Urban planning community | #theplannerlife

+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: CA Subdivision Map Act - Do government acquisitions of land create separate legal private lots?

  1. #1
    Member
    Registered
    Apr 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2

    CA Subdivision Map Act - Do government acquisitions of land create separate legal private lots?

    Hello everyone. I'm hoping to find some help with a SMA question. For sake of simplicity, imagine a private property owner has a large square lot, say 100 acres. The county condemns a 100-foot-wide strip running north-south down the middle, from top to bottom, for a new road right-of-way. Then a utility condemns a 100-foot-wide strip running east-west, from end to end, for a transmission line right-of-way. The original square now appears to have a plus sign superimposed upon it. Each agency took fee title to their respective right-of-way, so these are separate parcels owned by the government, not just easements. The remaining private property consists of the four equal quadrants lying outside of the plus sign. All four comply with General Plan and zoning requirements related to lot size, dimensions, etc.

    It is clear in the SMA that no map was required and the government parcels are legal lots. It is also clear that the remaining private property was legally divided from what is now the government land. The question is: did the condemnations split the private property into four separate legal lots, or is it one legal lot interrupted by the government parcels?

    Thank you in advance for your input!

  2. #2
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 1996
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    14,737
    Blog entries
    3
    Old question, I know. I can't answer for California, but in other states I've worked in, the bisected lot would still be considered one legal or tax parcel, usually mapped with the joined lot symbol (looks like two interconnected checkmarks). It'll usually have one tax ID number.. From a planning/zoning standpoint, the lot would need to be subdivided to become separate legal lots for the purposes of sale and building.

    Bumping to see if we can get you an answer from a planner in California.
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  3. #3
    Cyburbian Salmissra's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    4,655
    It's still one lot in TX until it is platted. At that time, the road and the transmission lines are required to be shown on said plats, with documented widths, lengths, etc, and the name of the entity (county, city, state, private company, etc) clearly labeled.

    I would think that a utitily and the road maker would have been in some consultation before (based on a comp plan?) to better organize the takings.
    "We do not need any other Tutankhamun's tomb with all its treasures. We need context. We need understanding. We need knowledge of historical events to tie them together. We don't know much. Of course we know a lot, but it is context that's missing, not treasures." - Werner Herzog, in Archaeology, March/April 2011

  4. #4
    Cyburbian Raf's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Playing at a movie theater near you
    Posts
    5,643
    Quote Originally posted by CCPlanner View post

    It is clear in the SMA that no map was required and the government parcels are legal lots. It is also clear that the remaining private property was legally divided from what is now the government land. The question is: did the condemnations split the private property into four separate legal lots, or is it one legal lot interrupted by the government parcels?

    Thank you in advance for your input!
    How was the split performed? "Fee title" simply is required for the government agency to legally subdivide the property. A utility company, may have required a map to subdivide a property unless it is a public entity. Going to assume it was split into four private lots. Check to see if a Certificate of compliance was filed with the County Recorder's Office.
    No Signature Required

+ Reply to thread

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 43
    Last post: 21 Apr 2009, 8:56 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last post: 24 Jun 2008, 2:05 PM
  3. Replies: 15
    Last post: 30 Jan 2006, 9:34 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last post: 01 Sep 2004, 9:49 AM
  5. Replies: 8
    Last post: 01 Jul 2003, 6:42 PM