No Combo for Now

[kevin_standlee]

I checked into what it would take to combine the lot on which Fernley House sits with the newly-purchased adjacent lot. It turns out to be a lot more expensive than I expected: $2400 for the application fee, and it requires that the land be "reverted to acreage" and then re-divided. Besides, as the lot secures the loan we took out to purchase it, I expect that we can't — or at least shouldn't — fiddle with the boundary lines until we've paid off the loan.

Comments

[solarbird]

Oh! You bought it? Yay!

Boundaries

[belak]

Likely, it would trigger a red flag for the loan, but could be worked out if the loan company were willing.

The only reason to combine the two would be to cut the separate charges for taxes and other fees. Many counties charge a separate fee per parcel for things like school district taxes, sewage fees, and garbage/recycle fees are usually per parcel, regardless whether there is a dwelling on both properties. They purposely make it difficult, because they want the income from BOTH parcels, not just one, which likely would save you some money if you managed to get it approved.

I'm not sure I understand "revered to acreage" as in respected to acreage? I can't find another reference to revered/revere than respected. Or do you have to flatten everything, THEN apply for a dwelling to be situated and built after they approve said changes? Confusing and yes, expensive!

[ckd]

I am not a lawyer, and definitely not a Nevada real estate law lawyer, and even more definitely not your lawyer...but it looks to me like NRS 278.4925 might allow a "merger and resubdivision" without requiring the full reversion to acreage. I have no idea how applicable that is to your situation (or if it even helps if it is applicable), but it might be worth knowing about.