A boundary line agreement was recorded in 1950. The agreed boundaries are well marked. The boundaries were run using means that weren't the best available even then but it was cheap.
Now the property owners want to use new, more accurate boundaries run using modern methods. They are in agreement on this. The overall difference between acres gained and lost is insignificant.
Can a new boundary line agreement supersede the old one or is a boundary line adjustment required?
> A boundary line agreement was recorded in 1950. The agreed boundaries are well marked. The boundaries were run using means that weren't the best available even then but it was cheap.
>
If I understand your information correctly, the parties know with certainty where the boundary line is located on the ground, but newer measurements differ from the measurements noted on the 1950 agreement?
> Now the property owners want to use new, more accurate boundaries run using modern methods. They are in agreement on this. The overall difference between acres gained and lost is insignificant.
>
You mean "new, more accurate boundaries measurements" to the same boundary agreed to in 1950? If so, then there is no difference in acres "gained and lost." Do you really mean that the "new measurements" result in a different calculation of the "area"?
> Can a new boundary line agreement supersede the old one or is a boundary line adjustment required?
It seems that all they really are requesting is that the older measurements and calculations be updated with newer measurements and calculations. That has nothing to do with the "superseding" the original "boundary line agreement." I'd consider it more of an augmentation, clarification or update to the original agreement rather than superseding the agreement by replacing it with a new agreement. The documentation should reflect that.
They are not (if I understand correctly) creating a new boundary, so a boundary adjustment isn't necessary. Boundary "adjustments" create a new boundary; boundary "agreements" establish the location of the existing boundary by perpetuating newer evidence. Boundary "adjustments" affect title to land and require a conveyance document; boundary agreements do not affect title but merely establish the location of the boundary by perpetuating (current) evidence of its location.
Updating the measurements and calculations is a survey matter and an issue for surveys to disclose simply by "record" vs "measured" values on the survey. Depending on your state filing (as opposed to a lack thereof) requirements, the update could be handled by filing a survey reflecting the updated measurement values and/or filing new owner affidavits or a joint affidavit.
JBS
Were Corner Records Filed?
"A boundary line agreement was recorded in 1950. The agreed boundaries are well marked."
If previous corner records were not filed, my suggestion is to set the new corners and file corner records. As long as both owners agree where the corner is, where the old marker is/was is irrelevant.
Write two new descriptions each referencing the other lot's new description, "a pin with cap set at the termination of the fourth course of a revised deed dated 'same date' for 'Lot Adjacent' about to be filed"
Paul in PA
Were Corner Records Filed?
No corner records were filed. A sketch map was recorded with the agreement.
I'm down with all of that.
I didn't do it.
Just try to answer the question if you can or don't, it's up to you.
The "new" boundary is not easy to erase is part of the problem.
I wish the world was all neat and tidy but it isn't, sometimes things happen.
I think the question JB was asking, and it is the one you have to answer in order to know what to do, is: Are they changing the boundary on the ground or is the boundary staying in the same place, to be documented with updated measurements?
If the boundary is being changed, it would require a conveyance. If the boundary is staying the same, you can update the measurements and document what you did.
:good:
I thought that was clear, I see that I was a little ambiguous in the OP, my apologies.
New boundaries were run in mistaken ignorance of the old agreement. Questions were asked by someone who noticed the alternate evidence. Files were rifled, agreements were found, oops. I have great respect and admiration for all of the Surveyors involved, it's just one of those things that happened.
I have never personally been up there so I'm trying not to reveal more than necessary. I have had a habit of rifling files for the 13 years I have worked for the State but I am nosy and curious and I sometimes find interesting and helpful stuff although not a BLA so far. I found a section corner last week just because I rifled through boxes of old field books and found some very helpful information about where to look. The funny thing is I had assumed a stump was a certain BT, it was a BT but a different one than I thought. I didn't even know there was a BT at that bearing until I found some notes referencing it (not an original GLO BT).
The original boundary line agreement controls unless a boundary line adjustment can be performed. An agreement establishes an unknown line, it doesn't change the line. A recombination or adjustment can modify the original line.
yeah it is called a lot line adjustment
No, the owners have no authority to ignore the subdivision map act.
OK let me launch this and see how it floats...
All the same property owners are present.
Suppose they agree they don't like the old agreement anymore. The new lines aren't just anywhere, they are in a more precisely accurate locations per the existing descriptions. Let's just say they more accurately reflect the existing descriptions.
Can they cancel the old agreement and then execute a new one?
Note: I'm not saying I like it or think it's a good idea and I'm not planning on making a habit of this so I don't need to be scolded about it. Just asking.
yeah it is called a lot line adjustment
SMA:
66412. This division shall be inapplicable to any of the following:
(a) The financing or leasing of apartments, offices, stores, or
similar space within apartment buildings, industrial buildings,
commercial buildings, mobilehome parks, or trailer parks.
(b) Mineral, oil, or gas leases.
(c) Land dedicated for cemetery purposes under the Health and
Safety Code.
(d) A lot line adjustment between four or fewer existing adjoining
parcels,
OK let me launch this and see how it floats...
If two abutting property owners want to agree on anything they should be able to do it. I can't see why they couldn't go out and stretch a string and say they agree. Then they could have it surveyed and memorialized until they want to change it again. I would not think they would even need much of a reason other than they want to pick something they want to agree on. This is all under the assumption that their new BLA won't affect third parties.
The original BLA probably ought to rule if they can't agree to anything or don't change anything.
Maybe I am missing something.
OK let me launch this and see how it floats...
Well, it depends on your local subdivision regulations and state laws. You can perform a lot line adjustment provided both lots will still meet zoning in most cases. It doesn't invalidate the old agreement, it changes the line to a new line. That's my take anyways.
yeah it is called a lot line adjustment
Dave,
You accidently on purpose left out the important remaining text which includes: "if the lot line adjustment is approved by the local agency", and then then goes forth to state the basic requirements and a number of limitations of a LLA.
Although the SMA states the LLA is exempt from the SMA, it sets forth enough requirement to actual dictate some very important aspects of the LLA process.
My take is the effect is the SMA does not truly exempt the LLA from the SMA, it only exempts it from the final/parcel map requirements. The SMA dictates enough of the the basic requirements for a LLA, and violating those basic requirements will therefor violate the SMA.
Another consideration is that since the SMA requires that a LLA be approved by local agency. If you don't do that, then you violate the SMA by not acquiring the exemption status it provides.
You have a boundary that has been fixed and established. You want to adjust it.
Parcel map or LLA in California.
OK let me launch this and see how it floats...
I agree. In our location we cannot change boundaries of lot lines, but the city and parish do not require a new re-subdivision if people agree to adjust a common ownership line. For example landowners with common lot line (say Lot 1 and Lot 2) want to amend their common line, each might end up owning Part of Lot 1 and Part of Lot 2 with the new BLA in place. Since a new lot is actually not created, our jurisdiction here does not require new subdivision platting. I am sure that varies across the country and wasn't clear in the initial thread.
Sure, a correction instrument
> All the same property owners are present.
>
> Suppose they agree they don't like the old agreement anymore. The new lines aren't just anywhere, they are in a more precisely accurate locations per the existing descriptions. Let's just say they more accurately reflect the existing descriptions.
>
> Can they cancel the old agreement and then execute a new one?
Yes, if what is done is under the fiction of correcting some error in the prior agreement, sure. That would be perfectly permissible in Texas (where this hypothetical property is not situated). It would take some finesse and probably Dave Karoly would need to make certain that some future surveyor would not be able to demonstrate that it was all a sham correction done for the purpose of skirting some (California) law.
Do you have Correction Deeds in California? Since both of the parties to the original agreement would be executing the correction instrument, I'd think that element would be airtight. That is, their recital that they have found the agreement as executed not to fully express what they intended to do would be self-proving.
yeah it is called a lot line adjustment
OK I see what you mean there.
I think it comes down to a framework for the local agency process. I'm not sure what an advisory agency is.
New Lines Are Exactly Where They Should Have Been?
If the newly monumented corners are more precisely placed per the original description, then nothing needs to change except to file corner records for the new monments.
That solution is a no brainer.
Paul in PA
yeah it is called a lot line adjustment
> ..... I'm not sure what an advisory agency is.
In CA this is generaly in reference to the plaaning commission, as opposed to the local agency council or board and its departmental staff.
