California Surveyors Forums

Greetings.

I have a client who has a large lot where a very small drain line made a diagonal cut across his NE corner. (easement if favor of Irrigation district)

A few years ago, the irrigation district decided to beef up the drain, added tall levees on both sides and deepened the channel. This serves very well for the farming community, however, now my client cant really access this small remaining triangle. The amount is roughly 1/4 acre.

He wishes to quit claim this portion to his neighbor, who is actually using the area to park farming equipment.

The local planning department is leaning towards a LLA because both properties have independent Williamson Act contracts.

My question:

1) can he quit claim this snipe ?
2) can he do this w/o doing a rescission / reentry of willy act contract ?
3) can he quit claim and do his own rescission reentry ?
4) is he stuck with the LLA and all the big government fees ?

Bear in mind, his neighbor is willing to pay rescission reentry fees for both his and neighbors lands and I will be paid to prepare the new legals for quit claim deed and also for the Willy act stuff.

How far must we go fro that 1/4 acre ?

Thanks to all responders

I believe a quitclaim would be in violation of the SMA. You can't go deeding off portions of your property without following the SMA. A deed to the Irrigation District, however, would be exempt pursuant to Sec. 66428(a)(2) of the SMA, so maybe they would be willing take the property or you can use them as a go-between to transfer the property from your client, to the Irrigation District, and then to the neighbor. Otherwise, I think a LLA would be the way to go.

dedkad wrote:I believe a quitclaim would be in violation of the SMA. You can't go deeding off portions of your property without following the SMA. A deed to the Irrigation District, however, would be exempt pursuant to Sec. 66428(a)(2) of the SMA, so maybe they would be willing take the property or you can use them as a go-between to transfer the property from your client, to the Irrigation District, and then to the neighbor. Otherwise, I think a LLA would be the way to go.

That'd be a no-go with the Irrigation District. They might take it, but they would be crazy to agree to be a go-between for an end-run around the SMA. They'd also be subject to going through the surplus process for the property, and getting board approval to do so- difficult to explain how you came to be the owner of the piece that you're getting rid of only a few days before.

Could granting the neighbor an easement for the use of the 1/4 acre triangular parcel suffice? Maybe the compensation could be the relevant property taxes...

I have been considering a similar situation to resolve a TPZ partial that I would like to acquire or at least use, but the Timber Company owns the entire section and the small piece is cut off from the rest by a county road. Subdivision is out of the question and if I could use the small piece as my yard only and maintain the trees for them and not build anything other than a road to pass through, that would work great for me. It sounds as if your client would be happy to let the neighbor use the land for whatever he wants beyond a parking lot but the hassle of making it a legal parcel is too arduous.

I am just going to go with a LLA and call it good.
They will have to jump through the normal Willy act hoops but in the long run, it will clean up the title. Also I considered that a quit claim parcel might be construed as an illegal division giving unjust enrichment to the receivers in so far as they could do a LLA at a later time, using the quit claimed piece.

Thank you for the responses Happy weekend