Opinion: Score 1 for the state, -13 for homeowner
By Kathryn Reed
Thirteen inches. That’s how far our shed extends into the California Tahoe Conservancy lot. Altogether, it’s about 9 square feet.
We have to remove it, or cut it back. That was the conclusion of what has now become more than a yearlong dispute with the state.
Shawn Butler with the California Tahoe Conservancy goes over the lot encroachment diagram. Photos/Kathryn Reed
A year ago this month, a rude CTC employee engaged me about the property line, which led to me to write a nasty column and to speak before the board.
At the time we had been here for more than 10 years and there had never been an issue. In fact, the shed in question came with the house. It looks a lot older than 11 years. Conservancy employees had been at their property multiple times. Not once was the property line mentioned.
In the past year a surveyor came out and marked the property line. No dispute now. The official boundary survey map we were given last week shows the stepping-stones going from the back gate to the shed are also on state property. (I removed those last weekend.)
While Shawn Butler, program supervisor of the land management program for CTC, was kind and professional, there was no way he was going to give us 13 inches.
“We want to be consistent with encroachments,” he said as he walked the property. Joining us was Tom Davis, the South Lake Tahoe city councilman who is on the CTC board.
Butler said the Conservancy wants to work with us and would help to remove the shed. We may take them up on that offer.
We’re researching whether it makes more sense to reconfigure the existing shed, buy a new one or some other option.
Wild wood rose abutting and taller than a 6-foot fence.
I need to start getting my wood split and stacked for next winter, so the decision will come soon.
What I’m left with, though, is feeling screwed. Where was our real estate agent? Shouldn’t he have known the property line? Did the previous owners know they had gone over the property line and didn’t disclose it? Why does the CTC care about this now?
It’s not that the shed is great. In fact, it’s pretty crappy. But it still does its job to keep our primary heat source dry until we need it.
Still to be resolved is who owns a large pine tree that seems to be in the middle of the property line. Butler said the forester from his agency would come take a look.
Another thing that needs to be done is cutting back all the wood rose that is growing against our fence. According to the South Lake Tahoe Fire Department, it’s a fire hazard. Some of these wild roses are more than 6-feet-tall.
And instead of immediately saying CTC would remove it, Butler said the forester likes this plant and would have to look at it. Davis took a look around and couldn’t believe how thick it is.
I’m not disputing the shed is on CTC property. But at the end of the day I’m still left scratching my head. It seems like that overgrown state lot that looks like a fire hazard should be more of a priority. But what do I know? Today, is only the seventh anniversary of the Angora Fire.
This is a case where ignorance is not bliss. No one, not your realtor, your title company, your neighbor or your dog is responsible for knowing where your lot line is. It is you. You are responsible. You are actually lucky. Your shed sounds like it is useful but old and rickety. Let them take it down and move on. They are being gracious in their offer to remove it.
When buying property adjacent to CTC, it is imperative to understand where your lot lines are as the CTC enjoys certain easement exceptions and special rights regarding their land. The CTC cannot make exceptions to encroachments on their land, it is a slippery slope.
The CTC is a force for good but do not cross your lot line. No amount of pleading and hand wringing will change this outcome. Good luck.
Your fault, your problem. When the title report was issued, prior to you purchasing the property, the size of the lot was described. This is also called the parcel size. Upon receiving that title report, you ignored that description of the property. You shouldn’t have done that. You should have quickly recognized that the shed was very close to the other property, or crossed the property line. That was your mistake. Now you want to blame your mistake on someone else. Shut up and deal with it. Consider yourself lucky that the shed has little value.
Hey Atomic . Don’t you find it annoying that some people are always trying to shift the blame onto others, no matter how much at fault they are. I was finishing writing my response as you posted seconds ahead of me.
That’s such a drag. We found out about property line issues about 20 years ago down in lower El Dorado County. A new neighbor turned ugly about what she thought was HER property that we were using. After spending a bunch of money on surveys, and much research on the history of a couple of different subdivisions in the area, it turned out WE were correct, and she was wrong. But she remained the nasty neighbor from then on. Sore loser. El Dorado did a lot of slip-shod surveys back in the day.
But be careful about removing and/or replacing that shed. You might release the ire of the TRPA over coverage issues!
Good luck, you two!
Accurately locating a lot line even when there is a fence is simply not possible with a parcel map and a title report. Only a licensed surveyor can delineate these lines, often using previous buried corner markers and the instruments of the trade. I believe plenty of sales occur whereby fences, sheds, etc are over actual property lines but the new buyer doesn’t think twice and assumes all is right. Virtually no one surveys their lot as part of the purchase process. That said, it is still your responsibility. You bought your lot, not 13 inches more than your lot, but JUST your lot.
The author has taken enough of the CTC’s time and effort fighting a losing battle. It is time to deal with this as an adult. This person should be embarrassed that this has gone on so long with so little grasp of the law. They have had enough time to educate themselves of this reality. They have not. Yes Pizza, it is annoying.
So you got to use the public’s property for 10 years at no cost, and now you’re complaining that the CTC is doing its job and ending your free ride? How about you take some personal responsibility for your failure to conduct proper due diligence when you purchased the property? Thank you to the CTC for stopping private encroachments on public land that belongs to all of us!
I, for one, am sorry to hear of your property dispute with the CTC. It is unfortunate, but you have to admit that you may have made yourself a target by rocking the boat here in this little mountain town.
Political means being used for personal vendettas? Nah, couldn’t happen here!
My only advice is to take your medicine, learn your lesson, regroup and become stronger and wiser for the next battle, because it will come in one form or another. You have an outsized voice in this community and there are those that do not appreciate it. That is made obvious by the shills for our local govt that hide behind aliases in these comments sections.
Porked, Kae you and Susan just got Porked
A review of the disclosure provided by the seller would be appropriate. This is more than a lot line issue, it is a setback issue as well. While it is easy to blame the buyer, the seller, too, may have some responsibility. The statute of limitations starts at discovery, not at the date of the sale.
I don’t see the seller responsibility. If you are buying land, get a survey. Its incredibly irresponsible not to.
well said david, as well as both real estate agents. This should have been pointed out and disclosed as a posible problem by both of them for the above stated reasons.
Unload the Shed and slide some timbers under the shed and have a crane service move it onto the property – problem solved.
Here are the facts. CTC knew of this encroachment over 13 years ago but decided time after time not to do anything. They made the issue even worse and then there are prescriptive rights once an entity chooses to ignore it. Being in the real estate business you see this all of the time. In court if one chooses not to correct the issue then prescriptive rights can be won. Only 3% of buyers do surveys because of the historical visual boundary identifiers. A survey will cost $5,000 to $12,000, so what should be done is ask to see the known corner survey markers but in some areas the surveys are wrong and nobody does anything because it is a big problem. Sorry for your situation but I see it all the time with my business and the CTC has a huge problem with this issue. They did nothing for so long that many people have driveways, yards, etc. but the agency did nothing because of prescriptive rights.
Surveys are expensive and not needed 90% of the time. While I sympathize (we didn’t pay for a survey either and relied on the metal spikes in the ground), they should not cut you, me or anyone else encroaching on public land a break. You gambled you didn’t need a survey and lost. A shed is easily replaced.
Kae, I had a similar problem years ago although it didn’t involve the CTC, just a cranky neighbor. He thought the fence, which had been there for many years, was encroaching on his property. At the advice of a surveyor I measured from a property iron on the corner, and using a lot map found that that the fence was actually cutting off some of MY property. Mr. Cranky finally moved and the house sat vacant and the pipes froze and burst, flooding the house. When I called STPUD after hearing the running water next door, they couldn’t find a water shut off for the leaking pipes.So it turns out that for a very long time the water line was tied into my house.
So back in the day there were not alot of building inspections or clearly defined property lines.
I would suggest moving the old shed as Toxic Warrior mentioned. And if you want to get rid of any of those rose bushes, I’ll gladly take a few cuttings!
Good luck with the shed! Old Long Skiis
If you enjoy reading LTN.. Then don’t tell the writer to “shut up”… It’s titled “opinion” for a reason!
I agree with Shenja Says ! This is an opinion piece and can be opined from either side of the perspective. 13 years is a long time to now have the CTC take issue. Surveys are costly but in the end homeowners are responsible for understanding property boundaries. One solution is CTC offering up a lot -line adjustment to be paid by homeowner if willing plus CTC cleaning up their lot.
Tahoe Conservative, Kae & Sue did their due diligence when they paid a realtor to represent them. They also paid for a title report and title insurance. The average person does not know how to read a parcel map or determine property lines. Maybe some one should have inspected the property before close of escrow.
It is my understanding after a short bit of research that CTC is not bound by California prescriptive easement law. Open and notorious use of CTC land gains you nothing. If it were private land, then I believe prescriptive easement law may allow for some rights to maintain its present use.
Once CTC knows that an issue like this is made public, then they likely have no choice but to uphold their rights. Any other reaction would cause an avalanche of similar situations. I’m sure their attorneys have briefed them on this. Unfortunate situation. Try to get creative and move the shed as suggested, it could be fun!
Whoa!!! Pizza Eater, guess you forgot your manners as so many do in this day and age! I am referring to your “Shut Up” comment. Chill out!
Government property is generally immune from prescriptive easements as some might erroneously think the author has. The CTC is going overboard in its offer to remove or help remove the encroaching structure illegally placed on its property.
Word on the street is CTC is getting ready to sell some property/lots to the forest service out by Lake Tahoe Golf Course. Has anyone else heard about this CTC/Forest Service deal.
Hi Kae-
Your experience is a primary reason why many states have regulations that require recording a new record of survey for every real estate land sale. Unfortunataely California does not have this requirement.
Verification surveys can be paid for and certified to either the buyer or seller, depending on the terms of the deal. This is something that is often done around Tahoe, simply to avoid situations like yours. A survey certified to a seller ensures that he/she will never ever have to deal with the issue, since the responsibility for any error then rests with the professional who did the survey.
A lot survey is not always as expensive as was mentioned in a comment above, since it takes very little time to verify existing physical markers, unless they have been moved, destroyed, buried etc.
Parenthetically, I am aware of several property owners in Tahoe who have actually pulled up and relocated survey markers to gain an advantage for something they wanted to do, or to make something they did look legitimate. This practice is particularly seen at the border with Government land like Forest Service Lots.
Therefore, I would advise all buyers to take steps to ensure they really understand what they are buying. There are few real estate agents in my experience who ever bring this up. Probably don’t want to hold up a commission?
In California, real estate agents are not qualified nor required to determine lot boundaries. In fact, the possible uncertainty is a disclosure in some sales.”The lot lines and existing marked property corners are believed to be accurate but have not been surveyed by the seller.” or some similar language.
I was trained as a surveyor at my University, as it is germane to my profession, but never took the licensing exam. While I am knowledgeable, I would not call myself an expert at this time. I do know that easement law is one of the more complicated laws around and varies by place. It is interesting to hear the “experts” responding to this opine on the situation. Must just like to hear themselves.
Good luck in resolving your situation. The Pine Tree and the roses do seem to be the remaining sticking points.
Roses are always a ‘sticking point’. ;-)
I suspect that what’s bothering Kae, and, to some degree, bothering those of us who are outside observers, is that California Tahoe Conservancy has a “good guy” image among those of us, even outsiders like me, who want to see the Lake and its surrounding areas preserved, but assume that CTC would be one of the leaders, particularly in the South Lake Tahoe political environment, in compassionate preservation.
I imagine that Kae pretty much comes from the same point of view and is surprised by the comments. A property line is a property line, but CTC, which is beginning to seem more than anxious to trade off some of their preservation property for financial gain, should, perhaps, address issues like this with a sense of compassion and an open mind to compromise. There’s always a “bottom line,” but true negotiations require that it not be reached too quickly.
Copper, come on man. CTC got land that has little ecological value, lands they didn’t want but were part of deals that included lands that needed preservation. Those lands are being, and should be sold and the money used to conserve high value land.
Kae encroached on public property. It goes no further. That is illegal and MUST be illegal.
There is no commonality between these two unrelated topics.