turns out.

66434 d) of CA Govt. Code (part of Subdivision Map Act):

“....together with the description of the real proprty being subdivided.”

Important for continuity of chain of title. Sometimes accomplished by reference to vesting doc. #.

Ah, well, there you are. That being the case, it appears this requirement is satisfied in many places by referencing the doc. no. upon the map, and referencing the courses as being per the deed on the face of the map as well, as Stefan mentions. Without writing out the entire legal description verbatim as the OP is being requested to do.

Good question then! Is this widespread practice acceptable in light of 66434(d)? Is a jurisdiction warranted in requiring the legal description appear verbatim on the map?

Apologies for initial off-point response.

The section Steffan quoted is from the form of the Final Map. The same word for Parcel Maps can be found in §66445(c), though.

The definition of "...the description of the real property being subdivided..." is up for interpretation. I do not recall seeing a "complete" description of the property appearing on a subdivision map unless it is a really short one, such as "...the North half of the Northeast Quarter of Section..."

I would expect that most County Surveyors (and those reviewing subdivision maps for cities) would not expect a three page metes and bounds description if that was the description used to convey the entire property. The description "...being a subdivision of Lot 14A of the Map of the Buri Buri Rancho..." would be sufficient.

Ian Wilson wrote:The definition of "...the description of the real property being subdivided..." is up for interpretation.

+1

I've seen this practiced down in Antonio's neck of the woods a few times. I never understood why a legal description of the parent parcel was placed on the face of a map, especially if it had slight differences (vesting deed) from the surveyed boundary. I believe the intent of the wording in the code was to provide for a mechanism that differentiates the land within the subdivision from any other piece of real estate. Something like putting Section, Township & Range in your title block.

The last I heard of Antonio, he was in Roseville(?) Not sure where he is now.

Of the 58 County Surveyors, 11 have chimed in to me through emails that they do not require the entire description on Parcel Maps or Final Maps. Most of those people are north of the San Gabriel Mountains, though.


Keep in mind, though, that each City has jurisdiction over its own subdivisions. That makes a few more than 500 entities in California.

Back in the old days -- before my time -- it wasn't uncommon to see a complete M&B description on the face of a subdivision map in my area. I haven't seen one on a recent final map, though.

I live and work in Fresno now. We can afford a house here.

The County of Fresno requires a legal description as a block on the title sheet of the final or parcel map. It has to match the Parcel Map Guarantee exactly. I've only filed a map in 2 cities, but I have to assume it is county wide based on the recorder rejecting one.

I do like it when I see a description on really old maps because then I can actually tell where the boundary is. Placer county required a note that says "The source of metes and bounds is DOC#....", i thought that was cool becuase if you ever have a real title question it is easy to find the description of the property before the final map.

on an aside, I got a call from a lawyer after one filed because the owner wanted to remove an encomfrance on one of the 2 new parcels, but the description of the parcel being subdivided was "2 parcels". The mortgage person couldn't trace parcel 2 around parcel 2 and I thought that was hilarous. That was fun. Good thing for the description requirement.

I am aware of the codes referenced above, but I can't believe that it is supposed to be taken as a complete description, based on my view of the common practice.

My question stems from another county though. The recorder would not file the map because the description in the title block of my map said "A portion of the NE 1/4...." while the PMG only referenced parcels of prior PMs. With all of the record references and an establishment note on every single line/point, plus a narrative, there is not a snowball's chance in hell that a surveyor could not figure out what the map is subdividing. If one couldn't, I'm confident the competent county survey staff would have asked me what the heck I was doing.

The recorder said there just needed to be some crossover between the PMG and PM - we got title to add the sectional reference as a caption to the descrtiption in the PMG and the PM was recorded hours before more taxes would have had to of been paid. Win, I guess. They would not let me add a description block by hand, which I was ready to do.

Looking at the filed maps from newest to oldest, it takes 2 pdf downloads. "A portion of SSTTRR". Property being subdivided: parcel 1, LLA x. What's cool is the PMG is also in the file. Does it reference SSTTRR? no. And I'm expected to believe I'm not being picked on because my license number starts 93.

My conclusion is that the description was fine and the recorder has no authority to change it. It is a technical matter and comment on such constitutes practicing land surveying, which requires licensure. Will that ever matter? no.

A.Westerlund wrote:
The County of Fresno requires a legal description as a block on the title sheet of the final or parcel map. It has to match the Parcel Map Guarantee exactly.

This appears to be overkill and maybe the private sector, and the local CLSA chapter needs to educate the County. I know there are some good people working in and around Fresno, who could educate the needed. It appears to be someone's interpretation, and would be curious if the county has an ordinance requiring a complete M&B description on the subdivision map, as only an ordinance has the power to require this.

Not going to suggest a solution ... but I do agree the situation is nutty

First: It is really important that we know exactly what property is being subdivided, exactly without assumptions.

Second: in the past many maps were created and on occasion We had a damned hard time resolving issues without knowing Who Owned What (or thought they did) and What was the true intent.

Third: WE must presume the Intent of the copious laws, rules, and regulation were formed to solve this possible ambiguity. "put that Important data on the face of the map" got a bit "over-defined" and confused the squat out of it.

Fourth: I feel that a Simple deed or Map reference serves the purpose in Most cases.
"Frank's land as described in (deed reference OR Lot and Block per Map).
There can be cases where the intent is a designated remainder, then Perhaps the best way would be pounding out a properly crafted fresh "Legal Description" prepared by a qualified professional. (that would exclude most title clerks, many attorneys, and some Surveyors)

Time for some clarifying legislation I think.
Who to do that?
US, the ones that are affected and understand the issue!