I have a client who's father hired a licensed surveyor in 1985 to subdivide part of his parcel into six lots. This was prior to the County having any subdivision regulations. The subdivision was completed and monuments for all six lots were set, then lots 2, 3, and 5 were subsequently sold off. The subdivision plat showing all six lots was recorded in the land records as part of the deeds conveying lots 2, 3, and 5. The family and neighbors have been relying on the lines marked in the field for the past for 31 years, but the unsold lots (Lots 1,4 and 6) have never been shown in the assessment records in that time.
My client went to purchase lot 4 from his father and the County Planning office is refusing to recognize lots 1, 4, and 6. The County's stance is that because those lots were never conveyed and the plat was not recorded as a 'standalone' subdivision plat that the lots don't exist. My stance is that all of the lots were created simultaneously when the subdivision plat was recorded as part of the deed for the first lot that was conveyed. I don't believe the County can recognize one lot and not the rest of them because they are created simultaneously. I also don't believe the fact the plat was only recorded as part of other deeds invalidates it in any way. The fact that it was recorded is all that matters.
Who is right?
There is a doofus employed in the County Planning office. There obviously is a set of records that has been indexed under the headings of Lot such and such for over thirty years. Geez, Louise! Where do these myopic nincompoops come from and how do they all seem to get employed in positions where they can pretend they have POWER???
I would say you are. At least the plat was recorded. I don't no how many deeds I've worked off of that call out a plat that is not recorded. What is a "standalone" subdivision plat? Is that like a "parallel" traverse?
In the jurisdictions I work in the lots in a subdivision do not legally exist until the moment the plat is officially recorded by the County Recorder. Conveyance has nothing to do with it.
I will say that this particular County employee has always been pretty good to deal with. He just responded to my last email and his response is summed up in his last few sentences "IÛªve given you my opinion but I am no expert in subdivision law. The Subdivision Ordinance says any lot ÛÏthat was not duly recorded in the official land records of the county prior to adoptionÛ has to be granted final approval. I guess everything hinges on what constitutes being ÛÏduly recordedÛ"
He is forwarding our conversation to the County attorney to get his opinion.
Just say my client wants to buy the Lot between Lot 3 and 5 in this subdivision. Then see what he has to say
What was the legal description used in the deeds to convey the first three lots?
MD Surveyor, post: 385670, member: 10081 wrote: I have a client who's father hired a licensed surveyor in 1985 to subdivide part of his parcel into six lots. This was prior to the County having any subdivision regulations. The subdivision was completed and monuments for all six lots were set, then lots 2, 3, and 5 were subsequently sold off. The subdivision plat showing all six lots was recorded in the land records as part of the deeds conveying lots 2, 3, and 5. The family and neighbors have been relying on the lines marked in the field for the past for 31 years, but the unsold lots (Lots 1,4 and 6) have never been shown in the assessment records in that time.
My client went to purchase lot 4 from his father and the County Planning office is refusing to recognize lots 1, 4, and 6. The County's stance is that because those lots were never conveyed and the plat was not recorded as a 'standalone' subdivision plat that the lots don't exist. My stance is that all of the lots were created simultaneously when the subdivision plat was recorded as part of the deed for the first lot that was conveyed. I don't believe the County can recognize one lot and not the rest of them because they are created simultaneously. I also don't believe the fact the plat was only recorded as part of other deeds invalidates it in any way. The fact that it was recorded is all that matters.
Who is right?
The County is right.
Your mileage may vary.
Different places have different policies.
The index books require an organized method of indexing the deeds. Once a deed is recorded using a numbered lot system, the indexing books must accommodate said lot accordingly. As the first deed recorded also provided the subdivision map, the indexing should have been put in place at that time to include all lots shown. If there was no part of the subdivision plan altering existing county operation, such as attempting to dedicate a road, then there was no need for the county to sign off on how the individual split off his private property as they had not adopted any subdivision regulations at the time the subdivision was created.
Attempting to apply today's rules to a pre-existing situation is asinine.
Duane Frymire, post: 385712, member: 110 wrote: The County is right.
Can you elaborate, please?
From what I am familiar with (the states I work in) there has to be a declaration by the owner and a certification by the surveyor... If this scenario was around here, and these two items did not happen on a recorded document I think it would be HARD to say they ARE lots on a subdivision. I would say the owner has to sign some form of a declaration, saying that they were subdividing the property, and the surveyor would have to say that he performed the work.
Cameron Watson PLS, post: 385707, member: 11407 wrote: What was the legal description used in the deeds to convey the first three lots?
The legal descriptions are in the format of "Lot # on plat prepared by xx on date xx. Said plat is attached hereto and made a part hereof."
ppm, post: 385719, member: 6808 wrote: From what I am familiar with (the states I work in) there has to be a declaration by the owner and a certification by the surveyor... If this scenario was around here, and these two items did not happen on a recorded document I think it would be HARD to say they ARE lots on a subdivision. I would say the owner has to sign some form of a declaration, saying that they were subdividing the property, and the surveyor would have to say that he performed the work.
The recorded plat was signed and sealed by a licensed surveyor. I think you can make a good argument that the owner recognized the subdivision when he conveyed the first three lots from the plat.
How does the tax office describe the land?
I agree that public notice has to be given by recording the subdivision in the clerk's records before anyone takes notice.
After that, locally across Texas the property can be described by Lot and/or Block of Subdivision as recorded in book and page of clerk's records.
A Harris, post: 385726, member: 81 wrote: How does the tax office describe the land?
The tax assessment office only recognizes the three lots that were conveyed. The area of three lots that were not conveyed is still shown as part of the larger parcel on the tax map.
If it walks like a Duck its a Duck, if it quacks like a Duck its a Duck.
This property was surveyed by a Surveyor and dividing into Lots by a Surveyor, signed stamped and recorded in the Courthouse. Then Lots were sold using the legal description that it was recorded. Just because it was filed before the County had their subdivision rules does not mean it is not a subdivision plat.
This sounds like what is termed an "antiquated subdivision" in California. That is, a map prepared prior to the enactment of the Subdivision Map Act in 1893, which required the filing of a map prior to sale of lots shown thereon. Maps were indeed filed without local agency review, and lots sold by reference to the map. For those portions not sold, they are considered to still be unsubdivided, and are taxed that way. The rub comes at time of development. Current standards apply and often require the merger of substandard lots in order to comply with zoning ordinances.
Many States have a Statute stating 'all subdivision plats recorded prior to such and such date are deemed valid'. That would be my first bit of research...
You're right. Once it is accepted and recorded, the lots are created.
thebionicman, post: 385732, member: 8136 wrote: Many States have a Statute stating 'all subdivision plats recorded prior to such and such date are deemed valid'. That would be my first bit of research...
The County subdivision ordinance states "any lot that was not duly recorded in the official land records of the county prior to adoptionÛ has to be granted final approval." The County Planner recognizes this but, the part he is struggling with is that the plat was recorded as part of various deeds and not as a separate subdivision plat so he doesn't believe that satisfies the "duly recorded" statement. He is referring the question to the County attorney who I assume will recognize that the plat was in fact recorded.
