Parcel Map Limits

[chrisopopolis]

We are splitting a parcel (Parcel Three described in the attached Vesting Deed and shown as APN 043-322-01 on the attached assessor map) into two parcels.
The combination of 6 parcels described in the deed have been conveyed together since prior to the Map Act, even though they are separated by a street which is owned in fee by the county.
The title company says that a parcel map showing only the parcel being split needs to be filed, but that Parcel Three (APN 043-322-01) could not be legally conveyed separately from the other five parcels without either the parcel map or a Certificate of Compliance.
I have received another opinion that the parcel map which is filed to split Parcel Three into two lots would also need to include the other five parcels shown on the current vesting deed.
Can anyone provide feedback as to whether or not we would need to include all six existing parcels within the subdivision?

[E_Page]

As I recall, assuming that these parcels had each been separately conveyed at on point in the history of each, they continue to be separate legal parcels lacking specific language in the deed that they are to be considered merged.

There is an AGO on this point, although I don't recall the number. I'm sure that someone will come along and post it soon.

[chrisopopolis]

As far back as the title company has searched (40 years), the 6 separate parcel descriptions have always been consolidated on a single deed. To my knowledge, none of them were previously described separately. That might mean the civil code section cited above would not apply? Interested in other thoughts/input.

[E_Page]

Title companies typically limit (at least their initial) chain of title searches to 30 or 40 years back. To find the answer to a question like this, you need to go back to the deeds of first conveyance for each parcel. The legal status of a parcel or parcels is not limited to the effect of conveyances which occurred on the most recent deed or to those that occurred within any arbitrary timeframe.

You may have to research it yourself, going through the county's Grantor/Grantee index to determine when these parcels were first conveyed together and whether they had ever been conveyed separately.

Since these are all M&B descriptions, having at least 3 POBs among them, and since those with common POBs are not written as contiguous parcels (if they had always been conveyed together, why are Parcels 1, 2, & 3 not described as one larger contigous parcel? same question for Parcels 4 & 6), I suspect that if you search back far enough, you will find that each of these had been conveyed separately when 1st created.

You should inspect each deed in the chain for language specifically indicating an intent to merge parcels.

[LA Stevens]

In Marin County it is quite possible you may have even more parcels listed once a proper title search is accomplished.

Hard to believe the shopping center you are working on has never had a Record of Survey filed on it. I can't tell you how many times it has been extensively remodeled since the late 60's. You know they must of had at least a couple of Land Title Surveys accomplished.

If you are establishing boundaries in this area, you should contact me. I have job references which may be surveys conducted by Dean Rhodes who practiced since the 1950's through the late 80's. My yet to be completed database states they are over AP 043-321-01 & 043-322-01. I also have many ARB maps and surveys from one of the oldest title plants. Some times the vesting deeds are written on the maps.

Also if you perform a proper title search, it will determine the timeline the specific boundaries were created and it may help lead you to the original surveyors notes who established the lines. In addition, many times you can discover the maps and notes of other surveyors who perpetuated the original lines.

Your work has just begun.

Best,

[MFORD]

LA Stevens - "hard to believe a Record of Survey hasn't been filed?"

Remember, these parcels are in Marin County. Ground zero for unrecorded maps. These parcels have been surveyed twice, almost. The surveyor didn't get it right either time. He prepared two ALTA maps, one each in 1999 and 2004. He didn't file a ROS either time. Check with your local CLSA chapter PPC for the details.

[LA Stevens]

I believe all complaints submitted to the PPC are confidential. I would guess they are part of a Land Title Survey broker.

Marin is hardly the worst, unfortunately.

[MFORD]

Unfortunately in this case the surveyor resides is Marin County. As I said Marin County is ground zero for not recording maps. Also equally unfortunate is that some surveyors in Marin have made a business of taking advantage of that circumstance to the detriment of the profession.