Dave Karoly, post: 402921, member: 94 wrote: I know, right?
Schwartz v. Helms Bakery Limited, 67 Cal. 2d 232 (1967).
I wondered what happened to the Helms bakery trucks. This case must of bankrupted them? 🙂 Jp
Tom Adams, post: 402905, member: 7285 wrote: It's not the job of the County recorder (or the county surveyor) to decide whether a surveyor is properly depicting the boundary. If your professional opinion is that the property line ends at the right-of-way line then it's not someone else's place to refuse to record your plat.
I completely agree, but here in Ca. there are many CS's who interpret the code more liberally and see it as there job to oversee correctness of a survey. (this is an entirely different subject with valid points of view on both sides) My guess is that, of these that see a more expansive role, the vast vast overwhelming majority of those never bring up this issue. I thinks Dave's experience was probably a very rare one.
roger_LS, post: 402928, member: 11550 wrote: I completely agree, but here in Ca. there are many CS's who interpret the code more liberally and see it as there job to oversee correctness of a survey. (this is an entirely different subject with valid points of view on both sides) My guess is that, of these that see a more expansive role, the vast vast overwhelming majority of those never bring up this issue. I thinks Dave's experience was probably a very rare one.
It's an issue that I think is pretty serious. If someone can "tell" a licensed surveyor changes in boundary determination, and make them change it. It undermines what the licensed surveyor is licensed to determine, and I assume they are not putting their signature and seal to your plats. They want to tell me the property pin goes "over there" then they should draw up their own plat and sign and stamp to it as their professional opinion.
Tom Adams, post: 402929, member: 7285 wrote: It's an issue that I think is pretty serious. If someone can "tell" a licensed surveyor changes in boundary determination, and make them change it. It undermines what the licensed surveyor is licensed to determine, and I assume they are not putting their signature and seal to your plats. They want to tell me the property pin goes "over there" then they should draw up their own plat and sign and stamp to it as their professional opinion.
I have only had one serious disagreement with a County Surveyor's checker trying to tell me to change a boundary. Eventually the actual County Surveyor told the checker I was right.
Dave Karoly, post: 402933, member: 94 wrote: I have only had one serious disagreement with a County Surveyor's checker trying to tell me to change a boundary. Eventually the actual County Surveyor told the checker I was right.
They seem to be pretty reasonable types. 🙂
I try not to let a check print go out with an issue like that without a chat first with the submitting surveyor.
It's true that most zoning ordinances are tied to gross acreage for area considerations.
By convention, the net dimensions are shown on final maps. I've been preparing them and reviewing them for 40 years now and, in some cases, have set monuments on street centerline for property corners. Think City of Los Angeles.
City maps are much denser than rural ones. It is customary to depict gross and net acreage on maps with lots greater than a couple of acres. How it may shown on a final map doesn't affect the reality of how subdivided property rights are created.
Warren Smith, post: 402942, member: 9900 wrote: How it may shown on a final map doesn't affect the reality of how subdivided property rights are created.
That's not what I've been hearing.
Warren Smith, post: 402942, member: 9900 wrote: ... in some cases, have set monuments on street centerline for property corners. Think City of Los Angeles..
It seems like I would avoid setting property corners on centerline of the street as much as possible. It just seems needlessly dangerous to both set and for a surveyor to recover. Can't you set a "witness" back in the yard, perhaps at the intersection of the property line and the easement line? (okay...I see the "in some cases" above, but it seems like you would want to do that as little as possible. ahd would you be setting those in a monument box if they fall in the asphalt? and what good does it do anyone?)
I bought a home (commercial zoned) here in FL May of '17. This, and the adjacent property, were vacated for many years and an adjoining business, 3 parcels removed, use the ROW (including in front of my property) for their employee's parking. I complained and the city, they told me to have a survey done and would do something only if the cars were encroaching "my property". The surveyor drew the property line at the R/W. When I questioned this, he told me the actual answer was in the courthouse language and to hire a lawyer.?ÿ ?ÿSince it's a county road, I also tried unsuccessfully to get their involvement (in fact, just across the street there's "No Parking or Right of Way" signs). I understand it can be beyond the scope of a "surveyor" but the right answer, in my case, is whether I have to live with line of cars parked in my front yard.?ÿ
I bought a home (commercial zoned) here in FL May of '17. This, and the adjacent property, were vacated for many years and an adjoining business, 3 parcels removed, use the ROW (including in front of my property) for their employee's parking. I complained and the city, they told me to have a survey done and would do something only if the cars were encroaching "my property". The surveyor drew the property line at the R/W. When I questioned this, he told me the actual answer was in the courthouse language and to hire a lawyer.?ÿ ?ÿSince it's a county road, I also tried unsuccessfully to get their involvement (in fact, just across the street there's "No Parking or Right of Way" signs). I understand it can be beyond the scope of a "surveyor" but the right answer, in my case, is whether I have to live with line of cars parked in my front yard.?ÿ
I think it's a little ridiculous for the surveyor to tell you to lawyer up.?ÿ Just go over to the business, explain the situation, and ask the owner to have his employees park elsewhere.?ÿ If that doesn't work then gather the survey, a right of way plat showing your parcel if you can find one, and maybe take some pictures of the no parking signs and cars and show that stuff to the city people.?ÿ I think it's usually pretty easy to argue something like that isn't safe and they will be forced to take action.?ÿ If for some reason that still doesn't work you could try posting tow away signs along the front of your property, or call the police to report a possible abandoned vehicle in the right of way (I did something like this myself once and it worked).?ÿ The last thing I would do is dump a bunch of money into a lawyer.
As a City Surveyor that deals with street vacations and the question of ownership after the vacation I sometime wish ?ÿthat past surveys and final plats showed the ??gross ownership lines? which in turn would be a form of public notification of the underlying ownership. ?ÿFor the percentage of streets that vacate I don??t think it is worth the change of standard mapping procedures. ?ÿBut it would help educate public officials, planners, and the public that the underlying ownership of the road is held in private ownership ( unless the contrary can be shown). You would be surprised at the number of people that think the agency owns the r/w and that county mapping ??decides? who the ownership returns to. ?ÿI personally would not make that determination on a survey until which time the title company would back my decision by adding the strip to the area insured, and remove the desclaimer ??area of vacated road X as would be inured by law?. ?ÿ Interesting subject matter. ?ÿI enjoy the reading the different opinions. ?ÿJp
Utah has a statute that says dedication for public use vests defeasible title to the public.?ÿ The law is not all that old so before the law went into effect it may be complicated.
I bought a home (commercial zoned) here in FL May of '17. This, and the adjacent property, were vacated for many years and an adjoining business, 3 parcels removed, use the ROW (including in front of my property) for their employee's parking. I complained and the city, they told me to have a survey done and would do something only if the cars were encroaching "my property". The surveyor drew the property line at the R/W. When I questioned this, he told me the actual answer was in the courthouse language and to hire a lawyer.?ÿ ?ÿSince it's a county road, I also tried unsuccessfully to get their involvement (in fact, just across the street there's "No Parking or Right of Way" signs). I understand it can be beyond the scope of a "surveyor" but the right answer, in my case, is whether I have to live with line of cars parked in my front yard.?ÿ
It's not really beyond the scope of a surveyor.?ÿ
Just because a street is disused or even?ÿunconstructed doesn't mean that it is "vacated". The right of way still exists, and the public can use it as such. If it is signed "No Parking", that is a matter for traffic enforcement.?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
Of?ÿ course the status of ROWs, varies by jurisdiction, but often the public has limited fee. In other words the public owns it, but if the ROW is vacated it reverts to the owners of the parcels it came out of. This is often the case when a ROW is created by dedication in a subdivision plat with lot lines that terminate at the ROW.
This limited fee only differs in small ways from an easment. Examples of the differences include the exclusive right of the owner of the land underlying an easement to clear lumber, pick berries, and other activities that don't interfere with the use of the ROW.?ÿ
