Subdivision Alteration Quiz

[FredK]

If subdivision X contains lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, and later lot 1 is redivided into five lots (1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, and 1E) has subdivision X been altered?

My position is, unless there is a specific definition to limit or further define the word “altered”, then subdivision X has been altered since it now contains three original lots (2, 3, and 4) and a new subdivision that contains the five new lots. To further support my position, I know the city will require a revised plat map for X.

The City Attorney’s position is that subdivision X has not been altered because it does not make sense to call the redivision of a lot within X an alteration of X.

I like my chances in front or a judge on this issue. Do you agree with my assessment?

This issue has come up since there is state law concerning subdivision alteration that I want to make sure gets applied and the City Attorney does not want it applied.

What is the name of your state? WAWhat is the name of your state?

 

[danno6925]

Tell him to bite rocks

I believe this would be a new subdivision entirely. Once you remove the lots, they are no longer part of X, and would be taxed individually, would they not?

I'm thinking that if the city doesn't want to see it applied, there must be money involved and the application of this law would limit their cashflow somehow. Could you give an outline of the state law you wish to see applied?

 

[jimmler]

If subdivision X contains lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, and later lot 1 is redivided into five lots (1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, and 1E) has subdivision X been altered?

My position is, unless there is a specific definition to limit or further define the word “altered”, then subdivision X has been altered since it now contains three original lots (2, 3, and 4) and a new subdivision that contains the five new lots. To further support my position, I know the city will require a revised plat map for X.

The City Attorney’s position is that subdivision X has not been altered because it does not make sense to call the redivision of a lot within X an alteration of X.

I like my chances in front or a judge on this issue. Do you agree with my assessment?

This issue has come up since there is state law concerning subdivision alteration that I want to make sure gets applied and the City Attorney does not want it applied.

What is the name of your state? WAWhat is the name of your state?

Your assessment is wrong. It is a resubdivision of ONE of the lots in X, not an alteration of the whole subdivision. You would only have to sign the plat if your lot was being changed.
https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=323252

jimmler
I am not a lawyer, I have been in surveying since 1989.