Has anyone ever written a description that started on the arc of a curve? In 45 years of surveying; I can't say I've seen one, let alone written one, that started on a curve.
I have to write a description for a driveway easement, and I'm open to any and all suggestions.
?ÿ
TIA
Dougie
I can't remember a specific instance, but probably I have written several like that.
Proper reference, and normal calls, why not?
Yes, more complicated than beginning at a point on a Line, but again, why not?
PS: I have had clients/agencies that really prefer/demand that the True POB is the first reference, so I accommodate them.
PPS: it gets really complex if the First course is also a curve, but I love the challenge.
It is an art I do miss from my high volume production days. I believe I was darn good at it.
If the point is not on a property corner then your description needs to be enhanced for several reasons. First you need a commencement line/lines description to the POB, second the curve requires more information because it is non-tangent to a straight line. For instance a curve beginning at the end of a tangent line can be fully explained with arc distance and radius, where as a curve from a non-tangent point will require most or all of the common 5 curve elements. Delta of a curve provides more precision than arc or chord length to 2 decimal places, whereas a curve with a tangent PC and ending PT defines the delta angle. But oft times sloppy procedures by the creating surveyor provides an ambiguity for you to correct. I go with whatever closes the figure best. Your commencement line can be by arch definition or chord distance and bearing.
Also be aware that a side line into a ROW curve is not always radial even if the local ordinance requires it. Few review agencies ever really check if that requirement is met. The sidelines of a radial easement will not be radial.
Paul in PA
I already have a pretty good idea, of what I'm going to do; I just want to make sure it isn't wrong...
I think I have done a few...
At the very least I would commence at a locatable property corner and reference another one by bearing/distance before traversing to the POB, then call out the bearing and distance to the radius point from that POB, so the description relates the radius point and the POB to a physically locatable basis of bearing. Then give delta, arc distance, and chord bearing/distance as usual.?ÿ
Easy to calculate, plus check, in any CAD software package.
I try to run along the servient estate's property line to get to the POB, since that gives the landowner or easement beneficiary a fighting chance to understand that description, but that's not always possible or is just too messy. I never write easement descriptions without an exhibit, but sometimes the latter gets tossed in the circular file before recording...
?ÿ
If it Works it can't be "wrong". You are the Professional making that decision.
Paul in PA lists many pitfalls below...
copy a draft here if you like, but be ready to be flamed.
Outside peer review is always wise if you don't have that in-house.
I had many years with no competent in-house reviewer, but one particular County Surveyor was always ready to assist upon request, even if he would never be involved otherwise... RIP Dan.
Break the curve into two curves having the same radius?
I agree with the extra ties to the POB.?ÿ
I'd use: Commencing at .... [and give whatever is necessary] .... to the Point of Beginning, to which point a radial line bears [whatever it bears] , then run around your shape back to the POB.?ÿ I prefer radial lines and central angles over chords, but that could be a regional thing.?ÿ
The text Writing Legal Descriptions by Gurdon H. Wattles is an excellent source on curved descriptions.
Ken
I would usually commence at a solid point with a straight line leading to the start of the curve, then use curve data to get to the point of beginning on the curve.?ÿ Something like:
Commencing at the southwest corner of Block 7; thence north 88 degrees 17 minutes 40 seconds east along the south block line, 143.21 feet; thence along a curve (insert all pertinent curve data) 37.69 feet to the point of beginning of a tract further described as.......................
We write them all the time at the DOT. Commencement point described and with SP coordinates to the POB bearing and distance, described with SP coordinates. Thence along the arc of a curve for (length of arc in feet), to the right or left, having a radius of (feet), a chord bearing of (bearing) a distance of (in feet) to a point described, thence continue the description.?ÿ
Along long curves along right of ways we can't always start and end at PC's and PT's. The above gives 4 parts of a curve segment.?ÿ
"Beginning at a point" is redundant. "Beginning" is sufficient.
Hasn't anyone ever told you SP coordinates are fictional. They don't really exist.
It would hold on its own were it a recorded monument and its origin can be traced from other monuments in place.
If not, an offset from a centerline station would be great, and even better would be a bearing and distance from a recorded monument and using a bearing source that can be followed or is capable of obtaining the source again.
in the spirit of "ok this is a topic for discussion", I disagree.
"Beginning at a point" is unique and precise mathematically. Otherwise your calls to the beginning point could be interpreted as "you sorta go along this bearing an approximate distance where you kinda want to start"
In Writing Legal Descriptions, page 3.13, Wattles calls the phrase "to a point" redundant and recommends it's exclusion, except possibly in cases where some lateral tie to the point is made - such as would be the case with a Point of Beginning.
Beginning at a point on the arc of a xx.xx foot radius curve to the right and running xx.xx feet on said curve, through a central angle of xx°xx'xx" (the chord of said curve bears Yxx°xx'xx"Z, xx.xx feet), thence ....
could easily be rewritten:
Beginning on the arc of a xx.xx foot radius curve to the right and running xx.xx feet on said curve, through a central angle of xx°xx'xx" (the chord of said curve bears Yxx°xx'xx"Z, xx.xx feet), thence ....
Thus omittting the redundant "at a point". Anytime you can eliminate words that add no meaning it is a good thing. But if you wanted to reference that POB to some remote point the "at a point " is necessary
Beginning at a point on the arc of a xx.xx foot radius curve to the right which bears Yxx°xx'xx"Z, xx.xx feet from the NE corner of Lot 1, WHISPERING SUMMER WYND ESTATES and running xx.xx feet on said curve, through a central angle of xx°xx'xx" (the chord of said curve bears Yxx°xx'xx"Z, xx.xx feet), thence ....
@dougie While not common your situation begs for a sketch attached to the document. I am sure that you are capable of figuring this out (I wouldn't use coordinates) feel free to send me what you have and I'll take a look.
"While not common your situation begs for a sketch attached to the document"
Unsure if the "not common" refers to starting on a curve or attaching a sketch, but what's most interesting about this site is being educated about the regional differences in practice: I've probably prepared, or provided oversight for the preparation, of over 1,000 easement description in my career and 1.) at least 15% started at a point on a curved line and 2.) I can count on one hand the number that didn't have a sketch attached.
good and valid point there. (heh, heh...)
On other hand, including the "at a point" doesn't take away from the accuracy of the description. And leaving it out of your last line would reduce the precision, so I default to including.
