Got a message from the City today.
In 1976 an engineering firm did a subdivision plat. That engineering firm had a few owner/name changes and is now us and nobody from the 1976 office is employed by our firm today. I know 1976 isn't really that long ago, but for perspective, I was in the first grade then.
The City wanted to know if the plat that was recorded in 1976 was the plat that was supposed to be recorded. I don't have all the details yet, but someone in planning thinks that there were some changes made to the plat and the wrong plat version was recorded. They issued a permit back then to build a building that now sits across the lot line as platted. Surely, it couldn't be their fault, right?
Well, back in 1993 our office was flooded and we lost a ton of files and drawings, that was one of them as I cannot find anything related to that project today. So I have no idea what was to have been recorded or if there was in fact a revised drawing.
Regardless of what was to be recorded, there is a record drawing and it even has the official City stamps and signatures on it. I'm thinking someone needs to go out there and do a plat of survey to "fix" the problem.
> The City wanted to know if the plat that was recorded in 1976 was the plat that was supposed to be recorded. I don't have all the details yet, but someone in planning thinks that there were some changes made to the plat and the wrong plat version was recorded. They issued a permit back then to build a building that now sits across the lot line as platted.
Now that is a winner in so many different ways that I think it will be difficult to top. If the building was built over the lot line, what other possible explanation could there be but that the subdivision plat was wrong? :>
Over 40 years of occupation makes this possibly a non-issue.
Non issue or not, the recorded lot line still runs through the building. That could make financing and title insurance imposable to obtain for a buyer. How do you comply with setback requirements with that line still in place? Here it would need replatting to remove that line, just the effected lots would need to be replatted, not the whole subdivision. Starting to do more of those in order to clean up such things as underlying platted lines and unused easements created with subdivisions. We need to be able to advise our clients of risks and solutions, not just blindly do a survey because a clients asks for it. This case might allow for recovery of the cost of a replat from someone, that is for an attorney to address.
jud
Who else might have documents from back then? Builder? Owners?
Do the monuments fit the plat? If so, I don't think it's your problem.
2010-1976=34
just sayin'
😉
There appears to be a note of cynicism in your post, Kent. 😉
It's a non-issue waiting to happen, as my real estate attorney would say.
It's certainly quieted after the passage of time, but it will need to be resolved by agreement of the parties or quieted in court. Until then it's basically unmerchantable property, as has been pointed out.
BLAST! I hate it when that happens!
The county Surveyor, where was he?
I smell a Rat!
Agreed, but if it were only 5 years ago it would be quite a big deal. Now, all one really has to do is the paper work. The issue is very solvable.
> Over 40 years of occupation makes this possibly a non-issue.
run your numbers again.
😀
