Activity Feed › Discussion Forums › Strictly Surveying › ROW vs Property Line Corner POBs
In general a court is going to assume that there was no intention to create an overlap or gore. So the POB that honors the deed dimensions without creating an overlap or gore will be the one to use.
BigD,
Are you an attorney?
Not an attorney. It would probably make life a lot smoother around other people and their agendas….
That makes the most sense. However….. When dimensions get changed by a surveyor’s “property plan” with a “missed leg” and a corresponding “closure error” of the same length, changes of angles and a line that goes through a building instead of the original plot and area of continuing occupation, it does lend itself to a plethora of issues!
@big-d-2
….not necessarily….it depends…
I am glad that you have started posting again, I find your posts to be informative and practical. The plain and practical explanations are a solid contribution and have helped me put some legal concepts in context over the years.
Thanks
@big-d-2
“Property plans” or “plot plans”, whatever they are called, are an abomination.
“…people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.” -Neil PostmanA lot of people before me have made great points with a lot of useful information, but I wanted to add my two cents.
Posted by: @big-d-2another lot with that second house was created and put up for sale. That second later deed notes a ROW edge referring to two different dimensions from centerline in the same deed.
If this is a newly created lot from a larger senior parcel and the deed itself starts at a point/monument/etc on the edge of the 50′ ROW being whatever number of feet from the center line of the constructed road (pretty common language in my area) the surveyor could definitely be correct to hold the distances cited in the deed from that edge of the right of way, not the center line of the road.
Title to the center line is often assumed to be conveyed with said deed unless otherwise specifically excluded, or if the fee title has been conveyed to the town/county/state. This is at least how we deal with these situations in the colonial state I work in, but I am not sure if PA differs.
With that being said any survey situation such as the one being discussed can be very complex and I am only commenting on the information that has been shared.
Posted by: @big-d-2The intent seems that it was aligned with the first tract from the 1930s (PA is the location) using that same “magic point”.
I am not sure where you get this intent when you state the created lot clearly calls for the edge of the ROW as the POB.
Posted by: @rover83-that doesn’t necessarily mean that the lines “moved”, but the described lines may not match the original intent, or previous or current occupation.
I find this often with family properties or deeds written without any physical monuments put in the ground. No one intends to create a lot that goes through an existing house, but unfortunately the proper care when writing legal descriptions is not always taken.
Posted by: @big-d-2Just making a point about how important and necessary a full “retracement survey” is what should be the standard or at least to inform clients that they are only getting an opinion on a deed stakeout project (that could create pin cushion corners, lines through buildings, etc. as only fair to everyone affected!).
With it being so important, have you engaged the services of a professional land surveyor to conduct a full retracement survey to get another opinion?
Will add my BIG D comments and observations to your reply in CAPS WITHIN YOUR REPLY FOR CLARITY.
A lot of people before me have made great points with a lot of useful information, but I wanted to add my two cents.
Posted by: @big-d-2another lot with that second house was created and put up for sale. That second later deed notes a ROW edge referring to two different dimensions from centerline in the same deed.
If this is a newly created lot from a larger senior parcel and the deed itself starts at a point/monument/etc on the edge of the 50′ ROW being whatever number of feet from the center line of the constructed road (pretty common language in my area) the surveyor could definitely be correct to hold the distances cited in the deed from that edge of the right of way, not the center line of the road.
WHAT IS THE CASE (?) WHEN THE “AREA” REMAINS THE SAME YET THE LINE BEARINGS ARE CHANGED ON A “PROPERTY PLAN” THAT SHORTENS AND SHIFTS THE CORNER “X’ AMOUNT OF FEET OF DUE TO A “DROPPED LEG” CREATING A PREDICTABLE CORRESPONDING EXACT “CLOSURE ERROR SIZE LENGTH”. THROUGH THE ARBITRARY REMOVAL OF THE LENGTH OF THAT ONE PROPERTY LINE LEG IT IS CAUSING ANOTHER ISSUE IN HOW THE AREA OF OCCUPATION (BASED ON THE ORIGINAL LINES AND BEARINGS) REMAINING THE SAME AND UNKNOWN TO THE OWNERS NOW CREATES A LOSS OF AREA OF OCCUPATION AND THE “PROPERTY PLAN” BOUNDARY GOING THROUGH A BUILDING? THE CLOSURE ERROR OF THE EXACT DISTANCE OF THE ONE “LEG” EXCLUDED AND THE NEW ANGLE TO THE NEXT CORNER CONFIRM THAT A PROBLEM SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTED BY THE ‘DEED STAKE OUT” SURVEYOR’S APPROACH. WHEN A SURVEYOR CAN LITERALLY “SEE” VISUALLY TWO MARKED ” CORNER STAKES” IS ONE THING. WHEN A SURVEYOR CAN NOT SEE THE OTHER STAKE BECAUSE NOW A BUILDING IS IN THE WAY, PLACE A CORNER “PIN CUSHION” ONE FOOT AWAY FROM A PREVIOUS STEEL MARKER OR NOTICE THE MATH BASED “CLOSURE ERROR”, IT IS ONE MORE SUCCESSFUL DEED STAKE OUT “JOB”. NO NEED TO DO A LENGTHY “RETRACEMENT SURVEY” NO ONE WILL PAY FOR OR EXTENSIVE RESEARCH CHAIN OF TITLE OR ADVANCED MATH OR EVEN LET REALITY BE YOUR GUIDE FOR AN ENCROACHMENT YOU SHOULD INFORM THE OWNERS ABOUT….
Title to the center line is often assumed to be conveyed with said deed unless otherwise specifically excluded, or if the fee title has been conveyed to the town/county/state. This is at least how we deal with these situations in the colonial state I work in, but I am not sure if PA differs.
ALL OF THESE DEEDS HAVE ‘MINERAL RIGHTS EXCLUSION’ AND THE CLASSIC LEGAL PARAGRAPH “SUBJECT TO…. ALL OTHER PREVIOUS EASEMENTS AND AGREEMENTS… ETC.” WHICH IMPLIES THAT IF A PREVIOUS EASEMENT INCLUDED A POB IN THE CENTER OF THE ROAD, YOU PROBABLY SHOULD NOT ADD/TAKE FROM THE SENIOR PROPERTY THE GORE AND GAP ISSUE CREATED.
With that being said any survey situation such as the one being discussed can be very complex and I am only commenting on the information that has been shared.
THE ORIGINAL DEED AND OTHERS OF THE FIRST SUBDIVISION 1930s PROPERTY STATE THAT A POINT IN THE ONE CORNER OF THE 1800S SUBDIVISION TO THE CENTER OF THE ROAD IS “X” AMOUNT OF FEET. A POINT OF ORIGINATION REFERENCE TO CONFIRM THE POINT OF BEGINNING WAS THEN CHANGED TO A POINT ALONG THE ROW. PREVIOUS OWNERS REFER TO A LARGE METAL STAKE BEING DRIVEN INTO THE CENTER OF THE ROAD. PROBABLY STILL THERE BUT NOT ACKNOWLEDGED OR RECOGNIZED AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
Posted by: @big-d-2The intent seems that it was aligned with the first tract from the 1930s (PA is the location) using that same “magic point”.
I am not sure where you get this intent when you state the created lot clearly calls for the edge of the ROW as the POB.
SEE THE ABOVE EXPLANATION. MOST LOTS DONT HAVE INITIATION REFERENCE POINTS FAR FROM THE POB.
Posted by: @rover83-that doesn’t necessarily mean that the lines “moved”, but the described lines may not match the original intent, or previous or current occupation.
I find this often with family properties or deeds written without any physical monuments put in the ground. No one intends to create a lot that goes through an existing house, but unfortunately the proper care when writing legal descriptions is not always taken.
THE LINE THROUGH THE BUILDING AND THE OCCUPATION AREA WHERE THE BUILDING SITS MATCHES THE ORIGINAL VERSION DEED. NO ONE INTENDED TO PUT THE LOT USE UP TO DATE WITH THE LATER CONTRIVED “PROPERTY PLAN” OR DID NOT RECOGNIZE THE RESULTING CLOSURE ERROR FACTOR OR REALIZED WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DROP A LEG OUT OF A PREVIOUS ZERO ERROR CLOSURE SITUATION.
Posted by: @big-d-2Just making a point about how important and necessary a full “retracement survey” is what should be the standard or at least to inform clients that they are only getting an opinion on a deed stakeout project (that could create pin cushion corners, lines through buildings, etc. as only fair to everyone affected!).
With it being so important, have you engaged the services of a professional land surveyor to conduct a full retracement survey to get another opinion?
THIS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM FOR NORMAL PEOPLE. TO PAY AT LEAST 7 TO 10k MORE FOR ANOTHER “OPINION”? EVERYONE HAS AN OPINION. WHAT IS BAD IS WHEN SURVEYORS SHOULD KNOW BETTER BUT SEEM TO “TAKE THE MONEY” LEAVING THE NEIGHBORS NOW DESTROYED IN THEIR RELATIONSHIPS AND NOT TRUSTING EACH OTHER. PEOPLE EXPECT THE “PROFESSIONAL” TO TELL THEM THE TRUTH – NOT BE MISLED BY SILENCE – THEIR DEED AND PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION DOES NOT PROVE THAT IS WHAT THEY ACTUALLY OWN FOR A WHOLE HOST OF VARIOUS POSSIBLE REASONS. A ‘DEED STAKEOUT’ IS CHEAP AND EASY IF YOU DONT CARE ABOUT LINES THROUGH BUILDINGS, CLOSURE ERRORS, WASTING MORE MONEY ON MORE ‘PROFESSIONALS, UNNECESSARY LAW SUITS, ETC ETC ETC. IF PEOPLE IN GENERAL HAD A DIFFERENT VIEW OF THE FACT THAT SURVEYORS CAN NOT PRACTICE LAW OR SUGGEST LEGAL SOLUTIONS (BECAUSE THEY NEED TO KNOW THEIR LANE) AND THAT SURVEYORS SHOULD ILLUSTRATE ALL OF THE VARIOUS CONFLICTING PINS, THE GORES AND OVERLAPS AND ENCROACHMENTS ETC….. IT IS AN OPNION. DOCTORS GIVE OPINIONS FOR $100 AND SOMETIMES THEY WILL KILL YOU IF YOU DONT GET A SECOND OR THIRD OPINION. BUT PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO DO THAT FOR LIFE AND DEATH ISSUES. BETWEEN THE LAWYERS AND SURVEYORS OR CIVIL CASES RESULTING FROM A BOUNDARY CONFLICT PEOPLE GET DRAINED FOR MANY TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS SLOWLY OVER TIME. GREAT FOR PROFESSIONALS AND KEEPS THEM GOING. BEGS THE QUESTION – WHAT IS THE RIGHT PROCESS? YOU HAVE SOME SURVEYORS WHO WILL SAY DONT DO IT… JUST GO HALF ON THE PERCEIVED “ERROR” AND REDRAW THE LINE… NO NEED FOR A RETRACEMENT PROCESS…. LEGAL PROCESS…. CIVIL PROCESS… DO YOU SEE HOW IT LOOKS FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CLIENT?? ABRAHAM LINCOLN BECAME A LAWYER AND A SURVEYOR BECAUSE HIS FAMILY LOST THEIR FARM TWICE DUE TO LAND DISPUTES….. THEN MOVED TO ILLINOIS.
In answer to the “law in Pennsylvania” question about the title extending to the middle of the street:
“However, we note the law in Pennsylvania regarding ownership of streets is well settled: ??Upon a conveyance of land bounded by a street, unless otherwise provided, the grantee takes to the middle of the street, if the grantor owns thus far, subject to the public easement; and when the street is vacated, this portion of it reverts to the grantee.? Barnes v. Philadelphia, Newtown & New York Railroad Company, 27 Pa.Super. 84, 86 (1905) (citations omitted). Moreover, when a street is accepted, the municipality only receives a right to use the public right-of-way for public purposes, and title to property abutting on a public street extends to the center of that street and is vested in the adjoining landowner. City of Scranton v. People’s Coal Co., 256 Pa. 332, 100 A. 818 (1917) ; Lockhart v. Craig Street Railway Co., 139 Pa. 419, 21 A. 26 (1891) ; Gramlich v. Lower Southampton Township, 838 A.2d 843 (Pa.Cmwlth.2003), appeal denied, 578 Pa. 696, 851 A.2d 143 (2004). See also Miller v. Nichols, 363 Pa.Super. 508, 526 A.2d 794, appeal denied, 517 Pa. 608, 536 A.2d 1332 (1987) ; Hindin v. Samuel, 158 Pa.Super. 539, 45 A.2d 370 (1946).”
Stark v. Equitable Gas Co., 116 A.3d 760 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2015)
The impact of a surveyor mistakenly locating the rear boundary by measuring from the sideline instead of the centerline is an entirely different question. The answer is found not in what the surveyor did right or wrong. It lies in what the landowners have done after the surveyor left. What reliance was made? What improvements were made? How long have the improvements been in place? How many $$$ were spent? These questions will disclose the facts that are necessary to determine where the boundary lies.
It’s not at all clear that the surveyor made a mistake measuring from the ROW boundary. It sounds like the deed may have called for the boundary, not the centerline. If this was the case, the surveyor was correct, even though the 25′ under the road would be part of the lot.
@big-d-2
Surveyors can’t “practice law”, but they do interpret how the law applies to the set of facts they are considering and apply that interpretation. They also can suggest solutions to conflicts and ambiguities.
You won’t get a good answer on a forum from a bunch of people who don’t have a single document relating to the issue, and have not been in the ground to see how the record fits with the physical facts. If you want an answer hiring a surveyor is your best option.
@big-d-2
You still haven’t communicated (despite the jumbo-size word salad) what, exactly, your problem is, other than you and your neighbors are fighting.
But you’ve made it clear that you know better than everyone else (apparently including doctors?), and you’re always right. You must be a joy to live next to.
Good luck finding a surveyor to sort this out for you.
“…people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.” -Neil PostmanSome of you are misunderstanding who and what i am trying to illustrate. It IS extremely complex. Multiple suveyors ARE involved. MUCH money already expended by those who trust the professionals. Will drop this case from further discussion. The goal was to portray the plethora of issues and problems and not to solicit a remote “solution” from anyone. Thank you for your understanding and participation. Someone should put together a collection of real “scenarios” and use them for enlightenment of professionals. Is there always a “one right answer”? Possibly it is more about several potential “solutions” for property owners that are acceptable from a practical and useful viewpoint. You can only see what you know. The public practically knows nothing about surveying.
@big-d-2 I feel your pain.
Most Land Surveyors don??t understand basic boundary law, where the boundaries are already established don??t set new ones in the theoretically correct locations or to paraphrase Cooley, sometimes the ??wrong? answer is the right answer.
I’ve stumbled into yet another section with two subdivisions. Fun times.
Log in to reply.