I work in a rectangular state and am having a discussion with other Surveyors in regards to how to monument the description: the West 734 feet of the south 741 feet of the East 1519 feet of the SE 1/4. I say to go the described distance of 1519' (westerly) along the south section line and then 734' back easterly along that same section line for the south leg of the description; then go the described distance of 741' (northerly) along the east section line; from that point calculate 1519' westerly at the same bearing as the south section line for the northwest corner of the parcel and then back easterly 734' for the northeast corner of the described parcel which will then measure 734' E/W by 741' N/S and be parallel to both section lines. // Another Surveyor says that is incorrect and that the parcel should be set up perpendicular from both section lines which actually makes the distances longer than the description states. The interior angle between the two section lines is 86D-38M-16S. in my mind I need to monument the distances described in the deed rather than what a perpendicular offset creates. Open for thoughts ----.
I agree with Another Surveyor. In a rectangular system the stated distance is normally distant and parallel with the controlling line.
I also agree with Another Surveyor. Lacking any evidence of a valid prior establishment of the boundaries, the distances are to be measured perpendicular from the section lines and the resulting lines held parallel to those section lines. The distances along the section lines will always be slightly longer than the "of" distance unless by some fluke, the angle at the section corner happens to be 90-00-00.
It could be either way. Or not. What does the neighbor's description say? Where are the occupation lines, if any? Who prepared the description and what were they using for a base? Those numbers are not common but approach 12.5 acres, which leads me to wonder why they were chosen.
You have to be able to justify your decision and I wouldn't want you to have to admit that a poll that you ran on this forum clouded your judgement.
Is this subject addressed in any of the manuals or reference books? I have looked through a few in the past and didn't notice anything.
I am still looking for a reply as to whether anyone knows if this subject (perpendicular and distant from) is specifically addressed in any of the survey manuals or reference books. Thx.
"A grant or conveyance is to be interpreted in favor of the grantee" Browns Boundary Control and Legal Principles
Measuring perpendicular to the sections lines gives the grantee the maximum possible area.
Assuming the adjoining desvriptions match there are a few things in play.
Cardinal references in rectangular States are meant to be 'astronomic'. This is best expressed by staying parallel with the controlling survey line as established by the GLO. The Manual will be silent on this as its the function of a private Surveyor to put these on the ground.
The distance (again assuming no prior ations) is best read in light of the manner of creation. If the Grantor sold this parcel from his larger estate read it against him as a width. If he reserved it and sold the other part go with distance along the line.
I cant say it enough. These are generalities. I would be shocked if there were no other evidence pointing to a solution.
Thank you for the tip on Brown's Boundary Control and Legal Principles.
The distances referred to in your description are generally mean to reflect perpendicular distances. As always, the "contrary may be shown", but with all we know from your OP, that's what I'd do.
I would go for perpendicular offsets if possible, and if I am the first surveyor staking the description.
If I am retracing your survey and realize that you did a logical interpretation of the deed, I would definitely try to retrace exactly what you did, if I can figure it out. If a surveyor could interpret a deed in two different ways, the legal description is ambiguous at least at some level. The first surveyor who does it with good survey logic, would be the determinate factor.
Anyway, that is my first response to your question.
I don't see that the distances given in the OP are distances along the section lines, but instead are offset distances so that the perpendicular offset matches the distances called for. The actual distance along the section lines may be "more or less". That is my understanding after taking the CFedS Course (and passing)
I say it depends on the Section involved. The underlying predicate of the PLSS is to keep lines and shapes as regular/rectangular as possible. The West line of Sections 6, 7, 18, 19, 30 & 31 is were that adjustment is made. Therefore it is reasonable that the West 734' implies distances from the West line of 700' and 768' if the remainder East of that dividing line is regular/rectangular. As always there may be evidence that suggests otherwise.
Paul in PA
PJBear, post: 418909, member: 12558 wrote: Is this subject addressed in any of the manuals or reference books? I have looked through a few in the past and didn't notice anything.
Try Wattles Chapter 4 "Determination of What Controls"
Definitely perpendicular to the call lines unless you uncover field evidence to the contrary.
Add me to the "perpendicular from the controlling line" camp....
NotSoMuch, post: 430092, member: 988 wrote: Add me to the "perpendicular from the controlling line" camp....
Yup, me too. The methodology you proposed is incorrect with respect to intent. The books previously suggested will explain it. 😎