I'm nearing the finish line of surveying a community first formed as a mobile home park. It's current actual status is a bit confusing to explain, but the HOA owns all common areas and "lots" and "lot owners" own a certificate for sole use of certain units. Legally, it's one legal parcel with 40 +/- seasonal homesites. I guess it's kind of a Frankencondo.
The project started out with the intent to convert it to a true condominium where each certificate holder would legally own their unit as a separate legal lot. After months of internal squabbling, they're keeping ownership structure unchanged, but in the meantime, we've set a couple hundred monuments so are now filing the map as a record of survey.
Sent what I consider to be the ready-to-file version to the HOA at the end of last week for them to review to ensure that all of their internal lot line adjustments approved over the past 25 years are properly reflected.
So I get this in my email this Saturday from one of the lot/certificate owners via the HOA president:
Hi Prez,
Forwarding you the response from Dinglefritz. It came through the HOA email.
Have a great weekend!
Secretary
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Mr. Dinglefritz <dingle@pompousnet-dot-com>
Date: Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 7:28 AM
Subject: Re: f/u with surveyor
To: HOA BOARD <contactHOA@genericmail-dot-com>
Prez,
Thanks for the note [referring to my first attempt to answer his question]. Not sure what Surveyor is so confused about. This document which I got when I bought the place says 3681 sf of lot area(see attached). Surveyor's update says we are at 3679, which removes 2 square feet from our lot. I see that the note to Surveyor from the board incorrectly states "He's stated that the survey shows him 3 sq feet short." That's not correct, I wrote in my note that I am down 2 square feet.
My yard, according to the document I was given, says it is 83 feet by 44.35, which equals 3681.05. Surveyor now says that is 3679. Obviously, with small lots, this 2 sf that I bought and am now missing are important. So, I want them back.
Thanks
Dinglefritz
[NOTE: Names changed to protect the innocent and knot-headed alike. I added the emphasis.]
I know how I responded. How would you respond?
Come by my office and i will return them to you.
The error in the original document is not my problem. I suggest you contact them.
please let me know if you have any other concerns.
Thank you,
Dougie
Come by my office and i will return them to you.
Oh, you guys have a sandbox and a sledge in the back too? Great minds think alike.
I would respond that your survey reflects your findings and historical changes based on recorded records. Followed with the facts that you did not prepare the original survey and supporting documents and that you can't give them the 2 SF that does not exist, according to your calculations.
As for the 2 SF, which is pretty petty to bicker about, whether the HOA may or may owe him a piece of land not big enough to occupy with a lawn chair, that would depend on the wording of the sales contract. Did he purchase a Lot, or did he purchase the square footage? Either way, is 2 SF in a seasonal trailer park even worth the value of the time of entertaining such a pretty complaint? It probably cost you more in time to respond than the 2 SF is worth.
I got a square foot of heaven on earth; when I bought a black Oak Arkansas album:
maybe I'll get @nate-the-surveyor to survey it for me!
Legally a defined lot will be fixed in acreage.
However, it sounds like this was never a lot or tract in a filed subdivision.
A bit of a grey area if the properties are being re-configured.
A bit more info: Our company surveyed the original "lot" or homesite layout in the mid 1990s. They set monuments as well but never filed a map. We found about half of the monuments and about 2/3 of those appeared undisturbed. The amount and dispersal of found monuments allowed for reasonable replacement of missing and damaged monuments by proration, with all dimensions of all homesites being within a few hundredths of the CAD drawing of the original layout.
Over the intervening 25 +/- years, the HOA has internally approved several "lot line adjustments" for which they kept spotty records. Over several months of dealing with this group, we seem to have been able to get supporting documentation of all such adjustments and reflected them on my map.
Moe, you are correct, these are not legal lots. The full site is one legal lot, the homesites are more akin to mobile home stalls. The owners each bought a certificate amounting to a share in the ownership of the HOA and entitling them to the exclusive right to place a mobile home or small stick-built dwelling unit on a particular homesite.
I haven't seen any of these share certificates, so do not know the exact wording. Whatever the wording, I wouldn't resort to area where I have a good scattering of found monuments and specific courses on the original (unfiled) map they've been using.
Chris: My reply breaks down a little math for this guy to better picture just how petty his concern is. However, this isn't just any little mobile home park placed on someone's vacant lot. This site is a prime location fronting on a popular resort lake. One homesite of 40'x70', no direct beachfront, with a broken down trailer home that was probably old when it was placed on site recently went on market - or I should say that the HOA owner certificate representing that lot went on market. The owner has already turned down an offer of $400,000.
Could there be an easy explanation such as the lot isn't perfectly square? It wouldn't take much to amount to two square feet. That would be a lot easier to explain to that particular lot owner.
I remember Paul Cook, from Santa Barbara, posting, several years ago, about a double wide selling for 1.4 million, and you leased the land. It was ocean front, on top of a big cliff.
If you will pay for shipping i will load up a 5 gallon bucket of the 2 sq ft they are missing. I will even add some black gold in for them to plant whatever they want they can go vertical lol. Geezers. I miss seeing the +/- on acreage and square ft. Lol.
I miss seeing the +/- on acreage and square ft. Lol.
Got me thinking "Didn't I do that?" so I just checked. Actually on the map, we put lot areas to the .001 Acre with the +/-. However, they had request lot coverage calcs several weeks ago, and I provided that as a pdf of my spreadsheet, which I'm now certain is where he saw the 3179 sf.
Tell him he can claim to the outer edge of his corner pins if he wants the extra 2 square feet
2/3681= 0.000543 (or 0.05%)
There couldn't be any additional trees beyond this one in front of me, right?
No one mentions this, but if you assume that each length measurement is accurate to ±0.05 feet, then the computed area has an uncertainty of ±4.7 sq ft.
