united-states california real-estate
Is it legal to prevent a single parcel of land from being split?
<p>I've spoken with a landowner in the rural area of Saratoga, California, who owns a single parcel with more land than he knows what to do with, and I asked him why doesn't he build an MDU or some such, to which he replied that the city will never allow to re-zone and/or split the parcel of the land he owns, and that neighbours and such will generally be against any such arrangements, because it'll increase crime and drive the property values down.</p>

<p>However, upon what principle could an application to have the parcel of land split be denied?  Wouldn't such restrictions unduly violate the property rights of the owner with such a large piece of land?</p>

<p>Minimum parcel sizes after a split are viable targets for regulation.  Counties or townships (typically, or similarly niche jurisdictional units) set the numbers for what size of parcel subdivision is allowed.  </p>

<p>Though not a California example, here you can see that <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sewickley_Heights,_Pennsylvania#History" rel="nofollow">Sewickley Heights, PA</a> has created ordinance against smaller than 5 acre lots, which ultimately leads to a number of effects that the borough collectively desires.  <a href="http://www.northsewickleytwp.org/pdfs/ordinancesandzoning/Chapter%2022%20Subdivision%20and%20Land%20Development.pdf" rel="nofollow">These ordinance are laid out here.</a></p>

<p>Pardon that I cannot say examples in CA.</p>
