Sorry for this late Saturday posting. We are negotiating for the purchase of a house. The plat map and what I am seeing when I walk the yard are not in sync. I realize I can get this answered once we have the survey, but I am trying to figure out if we make the offer.
When I was at the house and walked along the seawall, I measured 19 paces or roughly 57 feet. But there is a mark on the plat of 45' along the seawall. Also, about 6' of this overlaps my western neighbor's in a strange triangle (4.57' is the adjacent side, 43.7 is angle theta, hypotenuse = 6') . If the plat is right, I would only have 39' of canal frontage.
Or... if the 45' is correct and I observe 57' at the seawall, then a lot of my property is in the canal. If it weren't for the locked backyard fence, I would go back and measure the side yard with a tape measure
Could someone take a quick look at this image from the plat and tell me if you read the 45' along the back of lot 654 is a length and not an angle?
Also, do I read T=9.89' | 25'R as a a distance of 9.89 feet and the 25'R is ?
Thanks in advance for any guidance in interpreting.
Bill
I would read the 45 as the distance along the rear line. The T=9.89' and R=25' are curve data elements denoting a 25 foot radius curve with a tangent length of 9.89 feet. Said curve would have an arc length of 18.84 feet. You would have to have survey to see how the lot lays on the land.
I agree with Bow Tie.
Furthermore, although the map as portrayed is missing some data (i.e. the bearing on the 26.31' line) I believe there are some mathematical errors. Unless I am missing something I can't get it to close attempting to use a tangent curve.
Licensed Land Surveyor
Finger Lakes Region, Upstate New York
Agreed. Something is off----somewhere.
But, that doesn't seem to answer the original question.
That bizarre little corner of nothingness only makes sense if the 45-foot line must be a minimum of 45 for some very specific reason. Otherwise, the 100-foot line would normally shoot on up to hit the 45-foot line and shorten it somewhat.
There might be a distance between the lot line and the seawall, so that you are pacing a line that is too far NW of the actual lot line and thus getting too large a measurement. Lots almost never extend to the curb on the street side, so why couldn't there be a strip between the lot and canal?
Also, how accurately is your pace known? Could you be off significantly in that measurement?
I get the plat to close within about 0.4 foot in a quick and poorly checked run. There is something off that a surveyor would have to track down by measurements from adjacent lots, which is a big deal if and only if there is an improvement of some kind too near the lot lines.
As for the funny little projection at the NW'ly corner, notice that the lot numbers don't appear to belong to the same subdivision. Perhaps two different surveys disagreed on how much land there was to divide up, and with the NE corner of lot 307 already set they gave the additional land to 654 despite the odd shape.
Lot 307 is from unit 6, and our lot is in unit 8, so there was a difference in time between the two plats.
I will get back there with a tape measure to measure the sea wall.
Thanks to all who replied. The radius and tangent calc is cool - what you all do is fascinating. It will be interesting to get the actual survey to see if any of that mysterious corner falls on land or not.
Bill
Do you know where exactly to make the measurement?
What Bill93 is trying to say is that the property line may or may not be along the line you paced or intend to measure.
Kudos to the surveyors: upon measuring the seawall with a tape measure, it really was 41 feet. Thanks for everyone's help.
Due to other issues found with the inspection (inside the house, not with the lot), we opted to pass on buying the house. I do appreciate everyone's response.
