Chapter 22.15
CONTIGUOUS LAND AND MERGER
Sections:
22.15.010 Consideration of contiguous land.
22.15.020 Extent of included land.
22.15.025 Indication of contiguous property.
22.15.030 Indication of undivided and merged property.
22.15.010 Consideration of contiguous land.
Each body acting on or considering any item brought before it by an applicant shall consider all land contiguous to that described on the application, whether improved or unimproved, which is owned actually or constructively, legally or equitably by the applicant or by any person having any such interest in the property described in the application. [Ord. 21-2003 §§ 2, 4; Ord. 20-2003 §§ 2, 4; SCC 574 § 2, 1983].
22.15.020 Extent of included land.
The body considering the item shall recommend or determine, as appropriate, the extent of the land which must be included in or described on the approval sought. [Ord. 21-2003 §§ 2, 4; Ord. 20-2003 §§ 2, 4; SCC 574 § 2, 1983].
22.15.025 Indication of contiguous property.
All contiguously owned property shall be indicated on any map and shall be revealed on all applications for any approval of notice. [Ord. 21-2003 §§ 2, 4; Ord. 20-2003 §§ 2, 4; SCC 574 § 2, 1983].
22.15.030 Indication of undivided and merged property.
All contiguously owned property not otherwise legally divided or property which is merged as a matter of law shall be included in the map approval of description, except as specifically provided herein. [Ord. 21-2003 §§ 2, 4; Ord. 20-2003 §§ 2, 4; SCC 574 § 2, 1983].
22.15.040 Merger.
A. Property shall be deemed merged as a matter of law only if said property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll as a unit or units, or as contiguous units, is held in common ownership, and:
1. Was “not legally divided” as defined herein; or
2. At the time it was divided did not conform to the minimum lot area requirements of the city so as to preclude use or development of the property, and at least one of the contiguous parcels or units, or portions thereof, is not developed with a building for which a building permit has been issued or which was built prior to the time a building permit was required; or
3. The subdivision map creating the contiguous parcels was recorded prior to January 1, 1948, and at least one of said contiguous parcels or units, or portions thereof, is not developed with a building for which a building permit has been issued, or which was built prior to the time a building permit was required.
B. Mergers shall occur only to the extent necessary to conform the lots with the minimum lot area standards. Consolidations may be made in any configuration, subject to approval of the director. For the purposes of this section, “not legally divided” means property shown on assessor’s maps as divided, and such division is contrary to the Subdivision Map Act, this title or predecessor regulations. [Ord. 21-2003 §§ 2, 4; Ord. 20-2003 §§ 2, 4; SCC 574 § 2, 1983].
22.15.045 Unmerged lots.
Any merger or purported merger of parcels or units of property which occurred pursuant to this title, including all previous enactments of this title, which are inconsistent with the provisions of RCMC 22.15.040, shall be of no force or effect and such parcels or units of property shall be deemed unmerged as provided in Section 66424.2. [Ord. 21-2003 §§ 2, 4; Ord. 20-2003 §§ 2, 4; SCC 574 § 2, 1983].
22.15.050 Lawful parcels.
Parcels, for the purposes of this title, shall be considered lawfully created if:
A. A certificate of compliance, final parcel map or final subdivision map has been approved on or after March 4, 1972;
B. The property was divided subsequent to January 1, 1948, by a final subdivision map or final parcel map recorded prior to March 4, 1972;
C. The property was in fact divided by actual sale, lease or financing arrangement prior to March 4, 1972, and said division complied with all laws in effect at the time of said division; or
D. The property was divided by court judgment or decree or other means only if such means are not governed by the Subdivision Map Act, or any ordinance of the city, provided the city council finds that no attempt was made to avoid the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act or city regulations. The burden of proof to enable the city council to make its finding is the responsibility of the property owner. [Ord. 21-2003 §§ 2, 4; Ord. 20-2003 §§ 2, 4; SCC 574 § 2, 1983].