OK.?ÿ After studying the view of the sketch and then returning to the original post, my thinking about this has refocused.?ÿ The question was about the two different bearings cited.?ÿ That question has been answered.?ÿ We, however diverted to picking apart the drawing.?ÿ The bottom line is that the author of the original post has only been supplied with a cartoon.?ÿ There must be a final drawing showing what has been approved to occur, which is a simple lot split.
The sketch shows the prior use of all of Lot 1, which is a cemetery on the right half and a generally unused space on the left except for a small structure.?ÿ If we look at the aerial view in the original post, we find that structure has been removed, much dirt work has occurred?ÿ and something new is in the upper portion of the left half.
The GIS department should be using the final approved plat, not the cartoon.
I am personally appalled that the great State of New Jersey has a law that specifically declares monuments to be unneeded.?ÿ Thanks to Dan Dunn for pointing that out.?ÿ See below.
"The note in the upper corner is required by New Jersey P.L. 2003, C.14(C45:8-36.3) and N.J.A.C. 13:40-5.1(d). This law was pushed through by others in the Real Estate industry when the State Board proposed requiring the setting of corners on all surveys."
