Property line etiquette

[johnjk]

You are correct it is from the GIS mapping system. Not looking to put up fences but more or less get a determination within a few feet of where the line runs. It has probably been a good 25 yrs or more since it was formally surveyed. The person who did the survey for the seller prior to our purchase used wooden pegs or tied off to tree branches. Hopefully walking the coordinates will help me locate the remainder of those markings.

When I go to build my barn next spring (2021) I've budgeted in having a surveyor come out and mark it properly. I want not only the corners marked but at least two points between the woods and the road (all overgrown field) and at least once between the woods/field and the end of the property out back. I found what I think are the property markings out at the rear. These are short concrete posts say about 6" high with what looks to be some sort of metal in the center.

We now own multiple contiguous properties that I would like marked separately as well so if I do decide to sell one, the boundaries are easily identified. No tax incentive to combine down to one either. Since they are contiguous, CAUV is done by our name and total acres owned on one form.

 

[Tornado]

You are correct it is from the GIS mapping system. Not looking to put up fences but more or less get a determination within a few feet of where the line runs. It has probably been a good 25 yrs or more since it was formally surveyed. The person who did the survey for the seller prior to our purchase used wooden pegs or tied off to tree branches. Hopefully walking the coordinates will help me locate the remainder of those markings.

When I go to build my barn next spring (2021) I've budgeted in having a surveyor come out and mark it properly. I want not only the corners marked but at least two points between the woods and the road (all overgrown field) and at least once between the woods/field and the end of the property out back. I found what I think are the property markings out at the rear. These are short concrete posts say about 6" high with what looks to be some sort of metal in the center.

We now own multiple contiguous properties that I would like marked separately as well so if I do decide to sell one, the boundaries are easily identified. No tax incentive to combine down to one either. Since they are contiguous, CAUV is done by our name and total acres owned on one form.

I would say you will likely have a hard time locating these corners, especially if they are not metal. The longer the boundary run, the harder it is to find the corner, even if you have an exact starting point, and have the proper bearing and distance of the line. I help people fairly often who come in and want to locate a corner, and seek our help. I give them all I can but tell them all the same thing - its gonna be tough without a surveyor. Even with a good idea where the corner is, and a map showing its general location, when you get out on the ground and start walking from your starting point its very easy to deviate just a few degrees off as you walk toward the undiscovered corner. 1 Degree variation at several hundred feed distance means you can be way off the corner when you finally stop at the proper distance.

You will be doing a good thing to have a survey done of your property. Its NEVER a bad investment to have a survey done in my opinion. It can head off so many potential future problems. Property line disputes are the number 1 contentious issue I run into in my job between land owners, and more often than not it initiates when someone starts putting up a fence.

 

[GreensvilleJay]

re: We now own multiple contiguous properties that I would like marked separately as well so if I do decide to sell one,

Up here, City of Hamilton JOINS adjacent properties into ONE if you 'buy next door'.PITA and THEY make $$$$$ of it.
Markers up here are round or square steel bars. I need to dig ans toss brake drums around them this year....waaayy easier for metal detector to find !!

 

[torch]

Up here, City of Hamilton JOINS adjacent properties into ONE if you 'buy next door'.

It's not the City of Hamilton. It's the provincial Land Titles Act (although the roots are in Common Law), and it's known as "merger on title". In Ontario, it can be avoided by slight differences in spelling -- eg: John Smith vs John P. Smith or Estate of John Smith.

 

[Tornado]

Im not familiar with how Canada handles assesses property, but this is interesting to me. What benefit do they gain by combining parcels? Here in Florida its an entirely optional thing. If you own two pieces of land you can request to have them combined. The only stipulation is that the parcels be touching, the taxes are paid up and current on both pieces, and they are titled exactly the same. There is zero benefit to the county in combining parcels aside from the fact that one tax bill will be generated when bills go out once a year instead of 2 bills. Depending on the situation, there often can be a benefit to the property owner however in lower taxes owed. Properties of a larger size are assessed at a lower rate per unit than small parcels. So, if by combining your properties you cross into one of these higher thresholds you may actually end up with a reduced total assessment. Here in Florida there is also the potential benefit of SoH caps if the property is homesteaded. So, there are several benefits to the landowner in combining properties but for the county there is no real benefit. Im curious how In canada the government profits by combining parcels as one member mentioned.

 

[johnjk]

Im not familiar with how Canada handles assesses property, but this is interesting to me. What benefit do they gain by combining parcels? Here in Florida its an entirely optional thing. If you own two pieces of land you can request to have them combined. The only stipulation is that the parcels be touching, the taxes are paid up and current on both pieces, and they are titled exactly the same. There is zero benefit to the county in combining parcels aside from the fact that one tax bill will be generated when bills go out once a year instead of 2 bills. Depending on the situation, there often can be a benefit to the property owner however in lower taxes owed. Properties of a larger size are assessed at a lower rate per unit than small parcels. So, if by combining your properties you cross into one of these higher thresholds you may actually end up with a reduced total assessment. Here in Florida there is also the potential benefit of SoH caps if the property is homesteaded. So, there are several benefits to the landowner in combining properties but for the county there is no real benefit. Im curious how In canada the government profits by combining parcels as one member mentioned.

In my case I get the tax reduction for agricultural use with both combined. My county auditor advised not to consolidate in to one larger property. Easily done but if we want to sell a parcel off, it is costly and time consuming.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tornado]

In my case I get the tax reduction for agricultural use with both combined. My county auditor advised not to consolidate in to one larger property. Easily done but if we want to sell a parcel off, it is costly and time consuming.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's weird. I don't see how combining a parcel for tax purposes would affect selling a property at all - unless it is a zoning or regulation issue at play (IE: the lots are grandfathered in, and changing them would force them to abide by some new land use regulation) Here - agriculture classification can be obtained irrespective of a property being in 1 parcel or spread across multiple parcels - its all about what the property use is.

 

[D2Cat]

That's weird. I don't see how combining a parcel for tax purposes would affect selling a property at all - unless it is a zoning or regulation issue at play (IE: the lots are grandfathered in, and changing them would force them to abide by some new land use regulation) Here - agriculture classification can be obtained irrespective of a property being in 1 parcel or spread across multiple parcels - its all about what the property use is.

He said, "...sell a parcel off." He might want to sell one part or the other and would have to have it divided up again, in that case. So leave it divided, and it's read to sell.

 

[Tornado]

He said, "...sell a parcel off." He might want to sell one part or the other and would have to have it divided up again, in that case. So leave it divided, and it's read to sell.

right. My point is that it doesnt matter at all when it is sold if it is combined or divided in the tax assessors office. It will not affect the sale at all. The only time I could see it being an issue is, as I mentioned, it is a land use/ zoning regulation issue where the lots are, for example, too small to be buildable lots, but were grandfathered in as they predated a regulation. This comes up sometimes - and if you combine them then resplit them out, you essentially lose the grandfathered in state. But this is a very specific case. Outside of that, when you sell property it is sold by legal description. whatever is in that legal description will be sold to the grantor listed on the deed, and the tax assessor will process the deed, and create a parcel for the grantor based on the legal description included on the deed. Of course some states could have some differences, but here in Florida it would make no difference to me at all if you cut across on parcel in a sale, or 10 parcels in a sale, I will map the new ownership based on what the deed specifically describes as being conveyed to the grantor. You MUST have a legal description for any property you intend to sell. If you combine parcel 1, 2, and 3 into one parcel then later want to sell parcel 3, you simply pull the legal for parcel 3 and put it on the deed. It makes no difference if parcel 3 is currently combined in a larger tract with parcels 1 and 2. Once the deed goes through, parcel 3 will be pulled out and a new parcel created for it, as the title has now changed on the legal description for that parcel of land. The owner doesnt have to "Re split out" the parcel, the actual transaction will do that on its own.

 

[johnjk]

Yes. What D2cat said. Only impacts at sale and then having to update/split to do it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GreensvilleJay]

Here's how it worked for neighbour, next road over. father and mother owned 3 properties with houses, in a row, his and her name on 1, hers on one, his on last. they die... ALL THREE properties 'magically' merged into ONE. It took almost 4 YEARS to get the one 'mega' property split into 2 building lots, with 2 existing houses had to be demolished. 4 surveys,and I can't imagine the stress....Cost upwards of 15K Canucks to the City before the dust settled and new house (all approved) was begun. 3 months in the City changed front porch law and again, 10K later he's 'up to code' even though he HAD permits.
There's also a 10K penalty IF the house is NOT completed ( final inspection) within 2 years from the day the demo permit is issued !
Welcome to the City of Hamilton. My 1 acre lot with shop next door was agri/manu code since '61. Again 'magically' it was rezoned to R1 - residential BUT taxes were COMMERCIAL ! $8K/year for 1 acre, no services, NONE. Basic unheated 2800sqft buiding.Let that soak in 8,000 bucks.....NO house, NO services, 1 acre of grass and a shell of a building.Welcome to the City of Hamilton.
I'd love to sell the land but without building permits, no one is interested. I'd actually merge it BUT have to pay Land Transfer Tax ( my company owns it...) AND 13% on top for GST ! Welcome to the City of Hamilton !!! BTW a bare acre here usually fetches 300K,my lot has mature trees,double ended,organic garden and the shop.

 

[skeets]

And I thought our elected crooks were bad

 

[torch]

Here's how it worked for neighbour, next road over. father and mother owned 3 properties with houses, in a row, his and her name on 1, hers on one, his on last. they die... ALL THREE properties 'magically' merged into ONE. It took almost 4 YEARS to get the one 'mega' property split into 2 building lots,

Sounds like the 3 properties passed to a common owner -- eg: "Estate of John Doe". Or perhaps she died first and he inherited her property between his property and the common one (which automatically reverts to him alone on her death). A little creative estate planning in advance would have prevented that.

Next it sounds like the property lines were re-drawn -- you speak of splitting it into 2 building lots and having to demolish 2 houses. Assuming the original lots were legal to begin with, a consent application to sever should not have been necessary -- the original consent would have still applied under the principle that a consent does not expire.

A new consent is only required where the lot boundaries change and existing structures are "grandfathered" when zoning requirements are changed. Actually, it goes even beyond that -- courts have held that the original footprint is grandfathered. These are not subject to the whim of the municipality -- they are enshrined in the Planning Act and the City is bound by the Provincial law.

All that said, the City of Hamilton always looked at Flamborough (and Dundas, and Ancaster, and Glanbrook) as a cash-cow saviour to their financial woes caused by decades of mis-management. I sold out and moved north in '99 after the handwriting was on the wall -- the province decided to bail out the city at the expense of the fiscally sound suburbs. And stacked the deck to ensure the former City could always out-vote the rural communities. However, I'm getting dangerously close to political discussion so I'll leave off now...

 

[GreensvilleJay]

yeah, I'm in Flamoborough an dHmailton gets over 8 miilion in 'donations' from the Casino. Neighbout told me they've spent north of 50K in taxes, permits and lawyers..all they wanted was to merge the two cottage properties into one, build their retirement home, other pty has 1863 house on it...just sold for 1.2M

 

[torch]

yeah, I'm in Flamoborough

Yeah, your handle is a dead giveaway

I grew up in Dundas and raised my family in the suburbs of metropolitan Rockton (Middletown Rd & 4th Conc. area). So I'm quite familiar with your neighbourhood. Of course, my time extends back before Brock Road became Old Brock Road and the village was by-passed. A lot of changes over the years...

 

[GreensvilleJay]

Heck I LIVE in Greensville ! own the old Dallinger Fishbait building for 33 years, ..sigh..1/2 my life....
I get my 'stable sweepings' aka pony poop from a stable at Middletown and 4th !! I still have my Greensville grad ring from '67..BTW 'they' tore the school down 2 years ago, sniff,sniff. No electric trains at the quarry either, waaaaa. I LIKED those !

 

[torch]

No electric trains at the quarry either, waaaaa. I LIKED those !

I will never forgive CC&C for swallowing MacKensie's Cave.

 

[GreensvilleJay]

I always thought the gondola filling station on the edge of the escarpment would have made a TREMENDOUS restaurant. Easily see Toronto from there,all of Hamilton as well. A UNIQUE experience , could have brought in millions every year. So what do 'they' do ? Tear it down........all gone..... though I have 2 bearing caps from the gondola winch system..hehehe.

 

[RCW]

The first time I left the US was a family trip to Niagara Falls, and we stayed in Hamilton, CA. Maybe 1975 or so.

We had recently sold the dairy. As a farmer, I haven’t been to a lot of places, but Hamilton is one I have been to.

I don’t travel well still. Can take the boy out of the farm, but you can’t take the farm out of the boy.....[emoji15]

I saw the Mississippi River recently for the first time (from an airplane window).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[torch]

..... though I have 2 bearing caps from the gondola winch system..hehehe.

Which brings us back to the topic of property line etiquette <lol> For us kids, there wasn't any We used to clamber around that old tower like it was a giant jungle gym. When I hit my teens we would rappel off it. Just had to tie a slip-hitch so we could recover the rope if security showed up...

The view was always excellent, even before the tower. That whole area is riddled with defenses left over from the war of 1812. Cannon emplacements in commanding locations were linked by a system of buried speaking-tubes to observer posts (little concrete foxholes) spread along the escarpment. As far as I know, none of it saw any combat though -- the Americans didn't make it past Stoney Creek. (Which was still way past the property line )

So, RCW, you may not have traveled extensively, but you still made it further than the US Army. Of course, you were an honoured guest not a trespasser!