Thread: Vacation of part of plat

You probably want to think of this as "once platted, always platted and can't be unplatted." If they want to vacate a portion of a parcel(s), then what they're really doing is moving lot lines. I would say that they could amend the existing plat but no portion of it can be unplatted (converted to metes and bounds).

It's really going to vary by state (as you can see by some of the replies). Without more info, I'd guess that by removing the back 30' it reduces taxes as taxes are either driven by a lot size threshold and/or a threshold and being part of a recorded plat). If there aren't any mechanisms to reconfigure lot lines, Florida could allow a partial plat vacate or a replat (either one would accomplish this). We would have to make...

Would not be allowed here unless the new parcel(s) are still platted and meet zoning. Can't take it back to metes and bounds.

Quote: Originally posted by SlaveToTheGrind Would not be allowed here unless the new parcel(s) are still platted and meet zoning. Can't take it back to metes and bounds. Ditto that. Most places I've worked would allow the combination of the 30' rear yards as long as the result was a new parcel and remant parcels that all still met the minimum zoning and land division requirements. But it could not be...

Have a party wanting to vacate the back 30 feet of several platted lots and incorporate them into a metes and bounds description for taxing purposes. Is it typical to vacate parts of individual lots, or should the entire lot be vacated? Have not dealt with this too much, but had two people discuss it in the last month. Any comments?

I have never heard of "unplatting" a lot. Vacating ROW, sure. Maybe the inquirers need to just further subdivide the lots and make the target land its own separate lot. Perhaps there is some minimum threshold for reducing the property taxes of a lot and having a little "unbuildable" lot that can still be used for some purpose (extra yard, etc.) will reduce the tax burden. Or maybe they need to just accept...

We don't allow partial plat vacations. There is a small window in the code that covers plat vacations, and since it sounds like your vacation area has infrastructure/been developed, it wouldn't qualify under our regs. Sounds like they need to replat. Move the lot lines and create a new lot/open space/common area, and every original lot owner must sign the plat. Otherwise, you're platting property without the owner's...

Since it appears a portion of the new parcel is currently un-platted lands, a new plat would be required here. Can't un-ring the plat bell. If the adjacent parcel was part of a platted lot in another subdivision (not metes and bounds description) and they wanted to combine the platted lots, it would be an amended plat of both subdivisions and recorded as a new map....kind of strange.... We have vacated whole plats in the past, but only...

Is the intended result that the back 30 feet of these several lots be one property that could be owned separately owned from the lots? By owned separately, I am including many alternatives, such as an owner who does not own any of the lots, an owner of one of the lots, or multiple owners, which could be all the owners of the original lots. If yes, then … Under California’s Subdivision Map Act, there are two basic ways to do something...