what makes a lot on a map

User avatar
pezdork
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu May 25, 2017 3:01 pm
Location: Orange County

what makes a lot on a map

Postby pezdork » Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:18 am

I seem to get all the weird questions...

So there is a street that was shown as "future street" on a tract map. The right of way is shown on that map as a solid line and there are 2 lots adjacent to it. The street is dedicated but not accepted on the map by the county.The Assessor gave the street an APN and labels it "an unnamed lot" per the tract. So our client is looking to unload the "parcel" When I talked with the Assessor their contention was this was a separate lot, which is crazy because the map was clear...the "future street " was an easement dedication...When I spoke with the county surveyor he agreed it was vague but essentially said its not worth it to go up against the assessor... so quick fix my client will be granting the "unnamed lot shown as future street on Tract...".

am I the only one who sees this as being weird that the Assessor can essentially subdivide property by assigning it a number.

My opinion is this parcel shouldn't exist. its underlying fee should have passed with the adjacent lots. The easement is dedicated over these portions but not yet accepted. The developer never intended to retain ownership of this. it did make me rethink how we would show these on final maps I prepare.
PLS 8639

id rather be playing mandolin.

User avatar
Steve Martin
Posts: 480
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 12:24 pm
Location: Hayward

Re: what makes a lot on a map

Postby Steve Martin » Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:17 am

Has anyone used this future street to access their property?

User avatar
E_Page
Posts: 1976
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:49 am
Location: El Dorado County

Re: what makes a lot on a map

Postby E_Page » Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:46 am

The "future street" RW would have been a RW easement. The underlying fee is with the adjacent lots. If a street is built but the RW not accepted, it remains a private street. If a street is not built, it remains a private RW easement over the fee of the adjacent lots and either of the lot owners from the same parent tract (or other adjacent properties if any had been granted an access easement over the divided property) would have the right to construct a private drive or road within the RW.

That is unless the dedication was for a fee interest to the County, in which case it would have been intended as a separate fee parcel. If that's the case, then it's most likely a separate lot. For this to be the case, either the dedication had to have been expressly for a fee interest RW, or there must have been an ordinance in effect at the time the map was approved that declared that all RW dedications as of a specified date are for a fee RW interest unless stated otherwise. Whether or not it can be disposed of as a separate parcel may depend upon whether it provides the primary access route to either of the parcels of the PM.
Evan Page, PLS
A Certain Forum Essayist

User avatar
pezdork
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu May 25, 2017 3:01 pm
Location: Orange County

Re: what makes a lot on a map

Postby pezdork » Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:02 am

Clarification: The street was never built and may never be built...it was a connection to a future development...

Evan, I made all those arguments...and was told by the assessor that I needed to check the Citys GIS landbase...because it was clearly showing this as a separate parcel. glad to know that I am not the only one who sees it that way.

this is the kind of stuff that drive me nuts. When im right, but I have no power and am stuck going along with asinine things because the people with power are incompetent.
PLS 8639

id rather be playing mandolin.

Edward M Reading
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 7:23 am
Location: San Luis Obispo

Re: what makes a lot on a map

Postby Edward M Reading » Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:11 am

The Assessor and the GIS do not determine legal lot status.
Edward M. Reading
SLO County

User avatar
pezdork
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu May 25, 2017 3:01 pm
Location: Orange County

Re: what makes a lot on a map

Postby pezdork » Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:25 am

Edward M Reading wrote:The Assessor and the GIS do not determine legal lot status.


says you...and me....and anyone else with a shred of common sense.
PLS 8639

id rather be playing mandolin.

User avatar
steffan
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:44 pm
Location: N CA

Re: what makes a lot on a map

Postby steffan » Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:39 am

Couple of observations and comments:

Ask the Assessor if he/she is empowered to provide an unconditional certificate of compliance if he/she is going to publically declare it to be a legal lot.
I would guess the local agency's muni code contains the procedure as to the department that actually has the power to provide certificates of compliance. Likely it is not the assessor.

Without a certificate of compliance or development permit, at any time in the future this lot may be recognized as having been created in violation of the SMA and may have a notice of violation filed against it. See 66499.36 of the SMA.

Unless the local agency formally abandons the offer, it is still considered an open offer and subject to agency acceptance "at any later date". See
Section 66477.2 of the SMA which states: "...the offer of dedication shall remain open and the legislative body may by resolution at any later date, and without further action by the subdivider, rescind its action and accept...."
Note that this section does not differentiate as to whether the offer was in fee or as an easement.

As mentioned by others, unless the offer was explicit as a fee dedication, it is considered to be an offer of easement only and the underlying fee is owned by the adjoining landowners to centerline. See AG opinion 04-809 and Civil Code 831.

User avatar
mpallamary
Posts: 1859
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:12 pm

Re: what makes a lot on a map

Postby mpallamary » Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:08 am

Surveyors are not in the risk business. I would get a title company to issue a preliminary report and if it is good, get a litigation guarantee. They are in the risk business. Do not take unnecessary risks. Purchase insurance.

User avatar
David Kendall
Posts: 290
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 1:45 pm
Location: Sonoma

Re: what makes a lot on a map

Postby David Kendall » Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:25 am

steffan wrote:Ask the Assessor if he/she is empowered to provide an unconditional certificate of compliance if he/she is going to publically declare it to be a legal lot.
I would guess the local agency's muni code contains the procedure as to the department that actually has the power to provide certificates of compliance. Likely it is not the assessor.

Without a certificate of compliance or development permit, at any time in the future this lot may be recognized as having been created in violation of the SMA and may have a notice of violation filed against it. See 66499.36 of the SMA.


I was having similar thoughts on this matter. If the Assessor is adamant that the GIS rules then ask him to make his statement in writing then take that straight over to the Planning Department. I'd bet that would resolve the discrepancy pretty fast.

Otherwise, someone has a third lot and those are usually pretty valuable! In the worst case your client could sell it to the city as a small neighborhood park....

Every time I am internally questioning what an agency is telling me I ask them for a written statement (regardless of whether I appreciate their opinion). These days they will do their homework prior to signing on the bottom line

User avatar
dedkad
Posts: 325
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 3:55 pm

Re: what makes a lot on a map

Postby dedkad » Mon Apr 16, 2018 11:41 am

A separate APN does not mean it is a separate lot. It's just the Assessor's way of cataloging who gets the tax bill. The APN's SHOULD follow lot lines because if the owner doesn't pay taxes on the property, then it could result in a subdivision from a tax sale. However, I'm not sure if there is any law that requires the APN's to follow lot lines.

But that isn't really the point I wanted to make. I think the question at hand is whether the Assessor is correct in calling this a separate parcel not owned by the adjoining property owners. Biagini v. Beckham is an interesting case which touches on some of this. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of ... 75018.html

The Court of Appeal cited a Supreme Court Case stating “when one lays out a tract of land into lots and streets and sells the lots by reference to a map which exhibits the lots and streets as they lie with relation to each other, the purchasers of such lots have a private easement in the streets opposite their respective lots, for ingress and egress and for any use proper to a private way, and ․ this private easement is entirely independent of the fact of dedication to public use, and is a private appurtenance to the lots, of which the owners cannot be divested except by due process of law.”  (Danielson v. Sykes (1910) 157 Cal. 686, 689, 109 P. 87.) That could imply that the lots have an easement over the adjacent offer, but not fee title to the property itself.

Furthermore, the court found that the offeror could fence off the dedication area to preclude use by the public, until such time as the offer is accepted. How could this be done if the offeror did not still retain fee title?

"Biagini also argues that the Beckhams cannot bar her access to the dedicated public right-of-way by means of a fence.   However, because we have concluded the trial court was correct in finding there was insufficient public use of King Way to constitute implied acceptance of the Beckhams' offer of dedication, there is no dedicated public right-of-way, and Biagini's argument fails on this basis.

Finally, Biagini argues that the award of damages was erroneous because the trial court doubled the actual damages proved in the case in accordance with “the trespass statutes.”   Biagini contends this was inappropriate because “[g]iven that there was an irrevocable, express written offer of dedication, then what [she] did in the dedicated area was neither wrongful, nor a trespass.”   Because we have upheld the trial court's determination that the Beckhams revoked the offer of dedication before it was accepted by public use, the premise for Biagini's challenge to the award of damages fails.   As that challenge exhausts Biagini's arguments on appeal, we are left with the conclusion that Biagini has failed to establish any error by the trial court."


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests