Another thread today reminded me of the attached photos.?ÿ This is a subdivision that consisted of nothing more than a bunch of lines on paper according to the, now deceased, person who admitted to drawing the plat many years ago.?ÿ I refuse to attempt to do a survey in this subdivision.?ÿ To see the few properties that appear to claim a portion of the hundreds of lots go to LAT 37.6232.21 and LONG -95.92863?ÿ You should be able to see the approximate location of a few paths through the underbrush and crap.?ÿ I do not know of any survey that has ever been filed within this alleged subdivision.
?ÿ
That looks a lot like the subdivision in Marshfield, Massachusetts where I bought (3) 20' x 100' lots in 1975. There was very little monumentation, none original. I took the center of the dirt road to be the center of the R.O.W. and since my 20' x 28' house was the first summer cottage built in the subdivision, I called the center of the house a monument to the center of the center lot. 15 years ago it was all McMansions.?ÿ
Nice artistic rendering of a subdivision that never was.
Ah, but, the County recognizes it as being a real subdivision.
Isn't there some clause in your S/D regs that state something to the effect of undeveloped subdivisions, after a certain period of time, revert back to the developing land owner as the parent tract in tact??ÿ Another question comes to mind, how is this land being taxed? Is it taxed as individual residential lots or agriculture/woodlands??ÿ
Apparently, way back when this was drafted by who was at the time holding down the office of County Engineer and Surveyor, this was deemed to be adequate.?ÿ Various lots were sold early on and more over the decades.?ÿ But, as you can see, little progress has actually occurred compared to the vision.?ÿ These should be assessed as residential lots with very minimal value.
This is the kind of real estate you might win playing poker and later discover you were actually the loser.?ÿ I once surveyed a lagoon full of some sort of asphaltic waste product that was "won" in a poker game.
I can only state that I am glad I don't have to survey any portion thereof and still comply with the Minimum Standards for the State of Kansas!
The real problem: Your fee will be more than any amount of property, in the plat, is worth.
The real question: How can highway 39, an odd number, run East out of Chanute?
?ÿ
@dougie?ÿ
The eastern terminus of K-39 is about 10 miles southwest of Fort Scott at its junction with K-7.?ÿ The route is generally to the west through Chanute and now terminating at the new intersection with US Highway 400 not far from the subdivision above.?ÿ Prior to the creation of 400 the route turned south into and through Fredonia and points further south.?ÿ Numerous numbering changes occurred after 400 was built.?ÿ Nearly all of K-39 is the same as it was 60 years ago.?ÿ Slightly different routes for 39 existed between Chanute and Fredonia at different periods since 1930.?ÿ You will find K-47 is also an east-west route.
I was told by a KDOT engineer who had studied such things?ÿ that all but one of the single digit Kansas highways still exist.?ÿ K-6 is the exception to that general rule.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state_highways_in_Kansas
We have several of these in my County. I have surveyed in some of them because I found old lines of occupation. Absent that I wouldn't touch them... I can't imagine what the drafter was thinking!
I've never surveyed in this one, but it seems like a doozy...?ÿ
Wholly Guacamole!
Most of the vintage subdivision maps similar to that in Upstate NY were drawn by Engineers.?ÿOne reason I came to the opinion that most engineers couldn??t survey. If they could they wouldn??t prepare a map that was inadequate. ?ÿThat crap wouldn??t fly today if prepared by an Engineer or Surveyor.
